User talk:LordAmeth/Archive1

'''This is an archive of my talk page for all discussions in 2004-5. Please do not edit or add to any of these discussions here; please add any new material to my main talk page. Thank you.''' LordAmeth 23:34, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Hi! welcome to Wikipedia!

Hope you enjoy contributing to Wikipedia. Be bold in editing pages. Here are some links that you might find useful:


 * Try the Tutorial. If you have less time, try How to edit a page.
 * To sign your posts (on talk pages, Votes for deletion page etc.) use ~ (four tildes). This will insert your name and timestamp. To insert just your name, type (3 tildes).
 * You can experiment in the test area.
 * You can get help at the Help Desk
 * Some other pages that will help you know more about Wikipedia: Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines, Neutral point of view, Civility, Wikiquette, What Wikipedia is not
 * If you made IP edits before creating a user account, you can attribute your IP edits to your account at Changing attribution for an edit.

I hope you stick around and keep contributing to Wikipedia. Drop a note at New user log.

-- Utcursch | Talk to me

Hi, nice work on the Japanese battles, but when you add the battle table, you shouldn't use blue text when they are not naval battles. It's easy to fix, just take out the ;color:#2222cc part of the code. Thanks! Adam Bishop 19:56, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Takeda Shingen
I think i got the story from "Japanese in the Storm Series" by someone called Domo Fuji something. I dont know if its a fictionalized story of Shingen or if its true.

Regarding my article about Kosaka Masanobu
Hello lordameth, first I want to say that you wrote alot of great articles that i enjoyed reading, anyways now that we finish with the pleasantries now for serious disussion. I got a message from you about regarding Kosaka Masanobu bisexuality with Shingen, I got that information from John Turnbull history book called "Kawanakajima" there is a biography of Shingen private life, it says that "...Shingen although is buddhist, he indulged himself with two concubine and had a suspected bisexual relationship with one of his retainer". If you check my "history" can you find a single piece of me vandalishing Wikipedia? Anyways I find it a bit personal "attack" when you suspected me as vandal, because i really enjoyed being here.

Revolutionaries and rebels
The distinction you make between Revolutionaries and rebels on the Category:Rebels is wrong, please read my arguments on Category talk:Rebels. I hope we can change the introduction to something more suitable, thanks. --145.94.41.95 22:44, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Heijo Palace Photo
Hello LordAmeth,

I noticed you put the PD-art (non)copyright tag on the photo that's in the Heijo Palace article. Reading the on-screen text, I wonder if it's the right tag, since it refers to two-dimensional art depicted in the image, but the art in the image is three-dimensional. How would PD suit you?

Fg2 09:27, Mar 28, 2005 (UTC)


 * Sure, I'll go change it. No biggie. Thanks. I used the art one since there's no tag for sculpture or architecture... maybe there ought to be? LordAmeth 11:29, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)


 * Good point. I don't know whether law distinguishes sculpture and architecture (or protects their images in photographs) from other subjects. If it does, it makes good sense to have an appropriate tag. Thanks Fg2 20:38, Mar 28, 2005 (UTC)

Welcome to WP:JAWNB
Konbanwa (at my site 22:51), thank you for your participantion to WP:JAWNB, our noticeboard. You said you are interested in Japanese medieval miritary things; would you help to expand Inland Sea? I refered sligtly to suigun in its history section, but it could be expanded, I think. Also your visit to WP:JCOTW(Collaboration) will be welcome, Cheers, -- Aphaea *  13:52, 8 May 2005 (UTC)

Ceremonial -> Ceremony
Why did you change the heading on the category? Ceremonial is the collective term used to describe it. Ceremony refers the individual ceremony within the category of ceremonial. By changing the name you narrowed down the category and lost its broader meaning. Fear ÉIREANN (talk) 21:17, 8 May 2005 (UTC)
 * I apologize for making such changes without asking anyone first, but as I explained on the Talk page for the new category, Ceremonial is an adjective, and if you're not going to follow it with a noun, then it makes no sense. Ceremony, on the other hand, is a noun, and one that could count as a plural. "State Ceremony" is a valid term to refer to all State Ceremony (just as State Ritual refers to all State Ritual) and not just a singular event. LordAmeth 21:37, 8 May 2005 (UTC)

