User talk:LordAmeth/Archive4

'''This is an archive of my talk page for all discussions in 2008. 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 (talk) 05:55, 4 January 2009 (UTC)'''

Japanese name translation
Hi, I was wondering if you could translate the Japanese names in List of mayors of Kaohsiung, including the ones that I tried translating. Thank you. And Happy New Year.-- Jerrch 21:09, 2 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Thank you so much!-- Jerrch 01:12, 3 January 2008 (UTC)


 * No problem. Happy to help out. The only one I really don't know about is the last one, 中松 乙彥. 「乙」would normally be read as "oto" or "otsu"; I've personally only ever seen it in the word "otome" (乙女) and the name Saotome (早乙女). 「彥」is, as far as I can tell, not a Japanese character, or at least not one used any longer following the post-war language reforms. Sorry I couldn't get you an answer on this last one, but if you need any help with Japanese topics in future, please ask; I'll do my best to help out.
 * P.S. In working on this, I came across this site, which seems an excellent tool for figuring out the readings of Japanese names. LordAmeth (talk) 01:21, 3 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Alright, thanks. And I do remember from the cartoon series "Cased Closed" this character that had 彥 in his name. I went ahead and looked for it: it was 円谷光彦, Tsuburaya Mitsuhiko. I am pretty sure that 彥 is the Chinese character for 彦, the kanji version. So do you have any ideas?-- Jerrch 01:44, 3 January 2008 (UTC)


 * That's what I figured. Sorry to make you do extra work - I should have followed that through on my own. That name database site, and a general Google search seem to indicate that it's most commonly read as Otohiko, though the Otsuhiko reading also exists. I imagine it's another of those obnoxious cases where there's an archaic/historical reading, and a modern reading, as appears to be the case with the Asai/Azai clan as well. My best guess is that we should go with Otohiko. Thanks again. LordAmeth (talk) 07:42, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

History_of_Japan#World_War_II
Please explain this revert!

And while doing so please also explain why you consider theese events so insignificant (Allied_war_crimes_during_World_War_II) and (American Mutilation of Japanese War Dead) that you revert without even an explanation, but have no problems with the section containing verbose prose about american flags that really add nothing of value except for some sentimental americans.--Stor stark7 Talk 02:36, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I consider them insignificant for two reasons: (1) because, since this was your only edit, it was more obviously placed there with an agenda in mind. If it had been included in a far longer more complex edit describing atrocities on both sides, etc, it might have been alright, but these kinds of brief one-phrase edits which seek to promote a particular negative image of the US violate, to my mind, the spirit if not the word of WP:NPOV. (2) Because this is an article on the History of Japan. It's not even Military history of Japan or World War II, let alone American atrocities against the Japanese during World War II or something like that which would really be the most appropriate place for discussion of this topic. "History of Japan" is far too broad a topic to merit such details. You will find that the topic is described in lengthy detail elsewhere on Wikipedia. As for the American flag stuff, I hadn't noticed that stuff - I was only looking at the most recent changes.
 * I do apologize for not explaining myself in the edit summary on the revert. It can be difficult to distinguish ideology-driven vandalism, which doesn't really require a lengthy explanation for the revert, from earnest edits, which might merit such explanation. LordAmeth (talk) 02:50, 3 January 2008 (UTC)


 * (1) Excellent, then we can proceed to remove the section about International Military Tribunal for the Far East, since there is no balancing section about Allied crimes. I'll get right on it... or maybe you can do it? Also, you are in violation of Good_faith in your attempts at mind reading. I was merely trying to find suitable articles to point to a new specialized article. "negative image of the US"?? So you are here to defend the image of the homeland rather than improve the content of Wikipedia?
 * (2) No, this is the History of Japan, section about WW-II. When such a section has grown enough it is customary to split it off into an article of its own, in this case "History of Japan during WW-II" or something similar. The WW-II section of History of Japan is then trimmed down and made to point to the specialized article. Strange that you seem unaware of these things.
 * Please elaborate on "You will find that the topic is described in lengthy detail elsewhere on Wikipedia". What is, and where is it? Did you even bother to check the articles in question out? Thanks for the apology, it was being treated as a vandal that annoys me the most in this. --Stor stark7 Talk 04:01, 3 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I apologize to have apparently misread your intentions. It is an unfortunate result of the fact that various Japan-related articles are very frequently the victim of that particular brand of vandalism. As for the assumption that I have some sort of pro-US anti-Japan agenda, you couldn't be more wrong. I love both countries, and acknowledge their respective war crimes, atrocities, and other wrongdoings. I just don't feel the need to focus on these aspects of the war, on either side.
 * Articles on Japan during WWII already exist, so this process (which I am well aware of) of adding to the article until it's ready to be split off doesn't really apply. The relevance to the article overall should not be ignored in making these kinds of edits within a section. As for which other articles are more relevant to the subject than the overall umbrella History of Japan, I'd point you to Allied war crimes during World War II, Pacific War and Military_history_of_Japan (which I am surprised has not been split off into its own article yet). Many of the articles on individual battles would be excellent places to make reference to this practice.
 * I apologize again for reverting your edit without any explanation, and for misjudging your intentions. Should this perhaps be continued on the talk page for the article, instead? That way others with opinions on the matter can chime in, and we can all work together to find the best way to address the issue in the article. Thanks. LordAmeth (talk) 07:13, 3 January 2008 (UTC)


 * No worries, and I'll take your advice.--Stor stark7 Talk 23:20, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks and Happy New Year
Firstly, let me wish you a very happy New Year and thank you for your help in the Milhist Tag & Assess 2007 drive.

Secondly, although the Tag & Assess 2007 drive is now officially closed, you are very welcome to continue tagging and assessing until 31 January 2008. Any articles you tag and assess during this time will be credited fully to your tagging tally for further award purposes.

Thirdly, if you can find the time, it would be great to have your feedback/comments and participation in the recently-set-up Tag & Assess workshop The idea is to see what lessons we can learn from the 2007 drive to make the 2008 one more efficient and enjoyable.

Thanks again for your help, -- R OGER D AVIES  talk 10:40, 3 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Okie doke. I'll take a look at it, and see what sort of comments I might be able to offer. LordAmeth (talk) 10:42, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Imperial Rescript on Surrender
Hi, the history log of Imperial Rescript on Surrender indicates that you worked on this page. I am currently trying to sort out the PD published translations from the unpublished translations done on the Wiki, so that we can demonstrate the latter group (s:Category:Wikisource translations) as an example of WMF resources at work.

