User talk:Hujuhi378

May 2020
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Lai Đại Hàn‎; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note: If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. --John B123 (talk) 18:05, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
 * 1) Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

Hujuhi378 (talk) 21:28, 12 May 2020 (UTC)Are you the person who added the quote from the Kos? Please state your reasons of where you are coming from; trusting of one single blog post accused of being propaganda, having no citations from another source.. Besides no other sources even mention the such claims from the Vietnamese government. No other sources claim that at all. Also, the Vietnamese government does not even officially recognize the "Lai Dai Han". They did not even allow the BBC in Vietnam to take a documentary of the Lai Dai Han. Then suddenly according to this one unreliable blog post; the accusations by the "Vietnamese government" of South Korea "forcing women to be comfort women" becomes true? Please do your research. The Vietnamese government never claimed that all and other sources do not say something close to that. Also the Kos is considered to be very biased by multiple sources. . Multiple editors? One is not multiple. Though I apologize for the repeated edits but you also did the same.


 * No I didn't add that content to the article. It was added on 16 November 2016 (page dif). I reverted your first edit which had no edit summary because there was no explanation of why sourced content had been removed. Having had you edit reverted, you should have started a discussion on the talk page as per the WP:BRD guidelines. Your second removal of the content had an edit summary that included "It is talking about the Korean "comfort women" during WW2 and not related at all with the Lai Dai Han". This is not the case, the article does have a section about Lai Dai Han. Wikipedia does not work on the principle that you just keep changing content back to how you think it should be, which is why I have reverted you subsequent edit. You need to start a discussion on the talk page to gain other editors opinions. --John B123 (talk) 22:19, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Hujuhi378 (talk) 09:09, 14 May 2020 (UTC)Yeah I was not very used to the Wikipedia guidelines of editing. So I did not add in my reason and the second time I added my reason for the edit then the third time I explained fully why that part is not proven. Why are you repeating my past claims when I already explained the actual reason for not finding that post credible at all. Yeah I know it is talking about the Lai Dai Han now. But its claims are not cited and no other sources say those claims. Please see my statements above mentioned in this talk and not the past statements I made in one of my first edits. Oh so it's totally fine to cite totally unreliable sources a.k.a, a post close to a personal blog? Then just add it? (just basing on that one blog post?) Yes I will abide by the "Wikipedia rules." So, yes that is why I came to the "talk" page do "discuss."
 * I was explaining why I reverted your initial edits.--John B123 (talk) 15:28, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Hujuhi378 (talk) 16:20, 14 May 2020 (UTC)Okay. But why did you revert my edits after those initial ones? So what needs to be done for that statement from the Kos to be mixed/deleted? Of course, by following Wikipedia's guidelines.


 * I deleted those as the procedure is that you shouldn't remake an edit after it has been reverted, see WP:BRD. Now you have explained the reasoning I have deleted the paragraph. --John B123 (talk) 17:00, 14 May 2020 (UTC)