It is irrelevant. Many of the items in the category are not themselves ceremonies but ceremonial items. The wording was deliberately chosen to enable the category to include ceremonies, ceremonial items, locations for state ceremony, the evolution of ceremonial ritual, etc. The way you recategorised it, it would only apply specifically to ceremonies and not those items associated with ceremonial. Please understand the difference. I've rollbacked your changes. Fear ÉIREANN (talk) 21:41, 8 May 2005 (UTC)


 * You do what you want, I really don't care enough to get into an edit war with you. But "Ritual & Ceremony" still does incorporate ceremonial items, locations, etc, within it. And 'Ceremonial' is still an adjective. Just as you would call a category "Royalty" instead of "Royal" or "English culture" rather than "English" or "English cultural", so "Ceremony" is more appropriate than "Ceremonial." LordAmeth 21:46, 8 May 2005 (UTC)


 * 'Ceremonial' is the correct term in this context. Ceremony is not. The trouble is that in the English language just because something is an adjective does not mean in some contexts that it is wrong. Ceremony in this context would be unambigiously wrong because some of the things in the category are not ceremonies and have nothing to do with ceremonies as the ceremonies they are associated with have long been abolished. They are now sometimes described as historical ceremonial objects, eg papal tiaras that have not been used since 1963, the Austrian Crown that has not been worn since the 1830s, etc. Your definition did not recognise that not all ceremonial objects are attached to ceremonies; some indeed never were. And unless the category is explicitly defined to cover that, you produce edit wars with people removing things from the category saying 'but it isn't technically part of this category'. That is why I deliberatedly named it to explicitly cover these areas, to avoid edit wars over disputed implicit meanings. Be careful if you are renaming categories to understand why they have a particular name. Fear ÉIREANN[[Image:Flag of Ireland.svg|25px]] (talk) 22:37, 8 May 2005 (UTC)

Former Buildings and Structures
I have begun working on new sub-categories of Category:Former buildings and structures, but I have run into a number of dilemmas, and welcome advice, opinions, or suggestions.

(1) I'd like to categorize both by country (e.g. 'former buildings and structures of Japan') and by structure type (e.g. 'former Buddhist temples'). But should I keep these two types of sub-categories separate, or should I nest them, creating separate sub-categories? In other words, should we do 'former castles & palaces' or should it be 'former castles & palaces of England', 'former castles & palaces of China', etc.?

(2) What exactly constitutes a 'former' building or structure? When I first started doing this, I thought it'd be pretty simple to make the distinction. Something that is totally non-existent, like the Ishiyama Honganji or the Hojujiden obviously belongs in this category. But what about places like the World Trade Center (the famous Twin Towers are, of course, gone, but some of the smaller buildings still exist, and the site is still set aside and regarded as the WTC site), or the Heijo Palace (Palace in Nara, Japan, of which a few restored/rebuilt gates remain, as well as the foundations; the site is set aside as a World Heritage Site)?

(3) Do statues count as 'structures'? Personally, I'd say it depends on size. The Statue of Liberty is a structure, while the Thinker by Rodin (somewhere around 5-10 feet high) is not. What exactly the cut-off or defining features of a 'structure' should be, I'm not sure. Does Mount Rushmore (man-made) count as a structure? Does the Old Man of the Mountain (natural) count as a structure?

My dilemma comes primarily from a desire to include certain articles, exclude certain others, and justify, in a clear-cut definable way the reasoning behind it. For example, New York's Pennsylvania Station was once a massive, beautiful above-ground structure, before it was destroyed and replaced with the very function-over-form underground station that exists today. So, I want to include the Station in the category to honor, or recognize, the former, beautiful, landmark building. On the other hand, the temple in Kamakura which houses the famous Great Buddha (I forget the temple's name right now) has been destroyed; all that remains is the Buddha itself, and some of the foundations. But since the temple is still functioning as such, without being moved or changing its name, and since the Buddha is the real attraction, not the building, I want to leave this out of the "former" category. This is just one example of the kinds of paradoxical dilemmas I am faced with. Any thoughts as to how to rectify this? Thanks all.