Could you verify either here or on the Wikisource talk page that the formal translation on Wikisource was created and donated by yourself (i.e. not copied from any other site), and note which license you are granting it under (PD, CC, or GFDL). John Vandenberg (talk) 23:14, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid I must admit that I did not translate that myself, but copied it from a book (Lu, David. "Japan: A Documentary History."). If I recall correctly, he had it cited to a public domain translation, but as I don't have that book on me any more, I can't check it. I thought I'd made reference to the original source in my original edits to that page on WikiSource, but evidentally I did not. Sorry. Good luck with your project though! Excellent idea. LordAmeth (talk) 00:19, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

You're invited!
...to the next New York City Meetup!

In the morning, there are exciting plans for a behind-the-scenes guided tour of the American Museum of Natural History.

In the afternoon, we will hold a session dedicated to discussing meta:Wikimedia New York City issues (see the last meeting's minutes).

In the evening, we'll share dinner and chat at a local restaurant, and (weather permitting) hold a late-night astronomy event at Columbia's telescopes.

You can add or remove your name from the New York City Meetups invite list at Meetup/NYC/Invite list. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 01:11, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Battle for Czech Radio, project assessment
Hi, Prague is geographically in the Central Europe not in Balkan, please see Prague for details. Happy editing.  ≈Tulkolahten≈ ≈talk≈ 12:29, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Ah, I apologize. I feel like an idiot to admit it, but I'd confused the location of the Czech Republic for being much closer to Croatia, Bosnia, and Serbia. Do we have any task force to cover Czech, Slovakia, Hungary, and Romania? LordAmeth (talk) 23:40, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
 * He he, that's happen sometimes. What is task force ? :) We have Project Slovakia and Project Czech Republic.  ≈Tulkolahten≈ ≈talk≈ 13:08, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Within the Military History WikiProject, there are task forces aimed at covering the military history of various regions - for example, the "military history of the Balkans" task force to which I mistakenly added the Czech Radio article. If there are a significant number of people within the Czech Republic and Slovakia Projects who focus on Military History and would like to form a task force, it could be quite nice. Actually, it'd be great to have a Central Europe task force, since there are a ton of Switzerland, Austria and Austria-Hungary articles which are not covered by any task force... LordAmeth (talk) 21:39, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Possible edit warring on project article
There seems to be some issues going on over on the article : Military history of African Americans, in particularly in the section Military history of African Americans. Could you take a look at the article's edit history as well as the discussion, Talk:Military history of African Americans, and possibly give some input? Thanks. Sf46 (talk) 23:59, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Hmm. I appreciate your thinking of me and asking for my input. However, this is unfortunately quite far from my field of expertise, and I simply do not know what I can contribute to the conversation, because I do not know the details of the facts of the matter. Basically, it seems to me that the version seen following your latest revision emphasizes without exaggerating those individual cases in which African-Americans did participate. Meanwhile, the revisions made afterwards by SiberioS played down that participation. If I am missing something, please do point it out to me, but it seems to me that this is simply two different points of view, two different presentations of the same information. Neither version seems to me to be grossly misrepresenting the facts, but of course I don't know the facts so I could be wrong.
 * In any case, I apologize to not be able to contribute to the discussion more directly. I hope that a compromise can be reached. LordAmeth (talk) 11:55, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Sephie-mer03.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Sephie-mer03.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure 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 it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 07:37, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Invitation


Hello. You may have seen that some Wikipedia articles lack sources to given dates, timelines and chronologies. If you feel that you could like to help in making all articles more reliable and well sourced in this regard, we would like to encourage you to use, as part of your daily editing and when fact is not enough for requesting clearly and specifically a citation or source for dates, timeline or chronology, the following inline tag:
 * Timefact displays {chronology source needed} for requesting timelines, dates and chronology sources. Click  here for more information

At WP Timeline Tracer, we thank you for using these tools and for helping to make Wikipedia articles more accurate and reliable.  Dao ken  11:07, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
 * That is fantastic. Thanks for the notice. Since I have very few sources directly available to me, and very little free time these days, I find that I am unable to contribute as much as I would like to improving the citations and thus reliability of Wikipedia. But I think that these new templates should be at least some help.
 * If the Timeline project needs any help with individual specific questions relating to Japanese history, I'd be happy to do my best to answer them. I have recently obtained a new history book with a fairly detailed timeline of all Japanese history, and can likely consult other sources as well if free time permits. Thanks much. LordAmeth (talk) 13:38, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Glad that you find the templates useful. And thank you for your offer, you can be sure that we will. If you feel for joining the project when you have more time available, you will me most welcome.  Dao ken  13:12, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Daijō-kan and Kugyō
In the context of your participation in Daijō-kan, it's possible that you'd be interested in scanning User talk:Amake. As you can see for yourself, the issues at hand flow from User:Bueller 007's critical osbservations concerning: Also, you might have wanted to be alerted that your name was mentioned approvingly in: You understand that most articles evolve independently; but, in my view, these would seem to be inextricably inter-related. --Ooperhoofd (talk) 03:30, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Daijō-kan -- see Talk:Daijō-kan.
 * Kugyō -- see Talk:Kugyō.
 * Talk:Daijō Daijin
 * Talk:Sadaijin
 * Talk:Udaijin
 * Talk:Naidaijin
 * Talk:Dainagon
 * Talk:Chūnagon
 * Wow. While I think I most likely side with you in the end on this, as leaving things open for potential future contributions is often (if not always) better than being deletionist, I must admit I am finding this whole thing quite difficult to follow, in part due to your tendency to use quite dense, academic-style words and phrasing. In any case, I shall endeavor to find time to take a look at this later... perhaps in the morning. Thanks for the heads-up. LordAmeth (talk) 11:26, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Kibi
Thank you for your very kind words. Jenny Len ☤ 11:47, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. I'm genuinely excited to discover another fellow pre-modern Japanese history editor; pre-Heian topics such as Kibi are particularly lacking, and so it's great to see such good work being done on it. If you're planning on doing more work in this vein, well, at the risk of being pushy or sounding like a salesman or something, I'd like to suggest that if you're interested it might be good to join (or at least take a look at) WikiProject Japan and WikiProject Former Countries. I personally find that one of the best (read: most fun) parts of Wikipedia is the community. Thanks again. LordAmeth (talk) 12:17, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I am planning to do more work on that area, however, I don't manage to have a fast pace, but I will do some. I will give a look into those projects, I gave previously a fast view but I will look a bit deeply, thank you for pointing me to those wikiprojects, sounds interesting indeed Jenny Len ☤ 09:30, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Image:Sephie-mer03.jpg
A tag has been placed on Image:Sephie-mer03.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I6 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a non-free image with no fair use rationale uploaded after May 4, 2006 which has been tagged as not having a rationale for more than 7 days.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on |the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. DJBullfish (talk) 07:32, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Beyond Uchina
It is a nice place to visit at least once and a very interesting subject for historical and cultural studies Jenny Len ☤ 08:47, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Kabuki actor photos
Hi. Glad you liked the photos. The Photo was taken at a "foreign press dinner" in Tokyo, where these actors were the guest of honor and also talked about their work (through translators). This was early in 2007. Hope this helps -- Chris 73 | Talk 08:49, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Sure. I just wanted to be able to put a bit more than the actors' names in the captions. I suppose that'll be fine; no need to go into too much detail about where the function was, or what precisely the name of the event was. Much thanks. LordAmeth (talk) 13:00, 28 January 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) 00:26, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Military history WikiProject coordinator elections
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! Kirill 03:32, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Template:WikiProject Jewish history
Hi LordAmeth: Can you explain why the WikiProject Jewish history template is broken, and hopefully fix it. Thanks, IZAK (talk) 05:54, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
 * How is it broken? What specifically is going wrong? I'm afraid I'm not very knowledgeable about coding, and simply created this one by copying the code of another template... LordAmeth (talk) 09:37, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Same
I've saw what you did in Nguyễn Lords, I need you do same thing in Trịnh Lords. Thank! JacquesNguyen (talk) 09:59, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
 * No problem. LordAmeth (talk) 10:03, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:ARIARoleplaying.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:ARIARoleplaying.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure 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 it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 04:42, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:CrossGenTheFirst-1cover.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:CrossGenTheFirst-1cover.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure 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 it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 20:53, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Horo-Japaneseheraldry.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Horo-Japaneseheraldry.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure 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 it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 22:24, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Kabuki-SkinDeep.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Kabuki-SkinDeep.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure 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 it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 23:08, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Christian spamlinks?
Hi! Please visit my last edits in "Demographics" of Japan about Religions in Japan. Do you think it was Christian spamlinks? Thanks!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Japan#Christian_spamlinks

