User talk:LactoseTI/Archive 1


 * ~Kylu ( u | t )  04:50, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Good friend100
Did you check the talk page on Japan? Who "wins" the argument? Who has the last thing to say? And why doesn't anybody else respond to me?

After you check all the things I have written, do I look like a Korean POV who is spreading words all over the talk page of Japan and slowly decaying the article?

Good friend100 01:19, 16 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Summary of key points addressing this issue that I left on your talk page--no, having the "last word" didn't mean you won. Generally you embarrass yourself to the point that others deem a response to be unnecessary.


 * No one else responded because we have busy lives; you'll probably get a note or two dribbling in eventually.


 * The world doesn't revolve around you; most Wikipedia users probably don't check your talk page daily.


 * What's more, I don't believe I'm the only one leaving comments about this issue--you've been warned by several.

No response? Good friend100 16:04, 16 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Sorry, I'd been taking the time to respond on your talk page since it was a matter regarding your behavior, not mine. Look there. LactoseTI 16:09, 16 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Really? I have been warned by users on my talk page? Who then? I didn't know.


 * I'm not selfish. "The world doesn't revolve around" Takeshima. Good friend100 00:59, 17 July 2006 (UTC)


 * You said that I embarrass myself to the point nobody responds. Not nessarily. You can have the last word and some users back off when your comments or claims are true and they have nothing to say.

Pick a fight
On my talk page, you wrote that I wanted to "pick a fight". Is that a response to my question to bring this argument to the Dokdo talk page?

I am not trying to pick a fight and I don't understand why you interpreted it that way. I am simply asking why, if you so strongly believe that Dokdo is Japan's territory, you are not opening a poll at the talk page or supporting your claims with the facts like you did at my talk page?

You can at least respond why you are not even glancing at this question in your responses. Good friend100 02:16, 17 July 2006 (UTC)


 * To be honest, I couldn't care less about the issue itself. The issue is whether it belongs on the Yasukuni page.  You are the one that placed it there.  If you aren't suggesting a change to the Yasukuni article, you're putting something where it doesn't belong (at best) and trying to pick a fight (at worst).  I bothered to post on your talk page to help let you realize that such actions are inappropriate.


 * I don't care about your opinion about Takeshima. As this is an encyclopedia, I'm not in it for the debate exercises.  I have mentioned this several times, I guess you didn't read it; much as you don't seem to read the details of what's going on in the articles before changing them inappropriately.


 * Just for your information debate over material doesn't belong ANYWHERE on Wikipedia--whether it's the Takeshima talk page or not. The only debates should be over what content should be included, and whether something is unnecessarily POV based.  Incidently, this is why it would be inappropriate to take it to the Takeshima talk page.  LactoseTI 02:21, 17 July 2006 (UTC)


 * I suppose over 95% of the discussions at the Dokdo talk page should have never taken place then.


 * And what did I add to the Yasukuni page? All I did was mention Koizumi and the relation between Korea and Japan and you tell me to stop "spewing my ideal information all over Wikipedia". Good friend100 02:58, 17 July 2006 (UTC)


 * You're right--95% of the discussion probably shouldn't have taken place. Ideological bozos are why that page is currently in need of protection until it can be sorted out.


 * *sigh* out of context again--what you did was raise the issue of Takeshima on the Yasukuni page, without any intention to add anything to the Yasukuni page. What a waste of space.  LactoseTI 03:03, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

It was a question. Did I vandalize the page? No I didn't. A simple question that could have been ignored, buddy. Good friend100 03:06, 17 July 2006 (UTC)


 * While not vandalism in the truest sense of the word, it wastes other editor's valuable time and energy. What's more, it's a politically charged idea.  Some call it Internet trolling.  I posted to let you know that you shouldn't HAVE to ignore such drivel; it doesn't simply belong on the page. LactoseTI 03:10, 17 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Its clear that you look down on me since I am younger than you. So the weird thing is, you shouldn't have answered. And I don't think I'm an internet troll. I don't run around the talk pages and make rude comments. Good friend100 03:13, 17 July 2006 (UTC)


 * I have no issue with your age. The funny thing is most people are younger than I am--so I would have a hard time going around not speaking to anyone!  Trolls are not necessarily rude.  You did, in this case, go to a talk page and introduce an unrelated statement, most likely to start a fight.  It's a good thing it was caught before it materialized. LactoseTI 03:24, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Stop adding crap and revisionist pov to your edits please. It's very obvious what you're trying to do here.