Wakizaka Yasuharu
Hello LordAmeth. I think you wrote the article about Wakizaka Yasuharu. But, the reading of 脇坂 is not Wakizaka in general (ref. (Googling Wakizaka)), but Wakisaka (ref. (Googling Wakisaka)). In addtion to that, I have written the article about Wakisaka Yasuharu before. I think they have to be merged in line with this. (I'm sorry for my poor English.) Thanks. Kanoen 04:36, 14 May 2005 (UTC)
 * &#12288;ごめんを言わなくてもいいよ;&#12288;カノエンさんの英語のの日本語より上手だ. My sources (my history books) all called him Wakizaka. Tomorrow, if I find time, I'll merge the two articles. Thanks for letting me know. LordAmeth 05:01, 14 May 2005 (UTC)
 * I moved my article over to Wakisaka (with an S)... I tried to leave in what you wrote that didn't overlap with what I wrote, and what wasn't superfluous (extra). But I ended up just replacing the whole thing with my version. Hope you don't mind. Feel free to put elements of your article back in... LordAmeth 11:21, 14 May 2005 (UTC)
 * I tried to merge with my version. Please check whether the current verion has something strange. Kanoen 04:57, 30 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Ok, I'll take a look at it. LordAmeth 10:55, 30 May 2005 (UTC)

Did you know?
 Did you know has been updated and a fact from the article Battle of Bun'ei, which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you have another interesting fact to submit, then please suggest it at the section's talk page.

Image:Sophia Ichigaya MainBuilding.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Sophia Ichigaya MainBuilding.jpg, has been listed at. Please look there 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 its not being deleted. Thank you. —MetsBot 19:42, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

LordAmeth mal-edits Treaty of Shimonoseki

 * Your elimination of my typesetting effects emphasis was probably about half right inasmuch as an article impacting five languages get confusing, and using such keeps me straight to the research. If you've got the time to waste, go for it.
 * However, since the user:Nik42 didn't tag the article Talk with POV objections, I had gone out and solictited 4 or 5 history savvy admins to give me a POV read there; so your timing !^$*&^$*%$%#$, as those requests went out yesterday. My comment in the talk evidently never got posted - my bad, but the damn server was down. Since you objected to this:
 * "The Treaty of Shimonoseki. This humiliation is regarded by many Japanese historians as being a turning point in Japanese external affairs - from this point on, the nationalist, expansionist, and militants began to join ranks and steer Japan from a foreign policy based on economic hegemony toward outright Imperialism (landgrabs). In time the once peaceful and mercantile Japan, transformed by mimicking the rapacious high handed Western powers in the coming decades - in one of history's more delicious ironies - would adopt a reverse racism and eclipse its teachers in applied Imperialism and cultural disdain. "

Without revising it's content to less emotive terms, I don't think I'm TOO IMPRESSED with your knowledge of history in that place and era, no matter what how you managed to snow your professors. One of my sources lived one or two towns over (Newton), taught at Havard most of his life, and wrote five revisions to his much reprinted books, so I suggest you review your history of the era. Especially since I've been heavily researching this area for nearly a month.
 * At the least, a competent job would assume you attempt to keep the content which is factual, however loaded the wording, and all of that is historically true. Period. I was editing late and was too tired to recast it into the four or five longwinded but less polite sentences at the time &mdash; and forgot about it. But it is accurate, if you choose to truly study your to supliment your educational wastepaper. Welcome to the bigs. This is the real world, and your school carelessness must be left at home with the sandbox.
 * Kindly be more careful in the future. You may be hell on wheels in D&D, but your history in this era is sadly lacking. Or did you just not care? For your edification, I've posted a partial list of my references on my page - follow the Flue Powder then scroll up, or use the TOC to:R-JW Project References.
 * User:Fabartus || Talkto_FrankB 29 June 2005 20:20 (UTC)
 * Excuse me. First of all, my intent was not to dispute the historical accuracy of your information, merely your excessive use of bold and italics. When have you ever seen such use in a professional academic work? I cannot recall ever seeing entire sentences in bold in a history text or in an encyclopedia. By placing things in bold, you emphasize a point, an argument; you emphasize one point of view. This is not the purpose of an encyclopedia. If you're confused as to what I mean about objectivity, see Wikipedia is not a soapbox.