Angelo De La Paz (talk) 14:49, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:SamuraiFiction.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:SamuraiFiction.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 ensure 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 non-free media 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. Project FMF (talk) 04:16, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

coordinator election
The Wikiproject History is going to elect 3 coordinators. As a member you are invited to participate. Wandalstouring (talk) 12:25, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Need a guideline
You're fluent at Japanese language, and left your input on the WP:NC-KO at WP:KO. I think you can give me a shed of light on how to carry on the poll. It is not even an official poll but these newly registered editors seem too eager to cast their vote. What is better(?), they look like some socks of somebody or meatpuppets from 2channel. The evidence is here.

Talk:Sea of Japan

If you have a time, can you make a guideline in this mess. Or should I raise an issue at WP:ANI? Thanks. --Appletrees (talk) 17:55, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I appreciate the vote of confidence, but I'm not actually fluent yet, still working on it. To be clear, I must admit I am for sticking with the name "Sea of Japan" if "East Sea" is indeed used only in Korea & Korean-related materials; Still, this meatpuppet thing is ridiculous, and I'd certainly take your side in opposing it. But I'm afraid I'm not quite sure exactly what it is that I can do. I think that mentioning it at WP:ANI is a good idea; outside of that, if there's any way I can help, such as contributing to a vote or discussion, I'd be happy to help out. Please let me know, and I will see what I can do.
 * PS Forgive me for being ignorant, but why is 李王朝時代 (Yi Dynasty period) offensive, and what should be used instead? LordAmeth (talk) 01:44, 16 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the answer. I know that you don't support the changing title, but I need a help from admin who can read Japanese and clean up the mess. I think the poll is just a spin-off or arbitrary idea in a casual way, so the title can hardly be changed to East Sea. If it were very serious and official poll, it should've had a guideline such as time limitation and qualification for the vote. The initial issue was the dispute on whether mentioning East in the intro or first subsection is valid or not. Through the discussion, I hoped to unify the complex Korean naming convention on the matter. I think it is a time to close the poll and sort out the meatpuppets from regular users. Most of new users seem like Spas and meatpuppets, or sockpuppets. They just say like "Oppose per whose saying" without their own voice. And I found another thread from 2channel which is like live news about my edits and fills with personal attacks and pejorative racial slurs against me (Chosenjin, hwabyeong patient, psycho, institutionalized mentally deranged person, irrational person, stupid, .etc). They escalate edit warring on Korean articles especially South Korea. Aside from the poll, my question is "should I raise this meatpuppet issue at ANI or Arbicom? Thanks.


 * http://society6.2ch.net/test/read.cgi/korea/1198939173/


 * re:p.s Just use Joseon dynasty because Yi dynasty is used by Japanese to degrade Joseon. Although North Korea calls herself Joseon, it doesn't mean the succession of Joseon dynasty, but Gojoseon(고조선 ancient Joseon). Westerners have translated Korea into "Land of Morning calm" and commonly called it, but originally Joseon indicated "country". --Appletrees (talk) 10:46, 17 February 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm really sorry to hear about what's been going on on 2ch. I'd heard rumor of the kind of racist bullshit that goes on on the Korea-related threads on there, but never saw/read anything specific of it.
 * I would definitely suggest you raise this issue with the Admins Noticeboard or Arbitration Com. Good luck with this; this kind of activity is just horrendous and offensive, and something needs to be done. I trust that someone on one of those pages will know what to do better than I. LordAmeth (talk) 12:01, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Hi. I'm not sure if you know Japanese enough to catch on to the fact that Appletrees is trying to mislead you. In contrast, we cannot find any trace of that bombing as the actual provoker of the possible sockpuppetry.
 * First of all, the poll results are obviously "oppose". Appletrees blows a trivial problem all out of proportion, trying to make the public think that all oppose votes are unfair.
 * Actually, the copy-and-paste bombing on 2ch doesn't work. If you read Japanese, it's all too obvious. Here are excerpts from and.
 * "Isn't this a preparation for invalidating oppose votes by labeling them as canvassing?" (反対票をcanvassing扱いにして無効化しようという工作か？)
 * With sarcastic intent: "Here comes Appletrees again." (またりんご来たのね. ), "Thank you, Appletrees" (りんごちゃん乙).