 * Please familiarize yourself with Wikipedia policies on good faith and civilty. Please also sign your comments. LactoseTI 18:50, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Don't pretend to be npov, please. Abab 19:47, 17 July 2006 (UTC)


 * I'm not a neutral point of view or a point of view; however, I do strive to make the articles on Wikipedia have a more neutral point of view overall. If you disagree, perhaps you'd like to discuss some specific case?  Thanks for signing, by the way, it's easier to figure out exactly what's going on where. LactoseTI 20:31, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

I already said this. You seem NPOV and fair on the outside, but really you are the one without "good faith and civility". The ironic thing is, none of your claims seem to be true. "I strive to make the articles on Wikipedia have a more NPOV". Then whats with your claims on Dokdo? Is the name "Takeshima" NPOV? The word Dokdo is not POV because first, that is the true name since Dokdo is under Korean control, and second, there was a large poll a couple months ago, but you missed it. Good friend100 04:01, 18 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Takeshima is no more of a POV word than Dokdo. Liancourt Rocks is clearly a more neutral name.  The poll was rigged, and in violation of several policies.  For that and other reasons, the page is currently to stop edit wars until we can figure out what to do, most likely culminating in a fair poll. LactoseTI 04:34, 18 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Interestingly, your argument would say that since Japan had a military presense in Korea for much of the last century, the term "Korea" at the time would be a POV word. LactoseTI 04:41, 18 July 2006 (UTC)


 * If the poll was rigged, you should open a poll you think is fair. And make sure it doesn't lead to vandalism like it did before. Liancourt Rocks is only a neutral name to neutral observers. Good friend100 21:54, 18 July 2006 (UTC)


 * If neutral observers view it that way, it's a good argument that it (Liancourt Rocks) is the NPOV title. I'll have to remember that sentence... LactoseTI 02:52, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

You should open a poll. Instead of making fun that I gave you valuable information you sarcastic, cruel person. I already wrote this down. I have hardly no respect for you now. Words of mouth is going to hurt you a lot. Good friend100 03:32, 19 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Please familiarize yourself with No_personal_attacks and Civility. By the by, I really couldn't care less about whether or not you have respect for me.  Your "valuable information" was neither "valuable" nor "information," but instead was not much more than a child closing his eyes and covering his ears, babbling the same words repeatedly.  I won't go further at risk of truly being uncivil, but you are somewhat stretching my patience by resorting to nothing more than name calling and threats. LactoseTI 05:08, 19 July 2006 (UTC)


 * You should familiarize yourself with that link. The problem with you, is that all you take is other people's actions and judge them and never judge how you are doing yourself. You must understand what you have written on my talk page is name calling. And still no apologies? You still don't understand the quotes I picked up from you are insults? Good friend100 23:48, 19 July 2006 (UTC)


 * One thing I agree with is that it's always easier to see faults in others. I welcome constructive comments from anyone on my contributions.  I understand that you interpretted or felt them to be insults, but they were not.  I repeated noted that; especially remember to take things in context.  I think you should be happy, not insulted, that people are at least taking an interest in some of what you're contributing.  So of course, no apologies would be in order.  LactoseTI 13:20, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Then it really is a problem, if you cannot understand how somebody feels even though they are not to meant as insults. Pretty selfish if you think you have done nothing wrong. Good friend100 04:05, 26 July 2006 (UTC)


 * As a Korean, especially one that lives in the US, perhaps you have an unrealistic image about the nation and feel protective of it. There's not much wrong with that, but don't expect others to walk on eggshells/pamper you in a way so that you'll never be insulted.  Facts are facts; unfortunately, some people seem to get insulted by the way things are.  I regret that you feel bad when you hear the truth, but that's how it is... LactoseTI 02:29, 27 July 2006 (UTC)


 * You don't seem to understand why I feel insulted. I don't feel "bad" because of the "truth" you are talking about.