Secondly, I find it incredibly rude and presumptuous of you to accuse me of not caring about the accuracy of the text, and to talk (write) to me as if I'm a child who dabbles in 'adult' historical matters. I have a degree in History and Asian Studies, and have quite a number of quite reputable sources which I use for my research. Your wording was 'loaded', and your use of bold text excessive. That is all. There's no need to attack anyone over this. LordAmeth 30 June 2005 02:30 (UTC)


 * We were both editing when you place the POV template on the article tonight. I answered you at length in talk. User:Fabartus || Talkto_FrankB 30 June 2005 06:36 (UTC)


 * I've seen your post on the treaty talk, and will soon post the friendly wide ranging post it generated there in a bit once it's finished. I'm also taking the long post here last night (this morning) to the record there, as there is no reason to junk up your living room here, and would suggest you take all our posts here into the bit bucket or an archieve! (There is no reason to air dirty laundry to any new visitor, and I suspect if you can forgive me for short sleep irritability, we can get along in a quite friendly fashion. I was wrong on several levels, and let stress out 'sideways', and for that I apologize heartily. User:Fabartus || Talkto_FrankB 30 June 2005 18:39 (UTC)


 * I refactored the talk too, and now have to quit... The post you put on your own page is out of order there, so far as I had time to percieve when I went to close it out. I'm outta time, but you may want to move it or leave it out of order... your call. Thanks. Best Regards. User:Fabartus || Talkto_FrankB 30 June 2005 18:43 (UTC)

History of Foo subcats
Hey. I am sooo glad that this debate has been settled, and thanks for making the changes to the categories. But I'm curious what the plans are for the subcategories? The debate on "Fooish battles" vs "Battles of Foo" seems to have died out, with no obvious consensus reached. Are you planning on creating categories for Battles of France, Battles of the United States, Battles of Greece, etc.? I feel bad to start it on my own with no consensus, but I feel it's sat around for too long... Please let me know what you think. LordAmeth 3 July 2005 14:25 (UTC)


 * Pearle's not authorized to rename categories without a consensus on WP:CFD. The lack of such consensus probably means that there are other people who would either revert or complain about a unilateral rename.  The current run is only for History of Foo categories.  Where is the archived discussion about Battles of Foo?  It may be worthwhile to renominate it, but I can take a look at it to see what happened the first time, and maybe do something to try to avoid repeating that fate. -- Beland 4 July 2005 18:50 (UTC)


 * The original discussion is at Wikipedia talk:Categories for deletion. I tried to restart the voting process, but there just wasn't really any response. Thanks for your help. LordAmeth 5 July 2005 11:33 (UTC)

Battle categories
I don't really mind, but the point of categories is to make it easier for people to find related topics. When there's a category with only one article in it, it's no help at all. If there's a debate going on about what the name of the category should be, that's fine, but until the question is settled, all the articles that belong together should be together in the same category, which may then later be re-named. If you want to move Siege of Boulogne to Category:Battles of England, fine, but move everything else in Category:English battles there too. --Angr/undefined 12:30, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

John III of Portugal
You voted for John III of Portugal on WP:IDRIVE, but it dropped out. Due mainly to language problems it is not featured quality yet. I have renominated it at the Biography Collaboration, so it gets the attention needed to become featured quality. If you are still interested you can vote for it there.--Fenice 12:02, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

Notes to Self on Godai (Five Elements of Japan) article
www.geocities.com/fascin8or/jsp_godai.htm

mahabhuta is the Sanskrit Buddhist name for the elements. As Void or Space is the fifth, an occasional sixth is added, representing Consciousness.