What's going on at 2ch is not straightforward. Various groups of people post comments with hidden intentions. 2ch users are deeply cynical and usually ignore (スルーする) these stupid posts. The principle is: "You can hardly be a 2ch user unless you can tell the truth from lies." (嘘は嘘であると見抜ける人でないと (掲示板を使うのは) 難しい). So high literacy level is required. Maybe Appletrees is not only selective but unable to read what they actually say.

And here is an advice for you: keep skeptical about anything related to Korea. Don't trust what other people say unless you check primary sources or at least verifying traceability of primary sources. I guess you realize that online information about Japan is often unreliable. The situation is much worse concerning Korea. For example, 李王朝 (or 李朝 is more common) is not offensive at all. --Nanshu (talk) 22:13, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I actually read very little of the Japanese, including the poll results, and just took Appletrees at his word. My language skills are at the level now that I could probably read most of it if I took the time, but I'm afraid I didn't bother. In any case, thanks for bringing this to my attention. I'm afraid I don't have the patience, nor the time, to do anything about the situation, but here's hoping that the situation somehow gets resolved. LordAmeth (talk) 07:14, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

coordinator election
The Wikiproject History is going to elect 3 coordinators. As a member you are invited to participate. Wandalstouring (talk) 10:49, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Nguyen Lords and Trinh Lords
Hi there LordAmeth. Can I ask which research journals your uni has (online) on Vietnamese history? I would be delighted if you could get me copies of Vietnamese history articles from journals that my uni doesn't have. Just got cracking on Artillery of the Nguyen Lords. Regards,  Blnguyen  ( bananabucket ) 02:04, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I unfortunately do not currently have access to any online journals, as I'm not enrolled in a uni at the moment. However, I have the following articles on my HD:


 * A Maritime Logic to Vietnamese History - Charles Wheeler
 * Coin and the commercial trade between Vietnam and Japan in the 17th century - Thuan Luc
 * A New Look at Old Southeast Asia - Craig Reynolds
 * Age of Commerce in Southeast Asian History - Anthony Reid
 * Composition of 19th century Political Elite of Nguyen Vietnam (1802-1883) - Nola Cooke
 * Literati Culture and Integration in Dai Viet 1430-1840 - John K Whitmore
 * Middle Eastern entrepreneurs in Southeast Asia c1750-1940 - William Clarence-Smith
 * Ming Shi-lu as a source for SE Asian History - Geoff Wade
 * Rethinking the Sea in Vietnamese History - Charles Wheeler
 * Seventeenth-Century Crisis in Southeast Asia - Anthony Reid
 * Southeast Asia Inside Out 1300-1800 - A Perspective from the Interior - David K Wyatt
 * Structuring Southeast Asian History 1350-1830 - Victor Lieberman
 * Surface Orientations in Vietnam - Beyond Histories of Nation and Region - Keith Taylor
 * Taiwan, Coastal South China, and Northern Viet Nam Maritime Trading Network - Wilhelm Solheim
 * Vietnam-Champa Relations and the Malay-Islam Regional Network in the 17th-19th Centuries - Danny Wong Tze Ken
 * Vietnamese Historical Sources for the Reign of Le Thanh-tong (1460-1497) - John K Whitmore
 * View from the Sea - Perspectives on the Northern and Central Vietnamese Coast - Li Tana
 * I realize that the titles alone might not be too helpful, but if you're interested in any of these, please don't hesitate to ask. LordAmeth (talk) 08:36, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

"A pox on both your houses"
Do you know this phrase from Shakespeare? In the play "Romeo and Juliet," one of the characters is fed up with the feud between the Capulets and Montagues. He curses both clans for their feuding which profits no one. Your unwelcome comments at Talk:Japanese era name struck me as a kind of variation on that sort of common-sense logic.

However, it is entirely off-base; and I am frustrated by opinions from well-meaning third parties if it means that I am simply to be soiled because of anything to do with User:Bueller 007. The edits of this specific editor are consistently offensive across a range of subjects and articles; and if my efforts to disperse the problem somehow makes more problems for me.

Your consistent strategy whenever you encounter disputes is to waffle, to calm the situation by agreeing with both disputants, to find reasonable elements of both sides ... But I'm inclined to sayThanks, but no thanks.

Who's kidding who?

As far as I can tell, User:Bueller 007 logs on to Wikipedia in order to release some kind of youthful angst or frustration, but I'm unwilling to tolerate peronsla abuse. Sometimes I begin to get the idea that there's a peculiar kind of stalking at play -- and I'm a too easy prey. Why should I log on to Wikipedia for such unwelcome experiences. No -- that disincentive is not something I need or want.

Let's review: (1) He made a critical edit -- fine. (2) I provided a verified source -- fine. (30 No -- that's not good enough?

If he has a problem with the source, he should take it up with Harold Bolitho at Harvard or with the Columbia University Press -- NOT me. In my view, until User:Bueller 007 finds another verified source to supplant or contradict mine, this "dispute" is nothing but a bizarre exhibit of pique. No.

I sought a third opinion as a way to deal with an intrusive annoyance. It was helpful in one sense and unhelfput in another. I wanted to diffuse an obnoxious pest ... or perhaps, at best, to figure out a way to re-focus the exchange so that it will be less odious, less pernicious in this or any other setting. Instead, like you, the uninvolved, 3rd-opinion referee sees reasonable cause to tell everyone to consider WP:COOL. This isn't wrong, of course. But it doesn't feel right.

The rationale is compelling from the outsider's point of view; but it misses the point. Or, alternately, I'm the one who persists in missing the point.

The hortatory admonition to try to ignore offensive edits is not helpful. In fact, it's a source of renewed frustration and confusion.

User:Bueller 007 ≠ Good Faith -- so what now? What if this were valid -- just suppose. What then? What should I have done to avoid conflicts I want to avoid?

Do you even begin to understand or appreciate my concerns? Or does this venue make it impossible to express informed, justified indignation and battle fatigue?

