User talk:Good friend100/Archive3

도와주세요
Please help me to expand an article concerning Balhae i'have found that Balhae previously controlled region located on the west of Sungari/Songhua river those are named 약홀주(若忽州),목저주(木底州) and 현도주 (玄兎州). i need further infos about those provinces which were probably lost during Balhae history maybe between 750-820 because i'm sure that :
 * - Under 대무예/무왕 reign, 장문휴 launched  a naval campaign against Tang at 등주(登州) in the Shandong Peninsula in 732 (maybe from 약홀주 ). I dont think that Balhae navy skirt/bypass the Korean peninsula controlled at this time by Silla but rather left 약홀주 (corresponding to the actual Dandong,the only "window" (port/city) located on the Yellow) shores to lauch it.
 * - In addition to that Balhae lost those regions before 820 (see List of Provinces of Balhae in 820).

My Korean proficiency level is a bit low to allow me to write 2/3 setences on those 3 former provinces of Balhae.감사합니다.Whlee 08:46, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

I found a list of links :
 * http://www.eurasianhistory.com/data/articles/m1/1672.html
 * http://www.eurasianhistory.com/data/articles/m1/1670.html
 * http://www.koreandb.net/dictionaries/Viewframe.aspx?id=4111&ser=2
 * http://www.newmurim.net/newmurim/main300/x1-4.htm
 * http://mahan.wonkwang.ac.kr/source/Balhea/10.htm
 * http://www.thinkpool.com/mini/bbs/pdsRead.jsp?hid=think2001&ctg=3&slt=&key=&page=5&number=366712&i_max=00005588599999
 * http://blog.joins.com/media/folderListSlide.asp?uid=shim4707&folder=35&list_id=8043592
 * http://enc.daum.net/dic100//viewContents.do?articleID=b12s0311a
 * http://www.reportnet.co.kr/detail/150/149519.html
 * http://www.encyber.com/search_w/ctdetail.php?gs=ws&gd=&cd=&q=&p=&masterno=71185&contentno=71185

Give me some time for the Balhae sources. Good friend100 11:50, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 알개습니다 고마워요!Whlee 12:21, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

On tributary relations
Goodfriend, I too think you should stop your edits on Goguryeo's tributary relations. I know what Assault11 doing is wrong and that the "Political connections..." section should be removed, but your eidts are not very well-grounded either. What Byington refers to in the source is a client state relationship, not a tributary relationship. The two relationships are entirely differnet political relationships. Tributary relationships were the means to cultural exchange and trade in the ancient past under the Chinese world order. Of course, using those relationships to assume some kind of a special "political connections" is factually incorrect, but that Goguryeo engaged in tributary relationship with Chinese kingdoms is a fact. Cydevil38 21:25, 7 June 2007 (UTC)


 * If you didn't know, I'm not denying the fact. The site says "Although Chinese histories treat Koguryo during these times as a tributary of the Chinese emperor, in reality the emperor was powerless to exercise any direct control over Koguryo or its kings" Good friend100 21:29, 7 June 2007 (UTC)


 * I'd rather see that as a clarification of the nature of tributary relationship rather than as a denial of the existense of a tributary relationship. Again, that section should be rewritten, and will be, but it will take some time to get other matters sorted out first. Cydevil38 22:22, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

List of tributaries of Imperial China
[User:Assault11] is repeatedly reverting sourced information on this article. 

The information is clearly cited yet he deletes it. He seems to delete information that he doesn't like, whether they are unsourced or sourced.

Assault is also deleting warning tags calling them vandalism, and is breaking Wikipedia policies. 

I am tired of his stubborness and I am requesting administrative action against him, thank you. Good friend100 21:21, 7 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Source clearly does not support his claim. No where in the source has there been any indication that tributes ended in 106 CE. I have provided sources (both primary and secondary) that confirms the exact opposite (see talk page). Good friend100 has been criticized by other editors regarding this issue . Assault11 21:42, 7 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Dispute resolution. There's no blocking needed here unless the revert-warring continues. --  tariq abjotu  21:48, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XV (May 2007)
The May 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 14:53, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Takeshima on the map
The map actually has the word Takeshima on it; that's why it needs to be reported that way. If a map says Dokdo on it, we'll report that, too. It's important to stick to what the maps say rather than putting our own interpretation on them. — LactoseTI T 20:28, 9 June 2007 (UTC)


 * I stand by my comment from the 3RR incident report page. Good friend100 20:42, 9 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Well try to stand by Wikipedia policy instead. Censoring what maps say isn't going to be tolerated or accepted, and if you continue to remove verifiable information, you will be blocked. — LactoseTI T 20:45, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

It says that it is unclear whether or not the Japanese government fabricated the map or not. And how do you know if it says "Takeshima" on the map? Its too small for me to read. Good friend100 20:51, 9 June 2007 (UTC)


 * That "fabricated" comment is just left by some POV editor. Someone will get around to removing it eventually.  As for the size, zoom in on it, it's tiny, but readable.  I agree we shouldn't use Takeshima unless it's actually on a map, but on a Japanese map when it does appear, it's perfectly appropriate (and essential) to mention it. — LactoseTI T 20:54, 9 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Thats all your interpretation on who left the comment. Do you know how to read Japanese? Good friend100 20:56, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Manchuria Debate

 * Hiya. After I offered my 3rd Opinion and got smacked int he chops for it, I decided that there were better ways to spend my day rather than deal with people who were either racist or taking the article far too personally for anyone's good. User:Cydevil38 has also contacted me on this topic as well, and you can see how I advised him as to the process to move along the path to resolution, the last option being ArbCom. You will want to work with him in this matter, as he appears to be concerned over the toxic nature the discussion has taken on.
 * I have recommended that those people who are being the most disruptive can be watched very closely for 3RR or uncivility violations, for which they can be blocked (it will be important to make sure that they actually violate this policy very clearly). This should only be used on the most disruptive editors on both sides, as it is almost always the case that the people in the middle are the ones who actually find a compromise and consensus, without the polarizing influences of one side or the other.
 * The next step after "helping" these people garner 3RR blocks is to pursue an RfC in the matter. This is the logical next step, as discussion on the page, and private discussion betweeen editors, and 3rd Opinion have not served to resolve the issue. An RfC will ask for the comment from one or more admins. Those people who have accumulated a poor reputation (say, from uncivility or 3RR blocks) are looked upon poorly by admins, who will see the edit-warring for what it is, and block those most guilty of interfering with the editing of the article.
 * If that doesn't do the trick, ArbCom is the final destination. There, they will not look at the point in contention. They will look at everyone's behavior in the article, and their penalties for those who have been impolite or have accumulated infractions will be dealt with in exceeedingly stringent methods, up to and including being banned permanently from editing WP.
 * It is for this reason that you must not engage in edit-warring or 3RR violation over this matter. Revert as necessary, but don't break the rules. Tomorrow is another day, and all that. Try very, very hard to stay above the fray (this from someone who has learned the hard way about that). This protects you when the matter escalates, as you can claim honestly to be on the side of right.

I will take a look at the discussion, and maybe offer some comments on the User talk pages to cvalm things down. It quite likely will have no effect, but it may be worth the attempt. - Arcayne   (cast a spell)  21:01, 9 June 2007 (UTC)


 * I understand, you are right about the weight of an editor's comment according to his/her history. As for myself, I got 4 blocks under my belt. I got filed again, but I'll try to not edit war, thank you for the information. Good friend100 21:04, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

On Wikiquette alert
Goodfriend, I think it's better if you just stop revert warring and take Hong Qi Gong's proposal here and cooperate on that new article on Tributary Relations in East Asia(or Asia) which can clarify the nature of tributary relationships. Perhaps in that article, you can take Goguryeo as an example to show readers how tributary relations functioned. Cydevil38 00:23, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

I'd disagree. Nlu recently signed a RfC User Conduct on Assault11. I doubt he had the authority to deal with Assault11 back then, though I do think it would've been better had RfC User Conduct on Assault11 been filed earlier on before all this ruckus started. And Endroit is trying to put a stop to the current RfC User Conduct for reasons I think we both are well aware of. Cydevil38 00:44, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Possibly unfree Image:Goguryeofootsoldier.jpg
An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Goguryeofootsoldier.jpg, has been listed at Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at Possibly unfree images if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. — LactoseTI T 00:10, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Request for Mediation
This message delivered: 12:18, 13 June 2007 (UTC).

You have been blocked
Per your continued edit warring, most recently at Goguryeo-China wars, you have been blocked for 1 week. As always, you may contest the block with. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 18:13, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Callofduty2pointeduhoc.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Callofduty2pointeduhoc.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. G 1  ggy  Talk/Contribs 23:44, 20 June 2007 (UTC)


 * That's all good. Well done :D  G  1  ggy  Talk/Contribs 00:40, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Requested move
No idea who the next admin will be. Could be anyone. As for persuasion, you gotta just have a stronger argument and signs that your view is the consensus. Goes for both sides of the issue. --WoohookittyWoohoo! 00:00, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Probably not a bad idea. --WoohookittyWoohoo! 02:38, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Your comments on my talk page
In response to your comments on my talk page, I get no amusement from you being blocked. It doesn't matter whether you are "right" or "wrong," or whether or not you had good intentions with your reverts. Reverting 5 times in 8 hours is disruptive and a clear violation of the 3RR. I'm not sure what you mean that you're "not going to put up with this," but I suggest you keep a cool head and refrain from this kind of disruptive behavior, and you won't have to worry at all about being blocked. — LactoseTI T 06:53, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
 * What the administrator did is what he did and theres not much I can do about it. And I don't care what you want to say to me, you certainly don't help with anything here either, like not warning editors who make personal attacks. Note that your friend Komdori has been edit warring too and its not fair how I only get blocked and he's happy with his edits. Oh, well, no point screaming "its not fair" now, is there? The mighty administrators must do their job, right? I'm not going to file a report on him because theres no point in it and theres no point playing at that level you like to play at.