Elements are chi, sui (mizu), ka (hi), fuu (kaze), and kuu (sora)

Battle Categories
I'm not entirely sure what your change on Battle of Orléans refers to, since Category:Battles of the Hundred Years' War is not a subcategory of either Category:Battles of France or Category:Battles of England.

On a more general note, the categories I added could probably be removed if they were added to Category:Battles of the Hundred Years' War instead, but this is only because the entire war occurred in France and because every battle involved France and England. Since most "Battles of the Foo War" categories cannot be correctly subcategorized that way (i.e. a war with three participants may not have all three at every battle, and may have battles located in different countries), I think that the occasional redundant categorization is an acceptable price to pay for consistent and easy to understand set of categories attached to every battle article; do you think that's a bad idea? -- Kirill Lokshin 03:14, August 24, 2005 (UTC)
 * I understand your argument, and have definitely thought about that problem. For example, the Pacific Campaign of WWII does not fit easily into Battles of Japan & Battles of the US; there were British battles, and Chinese battles involved as well... The Hundred Years' War does fit nicely, however, so I've made it a subcategory of Battles of England & Battles of France. Personally, I like the idea of keeping redundant categories to a minimum where possible - this way the Battles of England/France categories will look more organized - fewer articles in the main category, and more organized by war into subcats. Where it's not possible to do this, by all means I support doing whatever we can - organizing by country and by war, if a little redundant, is the best we can do. LordAmeth 11:25, 24 August 2005 (UTC)
 * That seems like a reasonable approach to take. I'll try to keep the redundant categories to a minimum in the future. -- Kirill Lokshin 14:22, August 24, 2005 (UTC)

Japanese emperor names
Hi - This issue is something I have absolutely no expertise in, so other than a "neutral, common sense, outsider" view I don't think I can contribute anything. I'll take a look, but my inclination is that there are folks with far more relevant expertise (Fg2, Blankverse, Taku, yourself, etc.) who I would happily defer to. But thanks for the compliment. -- Rick Block (talk) 03:44, August 25, 2005 (UTC)

Wagon
I was very excited to find something in English on that instrument. I'm trying to translate a comic and it came up and all the google hits were in Chinese. Thanks! Franzeska 19:46, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

Categorization
Actually, I chose the 10th century only because that would catch all of the existing articles; I have no idea what, if any, battles take place in Japan before the Genpei War. The dates I inserted in the categories are meant to be rough guidelines to indicate the intent of the categories (and are only important when a country has multiple associated categories, like England), and I certainly won't object if someone (such as yourself) better versed in the history of the specific country involved corrects them. -- Kirill Lokshin 00:35, September 5, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks:
Thanks for letting me know. I'm glad I can contribute to Wikipedia & hope to join more clubs (if I can find them). Spawn Man 12:02, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

Hi. I was studying your incredible list of contributions & noticed that you specialise in Japanese warfare. I was wondering if you knew how to speak Japanese, because I study Japanese & would like to hear from fellow Japanese studiers.Spawn Man 08:04, 8 September 2005 (UTC)
 * I did in fact take Japanese for five semesters in college, and lived in Tokyo for a semester, but I feel that I've gotten quite rusty. I really do need to get back into practice. So, are you studying Japanese at school, or on your own? Just out of curiosity - it's so rare that High Schools offer anything more exotic or interesting than German or maybe Latin. LordAmeth 11:01, 8 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Well I'm actually homeschooled, but go to High School for Japanese classes three times a week. The High School I go to also has French & Maori, but that's it I think. I also used to go to art at Highschool, but stopped as going to school 6 times a week was too much. Spawn Man 00:36, 9 September 2005 (UTC) P.S= Plus I also noticed you're in the stub-sorting group like I am. You must be pretty busy.... P.P.S= Why do you have to have that licsence thingy at the bottom of your user page? P.P.P.S= What the heck does P.S. mean, letalone P.P.S? Spawn Man 13:04, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
 * I put the license thing there because I saw that a number of other people have it. I'm not even sure what it means. Something about authorizing that the work I contribute here is copyright-free, or something like that. "PS" stands for "post-script", as in 'writing after'. PPS therefore means 'post-post-script', the writing that comes after the after-writing. Or something like that. LordAmeth 16:41, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