Explain, please, why the following is untrue, inaccurate, invalid: User:LordAmeth ≠ Good Faith If this is were a false statement, then it follows that your informed opinion, your objective advice, your good counsel would be of salient importance? -- Tenmei (talk) 23:12, 24 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Tenmei, to be honest, I am sick and tired of your attitude. I have never met anyone else on Wikipedia, or indeed in real life either, who is so quick to accuse others of bad faith, of ill intentions, of incompetence. You call Bueller's comments "blunt" even though it is evident that this was simply a result of the character limit on edit summaries. You call my comments unwelcome, when you yourself brought the issue to the WikiProject asking for third-party opinions and suggestions. That my comment was not what you wanted to hear, that it was not the kind of suggestion you found helpful, has nothing, I promise, nothing to do with any kind of ill feeling I may have towards you (I don't hold grudges, and I don't bear ill feeling towards you) and everything to do with my actual opinions on the issue. Instead of starting conflicts, instead of accusing me or Bueller or others of things, how about you try, for once, to work together with people ?
 * You act as if you're the only one working in a professional, scholarly manner, but when it really comes down to it, you're constantly ignoring the issue at hand (in this case, whether or not era names should be translated directly) to write paragraphs and paragraphs about why you don't trust or believe X user, why you don't want to assume good faith on the part of Y user . If you were truly the educated, scholarly, professional, devoted historian which the tone and diction of your comments, and the content of your edits, make you out to be, you would put all of these petty personal attacks aside and focus on the issue.
 * I will fully admit that I am a poor moderator, that when it comes to resolving disputes, my comments may not be the most useful, the most helpful. But I'm not here to step in and resolve the dispute; I'm here to offer a third opinion, to bring another voice into the discussion, to turn attention away from personal attacks and back to the matter at hand, so that we all, together, can try to find a resolution . If you look at User:HelloAnnyong's comments at Talk:Japanese_era_name, he's not really saying anything different than I am; he's just wording it differently. I agree with HelloAnnyong completely, and yet you choose to jump down my throat, and to reply favorably, politely at least, to his suggestions instead.
 * Outside of the very beginning, when you first came onto Wikipedia and I hassled you for your use of the Titsingh source, I have never had anything but Good Faith towards you; I've shrugged off your personal attacks, forgiven you in my mind countless times, and done all that I can to help, to work constructively with you on your projects, and yet you persistently come back to accuse me of bad faith simply because I don't back you up in accusing others of ill intent. LordAmeth (talk) 23:40, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Sick and tired of being sick and tired
" Sick and tired " is an excellent phrase, a superb example of American English. Are you familiar with Fannie Lou Hamer, who famously said, "I'm sick and tired of being sick and tired."? You're not the only one who is sick and tired

When I read your first sentence, I flashed back to something I'd recently read by Harold Bolitho about the Nanboku-chō and Muromachi periods -- especially one phrase: "the more manageable chaos of the Muromachi bakufu." The fact remains, although we all have moved on, that my initial experiences in this Wikipeida venue were skewed by an unfortunate collision of misunderstandings; but eventually, for reasons I never quite understood, I found that I'd somehow crossed over into "the more manageable chaos of the ordinary Wikipedia rough-and-tumble." That my responses should continue to be informed by that bitter baptism is unremarkable.

I'm using the tools I have at my disposal to deal with the intractable difficulties I confront. In this context, I wonder if you've ever heard this expression: "The man whose only tool is a hammer treats everything as if it were a nail."

What if you were to revisit the remarks which caused affront -- but this time, what if you were to construe my text with a view to figuring out how to suggest better tools for dealing with the abrasive User:Bueller 007? What if you were to re-examine every sentence ending with a question mark -- and instead of construing the question as rhetorical, you instead imagined that these were heart-felt, genuine, real? If you were to engage in such an exercise, then why not start here with a subjunctive hypothetical which offers no discredit, dishonor or disrespect to User:LordAmeth's sensibilities:


 * Explain, please, why the following is untrue, inaccurate, invalid:
 * User:LordAmeth ≠ Good Faith
 * If this is were a false statement, then it follows that your informed opinion, your objective advice, your good counsel would be of salient importance?


 * Bolitho, Harold. "Book Review: State of War: The Violent Order of Fourteenth-Century Japan," The Journal of Japanese Studies. Vol. 31, No. 2, Summer 2005, pp. 470-473.
 * Re: Conlon, Thomas Donald. (2003). State of War: The Violent Order of Fourteenth-Century Japan. Ann Arbor, Michigan: Center for Japanese Studies, University of Michigan.
 *  English-language scholarship, as if by unspoken agreement, has traditionally kept much of the history of Japan's complicated fourteenth century at arm's length. True, Andrew Goble's study of Go-Daigo's abortive attempt to revive imperial authority in his Kenmu: Go-Daigo's Revolution dealt with one crucial segment of it, the years from 1321 to 1335. But the long aftermath, the 50-odd years during which two imperial courts butted heads in the pursuit of legitimacy, has been almost totally untouched. Not since 1971, when Paul Varley devoted a chapter to the Nanboku'cho in his Imperial Restoration in Medieval Japan, has anyone  dared set foot in that particular briar patch. Instead, over the intervening years,  survey histories have done little more than give it an oblique and apprehensive glance before racing on, with evident relief, to the more manageable chaos of the Muromachi bakufu.

This concisely sums up how I feel about the Nanboku-cho period, but I never actually expressed the view aloud. Perhaps if I were to ask you to assist me in formulating better strategies for better finding my way through the manageable chaos of Wikipedia -- aha! ..., would that be an appropriate and welcome question?

In your text above, I have underlined salient comments. In a demonstrable way, this suggests that I am taking in what you have to say, or at least that I'm trying to take it in.

The first two underlined segments express the view that I myself cause problems which don't need to be problems. I see it differently. I think that this mis-perception arises because I'm inevitably cast as either Capulet or Montague when I present an informed demurral -- as I have done in Talk:Japanese era name, Talk:Daijō-kan, Talk:Kōryū-ji. I apologize for nothing I've written or tried to achieve in any of these venues. However, whether my point-of-view has merit or not becomes insignificant here, today. What becomes more pertinent is that I am not well served by strategies which have not demonstrably achieved a satisfactory step forward. Worse, if your analysis is to be credited, I've only succeeded in making myself look bad. This is not good.

The third underlined segment describes precisely what I find vexing. That tactic is the only one possible for squabbling children -- and it mostly works. This is different. That "difference" is something you've not taken in at all. Clearly, I have failed to distinguish any issue from those emphemeral, impossible-to-parse concerns of squabbling children; and if I could crack that nut, I'd  have a handle on a better way to move forward.