 * Happy editing!!! For some reason, the administrators are really good at timing their blocks on me (three days, if you didn't already gleefully check the noticboard). I'm going to Korea (south, just to clarify) on 6/25/07 (which is almost three days away) and hopefully I can take some pictures there anbd upload them here and not get my talk page filled up with your/Komdori's tags on them. Talk to you and the other editors when I get back, which is probably in late August or something. Have fun editing and maybe there will be some improvement around here when I get back. Good friend100 13:58, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Now that I'm out of the way for 2 months you can have fun. Keep a cool head right? Yeah, sure, I'll do that. In fact, I'll apologize. And in fact, I'll refrain from this kind of disruptive behavior. Just know that I'm not an idiot and I'm going to make sure that other editors who need to be punished will be punished. And your right, it doesn't matter whether I'm "right" or "wrong", (politics don't really matter here) just join the rat race and bow down to the rules here, and your fine. Hahaha! Again, I'll be gone for 2 months, so if you leave a message or something I won't get back to it. Good friend100 14:15, 23 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Good friend100, you left a note on my talk page asking me to look into various matters concerning Goguryeo-China Wars. What is immediately apparent to me is that you and other editors are very stressed by this historical topic. Reviewing your edit history I see you've been entirely engaged in the subject of Korean history. Since you've asked my advice I suggest that you avoid conflict in this topic, and that you find some less contentious subjects to edit as well. When we only edit articles with disputes the process can seem like a battle that only has winners and losers. Wikipedia is a collaboration, one in which everyone should be a winner. Achieving consensus may mean we won't get our way on everything, or that we have to settle for something which is only acceptable but not ideal. That's OK too.
 * Since you are taking a short involuntary break, and a long voluntary one, I urge you to put Wikipedia and it's disputes out of your mind. When you come back, I urge you to find some new interests to supplement Korean history. Meanwhile I'll see what help I can bring to Goguryeo-China Wars. Cheers, ·:· Will Beback  ·:· 18:43, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Blocked
 You have been blocked for violating the three-revert rule on Liancourt Rocks, coming off another block. To contest this block, please reply here on your talk page by adding the text along with the reason you believe the block is unjustified, or email the blocking administrator or any administrator from this list. --  tariq abjotu  13:28, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

re:personal attacks
Saying that I've heard some "fucking outlandish stuff [on Wikipedia]" is not a personal attack, so don't falsely accuse me of that. Moreover, Wikipedia is not censored. Parsecboy 11:59, 3 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm not angry with Ksyrie at all. It's just mind blowing that someone actually thinks that government censorship of free thought is a good thing. It really is 1984 over there. Parsecboy 12:05, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Blocks
Hey good friend, remember that you can bring in more people into a dispute. I think that you've been blocked for absolutely no reasons other than 3RR - which you could have easily avoided. Reverting is a form of testing consensus. As long as you have more consensus, you can avoid 3RR. (Wikimachine 18:52, 4 July 2007 (UTC))

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XVI (June 2007)
The June 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 13:51, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Rfc
See Requests_for_comment/Jiejunkong. (Wikimachine 03:02, 10 July 2007 (UTC))
 * Umm, Good friend, I'm sure you've had enough trouble w/ these guys. Could you approve? It'll get deleted in ~24 hours. (Wikimachine 14:43, 10 July 2007 (UTC))

Image:Stick jump 4-14-07 youtube safe0001.gif listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Stick jump 4-14-07 youtube safe0001.gif, has been listed at Images and media for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. --Cheers, Komdori 19:06, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Image source problem with Image:Dokdo5.gif
Thanks for uploading Image:Dokdo5.gif. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Fair use, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 19:16, 10 July 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --Cheers, Komdori 19:16, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your contribution
Thank you for your contribution on Korea-related articles. Korean articles have been improved greatly since you started working on.

Hmm.....
Are you really retired?Kfc1864 07:11, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Military history WikiProject coordinator selection
The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are looking to elect nine coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by August 14! Kirill 03:12, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Military history WikiProject coordinator election
The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has begun. We will be selecting nine coordinators from a pool of fourteen candidates to serve for the next six months. Please vote here by August 28! Wandalstouring 08:14, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

welcome back
welcome back, I'm glad you changed your mind. However, you do owe the community an apology for inciting vandalism on Wikipedia. Odst 00:46, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Arbitration Case
You're one of the parties for this arbitration case that I'm filing. The link to the arbitration is at Requests_for_arbitration. (Wikimachine 03:42, 2 September 2007 (UTC))

Liancourt Rocks
I thought you had reverted to my edit. You don't feel that the current edition is JPOV & offensive? Wikimachine 22:23, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

See User:Wikimachine/Liancourt Rocks. I'll get it through, so just don't worry about it. Wikimachine 00:50, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Heads Up Regarding Your Recent 3RR Violation
Please see for information about the latest report. — LactoseTI T 15:32, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
 * A little late there. Good friend100 15:33, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Blocked
I have blocked you indefinitely from editing wikipedia. This is your seventh block for 3rr violations and you are clearly not interested in editing according to the accepted rules. Spartaz Humbug! 19:18, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Hey
So you got blocked? I hope that you start another account or just forget about Wikipedia completely - you don't need it. Remember my e-mail address & ask me about anything on Wikipedia if you'd like. I still think that there must have been a reason why you violated the 3RR, for 7th time, etc.

Also, about those pics from your visit to Korea, are you still going to upload them? Send them to my e-mail address & I'll upload them for you. So, thx for being a good friend for the last 1 & 1/2 yrs & also for starting WikiProject Korea (I remember everything, including how Visviva kind of got upset b/c his Korea Portal's central role would get replaced by the wikiproject, but he gave in) Good luck. (Wikimachine 22:11, 3 September 2007 (UTC))

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XVIII (August 2007)
The August 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

Delivered by grafikbot 09:28, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Requests for arbitration/Liancourt Rocks
Hello,

An Arbitration case involving you has been opened: Requests for arbitration/Liancourt Rocks. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Requests for arbitration/Liancourt Rocks/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Requests for arbitration/Liancourt Rocks/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Newyorkbrad 20:50, 11 September 2007 (UTC)


 * I am willing to unblock you for the duration of this case to allow you to participate if you are prepared to commit to not undertaking more than one revert a day on any article and and if you accept that you will be reblocked immediately if you do not stick to this agreement. Please feel free to either e-mail me or use the template to grab any passing admins attention. Failing that, newyorkkbrad has this page watchlisted and will copy anything across to the arb com case that you post here for that purpose. Spartaz Humbug! 21:02, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Welcome back. (Wikimachine 19:06, 16 September 2007 (UTC))

Reply regarding new referenced material for Protoss
Hi,

To reply to your comment, see the discussion at Articles_for_deletion/Protoss - generally, the article has too much on the single-player storyline right now, and not enough on gameplay, specifically how Protoss works in gameplay and how that has been significant for well-known professional players and competitions. We observed the likelihood that there are a lot of Korean-language sources that discuss these sorts of things that aren't currently easily available for those who don't understand Korean, so some Korean-language sources on the English Wikipedia page for Protoss would be a lot of help. We need more sources for that sort of thing specifically directed to Protoss as opposed to Starcraft generally, to suit the particular article on Protoss. Thanks a lot for responding! I hope you get a chance to help. - Reaverdrop ( talk / nl ) 03:19, 14 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Followup - nice work! Thanks. Can you find any sources for this material, too? - Reaverdrop ( talk / nl ) 22:13, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Your "Horrible" grammar comprehension
I understand you may not be a native speaker, but before using such harsh tones as "horrible grammar," perhaps you'd be best to check with a native speaker first. Best wishes, — LactoseTI T 22:28, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Discussion between me and Wikimachine on our talk pages
You're welcome to join in, but if there are going to be more than two participants perhaps it's best to keep the discussion on one page for the sake of simplicity (otherwise we'd all be posting replies left right and centre) - what do you reckon, my talk page or Wikimachine's? You choose! Phonemonkey 23:19, 18 September 2007 (UTC)


 * I know that's why you posted in two places, it wasn't criticism. On my talk page is fine by me - I'll ask Wikimachine. Phonemonkey 23:27, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Thats fine, ok. I wasn't taking it as criticism, by the way. Good friend100 23:33, 18 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Cool. Phonemonkey 23:42, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

My suggestion on Liancourt talk page
"Its most likely that we will start a fight between Goodfriend and Wikimachine vs. Phonemonkey, Lactose, and Opp2" - I didn't expect this response. Can you tell me why? Has there been a previous dispute over this? Phonemonkey 23:42, 18 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Response at Liancourt Rocks. Good friend100 23:43, 18 September 2007 (UTC)


 * I've taken the liberty of reformatting some comments for the sake of clarity (moved it up and placed indents), hope you don't mind. Please feel free to revert it if you're not happy. Phonemonkey 00:28, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Brand new Article for Korea
Please help me expanding this brand new article Republic of Korea Passport. Kingj123 21:39, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Lactose
This guy has been shadowing my edits and initiating revert wars. He's followed me to the Japanese sea lion article for goodness sake. Do you know if there's any way of reporting this somewhere?melonbarmonster 00:48, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Undiscussed reverts
Regarding this partial revert and subsequent edits: You violated the rules against uncooperative editing, by failing to provide informative edit summaries, and failing to explain in advance on the discussion page what you were going to revert. I can see no argument on the talk page why you thought this particular piece of information was problematic. You are therefore blocked now. Fut.Perf. ☼ 10:27, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Just a friendly reminder...
...that one of the rules for Liancourt Rocks is to always use edit summaries, right? Seeing edits without them always rings alarm bells. Can you please make it a habit to use them? Fut.Perf. ☼ 20:21, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Also, please be more careful with accusing others of vandalism, as you did here . The anon's edit was evidently made in good faith, as he was removing a passage that had indeed been made redundant by another (possibly better worded?) paragraph covering the same material that he had included earlier. Of course, the erroneously included signature should have been removed. Fut.Perf. ☼ 21:23, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
 * No problem. I think the anon you reverted was actually Clownface, right? He's still having problems with when and where to use a signature and how to use an edit summary. Perhaps you could give him some advice in Korean? His English doesn't seem to be too good. Fut.Perf. ☼ 14:36, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Gallery, When are you going to finish uploading the rest of the pictures? Jegal 02:47, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Good friend100, could you reply on talk page (Japanese invasions)? I'll try to find cites to the stuffs about armor. In fact I wasted hours & hours trying to find a legitimate source but I couldn't. I think that the best course of action for now is to revert to the version before your edits & then reintroduce acceptable ones. (Wikimachine 21:01, 4 October 2007 (UTC))

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XIX (September 2007)
The September 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

Delivered by grafikbot 09:33, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Bloody Chinese Picture with Clear Face in Korea War Article
Hi Good Friend, the picture is really offensive and I am honest about it. It is not only myself, all most all Chinese feel same way. If a certain group of people all feel the same way, isn't it indicate at least something to you? I wish you can understand. Peace. Dongwenliang 02:48, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

1RR parole violation
A report has been left of your 1RR parole violation. --Cheers, Komdori 21:42, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Blocked for one week, at least pending any changes that might be necessary for the current ArbCom case. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 07:33, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm willing to unblock on one condition: Your edits are to be restricted to your userspace (user page, user talk page and subpages) as well as the Arbitration case pages. I believe that you need to be able to edit the Arbitration case pages, so I'm willing to give you another chance. Violating that and I will restore the block myself. - Penwhale &#124; Blast him / Follow his steps 08:52, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

If I am allowed to edit only on the arb case for one week, does it mean that I will be able to edit freely after that week? I'd be thankful if I were restricted to the arb case for one week but its not a big problem.