Japanese:
On my user page, I've put what languages I can speak. How ever I don't know what to put for the Japanese section; Do I put Ja-N, Ja-1, Ja-2 etc etc... Does the higher the level mean the better you can speak it? Or the higher the level, the more basic Japanese do you know. I only know basic Japanese, so what should I put? Thanks, Spawn Man 00:42, 25 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Never mind, I figured it out.... Spawn Man

Imjin Waeran / Bunroku no Eki
The template you created for the Japanese invasion of Korea become little by little ambiguous, because Imjin War can not be considered as a campaign. There were more than 100 confrontations (major battles, minor battles and skirmish ones) between Japanese and Korean. Besides to this Busan (1592) is meaningless because there were two major battles, one on Korean soil won by Konishi Yukinaga's First division and the other which was inconclusive but a tactical victory of Admiral Yi Sun-sin. - Whlee 14:01, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Most wars consist of hundreds of skirmishes and minor battles; does this mean that listing or naming the major ones is meaningless? The Campaignbox serves a purpose, and getting rid of it because it's too incomplete or ambiguous helps no one. If you feel that battles should be added to the list, or renamed, please go right ahead. Just follow the proper format for naming battles. Instead of "Pusan Harbor Battle", how about "Battle of Pusan (naval)" or "Battle of Pusan Harbor"? As for your contention that the Imjin War cannot be considered a campaign, I'm afraid I don't see what you're referring to. Every source I have refers to it as Toyotomi Hideyoshi's campaign to take over Korea. If you think there's a better way to break it down, like making separate campaignboxes for land battles and naval battles, let me know; I'm sure we can work things out. LordAmeth 15:20, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

Nomination:
I have nominated you for adminship.  Spawn Man would like to nominate you to be an administrator. Please visit Requests for adminship to see what this process entails, and then contact Spawn Man to accept or decline the nomination. If you accept the nomination, a page will be created for your nomination at Requests for adminship/, where you must formally accept the nomination and answer the questions on that page. Once you have answered the questions, you may post your nomination for discussion. Spawn Man 23:20, 3 October 2005 (UTC)


 * You've only got 7 days to say you accept you know.... Spawn Man 04:52, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

Help:
Two of the articles that I have created have been deleted because of so-called copyright issues. See 1 & 2. I find this wrong because, 1, I did not use the source they state, infact I used books & another internet source. 2, Many other people have contributed to the articles. 3, They have been there a long time, & no one has had a problem with it. 4, The person who blocked the articles seems incompetant & foolish, & possibly a past enemy of mine. I think his name is Wikiheak or Wikiphreak. You seem like a knowledgable person, what can I do to get these unblocked, because clearly, I did not copy the info from firstworldwar.com. Sincerly, Spawn Man 00:01, 5 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Nevermind, issue resolved. Thankx anyway...Spawn Man 02:22, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

Adminship
You might want to link your nomination page to the main WP:RFA page; otherwise, you're not going to get very many votes ;)

Incidentally, having noticed your comments about categories: in case you're not aware of this, the community at large seems to feel that we need "Battles of Foo" and "Battles in Foo". I'm not creating any new categories for now, but it is something that will need to be discussed at some point. Kirill Lokshin 16:43, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Thanks for pointing that out about linking to the page. I thought it would go through automatically somehow. LordAmeth 02:10, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

I linked it for you when you accepted. Spawn Man 05:36, 8 October 2005 (UTC) P.S. You are getting a lot of support LA.
 * That I am. Very exciting. LordAmeth 11:47, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

Brain teasers
Hi LA, I hope you'll stop by my user page & check out the new Brain teaser section I've put there. Spawn Man 02:28, 10 October 2005 (UTC)


 * I've been asking around for people to vote for you as well.... hope you get adminship... Spawn Man 04:09, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