 * The reason why I feel insulted is because you sit there, technically calling me a Korean nationalist and being sarcastic. Not only that, your attitude towards me is just negative after you found out that I was a Korean and only a high schooler. Good friend100 03:13, 28 July 2006 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry, but there just were no insults--I say it here again, though I know it will fall on deaf ears. Is it a lack of ability or lack of willingness to read what others write (when they don't agree with you)? LactoseTI 20:26, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Archive
I archived our argument. Lets just forget about it and get on with other things in Wikipedia. I am getting tired of this and I am busy. Lets just say sorry and put it behind us. Good friend100 00:50, 20 July 2006 (UTC)


 * I accept your apology, though of course don't see one the need to offer one of my own (sorry, this may sound a bit arrogant, but it was what it seems you were implying); I hope you incorporate some of the constructive crticism in the future. I might suggest that you may wish to refrain from archiving discussions until they are old; it's generally "bad form" to archive very recent discussions. LactoseTI 13:16, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Its an ugly stain on my talk page and I hate it. It disgusts me and I want to forget it. I don't need your apology if you don't want to apologize. Thats fine with me. Lets just stop talking about this and discuss other things. Good friend100 02:17, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Don't think I am "submitting" to you because I am not. Good friend100 20:52, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Re:haengju image
We probably will need to research for some of the other images too. Good friend100 18:00, 30 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I've marked all I have seen and done quick searches, but didn't turn up anything. If you see other ones feel free to let me know and I'll help look.  There just aren't that many images out there for a lot of these events--when you find one it's almost like striking gold, if we can just get over sticky copyright issues. LactoseTI 19:12, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

HappyApple contact
Hello, thank you for warning me about the copyright status of the images regarding to: Hwacha firing (Image:Hwacha-firing.jpg) and Hwacha standing at Deoksu Palace(Image:Hwacha.jpg).

I am not Angelo Toscano. However on his website he can be reached and you can ask him about the copyright status, as he took the picture and he's a tourist, is not a picture take by an "agency" (there is no copyright unless noted). I have contacted him by letter, his aims is to promote Korean culture (as in the website says), i am awaiting for his response.--HappyApple 22:07, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

The other picture falls on the same category of the previous one. The Hwacha attacking to an objective, you can contact the user who took this picture on the forum. I belive if the user doesnt respond to any of your letters, a fair use can be claimed for this picture (that would be to use perhaps much bureaucracy at Wikipedia, but i believe that would solve any further inconvinience you have encountered).

Fair use often applies to pictures which have been taken by agencies and corporation (because they say specifically that their pictures have a copyright), it is quite rare to use it for people like you and me. Most of the images took by tourists or people do not claim copyright for them.

That's what i wanted to say, I'll hope this issue to be settled down very quickly. --HappyApple 22:07, 30 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the info. I'm (painfully) aware of a lot of the issues regarding fair use...  These days, not assuming everything is copyrighted leads to a lot of sticky and unpleasant lawsuits.  Using images from people like Angelo specifically who say copyright is even more dangerous.  Luckily, he's got contact information there and I am guessing he'll be nice enough to help.


 * The situation for the other photo is a bit worse. I didn't see how to contact them right off the bat, but not receiving a reply isn't really an excuse to use their photo.  Anyone can easily make mousepads or mugs from photos they take, and if you publish the image without their permission it can directly lead to them not being able to make money.  It sounds silly, but fair use really does apply to people like you and me--and not just agencies.


 * I especially like the hwacha firing photo, so I'm really hopeful we'll be able to get permission for it. LactoseTI 22:20, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I have contacted the user (named Andy) who took the picture of Hwacha firing the arrows (it would be really strange not to mention really unlikely to happen that someone could make profit by posting this image on a mug or a mouse pad-Isn't this an opposite of assuming good faith from your part?). The user's webpage is at http://www.xanga.com/Timur_the_Lamed i am awaiting for his response, i hope that the issues that happened by some sort of less information on copyright status to be solved very quickly.--HappyApple 04:10, 31 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Great! I'm glad you tracked him down.  Assuming good faith only applies to inside of Wikipedia--it's too bad, but we can't assume that the rest of the world will treat Wikipedia nicely... thus, the unfortunate need for the sticky copyright process.  The good faith part is that I assume that you didn't intentionally potentially violate copyright laws by putting it up; I believe that your really didn't think it could hurt--but unfortunately, we can't assume the entire world won't sue or get angry.  LactoseTI 12:13, 31 July 2006 (UTC)