By the way, I am editing on a school computer. That means that the IP address is probably different from my home address. So if there is an IP scan or something, I'm not using sockpuppets >.> Good friend100 17:16, 17 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Generally speaking, yes. (Unless you do something horrible.) - Penwhale &#124; Blast him / Follow his steps 18:00, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I agree with Penwhale on this offer, though that's not why I'm here. I want to let you know that there is an ANI thread about you right now discussing the possibility of a community sanction. If Penwhale's amenable, I'd be OK with allowing you to comment in that thread as part of your unblock (in addition to the ArbCom case), particularly if the discussion seems to be leading toward a sanction. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 18:09, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Can I just take the one week ban to chill off?

Also, please realize that I wasn't disrupting articles this whole time. I don't think I made any bad contributions until Komdori filed another report against me, even though I clearly apologized, undid my edits, and expressed my regret. I feel like im being ostracized simply because of policy violations when there are numerous editors edit warring and showing anti-Korean sentiment. For example, trying to emphasize dog meat in Korean cuisine or weakening Korean arguments for ironcladding at turtle ship. I'm not accusing anybody, but its not fair that I'm the only getting the banhammer all the time.

You can be anti-Korean as much as you want without violating policies and thats where anti-Korean editors prey on. I attempted to get administrators to realize this before, but they won't respond to me unless Komdori/LactoseTI make a policy violation, which they rarely (if any) do.

Considering the ANI file on me, I'd like to respond to other editors. I don't think I deserve a sanction, but rather at least get administrators to inspect all of us. Good friend100 22:35, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
 * You need to find a way to respond to those with whom you disagree besides edit warring. You've already been indefblocked once; that and the subsequent restriction to one revert should have given you the idea that your edit warring had stop, and yet here it keeps going. Frankly, I think you are skating on some very thin ice and are about one edit war away from being sanctioned by the community (whether a siteban or a topic ban I don't know). You must pursue dispute resolution if you feel other editors are being unfair or non-netural. That is the only advice I can give you. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 05:22, 18 October 2007 (UTC)


 * What do you mean by "one edit war away"? And whats a siteban? Good friend100 22:24, 18 October 2007 (UTC)


 * That means that he believes the community is close to vote to ban you via consensus. Siteban means a permanent exile (i.e. you're not welcomed to edit). - Penwhale &#124; Blast him / Follow his steps 06:58, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

You know, I'm sorry, and I regret getting all the way down here. What would happen if I offer that if I edit war again I will get banned forever? Good friend100 22:27, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
 * You are only one violation away from being reblocked indef by me. Behave or you will have to contribute to the rfar by e-mail. Spartaz Humbug! 08:05, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I agree completely with Spartaz that one more edit war from you should mean an indef block. You are now only a little more than a day from the expiry of your block. I strongly advise you to come up with a plan for how you are going to avoid edit warring. Remember that you may not get another chance if you do it again. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 03:03, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Requests for arbitration/Liancourt Rocks closed
The above arbitration case has closed, and has been banned from Wikipedia for one year. All parties are reminded that attempts to use Wikipedia as a battleground may result in the summary imposition of additional sanctions, up to and including a ban from the project. For the Arbitration Committee, Picaroon (t) 21:41, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Blocked, for a 1RR violation
You have been blocked from editing for in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for violating the three-revert rule. Please be more careful to discuss controversial changes or seek dispute resolution rather than engaging in an edit war. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text below.
 * Note, this is in violation of the 1RR agreement as referenced to at WP:AN3. Anthøny 09:14, 28 October 2007 (UTC)


 * The matter is being discussed at AN/I. Nishkid64 (talk) 18:57, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I see what happened. Komdori filed a report against me, but I don't think I was doing anything wrong. To the blocking admin, I wasn't doing anything wrong. Komdori is simply taking advantage of my parole to get the administrators to ban me forever. I feel that he is taking this to a personal level because I did not edit war, even Spartaz agrees that I wasn't doing anything wrong.

However, regardless of the degree of my mistake (which I see as zero), Komdori is successful in getting the administrators to pay attention to my troubled past so that they can block me indef or topic ban me. I learned my lesson, I already told you, and was contributing to a couple articles. Komdori has no right to keep trying to get me blocked. I make any intolerable mistake. In fact, seeing the report, none of those diffs show me making multiple reverts or edit wars. Komdori has taken this too far and he has taken this to a personal level of getting me indef blocked. I ask for an unban because I did not do anything wrong. And I have learned my mistakes. I have not done anything in that report that shows that I have broken the rules again. I have done nothing wrong since my last ban (the one week ban). Good friend100 19:16, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Rpgpic1027.png)
Thanks for uploading Image:Rpgpic1027.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 13:55, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

To Spartaz
Even you agreed that I did nothing wrong at Goguryeo. I didn't do anything wrong! I am very sad that Komdori has taken this to a personal level to get me banned. He has filed a report against me that shows that I have done nothing wrong. Yet the report itself just puts a negative impression on me and now the other admins will think I have violated the rules again when I have not. I have learned my lesson. I feel as if the blocking admin did not consider the report carefully. I didn't do anything wrong at Goguryeo. Cydevil deleted a large portion of the article so I reverted it. However, something was funny with the article so I reverted myself. How is this edit warring?? I don't understand. Good friend100 19:21, 28 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Spartaz, I'm watching the discussion. Wouldn't it help if I could have a say at the ANI? I'm trying to stay in contact. Good friend100 19:26, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Good friend100: to clear things up a bit, actually the report was filed before you had gone ahead and made that additional revert against Cydevil. The report contained other reverts you had done shortly earlier to the same article. --Cheers, Komdori 19:36, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

The report, even you can see, has no clear diffs that show me messing with the article and making reverts. I reverted Cydevil's edit because he deleted a section of the article. Then I undid my edit because my edit turned out wierd for some reason. I have no idea why you would use this to file a report against me other than for personal reasons. Actually, you have succeeded in turning this as a cause for me to get banned for life because now the admins are discussing it. You brought their attention to me and now they are discussing that I can't comply with the rules when I have not made any violations.

Its clear that you dislike me as a person. Every report until now has been made by you or Lactose. And now, your most recent report against me clearly shows that you are not doing this without bias. Even Spartaz agreed that I didn't violate anything. The report currently stands as "no violation" for now. But your conduct is something that needs to be inspected too. Because it isn't fair that you can just report me using flimsy evidence to try and get me banned.

I'm done with edit warring and I'm done with arguing with others. I just started to edit Japanese invasions of Korea and a couple others, but even that is disrupted because you feel that I need to get indef blocked. I think I got the message now. Wikimachine's banned for 1 year and I was blocked for a week. I know I have about a billion blocks stamped on my face. But I learned my lesson and I was attempting to edit peacefully. Please don't judge me before I make another blatant revert or if I edit war. Good friend100 19:43, 28 October 2007 (UTC)


 * There is nothing personal about this. These articles (Goguryeo, etc.) are very controversial, and the subject of many edit wars.  I don't think it's unreasonable to watch an editor closely when they have a history of disrupting articles.  You were on specific notice to behave and have had several last chances after stating you've "learned your lesson" repeatedly.  When you come off block after block and immediately begin to revert you shouldn't be surprised that you are re-blocked.  To be frank, it's a bit troubling that your gut reaction to edits you don't like on controversial articles, no less, is to still hit undo without discussing (as you did three times to Goguryeo recently).  It's true that you self-reverted one of them when you realized you might get in trouble, but you have repeated showed that you are unable to stop this knee-jerk reaction (we're into double digits on the block count, now). --Cheers, Komdori 19:56, 28 October 2007 (UTC)


 * I didn't even consider my "undo" as part of another campaign of edit warring. I already explained that Cydevil deleted a large portion of the text so I reverted it and then reverted my own edits because something was wrong with the article after the edit. Let me clear up something to you first that I undid my edits because I thought I messed up the article, not because I edit warred.