Congratulations!
I'm pleased to inform you that you are now an administrator. Please consider reading all the material on the administrators' reading list before testing out your new privileges. Though everything you do, excluding image deletions and page history merges, is reversible, you should nevertheless be very careful with your sysop capabilities. For instructions, please see the administrators' how-to guide. Good luck! &mdash; Dan | Talk 06:58, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Congrats on adminship   Dl yo ns 493   Ta lk   23:26, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Thanks! LordAmeth 23:26, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

Congrats on your successful adminship LA!!!!! I guess my petitioning worked a bit.... Well have a nice life as an admin.... Spawn Man 03:06, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

Congratulations from me as well; here's some champagne to celebrate the occasion! Kirill Lokshin 03:20, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

Save some for me too;> Congrads Lord A! --R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 02:01, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

How do I do it?
How do I go about removing foul language on an article, if the creator, keeps reverting my edits? Can you block him? I've explained on the talk page of the article the laws surrounding it, but he wont listen. See Here & Here. I just want the foul language &/or the explicit external links removed. The article should be neutral, meaning it contains no foul language or pornographic links. Any help would be appreciated. Spawn Man 22:26, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Well, if it's such a subject as that, then including such pictures and links isn't exactly vandalism. But you're totally right that the use of certain words and images is inappropriate, no matter the subject of the article. I will 'watch' the article, and if he changes it back, I will say something, and we'll go from there. LordAmeth 22:57, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

Thanks LA. I don't mind the diagrams by the way. Just the foul language. Spawn Man 22:59, 17 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Rather than wasting space on your talk page, I replied to his comments at the bottom of Talk:Strap-on dildo. Thanks, Bushytails 00:05, 18 October 2005 (UTC).


 * He keeps on reverting the swear word back, LA. I'm sick of having to fight for what's right! Obvious porn site links & swearing should not be allowed on any article. I have witnessed whole articles on pornographic material deleted, even though they were neutral & clean. Why? Because no one just wants an article so they can just use the links to see porn. Who is one step above you Lord Ameth? Cause for this I may need to go all the way to the top if none of the admins will do anything. All he has to do is change the one swear word. That's all I ask. But he wants his filth on there for all. I don't want wikipedia to come to this. I feel like leaving because of my morals. Spawn Man 01:41, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

Ague v. Bubonic plague
The entry in the Siege of Kinsale is not a spelling mistake: the Ague is an old term for a form of malaria; Bubonic plague is something else altogether. Could you please revert?shtove 23:12, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Terribly sorry, looked at it quickly, thought you misspelled "the plague". LordAmeth 11:01, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

Wars and Battles
After some (rather lengthy) further discussion, I've attempted a summarized proposal for merging the two WikiProjects here. Any comments would be appreciated. Kirill Lokshin 13:02, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

Nihongo
Heya. Just out of curiosity, I noticed you signed as "Shinobu" on the Template talk Nihongo page (and probably elsewhere). Is Gerbrant a translation equivalent of Shinobu? Do you sign differently based on what topics you're talking about? Just wondering. LordAmeth 20:20, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Well... it's sort of customary to use a nick when roaming online. When I signed up for Wikipedia I decided that, although I wanted to contribute with open visor so to speak, I still wanted to use a nick, something which the wiki software makes quite easy.
 * Of course the real question you're asking is: "Why Shinobu?" Well, people who know me offline would have an inkling if they knew (I don't advertise my nick offline)... Still, with Freud not being with us anymore, I think I can lift a corner of the veil. There was this series I read, where you were supposed to identify with the main male character - however I actually felt myself looking at the events more and more through Shinobu's eyes... there's more, but not a lot, and only a few who know me offline know something about that. *secretive smile* Shinobu 21:32, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

Aa, sono manga ne. Just wondering no big deal. Incidentally, you do know what Shinobu means, right? (don't worry it's nothing offensive..) LordAmeth 05:04, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Yes, I know. The kanji is clearly visible in one of the frames, even though it's spelled out in kana most of the time. Anyway, I find it quite fitting for her. Shinobu 16:06, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

Popups tool
Lupin|talk|popups 23:31, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

Nihongo template
I've looked through some of the converted articles, and it seems to work okay. However, in cases like Minamoto no Noriyori this happens:

Minamoto no Noriyori (源範頼)(1156-1193)

Is ")(" intentional? Should we make a template that allows for inclusion of extra info, should we simply add a space, like so: Minamoto no Noriyori (源範頼) (1156-1193), or is it okay as it is now?