Can you discern anything at User talk:Bueller 007 which distinguishes it from what I encountered in the early days when I confronted boys who didn't want me to play in their sand box? If you cannot, as I cannot, then perhaps you begin to appreciate what can be described as a kind of battle fatigue. --Tenmei (talk) 19:28, 25 February 2008 (UTC)


 * I can, in fact, discern a great difference between the misunderstandings and arguments we had when you first began here and the case presented at User talk:Bueller 007. In the former, we were accusing you of using a source improperly, of placing it in See Also sections where it wasn't relevant, and of relying far too heavily on an outdated source without using your historical knowledge to reinterpret and fix the contemporary misunderstandings. In the latter case, you're accusing Bueller - not the other way around. Now, I may very well be missing something, and if I am, I apologize, but from the one link you gave me, I see only your accusation of Bueller's interference on the Hoko-ji article, and not any stimulus for it from him first; if you look at the History page for Hokoji, it looks as though he didn't do any edits after you, i.e. that he couldn't have removed references you put in.
 * But that's neither here nor there. We have now gone on, between the two of us, for many paragraphs, without addressing the issue at the core of this - whether or not nengo should be translated directly.　So, what do you say? Can we please put aside the accusations and discussions of one another's good faith, and just move on? Please? LordAmeth (talk) 22:07, 25 February 2008 (UTC)


 * I posted a complaint at WP:WQA. A pertinant element is this paragraph, with its link here.
 * Perhaps a good place to start is "my aching arse" and "plagaiarism" ... or maybe that's not the way to go. If I had any better ideas, I would have tried them out before resorting to this uncertain option.  A plausible possibility is that I create problems which don't need to be problems.  I don't think so; but again, there you have it.  See:
 * User talk:LordAmeth

As for Hoko-ji: I created the Hojo-ji article -- created it from scratch. He tore it apart -- moved it without letting me know or leaving a trace I could follow. That's not good; and I didn't know what to do. I can't sort it out even now and apparently, you can't either. If this kind of problem is reproduced over and over again ad nauseam by User:Bueller 007, your prescription here is wrong because it doesn't stop or get better. Instead, it just gets worse and worse. --Tenmei (talk) 22:35, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh, I see. I figured it was something like that; that's why I said "I may very well be missing something...from the one link you gave me..."
 * I'm afraid I don't follow what you mean by "your prescription ... doesn't stop or get better". What exactly are you referring to? (To be clear, I'm not asking in an accusatory way. I am genuinely, sincerely, unsure what you are referring to, and would appreciate a clear, concise explanation, if it's no trouble. Thank you.) LordAmeth (talk) 22:55, 25 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Your own words are unassailable.[[Image:SatowCalligraphy.jpg|thumb|Japanese calligraphy by [[Ernest Mason Satow|Satow]]. The kanji reads "敬和" (Kei-Wa), literally "Respect and harmony".]] When you encounter editors who are having a dispute or confrontation or whatever, you self-consciously say to yourself: " I'm here to offer a third opinion, to bring another voice into the discussion, to turn attention away from personal attacks and back to the matter at hand, so that we all, together, can try to find a resolution ."  Whether this is identified as strategy, tactic or gambit, I should imagine that this is the best and most efficacious intervention you can be reasonably expected to offer.  However, this tried-and-proven prescription for creating a kind of intra-personal alchemy which allows everyone to move on is doomed to failure sometimes -- inevitable statistical reality.  I didn't (and still don't) know how to present a catalog of factors which would allow you or anyone else to distinguish that non-standard instance in which the normal calming-the-waters gesture just doesn't work.  I have found that unfortunate exception-to-the-rule to be the case with User:Bueller 007.  Even if we hypothesize that I have only become inexplicably more and more sensitive, and if we assume that User:Bueller 007 is not getting more abusive, abrasive, corrosive, or whatever -- even then, my reserves of tolerance and relisience have grown steadily more and more frayed.  --Tenmei (talk) 23:28, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

MILHIST coordinator election
It's my pleasure to inform you that you have been elected to serve as an Assistant Coordinator of the Military history WikiProject for the next six months. Congratulations!

If you have not already done so, please visit the coordinators' talk page, where you'll be able to find some open tasks as well as reference material and discussions relevant to you. You might also be interested in a bit of advice that I have to offer.

Again, congratulations, and good luck! Kirill 00:00, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Congrats!
Congrats on your re-election as an Assistant Coordinator of the Military history Wikiproject. In honor of your achievement, I present you with these stars. I wish you luck in the coming term. TomStar81 (Talk) 00:43, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Well done Lord Ameth. I wish you another six months of happy military mopping, more good times reading articles at WP:MHR and success with your own article writing on Japanese military history. And hopefully another big period of growth for WP:MILHIST. And hopefully we can work together on the Trinh Lords and Nguyen Lords - I do seem to have most of the articles you listed on my computer as well! Blnguyen  (vote in the photo straw poll ) 04:06, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Congrats on your elect LordAmeth. All the best for this term. Kyriakos (talk) 12:43, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations! and Good Luck! -- S M S  Talk 16:17, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

A personal thank you

 * Oh, we're giving out Barnstars to current coordinators now, are we? Alright. Thanks much. LordAmeth (talk) 00:23, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your support

 * I wish to thank you for your support in my unsuccessful bid at becoming an Assistant Coordinator for the Military history WikiProject. Rest assured that I will still be around, probably even more than before, and I have the utmost confidence in the abilities of the current and new coordinators. I might also mention that I am already planning on running again in August. As always, if you need anything, just get in touch. -MBK004 21:29, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Leo J. Meyer
Please have a look at the DRV for Leo J. Meyer (currently seen at User:Meyerj) located at Deletion review/Log/2008 March. Its my opinion that the article met the standards for verifiability and notability. I would appreciate your input into the matter. MrPrada (talk) 18:26, 3 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) 04:59, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