 * Regardless of your feelings toward me, I feel that you have taken this to a personal issue because your report was very flimsy without any hard evidence that I was actually edit warring. Its clear that you are trying to do whatever it takes (i.e make an unneccesary report) to get me blocked indef. I want it to stop. You have been an editor long enough to know what is edit warring and what is not. And if you tell me you couldn't tell if my "edit warring" was a violation or not, then that just supports the idea that you don't like me as a person. Please stop. I was just starting to edit Japanese invasions of Korea and work on it. Didn't I say that I learned my lesson after the one week ban? Didn't wikimachine get kicked out for one year? Isn't that enough? I stopped breaking the rules right? Please don't accuse me and also please don't tell me I should get indef blocked until I make a clear violation of the rules. Good friend100 20:08, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

And what do you mean by knee jerk reaction? When somebody deletes a large portion of the text, its obvious that you should revert it because thats vandalism. Also note that my "edit warring" was not conflicting with you or LactoseTI, etc. It wasn't controversial. It was simply a revert to vandalism. You are allowed to revert vandalism without discussing it. I just came to realize that you reported me without thinking about all this first. Good friend100 20:16, 28 October 2007 (UTC)


 * You undid two edits by an anon editor who was edit warring with you (he made edits, you undid, he undid, he made more, you undid, Cydevil edited, you undid, with no summaries, talk, etc.) This is not editing acceptably. You've said things amounting to "I've learned my lesson" many times and just keep on edit warring.  I'm all for second (and third through tenth) chances, but what is to say this is any different?  You've been warned time and time again, said you understand, and when you are off your week long unblocks immediately relapse. --Cheers, Komdori 20:21, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
 * As for Cydevil's edit, it was not even part of the report. Clearly, it could have been, though--removing a couple of sentences is clearly a content dispute, not wholesale, obvious vandalism. --Cheers, Komdori 20:26, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

I was not edit warring with the anon user. Did you check what the diffs were? The anon user deleted several important sentences, to which I considered as vandalism and so reverted (check my post before this one on vandalism).

And then the second undo I did on the anon user was because he deleted the word "major". And its a fact that Goguryeo was a major regional power, so I undid that edit.

Please explain to me how any of these reverts (both which I identified as vandalism) shows that I was edit warring and violating policies. Were these edits even alike to each other? Also, although you could argue that Cydevil's edit was content dispute, he did not discuss first and he has a history of edit warring too. So I reverted it. His deletion of a section (even more importantly, the first one), is vandalism. People have deleted or made heavy changes to the first paragraph in Liancourt Rocks. Their edits were reverted because they were considered vandalism. I did just the same. Good friend100 20:33, 28 October 2007 (UTC)


 * I want an apology from you. I realized that you have made many wrongs considering my "edit warring" at Goguryeo over these last posts. And saying that I got blocked immediately after my one week ban carries no weight in your argument. Because the diffs didn't even connect with each other, and the fact that Spartaz didn't agree with you, and the fact that it says "no violation" on my report, shows that my current block is not fair. I have raised concern over this on the block tag. The 5 day ban, if no admin unblocks me, is fine with me. Its understandable if they cannot see your mistake (unless they read this discussion between you and me). But this 5 day ban has no weight and I got blocked for no good reason. So don't use this ban as a weapon to get me indef banned because I have done nothing wrong after the one week ban. Good friend100 20:34, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
 * You should know the difference between vandalism and a content dispute by now. Even when being on your "best behaviour" you still see the need to edit war, it seems. The 3RR report has been updated to help clear up the confusion. --Cheers, Komdori 20:57, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Its vandalism because Cydevil deleted a large section of the article. The anon user deleted several important sentences without any discussion at all. I consider that vandalism. If I deleted half of the intro paragraph at Liancourt Rocks, wouldn't you revert it? I considered my reverts as undoing vandalism, not as a content dispute. If the anon user or Cydevil had a problem with the content, he/she should have opened a thread on the discussion page.

Also, what is with you saying that I was on my "best behavior"? Also, what do you mean when you say that I "still see the need to edit war"? How do I still see the need to edit war when I wasn't even edit warring? See the diffs you posted, you are contradicting yourself. Your diffs (and the diffs I explained above) show that I wasn't edit warring. Now you are resorting to claims that don't have any evidence. Its clear that I wasn't edit warring.

You are still trying to use your report as an excuse to get me indef blocked. Just because I got blocked doesn't mean I did something wrong. Regardless of the duration of the block, its clear that I did not edit war and I did not violate anything. Good friend100 21:06, 28 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Komdori, please don't repeat what you have just said here to ANI. What you say is not true, and I have explained why they are not true. Also, please don't write what you think of me. Its clear that you have bias against me and commenting as if I will never change is not fair. I don't have anything else to say other than a repeat that I have not made any technical violations and that your report is very faulty. Good friend100 21:54, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

I think I have some explanation to do. What happened was that I copied & pasted the "last stable version" of the introductory part before a bunch of anon IPs started unilaterally deleting parts of it and inserting new controversial ones. In the process, I forgot to delete the original one that was already there, so the outcome were two duplicate sections. I found out the mistake later on and corrected it by deleting one of the duplicate sections. I believe it was an understandable mistake on Goodfriend's part. However, I kindly ask that you self-revert the new part that you've added, that Goguryeo was the "largest and most dominant" of the Three Kingdoms of Korea. That simply isn't true considering that power balance between the three kingdoms varied significantly. Even if true, it's an extraneous element that I don't believe is necessary in the introduction.

As for Komdori's case against you, I'm very disappointed that there are administrators asking for an indef ban. As I see it, most of your reverts were restoring the article from unilaterally deletions by anon IPs. Unilateral deletions by those anon IPs could be considered vandalism, I believe. You should point this out to the administrators. Cydevil38 22:44, 28 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I guess I should alert them, but I can't do it until my block is over. I'm limited to here, but I really am disappointed that Komdori and LactoseTI are attempting to get me banned with a very weak argument. I wasn't even edit warring, simply undoing an anon user's deletions. Yet, these two are using that as an excuse to get me banned. I really am disappointed how bold these guys are, even when they know that the report is very flimsy. Check the report for yourself, Cydevil, and the diffs don't even match up. I'm sad how Komdori even files a report when he posts diffs that don't make any sense. Yes, Komdori/LactoseTI, let me repeat that the report is very flimsy and an administrator wrote that I had no violation. You guys are simply filing a report against me to make it look like I'm doing something bad again. Good friend100 00:41, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Re:ANI thread
You mentioned that you should be able to weigh in at the ANI thread, and you're right; that's only fair. I have your talk watchlisted, so if you want anything posted there, you can post it here and I'll copy it there for you. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 01:33, 29 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Yeah, well my argument is basically everything from above this thread. However, one of the most important information that I have to comment is that Komdori's report cannot be used against me because it shows nothing about me edit warring at all. Simply undoing an anon user's deletion of text in the articles doesn't mean that I'm edit warring. I explained above (with links) that the diffs don't even match.


 * Also, Komdori and LactoseTI are making this into a bigger problem than it is. Instead of watching me behave for a week or two, they immediately make an excuse about a couple reverts that I did, and now they are accusing me of "edit warring", which I definitely did not do. They are twisting their comments as if I was violating policies immediately after my one week ban. That is not true. I would like to ask you to put all this up at ANI because I'm just disappointed how Komdori and LactoseTI are so bold with accusing me when they don't even have any significant proof. Good friend100 13:43, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Please note that Spartaz agreed that I made no violation at Komdori's report. Its clear that I did nothing wrong. Good friend100 13:49, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Update: I just read through the ANI about me. LactoseTI keeps trying to hammer in that I was edit warring. I was NOT! I am really shocked at how boldly this editor lies about my reverts. ALL the reverts were isolated from each other and NONE of them had to do with the same person or the same information continuesly. Also, how can I be edit warring when I'm restoring information that was previously deleted? I know I'm starting to rant, but it makes me angry when others lie about what I did. Thank you for posting this comment as well. Good friend100 13:54, 29 October 2007 (UTC)


 * I'll describe the diffs that Komdori posted that he thought I was edit warring.


 * First diff shows that I undid an anon user's deletion of several important sentences in the article.


 * Second diff shows that I restored the word "major" to the article when describing Goguryeo as a "major regional power". It certainly was a major power, and I saw no reason for an anon to delete that so I undid that as well.


 * Do the diffs even include the same reverts? No. Did I repeatedly undo relevent edits without discussing? No. These two diffs are the diffs that Komdori listed on his report and frankly, his argument is extremely weak. His base of action comes only from the fact that I was on 1RR parole. However, the reverts were isolated and the report doesn't show a clear case of edit warring so the 1RR can't apply. I only reverted once on each completely separate edit. Also, some of the administrators were correct in assuming that the length of the 1RR parole was not clarified. I was aware of the 1RR parole after the one week ban. Yes, I was going to ask Spartaz about it, but then I got blocked. Good friend100 19:33, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Another thing that has lighted upon me is that I have made reverts and undid anon users' deletions in the past. Yet Komdori or LactoseTI have not taken those previous reverts to 3RR. Why? I interpret their prejudice in filing reports as a bold attempt to hammer me out of Wikipedia. Really, after the one week ban, I began to edit normally, and when I got blocked, frankly, I couldn't pull out of my head of any recent edit warring I had done out of the few edits (save Japanese invasions of Korea (1592-1598)) I had made after the one week ban. But what they are trying to do is not just vigilante justice to help hunt down bad seeds. They have taken this to a personal level to indef block me, which I really see as not fair on their part. Regardless of my trail of edit warring, they should assume good faith until the last moment (that is, up to the point where I get indef banned for edit warring). For all the other blocks, they were right about me edit warring. But for this block, it isn't. The report on me is just wrong.