Yours sincerely, Shinobu 15:43, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
 * It's up to you guys what you'd like to do. Adding a space is no problem, as I just need to leave a space after the template. Personally, I like it this way rather than including multiple types of information within one set of parentheses. Keeps things distinct. LordAmeth 02:31, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

Project notice
Not a problem :-) I usually go through Gsl's list of new articles and add banners and categories on a fairly regular basis anyways. Kirill Lokshin 19:32, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

Cholmondeley's
Hi, and thanks for your message. The question is whether the spelling is Cholmondeley or, as you write, Cholmondley. Only in the former case, I believe, should that place be mentioned on the Cholmondeley disambiguation page. All the best, &lt; K  F &gt;  22:24, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
 * I think that was a typo on my part. All references to Cholmondeley's should be spelled the same, I think. LordAmeth 22:30, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Thanks a lot. I didn't get the spelling right myself a couple of times even after working on that disambiguation page for some time. &lt; K  F &gt;  22:38, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

Japanese sieges
There's a question here you might want to look at; I've tried to respond as best as I can, but I think you're probably in a better position to provide an authoritative answer on the topic. &mdash;Kirill Lokshin 23:27, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

Japanese Collaboration of the Week
I suggested deleting this project on Wikipedia talk:Japanese Collaboration of the Week. I firmly believe that sometimes, it is necessary to kill a project that does not get results to save work and attetion for those that do. Since you were one of the few people who posted there recently, I would like to hear your opinion. -- Mkill 22:54, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
 * I have no problem deleting it. It's a shame it's come to be so inactive; but, as you say, we could save the effort to use towards other projects. And there's certainly more than enough ways for people to post and contribute, e.g. Japanese Wikipedians' notice board. I added to the Collaboration page today because I thought I remembered reading something about attempts to revive it. 仕方がないね. LordAmeth 23:59, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Military history of Japan
Why did you revert my changes? The phrase "many great advances" is excessive, and "military technology, strategy, and tactics" is unsupported by the examples given which are only of new technology. 213.105.81.183 21:36, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
 * It was really just a stylistic change. I thought it sounded more formal and encyclopedic the new way, that's all. "Over the course of.." is more appropriate than "during," I think, though that is also a minor quibble. As for "strategy and tactics", just because we don't defend it with examples in the article doesn't mean it didn't happen. As I said, just minor stylistic stuff; I did not mean to offend you or anything. LordAmeth 23:19, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Vote?
Could you please vote for my FAC here: Featured article candidates/Dinosaur. I've spent a lot of time on it, so could you please vote? Thanks, if you do, ku sai if you don't, (just kidding)... : ) Spawn Man 03:01, 15 December 2005 (UTC)


 * YAY! LA's the man! Spawn Man 03:46, 15 December 2005 (UTC) BTW, do you know what ku sai means? Our teacher said it was "You smell". Thanks again!!


 * That's what I thought you meant. rofl. I've heard it; I believe it's "kusai" (臭い), meaning "smelly" or "stinky". The "you are" is implied. LordAmeth 03:51, 15 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Hey, how do you write japanese on here? I want to write in greek or japanese, but I can't! Spawn Man 03:58, 15 December 2005 (UTC)


 * You have to install the proper stuff to your OS... Assuming you're on WinXP, well I don't know about Greek, but for Japanese, there's an option in the "Languages and Regional Settings" in the Control Panel for installing Asian fonts. LordAmeth 12:45, 15 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Thanks LA. There isn't an option for Japanese, but there is for Greek! Spawn Man 21:38, 15 December 2005 (UTC)