congrats
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2008-03-03/WikiProject_elections - well done! SatuSuro 05:47, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I hope I can prove myself worthy of everyone's expectations. LordAmeth (talk) 07:47, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Meridian01cover.jpg
Thank you for uploading Image:Meridian01cover.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 15:54, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Middle bass
Regarding your question at the Music WikiProject, I think "middle bass" may translate to "baritone". I'm not sure if you are still looking for this answer, but here it is. -Freekee (talk) 05:44, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I am indeed still looking for a solution to this question... Thanks much for your help. Can a woman be called baritone, or is there another word? (To be honest, despite what the Japanese article I'm translating from says, if one listens to the music, her voice is really not that deep...) LordAmeth (talk) 01:04, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Question
LordAmeth- お久しぶりですね. I had a question regarding the new article on Jiyu Yamamoto. I tried to fix it up, but someone came along and changed it right back. In addition, this person rather curiously believes that じゆ is read "Jiyon." From the looks of the article on the Japanese Wikipedia, it might be this Jiyu Yamamoto himself writing the article-- as his alias listed in the English article is "JTR II" and that's the user on the ja wiki who wrote the article there. (or not...just speculating). At any rate, does such an article even belong here? What do you think? -Tadakuni (talk) 22:41, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't know what this other guy is trying to get at, but it looks like it's all nonsense. The "Jiyon" spelling, the JTR II nonsense nickname... I'd chalk this up to vandalism if K.O.2 hadn't been the one to create the article, and hadn't done so many edits. Let's see if we can't clean this up, and then see what happens - if he changes it again. LordAmeth (talk) 23:02, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I've cleaned it up as best as I can, but some parts really do not seem to make any sense to me, even in the Japanese. Is this guy a real actor? What is he notable for? LordAmeth (talk) 23:09, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Happy First Day of Spring!

 * Woo. Thanks. I'm really looking forward to the sakura. Another week or two, I guess. LordAmeth (talk) 02:18, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Chinese Five Mountains
Hi. Some time ago you checked the article "Five Mountain System" I started and, reasonably enough, pointed out in the talk page that I should have included a section about the Chinese Five Mountains. I knew that, but the problem was and is that I have nothing to write that section with. I searched for documentation in Google Books, Google and Wikipedia itself finding next to nothing, and what I found is contradictory and confusing. There are five real mountains sacred to Buddhism, but according to some they are four, there are five temples called mountains ... In short, it seems the Japanese Five Mountains are far better documented. Since you are an academic, I wonder if you know where I could find some info (books, site, whatever) or to whom I could ask for some. Thanks in advance. Urashimataro (talk) 07:09, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I appreciate and understand your dilemma. I cannot count the times I have been in the same predicament, and I certainly did not mean to imply that you did poor work, or that you personally should be expected to do more. If a Chinese Buddhism expert happens to come along and see my note and do something about it, that's all I really was aiming for. To be honest, I do not think I have any better idea than you where to look for information on this. But thank you for responding to my comment, and for seeking to do more. One of my housemates is a Chinese historian, though far from being a Buddhism expert; I'll ask her if she has any ideas. I think I'm going to also leave notes with the China and Buddhism WikiProjects. Thanks again. LordAmeth (talk) 08:00, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks to you. Buddhism isn't my thing either. In any case, I am not in a rush. In time, I or someone else will find something ... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.148.192.32 (talk) 23:19, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Rewrite of insurgency article?
Since I see you've commented on Insurgency in the past, I put an invitation, on its talk page, to look at a rewrite in my sandbox at User:Hcberkowitz/Sandbox-Insurgency, and see if that is a valid improvement. Thanks!

Howard C. Berkowitz (talk) 05:11, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

NW Japan
I live in the prefecture of Niigata's rice fields and mountains.I can get to Tokyo in 80 minutes or much more depending on my choosing. If I had it my way, I would live in Tokyo everyday. Competition is tough there. I am here in a permanent way, I am kinda out there away from many people alike me. I can enjoy writing on here or another place.

I am much sought after like that.

Most people in Japan know very little about this prefecture. Sometimes it is funny to see reactions to people when I tell them where I live. At least,nowadays I can get to a bigger city by rail or bus.

Thanks, Electric Japan (talk) 13:48, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Ah, Niigata. Snow Country, deshou? I'm currently living in Yokohama, and even here I miss Tokyo... I am hoping to stay in Japan next year as well, but job prospects are few and far between. Anyway, hopefully I shall get the opportunity to visit Niigata someday. There's a shinkansen that runs straight up there, isn't there? Thanks for the friendly response. Always nice to meet another Japan expert here on Wikipedia; there are surprisingly few of us. LordAmeth (talk) 14:37, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

I am a man alone in Japan
Yokohoma is a good place to be,close to Tokyo. I got often there in the early summer and fall. I go on the all-night train or the more expensive Shinkansen. There is so few of us because of the employment situation. Tough to be productive when there are so few willing to learn something that will benefit them for a lifetime. Difficult. Thanks, Electric Japan (talk) 16:26, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Yokohoma additions
Hello. I got to know something about you. Why is it you don't think additions about the 2nd biggest city in Japan are not vital. I know people are appreciative when I can help them on the topic of Japan. A point of view that ain't in a travel book. Everybody knows about the information that is already on there. I know that people want inside information about the city. Where to go and where to eat from a expats point of view. I am here permanently and even I need information in English about the cities of Japan. I thought adding vital information like on other country information pages is a big improvement.

I have yet to read anything that is somewhere close to nitpicky criticism. Yokohoma is a city that is ignored by tourists because there is not enough information seen about it. Coincidentally, I was just there last Tuesday on my way to Kamakura. Anyways,do you agree? Thanks Electric Japan (talk) 14:59, 2 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I think Yokohama tends to be overlooked because there's not much to see or do there, particularly from a historical point of view, and because it's so close to Tokyo, and there's so much to see and do in Tokyo. As for your additions not being vital, this is because Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a travel guide, and things like where to eat are not encyclopedic. I am sure, however, that your efforts would be appreciated over at Wikitravel. LordAmeth (talk) 21:43, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Indescribably a nice place to visit, Yokohoma.I think you should just take a swing over to the New York City page and see what's on there. That is just one example of the gems of information you can find on Wikipedia. There is never any kind of no-no's on Wikipedia. You can't deny others of informatuon that you can't find anywhere but here. Improving the Yokohoma page will happen. It is the 2nd biggest city in Japan. It is one of the few places in the world where there is a unique horizon from high atop an indescribably great towering hotel. This place is for everybody to contribute with vital and informative information. The deal with Japan is that finding good worthy information about it is hard to come by. There are other wikipedians who will be adding to it. I know of that for certain. It is only a matter of time. I am always right about these kinda things. There is just too many people looking for the right information outside and inside Japan.