When I related this information to Komdori, he said he was simply keeping an eye on me, since I have been a troublemaker in the past. I agree that he can keep an eye on me, I don't mind. But picking on a couple isolated reverts and trying to formulate a ban on me using those small reverts is just going overboard. Am I ranting again? I'm sorry if you feel that I'm spitting nonsense out of my mouth. But again, wouldn't you get angry if somebody starts to talk about your conduct when they don't have hard evidence that you were breaking the rules? I'm simply trying to explain my side of the story about the diffs and all. Thank you, Heimstern, for providing a vehicle for me to get my comments through. Good friend100 19:38, 29 October 2007 (UTC)


 * One more comment, some of the most recent posts were done at my school. If, by any chance, an administrator finds that I have been using two IP addresses, please don't block me. I don't make sockpuppets. Good friend100 19:50, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
 * That's not sockpuppetry so that doesn't matter. Spartaz Humbug! 21:05, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Annyeonghaseyo
Hi. Good friend100

wprk dhlrnrdjtlffurdl aksgdl Wkfqatj duddjvksdmf qlfhrtotj ekfms rht dnlzldpsms wkf gkwl ahtgkwlaks, sladml tjswjsdmf rmrks wlzuqhrh dlTtmqslek.dnfldml durtkfmf dnlgotj glaTjwntlsms rjtdp rkatkemflqslek. rmfotj dlwpRkwl smRuTejs rjtdmf rlwnsdmfh sladmf djfxhekdxhgkwleh dksgsms dldbfmf rmsrjfh Whtdksofusms anflemf (wkf dktlrpTwldy) Eoansdp ajflRmxRkwl ghkrk sktj rm tkrjsdp rptlvksdp aucakel wjrrls goTtmqslek. wlrma cnlfmf qhdkgksl dkakeh dlqjsdpsms durltj duddnjsgl vuswlqgksms ep qkfdmf emfdlwl ahtgkf rjt rkxwlsms dksgtmqslek. rmfjgrp qhrhgks Rha Ehfkdldlswl anjtlrlsms wjdakf wjdakf wkrlrk dnflskfk tkfkadlfkrh toQkfrks rmwltakfdmf gksms wnwpdp dkwn Wkwmddl skqslek. rmfjsep sladms dlgndpeh duwjsgl cltkgks rmclemfdl sladmf rPthr wnntlgkf rjt rkxspdy. wjfeofh ekdmaqjsdp snrnejs rksdp ehqkfdp sjadjrkwl aktlrndy. dlf qnfj duf qke rp gotj sladmf Wht dkfosusms Rha tnrk Qjsgkrp qhdudy. wmdaudgkf aksgks wmdrjfmf emfdleoaus rmemfdl anjfkrh gkrpTskdy? rmflrh vuswlqdl wha dytkdgkrp ehfdkrksek tlvdmaus rhksflwkdprp dycjdgkehfhr gktpdy. ghrdms ekfms dbwjdprpskdy. rmflrh aucekfrksdms wjdakf wndmlgktlrh ckfkfl dnflskfkdp rhksfusehldjTwlaks, ekfms skfkdhk wlrwjqwjrdls rhksfusdl djqtsms wnwpdml rmfdmf Tmtlsms rp skdmf emt gkqslek. dlfqnfj dlfjgrp TjTsmsep dlgogktlf wl ahfmrpTspdy. qusghksgksms vmfhrmfoadl dlTdmsl, rmrjf dldydgktpdy. durltjs sladmf qhsms snsdl gkeh aksgdktjdy. dlsxjspt wnth, dlapdlfdlfkeh dkfaus ckfkfl skdmf rjt rkxdmsepdy. ghrtl gksrmf dnlzlfmf Tmtlaus djeldlswl dkffuwntpdy. rjrlek skarlfRpdy. ekdmaqjsdpsms wjfeofh rOspemfdml ehqkfdp sjadjrkwl aktpdy. rmfja.... 보는 눈이 많이서 일 부러 이렇게 썼답니다. 대문 자와 소문 자 를 주의하시구요. This is for percausion, so please use a tool for translation. you would know what i mean. bye. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.79.36.15 (talk) 16:12, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Editing Restrictions
1RR will be strictly enforced in your case which means one revert a day per article. That means a maximum of one revert not a series of separate reverts of different material. Frankly, I do not want to see you doing any reverting at all except for obvious vandalism. In the event that an edit of yours is challenged, I would like you to discuss this on the talk page citing references rather then waiting 24 hours and having a revert then. Also, do not simply revert any user without using a personalised edit summary that explains what you have done and why. I will be watching your contributions closely. I do not want to see you edit warring in any way shape or form. You escaped a ban by the skin of your teeth and there is exceedlingly little patience left for your antics. In short, the message is very stark, ensure that you only edit in a collaborative and constructive manner or you will be blocked and this time there will be no way back.

You will need to build up a considerable level of trust before anyone will be prepared to give you any more slack. I suggested on ANI that after 6 months you can apply there to have relaxation but there was no consensus on whether or not this was too strict. In the first instance, if you last that long, I suggest that you leave me a note in 3 months to see whether it is worth seeking a relaxation. Alternatively you can just ask at ANI but I strongly counsel against this unless there is a clear feeling that this is worthwhile.

You have not been placed under formal mentorship but I am very familar with your case and am more than happy to take any questions or help deal with any problems. You have been given a final chance that many editors did not believe that you deserve. I strongly recommed that you make the most of this. Spartaz Humbug! 21:04, 2 November 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm writing this to say that I completely endorse Spartaz's words and will also be watching your edits. Remember, you were indefinitely blocked once, and this 1RR provision was given in lieu of that block. Therefore, it only makes sense it should be just as indefinite as the block it replaced. By this I do not mean permanent, but I do mean that it will not expire until the community is ready to lift it. When the Arbitration Committee gives paroles of this sort, the only exception given is always "obvious vandalism". You should consider this your only exception, and should emphasize the word "obvious". Blanking an entire page is vandalism, so is adding "POOP!! LOL!!". Adding something you think is POV or removing a few sentences is not necessarily vandalism and you should not treat it as such. Read the policy on vandalism if necessary, since it contains a section about what is not vandalism. That's what I have for you. Good luck with this. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 21:12, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XX (October 2007)
The October 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

Delivered by grafikbot 14:02, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

tip
igeot jom boseyo: juso neun darjiman ttokgateun ujeoeyo, eo dangsin eol gobalhan gue gominji moenjiyo.


 * hakgyo @1
 * hakyeo @2

josimhaseyo, dangbunganeun geunyang geu yeogukindeul budditchijimaseo. dareun geule jipjung hasineunge joeulgeot gatseupnida. hangukeo pane hoksi eocauntga itnayo? iteumyeon jom alryeojuseo

The essential kimchi
Hi, Good friend 100, I want to thank you for reawakening me on the essential kimchi list. After I wrote it on the kimchi talk page, nobody seems care about the matter, so I almost abandoned a hope to get a consensus or help to improve articles related to kimchi. As you see, almost everybody are interested in making just blind edit warrings. The ggakkdugi article is very helpful for me to have a hope to cooperate with other people on the matter. Thank you again. --Appletrees 18:14, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Solar energy
Thank you for your comments on the solar energy page. They've inspired good changes. I hope you can visit again and see if the changes I made address your original comments. Mrshaba 07:54, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Your work on the see also material is appreciated. I also appreciate your kind comments on the page. I will read the see also material as you suggested for future reference. Please explain what you mean by "there are many vague sections". Which sections in particular need work. I see some relatively minor work in the architecture and solar vehicle sections but the PV section needs plenty of love. I've been communicating with a professional technical writer and we don't see any serious vagueness but the GA nomination is all about getting other opinions. If you see vagueness outside of the sections I mentioned above please point them out specifically. Also, I'm thinking the page is going to fail GA again due to stability issues. I'll resubmit the page in another month or two if that happens. What method should I use short of GA nomination to get advice on the content of the page. Mrshaba 20:23, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

I'd like a PV price history graph that looked similar to the oil price history graph. I'm working on a table of information to develop the graph from here: Mrshaba 01:54, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

A price history graph is vital. This type of graph would show how the price of photovoltaic (PV) panels has come down over time. On the same graph it would make sense to plot PV manufacturing so you can see that as manufacturing volume of panels goes up the costs come down. This relationship leads to the idea of the learning curve which is a common topic when discussing PV economics. I'll probably end up making several individual graphs and then hybrid graphs from those.

You can then identify landmarks on the curve that represent break even points for PV in different applications. Imagine this hypothetical example. Joe wants to build his house 400 meters from the power line. Power lines cost $X per meter to string so Joe would have to pay $XYZ to hook up electricity. Alternately, Joe could hook up photovoltaic panels with batteries and a diesel generator. As the price of PV goes down it is economic for Joe to build his house first at 400 then 300 then 200 then 100 meters from power lines and still end up breaking even by choosing a PV/battery system. Make sense? Mrshaba 02:12, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Something going on
There is an anonymous editor who I think is acting in bad faith. This Anon knows how to use WP quite well and he/she has used this knowledge to slow down the progression of the page. Pictures, numbers, definitions you name it. I also think there are some sockpuppet issues but I can't be sure. I care about this subject a lot so I've been able to ward off most of the bad info that seems to creep on the page with solid sources. I've also corresponded with many experts and institutions regarding relatively simple questions of semantics to help me determine the consensus views of agencies such as NREL and ASES. I went to the top of the food chain to get my answers so I feel comfortable with my view point. There has been fair debate with good editors over some of these issues. With the exception of the anonymous editor I think the debate has always been polite and I haven't had a problem debating viewpoints. I see the debate on the German solar energy page as well. This topic is difficult to frame because solar energy is rather complicated but these complications aside, there's been an anonymous editor who I don't think is helping. That's what's going on. Mrshaba 20:53, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

One other question. As I understand it, long term disruption is considered vandalism. Is this correct? Mrshaba 21:47, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Many Many Thanks
Thank you. Mrshaba 21:55, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Zimbabwe
Not to be mean or anything, but I've had to reverse your listing of Zimbabwe at WP:GAN, and have placed it on hold pending revisions. There were significant issues with the article in relation to the Good Article criteria; mostly lack of reference citations in three major sections. There were also some quite serious issues with the education section -- some flowery language, and really didn't cover the educational system as a whole (no mention of higher education). My full review is at Talk:Zimbabwe.

Also, when you passed the article, you did not add the GA template properly, leaving out the 'oldid=' and 'topic=' parameters. OldID is important for keeping track of which version you reviewed, and the topic parameter is important for keeping track of topics on the main WP:GA page. Furthermore, the article already had a previous ArticleHistory, which should have also been updated as well. Information on filling out the parameters for both templates can be found by clicking on these two links: GA and ArticleHistory. Dr. Cash 23:52, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

GA Reviewing
It would help to be familiar with the Good Article criteria, which is a list of six specific criteria that all Good Articles must adhere to. The first three (prose, verifiability, and completeness), are the most important, but also can be a bit more challenging to address. There similar to the Featured Article criteria, but a little bit looser. For example, prose generally just needs to be readable and free of major errors for GAs; FAs must be pretty much darn near perfect - zero spelling/grammatical errors, very well written, almost brilliant and something close to what you'd see in a magazine. Some gaps in referencing are also acceptable for GA, but anything that is challenged or likely to be challenged, and any hard data like facts and figures, must be cited at GA. If an article has any fact tags, they must be addressed before GA status is granted. Another key item to look for is if there are any whole sections that are completely void of citations; it's ok to skip a citation or two between every few paragraphs at GA, but if entire sections are missing citations, that's a red flag. It helps to be a little more familiar with the topic when judging criterion three, as you're looking for large sections or topics that may be missing. For example, an article on water would not be complete if it only covered liquid water and water vapor, but didn't mention ice at all. You also should look at hoe the sections are organized here; are section and subsection headers short and concise and descriptive of the section's content? Or are they unnecessarily long and ambiguous, and there are multiple subsection headers with very little content in each subsection?

I wrote a brief article in the first edition of the WikiProject GA newsletter which covers some basic aspects of reviewing, that you might want to take a look at. Dr. Cash 05:24, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Civility
Please do not attack other editors. If you continue, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia.

civility rules apply even when comments are made in edit summaries

17:30, 18 November 2007 Good friend100 (Talk | contribs) (86,106 bytes) (→Case for nationalist - lol "baloney". How immature are you going to get with using those terms?) (undo) was not civil. Please remain civil at all times, many thanks Sennen goroshi (talk) 15:38, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Aerith Gainsborough GAN
Hello, I was curious if you've completed your assessment of Aerith Gainsborough. I saw the note on your user page about being busy with school. If that is the case and you are too busy, I hope you wouldn't be offended if I ask for a second opinion. If not, then please disregard the question. (Guyinblack25 talk 17:55, 27 November 2007 (UTC))

Request for arbitration
A request for arbitration has been placed at Requests for arbitration. The arbitration involves not only the issues with Korean cuisine but the issues with editing the article South Korea and the civility of multiple editors.--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC (talk) 07:27, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXI (November 2007)
The November 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot 01:35, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Sennen Goroshi
I will try to say this in the most civil manner possible, I consider you repeated complaints about my conduct to be personal attacks, I will assume your good faith, and that these complaints are made because of your desire to improve wikipedia, not because of any desire to have some form of conflict with me, however it is getting annoying. As I have said to other editors, please talk to me if you have a problem with my edits, I am very willing to listen to civil comments/complaints, and even if I do not agree with those comments/complaints, I think it is far better for everyone that we try to resolve issues with discussion than with constant reports. The fact that I have only ever been blocked once, for 24hours shows that I am aware of wikipedia rules, and willing to follow them. I have had plenty of content disputes in the past, and a large number of them have been solved with discussions, involving myself and the other editor/s in question. If I am in blatant disregard of the rules, of course make a report, but at the moment, a lot of issues could be solved with a simple message, I think at the end of the day, it makes us both look a little stupid, to be constantly involved in ANI disputes. thanks Sennen goroshi 04:11, 2 December 2007 (UTC)


 * oh well, I have tried, I have made it so fucking clear that I am willing to talk to you, and try to sort out any problems we may have - but the response I am constantly getting is "you hate Koreans" "don't edit korean articles" "your actions got the south korea article locked" blah blah blah... Well it is up to you, I won't waste any more time trying to get some sort of peace with an editor who does not want peace. BTW don't blame me for getting South Korea locked, blame the editor who made 4 edits in 24 hours. But you won't do that will you? It is easier for you to blame me, you would hate to admit that the editor who got South Korea locked, was actually Patriotmissile, a fellow Korean. May I suggest that you act in a civil way towards me, or that you try to ignore every single edit I make, because right now this is a pain in the ass.Sennen goroshi 13:49, 3 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Since the RFC I have not changed, for a long time, I have made it clear in my comments that I welcome civil comments regarding my edits, and if/when editors react to me in a civil manner, without accusing me of various acts, then I will respond in the same way. Regarding my use of the word "fucking", it is a normal word, used to imply emphasis, wikipedia is not a place where I feel the need to communicate in anything other than a natural manner.Sennen goroshi 01:24, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter for December 2007
The December 2007 issue of the WikiProject Good Articles newsletter has been published. Comments are welcome on this, as well as suggestions or offers of assistance for the January 2008 issue. Dr. Cash 01:00, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Your image gallery and a favor
I transferred your upload images from here to Commons:Category:History of Korea, Commons:Category:Swords of Korea, or Commons:Category:Korean pottery, etc. The pictures are really great but unless they're used on the Korea related articles or are gathered in one place, none knows how to find them. English Wikipedia is the most representative among other language wiki places and your images are strongly associated with Korean wiki pedia as well. Commons is an image storage, so moving your images to there doesn't mean your images disappearing forever. Therefore, I really want to ask you a favor for the next time. When you upload images, please go to Commons instead of uploading images to English Wikipedia. I've spent quite some times to move yours to commons and correcting the changed image links is also not easy task because I don't have a bot to take over the job. Anyway, if you do directly upload images to commons, there would be just one process. In addition, I believe that the below images are fair use images, so I didn't transfer them. Regards. --Appletrees (talk) 18:51, 12 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Yes I made that mistake, just thought about commons right after I uploaded them. Anyways, I have a stack of images that I want to upload but I'm not the greatest time manager meh. Good friend100 (talk) 03:58, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

!
I'm very busy for the weekend, can you hold the fort with dokdo for the time being? I'm pretty sure you don't have much time either, but if you could dedicate any time to the Dokdo article, that'd be great. thanks. By the way, id you take any photographs of Korean cannons while you were at Korea? We desperately need some for this: Korean cannonOdst (talk) 05:58, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

!
'''UPLOAD THEM PLEEZ!!!!!! thanx.''' iluvbees (talk) 04:36, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Good Articles January Newsletter
Happy New Year! Here is the latest edition of the WikiProject GA Newsletter! Dr. Cash (talk) 03:58, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Disguised Reverts
I noticed in the history of Liancourt Rocks that you made the same edit twice in a row to remove information from the info box on 26 December. Not calling a revert does not make it not a revert. Please make sure that you use more accurate edit summaries in future. Thank you. Spartaz Humbug! 06:54, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

!
I'm canvassing, but I don't give a shit. please revert kusunose's blatant edit, cuz I am on the verge of getting blocked. o.d.s.t. : feet first into hell (talk) 02:35, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
 * ok. o.d.s.t. : feet first into hell (talk) 02:47, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Duplicate images uploaded
Thanks for uploading Image:GAYAarmorattack.JPG. A machine-controlled robot account noticed that you also uploaded the same image under the name Image:Sillaarmorattack.JPG. The copy called Image:Sillaarmorattack.JPG has been marked for speedy deletion since it is redundant. If this sounds okay to you, there is no need for you to take any action.

This is an automated message- you have not upset or annoyed anyone, and you do not need to respond. In the future, you may save yourself some confusion if you supply a meaningful file name and refer to 'my contributions' to remind yourself exactly which name you chose (file names are case sensitive, including the extension) so that you won't lose track of your uploads. For tips on good file naming, see Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions about this notice, or feel that the deletion is inappropriate, please contact User:Staecker, who operates the robot account. Staeckerbot (talk) 01:15, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Military history WikiProject coordinator election
The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are aiming to elect nine coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by February 14! TomStar81 (Talk) 04:38, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter
The February 2008 issue of the WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter is ready! Dr. Cash (talk) 05:30, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXIII (January 2008)
The January 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:56, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Milhist coordinators election has started

 * The February 2008 Military history WikiProject coordinator election has begun. We will be selecting nine coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of fifteen candidates.  Please vote here by February 28. -- R OGER D AVIES   talk 22:56, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

FYI on Seicer's upcoming RfA
Good friend100, I noticed that you've had interacting with Seicer here and thought you might be curious that he's up for consideration as an administrator [|here]. Regards.Netkinetic  (t / c / @) 19:05, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter
The March 2008 issue of the WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter is ready! Dr. Cash (talk) 05:59, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

WP:ANI
WP:ANI

Hi, Good friend100, I just come to inform you that you have been exposed to 2channel, Japanese famous bulletin board. Unfortunately, many Japanese editors seem to have abused Wikipedia with the threads for over 4 years. The discussion set up three days ago, but I let you know of this now. According to your page, you can read Japanese so you can also directly find information regarding you. I translated some, but the threads are too many, so If you have a time to look at it, visit the links listed there. I also add the diff in case you come to the page much later, Thanks. --Appletrees (talk) 01:57, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXIV (February 2008)
The February 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 04:35, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi are you active lately?
Hi, its quite long time no see. How do you do, pal?. You see, there is a concerning dispute over an interwiki affair (let's say in spanish wikipedia). And there is currently a discussion about it. I would appreciate if you could leave a comment about it. You can click over here. wikipedia is making me feel not well. By the way, i think the issue about Hwacha is a settled down dispute. Do you think it would be proper to blank discussion page?. Cheers, In the end, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends. Martin Luther King Jr --HappyApple (talk) 05:21, 14 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Sorry for doing that, but i have declared that i wish my case to be closed. I do not want to engage any dispute anymore. In the end, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends. Martin Luther King Jr --HappyApple (talk) 07:27, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Off topic
Hi there, are you Christian?, it was just a question, as in your user's page, it doesn't mention anything about your religious affiliation. I dont wish this question might be unnapropiate, but i wanted to wish you have a beautiful Easter Season ;-)

Don't hesitate to ask me for help, if you need it, i am just on my page. In the end, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends. Martin Luther King Jr --HappyApple (talk) 05:00, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Gallery
......yeah I understand if your busy but I'd like to see the rest for improving articles. Jegal (talk) 00:09, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

March 2008 edition of the WikiProject Germany newsletter
This newsletter is delivered by a bot to all members of WikiProject Germany. If you do not want to receive this newsletter in the future, please leave a note at the talk page of the Outreach department so we can come up with a better spamlist solution. Thank you, - - Newsletter Bot 'Talk  14:26, 23 March 2008 (UTC)''

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXV (March 2008)
The March 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 01:19, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

April GA Newsletter
The April issue of the WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter is now available. Dr. Cash (talk) 03:51, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Good Articles May Newsletter
The May Newsletter for WikiProject Good Articles has now been published. Dr. Cash (talk) 22:16, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXVI (April 2008)
The April 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:55, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXVII (May 2008)
The May 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:43, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Good articles newsletter
Delivered by the automated Giggabot (stop!) 01:32, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXVIII (June 2008)
The June 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 18:50, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Cite tag on Taekwondo
Content disputes etc. aside, I always add a cite request to any claim of a martial art being used by a military or law enforcement, as it is an important claim for any martial art. --Nate1481(t/c) 20:25, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

your user page...
on your user page you say you support republic of china as a legitimate nation, yet i see something about tibet being free on your user page.... in case you didnt notice, !@#$@!$!# republic of china claims tibet as part of china, not only are you contradicting yourself, youve revealed yourself to be a person who will side with anyone to advance his own point of view. and in case you didnt notice, tibetans are not altaic so its none of you business, see sino tibetan peoples article for proof that tibetans are closer to chinese than YOU. also, i notice this was old and last year, but you repeteadly argued for goguryo to be taken off tributary list to china, because you say "its because chinese are trying to make it seem as though goguryo was chinese", but many NON chinese states paid tribute to china, so your argument does not make sense, and its obvious from the arguing, hongqigong is a very logical and tolerant person, and not able to see as i have, how korean are editing wikipedia to advance theyre own point of view and he even insisted on a compromies because he could not see what slime true nationalism is. Altaicsmindyourowndamnbusiness (talk) 00:50, 13 July 2008 (UTC)


 * I dont give a shit. Good friend100 (talk) 12:50, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Korean War Crimes
I will have a look over it later. The references are all at the bottom. Thank you. --Ex-oneatf (talk) 14:15, 15 July 2008 (UTC)


 * I looked briefly over your edits. You appear not to have read the topic as a whole nor the references.


 * The article is not about nor limited to the Korean War.


 * It about the context for and longer historical pattern of Korean war crimes, how they have been responded to, used and denied leading to the recent political response of the Truth and Conciliation Committee and the land seizures of collaborators.


 * I imagine that in time, as each section grows in detail, that certain sections will be broken off into specific subject but please allow me and others time to develop the article before attempting to change its meaning entirely.


 * Thank you. --Ex-oneatf (talk) 15:15, 15 July 2008 (UTC)


 * hey, could you please see my edits regarding korean war crimes & see that they are perfectly reasonable? (Ferromagneticmonopole (talk) 02:07, 16 July 2008 (UTC))

Re:
You can find your answer here
 * WikiProject_Council/Proposals
 * Articles for deletion/Korean war crimes
 * Deletion review/Log/2008 July 16
 * User talk:Future Perfect at Sunrise

Regards --Caspian blue (talk) 13:38, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

WP:ANI
Hi, Good frined, I know you are inactive, but you and I are accused of being anti-Japanese hater or race writing articles motivated by propaganda. Could you leave your input at ANI for Lucyintheskywithdada's disruptive behaviors? His treat on me and Fut.Perf is alarming so I could not help to report him to ANI. I would appreciate if you leave a note there. Thanks.--Caspian blue (talk) 09:09, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
 * WP:ANI

Your responsibility
님은 언제나 문제를 일으켜 놓고서는 슬그머니 빠지면서 양쪽 다 비판하는 식이군요. 한국인전쟁범죄 때도 그렇고, 이번의 위안부 문서만 해도 그렇습니다. 님께서 먼저 revert하면서 환기시킨 문제가 아닌가요? 그러고선 며칠 간 나타나지 않다가 선생처럼 꾸짖거나, 비꼬면서 얘기하는데 기분이 매우 많이 상합니다. 전 하루에 두번 이상은 문서를 돌리지 않습니다. 님같이 제제받게 될까봐 무서워서요. 어디에 제가 선을 넘었나요? 늘 토론에 참가했는데, 님의 말은 상대방의 이유없이 되돌리는 행위를 정당화시키는 꼴밖에 되지 않습니다. 무책임감하게 토론이나 어디에 참여하지 않으시려먼 애초에 문제제기를 하지 않는 편이 낫겠습니다. 또한 이미 그 문제의 내용은 개정되었는데, 관리자에게 표절된 문서를 되돌린다라고 말하는 것은 뒷북이라고 밖에 생각되지 않습니다. 이제까지의 토론을 제대로 읽어나 보세요. 그리고 저를 공격했던 루시라는 애는 이미 과거의 꼭두각시를 남용한데다가, 최근의 도큐멘팅어뷰즈의 꼭두각시로 판정나서, 오늘 차단되었습니다. 전 거의 역사 쪽에는 편집을 하지 않았는데, 앞으로 님이 문제를 제기할 때마다 뭔가 큰 문제가 있나 보다해서 최근에 위안부 문제 등에 관심을 가지고 참여했지만, 별로 의미없을 것 같습니다.--Caspian blue (talk) 05:24, 26 July 2008 (UTC)


 * 님은 아주 저주를 퍼붓는 데, 정말 기분나쁘군요. 편집 분쟁은 WP:DR을 통하던지 그 주제에 대해 아예 손을 떼던지 할 테니, 그런 식으로 상대방을 꾸짖는 어투로 가장해서 저주하지나 마세요. 이제껏 영어판 위키백과에서 편집하면서, 다른 사람도 아니고 한국인에게 제일 기분이 나쁜 말을 듣기는 처음이군요. 님께서 제가 세넨 고로시에 대해 커멘트하라는 것을 제가 안했다는 이유로 그 후로는 제게 기분나쁘게 구시는데요. 제가 님보다 나이가 많아서 참았지만, 참 정말 어이가 없네요. 어디가서 그러지 마세요. --Caspian blue (talk) 05:39, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
 * 님에 그 토론페이지에다 제가 이미 선을 넘었고, 너도 똑같다라고 하는데다가, 차단될 것이다라고 하는데, 그게 저주가 아니면 뭔가요? 그게 어디 조심하라는 말인가요? 전 이제껏 3RR으로 차단된 적이 없습니다. 하나같이 세번 되돌리기 했다고 에딧 워링으로 차단되었기 때문에, 하루에 2번 이상을 넘기지 않습니다. 그리고 꼭 토론을 참여하구요. 님눈에는 그 문서에 되돌리는 애들이 전에 영원히 차단당했거나, 별도의 계정을 가진 애들인 것 안보이나요? --Caspian blue (talk) 05:54, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

"long term edit-warring" 이라고, 계속 로지택하고 되돌리면, 님하고 로지택이 함게차단될거에요. 그거 때문에 님께 조언 드리는데, 제가 무슨 님한테 욕한듯이 제가 자꾸 님을 기분 나쁘게한다고 제발 그만하세요. 저는 조언 드릴 뿐이에요. Good friend100 (talk) 06:07, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Not proper
I strongly recommend you redact your first sentence. That is not civil--Caspian blue (talk) 01:17, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

tibet and repiblic of china on your user page
in case you didnt notice, or are to dim to motice, the republic of china claims tibet is part of china..... you cant support 2 conflicting states..... remove one of them templates now...., and you know full well china is capitalist........162.83.176.163 (talk) 20:10, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

tibet and repiblic of china on your user page
in case you didnt notice, or are to dim to motice, the republic of china claims tibet is part of china..... you cant support 2 conflicting states..... remove one of them templates now...., and you know full well china is capitalist, not communist........162.83.176.163 (talk) 20:11, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

WP:ANI
Well, it is a free whether you comment on him or not, but well I try it. --Caspian blue (talk) 17:17, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXIX (July 2008)
The July 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 01:20, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Image
Hi there. Is it ok to let me know where did you shot this photo? Image:Korea-Goguryeo-King.crown-01.jpg Is it really the Goguryeo Crown? Zxcvmew (talk) 18:53, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter
Sorry about the delay. AWB has been having a few issues lately. Here is the august issue of the WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter! Dr. Cash (talk) 20:33, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Wiki badges
안녕, I have seen you editing on some hot Korea topics. Can you tell me please, where do you get all those cool badges on your user page? TIA --Hye-Hyun (talk) 17:06, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Nominations for the Military history WikiProject coordinator election
The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are aiming to elect nine coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 (UTC) on September 14! This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:17, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXX (August 2008)
The August 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:09, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Military history WikiProject coordinator election
The September 2008 Military history WikiProject coordinator election has begun. We will be selecting nine coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of fourteen candidates. Please vote here by September 30! This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:06, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

FA review for Battle of Incheon
Battle of Incheon has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here.

(I am informing you of this FAR because of your high number of edits to the Korean War.) — Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 01:33, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXI (September 2008)
The September 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:39, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

your intrest in china-related articles
Upon seeing your userpage, it is very clear that you oppose China's Soverginity and National Intrgrety, yet, why do you spend so much time on the articles? what do you care? You see China as the way Westerners usually see it, and if you dislike China (or the size of it, considering you are very eager to see that parts of it be seperated) so much, why waste your time on China-related articles like Tang Dynasty?

This Comment, altought it may not sound so, is in good Faith, Thank you. Btzkillerv (talk) 18:00, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXII (October 2008)
The October 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:58, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

your userbox
Since when were you a homosexual? lol it says on your userbox...... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ashiahsi (talk • contribs) 07:47, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Ship armour
Hello. What is so wrong with "may have featured ship armour" (or "...iron armour")? Your wording is susceptible to serious criticism in three points: If you feel the turtle ship was an ironclad, why don't you present your case at Talk:Ironclad warship, so that it can be included into the article? You well know that it was there removed a while ago by large consensus... Regards Gun Powder Ma (talk) 23:58, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
 * the historical existence of the iron armour is disputed (Turnbell, Hawley, etc.)
 * even if it existed, the term "ironclad" has been historically reserved for the 19th century steam ships (highly prominent definition in the featured article Ironclad warship).
 * even it featured iron armour and was called by some in such a way, there are earlier possible incidences of 'ironclad' warships, including the Santa Anna, the Atakebune and others, so it cannpot be "the world's first"
 * Whether Santa Anna(used lead to water proof hull), and Atakebune(may have used iron plates to block arrows and cannon fire) constitutes iron cladding is a matter of academic contention. There's no consensus with different people drawing different claims. Current text states that some sources state the Turtle Ship is the world's first iron clad ship. That's an accurate description.Melonbarmonster2 (talk) 08:57, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Request for Comment
I wanted to ask for your participation since you've contributed to the Korean cuisine article in the past specifically on the issue of dog meat. Badagnani and (Tanner-Christopher) are holding the Korean cuisine article hostage and claiming that dog meat is a staple of Korean food along with rice, kimchi, pork, chicken, etc..

I am proposing 1)removal of this section for the reason that it is factually inaccurate(dog meat is not in the same category as beef, chicken and other staple korean foods) and that we work on 2)an objective presentation of facts about dog meat such as mentioning it in a subsection on "foods eaten as medicine".

I have added dispute tags in the section to indicate that POV and accuracy of the section is in dispute and Badagnani and (Tanner-Christopher) are claiming that not even a dispute exists and have reverted my tags.

I am planning take this into dispute resolution steps so please participate and comment on this dispute so that we can have diversity of opinions and views represented. Thanks.Melonbarmonster2 (talk) 03:24, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXIII (November 2008)
The November 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 16:29, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Regarding Wiman
Hello Good friend100. A move request had been initiated regarding the article Wei Man, however it has now since been closed with the decision no move. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wei_Man#requested_move

I feel that the discussion was closed prematurely, also it seemed like the closing admin dismissed my rationale. If it is no trouble, would you mind setting up a second request move and possibly participating in it? I'm not too keen with the site's basic mechanics so I'd appreciate your help. Thanks. Kuebie (talk) 21:39, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXIV (December 2008)
The December 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 03:02, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

South Korea
hi, just to say I don't really mind you reverting that one bit of the article. A lot of the things that I removed were cited, but the overall tone of the article was awful.

I am happy that you chose to revert only one thing, as keeping that does not really change the overall tone.

The previous state of the article was awful I hope the current state is a bit more neutral and sounds less like a promotional article and more like a wikipedia article

カンチョーSennen Goroshi ! (talk) 16:21, 19 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Dont however take it too far, all of this "world leader" stuff sounds a little stupid, I would imagine that the USA or Japan article could have "world leader" for so many different things. カンチョーSennen Goroshi ! (talk) 16:43, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Happy New Year!
''Hi there, long time no see. How are you?.'' I hope everything is going fine to you. I know it is quite late to say Happy lunar new year, but i stopped by looking some articles and i figured out that, there is some time on my schedule to let you know to have Happy Seollal, if it is the proper way to call it :)

By the way, if you need any assistance in science or anything, you know how to contact me. Have fun. Cheers~ --HappyApple (talk) 07:45, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXV (January 2009)
The January 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 03:57, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXVI (February 2009)
The February 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:20, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Nominations for the Military history WikiProject coordinator election
The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process has started; to elect the coordinators to serve for the next six months. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 (UTC) on 13 March! This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 18:56, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Military history WikiProject coordinator election
The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has started. We will be selecting coordinators from a pool of eighteen to serve for the next six months. Please vote here by 23:59 (UTC) on Saturday, 28 March! Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:59, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXVII (March 2009)
The March 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 02:37, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXVIII (April 2009)
The April 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:09, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

GA Sweeps invitation
Hello, I hope you are doing well. I am sending you this message since you are a member of the GA WikiProject. I would like to invite you to consider helping with the GA sweeps process. Sweeps helps to ensure that the oldest GAs still meet the criteria, and improve the quality of GAs overall. Unfortunately, last month only two articles were reviewed. This is definitely a low point after our peak at the beginning of the process when 163 articles were reviewed in September 2007. After nearly two years, the running total has just passed the 50% mark. In order to expediate the reviewing, several changes have been made to the process. A new worklist has been created, detailing which articles are left to review. All exempt and previously reviewed articles have already been removed from the list. Instead of reviewing by topic, you can consider picking and choosing whichever articles interest you.

We are always looking for new members to assist with the remaining articles, so if you are interested or know of anybody that can assist, please visit the GA sweeps page. In addition, for every member that reviews 100 articles or has a significant impact on the process, s/he will get an award when they reach that threshold. If only 14 editors achieve this feat starting now, we would be done with Sweeps! Of course, having more people reviewing less articles would be better for all involved, so please consider asking others to help out. Feel free to stop by and only review a few articles, something's better than nothing! Take a look at the list, and see what articles interest you. Let's work to complete Sweeps so that efforts can be fully focused on the backlog at GAN. If you have any questions about the process, reviewing, or need help with a particular article, please contact me or OhanaUnited and we'll be happy to help. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 08:13, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XXXIX (May 2009)
The May 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:48, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XL (June 2009)
The June 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:15, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLI (July 2009)
The July 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 19:38, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Nominations open for the Military history WikiProject coordinator election
The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process has started; to elect the coordinators to serve for the next six months. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 (UTC) on 12 September! Many thanks,  Roger Davies  talk 04:24, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLII (August 2009)
The August 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 19:55, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Military history coordinator elections: voting has started!
Voting in the Military history WikiProject coordinator election has now started. The aim is to elect the coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of sixteen candidates. Please vote here by 23:59 (UTC) on 26 September! For the coordinators,  Roger Davies  talk 22:09, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLIII (September 2009)
The September 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:01, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Test your World War I knowledge with the Henry Allingham International Contest!
As a member of the Military history WikiProject or World War I task force, you may be interested in competing in the Henry Allingham International Contest! The contest aims to improve article quality and member participation within the World War I task force. It will also be a step in preparing for Operation Great War Centennial, the project's commemorative effort for the World War I centenary.

If you would like to participate, please sign up by 11 November 2009, 00:00, when the first round is scheduled to begin! You can sign up here, read up on the rules here, and discuss the contest here! This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 18:54, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLIV (October 2009)
The October 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 18:54, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

File:Dokdo is korea.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Dokdo is korea.jpg, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted.  F ASTILYsock (T ALK ) 07:53, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XIV (November 2009)
The November 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 18:31, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLVI (December 2009)
The December 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 03:17, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLVII (January 2010)
The January 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 03:38, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Nominations for the March 2010 Military history Project Coordinator elections now open!
The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process has started; to elect the coordinators to serve for the next six months. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 (UTC) on 8 March 2010! More information on coordinatorship may be found on the coordinator academy course and in the responsibilities section on the coordinator page. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:34, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLVIII (February 2010)
The February 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:27, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Coordinator elections have opened!
Voting for the Military history WikiProject coordinator elections has opened; all users are encouraged to participate in the elections. Voting will conclude 23:59 (UTC) on 28 March 2010. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:50, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

April 2010 GAN backlog elimination drive
–MuZemike delivered by MuZebot 17:36, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLIX (March 2010)
The March 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:48, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : L (April 2010)
The April 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 19:25, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LI (May 2010)
The May 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:09, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LII (June 2010)
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 19:03, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LIII (July 2010)
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:27, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

File:GAYAarmorattack.JPG listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:GAYAarmorattack.JPG, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Skier Dude ( talk  06:17, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

The Milhist election has started!
The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has started. You are cordially invited to help pick fourteen new coordinators from a pool of twenty candidates. This time round, the term has increased from six to twelve months so it is doubly important that you have your say! Please cast your vote here no later than 23:59 (UTC) on Tuesday, 28 September 2010.

With many thanks in advance for your participation from the coordinator team,  Roger Davies  talk 19:04, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LVI, October 2010
To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 22:45, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LVII, November 2010
To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 22:28, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

The Bugle: Volume LVIX, January 2011
To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 15:46, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LX, February 2011
To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 21:47, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXI, March 2011
To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 01:50, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXII, April 2011
To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 22:30, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXIII, May 2011
To begin or stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 22:37, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXIV, June 2011
To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to this page. BrownBot (talk) 23:01, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXV, July 2011
To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to this page. BrownBot (talk) 22:07, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXVI, August 2011
To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to this page. EdwardsBot (talk) 17:57, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXVII, September 2011
To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to this page. EdwardsBot (talk) 02:12, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXVIII, October 2011
To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. EdwardsBot (talk) 08:11, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXIX, November 2011
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 20:32, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Military Historian of the Year
Nominations for the "Military Historian of the Year" for 2011 are now open. If you would like to nominate an editor for this award, please do so here. Voting will open on 22 January and run for seven days. Thanks! On behalf of the coordinators, Nick-D (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 23:12, 15 January 2012 (UTC) You were sent this message because you are a listed as a member of the Military history WikiProject.

The Bugle: Issue LXX, January 2012
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 00:03, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXI, February 2012
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 09:52, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Military history coordinator election
The Military history WikiProject has started its 2012 project coordinator election process, where we will select a team of coordinators to organize the project over the coming year. If you would like to be considered as a candidate, please submit your nomination by 14 September. If you have any questions, do not hesitate to contact one of the current coordinators on their talk page. This message was delivered here because you are a member of the Military history WikiProject. – Military history coordinators (about the project • what coordinators do) 09:06, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

WikiProject Military history coordinator election
Greetings from WikiProject Military history! As a member of the project, you are invited to take part in our annual project coordinator election, which will determine our coordinators for the next twelve months. If you wish to cast a vote, please do so on the election page by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September! Kirill [talk] 16:37, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

WikiProject Military history coordinator election
Greetings from WikiProject Military history! As a member of the project, you are invited to take part in our annual project coordinator election, which will determine our coordinators for the next twelve months. If you wish to cast a vote, please do so on the election page by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 22:15, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Arbitration Motion Related to Liancourt Rocks
An arbitrator has started a motion here which will change the current article probation of Liancourt Rocks into a discretionary sanction on all pages related to Liancourt Rocks. You are notified because you were a party to the original arbitration case. - Penwhale &#124; dance in the air and follow his steps 23:20, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

WikiProject Military history coordinator election
Greetings from WikiProject Military history! As a member of the project, you are invited to take part in our annual project coordinator election. If you wish to cast a vote, please do so on the election page by 23:59 (UTC) on 29 September. Yours, Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 05:22, 25 September 2015 (UTC)