Thanks, Electric Japan (talk) 14:22, 4 April 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) 01:53, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

"SamuraiWiki"
If you have a moment, Milord, could you weigh in here? Thanks. -- Hoary (talk) 00:32, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for letting me know about this. I'm sorry I've been absentee lately. I think I'm on a lengthy Wikibreak. Not sure when I'll return. LordAmeth (talk) 05:17, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

The break is richly deserved. Enjoy it, and thank you for those comments that you left. -- Hoary (talk) 06:19, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Need help
I wonder if you could show me the way how to make the Shinto shrine template become available for Vietnamese wiki ? Thanks.Hanzo2050 (talk) 10:28, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I think if you just replace all the English terms with the appropriate Vietnamese ones, it should work fine. The crucial thing is that you change the code to call "Đền shinto" instead of "Infobox Shinto shrine". I apologize that since I don't read Vietnamese, it's hard for me to know exactly what's wrong or what needs help. Good luck! LordAmeth (talk) 10:37, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
 * It's worked!. Thank for a good implication. See you!Hanzo2050 (talk) 13:59, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:ARIARoleplaying.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:ARIARoleplaying.jpg. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 19:54, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

News! Tag & Assess 2008 is coming ...
Milhist's new drive – Tag & Assess 2008 – goes live on April 25 and you are cordially invited to participate. This time, the task is housekeeping. As ever, there are awards galore, plus there's a bit of friendly competition built-in, with a race for bronze, silver and gold wikis! You can sign up, in advance, here. I look forward to seeing you on the drive page! All the best, -- R OGER D AVIES  talk 12:58, 23 April 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) 01:28, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Macedonia naming dispute
Hi, I have added your talk comment in the introduction of the Macedonia naming dispute. Please check the introduction if the dispute is more clearly explained. I am Macedonian I tend to write often Republic of Macedonia, Macedonian and Macedonians. The Greek editors on the other hand try to remove Macedonian and Macedonians or attribute them as much is possible. So have that in concern. If there is overemphasize on Republic of Macedonia, Macedonian and Macedonians feel free to edit it. Tnx a lot for contributing to the talk. (Toci (talk) 10:46, 27 May 2008 (UTC))
 * Thanks for clearing that up. I think it reads far better now. Thanks. LordAmeth (talk) 22:53, 27 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) 01:17, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Requested move of ume
You previously participated in a move request of ume. I have revived the request so please visit Talk:Ume if you care to contribute. —  AjaxSmack   16:10, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Please, check the "Heike monogatari/ Tale of the Heike page"
I've performed some investigation in order to contribute with your work. You asked about the authorship and, fortunately, I've found some helpfull information in my great version of this fantastic book. Please, when you end your vacancies, just check it, because i could have mistaken easily. Greeting - Juan —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.27.16.94 (talk) 12:55, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Military History Wiki
Dear LordAmeth, you are a member of Wikiproject Military History, and I would like to notify you that a new Wiki has been made for Military History. If you are interested in participating in this project, please follow the following link.http://www.militaryhistorywiki.scribblewiki.com/Main_Page. Cheers,  Ṝέđ ṃάяķvюĨїήīṣŢ  Drop me a lineReview Me!

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) 19:27, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Bonin Islands
An elegant edit: military base ≠ SDF base. --Tenmei (talk) 20:46, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks. LordAmeth (talk) 22:26, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Tsugaru clan
Hi LordAmeth, long time no see; if you've got some time to spare, could you look over Tsugaru clan? In the wake of User:Exiled Ambition being blocked (see this), I've begun going through "his" articles and seriously expanding them. Tsugaru clan was part of that; I'm just wondering how else it can be improved before I turn my attention to other articles like Nanbu clan, Tamura clan, and other things. Thanks. -Tadakuni (talk) 20:08, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Wow. Beautiful work. I don't know anything about this clan, so I don't know of any glaring omissions or the like. I personally have some issues with minor formatting stuff - is "daimyo" really an English word, that it should be rendered in non-italics and without macron? Also, I think the various "disturbances" should be capitalized as if it were the proper noun name of the event, just like the capitalization of rebellion, war, and battle in Taiping Rebellion, Genpei War, and Battle of Hastings. Couldn't hurt to wikilink them too; you or I or someone else may eventually get around to writing an article on it.
 * I'm not sure if I like the formatting of the names in the end sections (Family Heads and Famous Retainers); feels like there's too much empty space, like it's unfinished. But, then, I guess, I don't really have any amazing cure-all solution. What do you think about starting with adding the surname, even though it'll be repetitive, to make it look fuller, more complete; wikilinking all the names, adding birth and death dates?
 * Thanks so much for your hard work. I'm happy to be back, though I think I'll be toning down my participation a lot from what I was doing before. I'm reading George Kerr's book on Okinawa right now, and have a number of other backup sources, so I think I'll just be taking it slow, creating new articles here and there, helping out with fixing, overhauling, Exiled Ambition's work if it wouldn't be stepping on your toes... but I do have to wait for the rest of my books to get here, as I shipped them home from Japan by boat. LordAmeth (talk) 20:54, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your feedback! As far as "daimyo" goes, I used to italicize it and give it a macron, but User:Fg2 would invariably come through and change it to "daimyo" since it's apparently an "English word of Japanese origin" now. Even if it is in Webster's, though, I don't think it's commonly known, so maybe a compromise would work-- at least wiki-linking it.
 * As for helping out with fixing and overhauling, feel free-- the more the merrier! I can't do this all on my own. I'll be sure to capitalize the "disturbances," and your suggestion regarding the family heads is a great idea, I'll get right on that, as well. Here's to a better and brighter future for Japanese history articles on Wikipedia! -Tadakuni (talk) 20:58, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Kind of a unique situation with the Tsugaru clan I wanted to ask your opinion on-- the appropriate naming convention for the Kuroishi branch's heads. The Japanese wiki's succession box has the heads before Chikatari listed as Kuroishi-han X-dai tōshu and starting with Chikatari, who was promoted to daimyo, the Kuroishi-han daimyo are listed as hanshu. The numbering for the hatamoto goes up to 6 including Chikatari, and then starts back at 1 since Chikatari was the first daimyo of that branch. You've probably seen my succession boxes-- "[X]th Lord of [X domain]," but I was wondering how I might denote the difference between the Kuroishi-Tsugaru who were merely wealthy hatamoto, and the later Kuroishi-Tsugaru who were full-fledged daimyo. -Tadakuni (talk) 16:21, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Ah, I see. They were hatamoto for a time, without controlling a given han. Is that right? And then, in 1809, Tsugaru Yukinori became daimyo of Kuroishi-han. Well, I think calling him "2nd lord of Kuroishi han" is appropriate. Are you wondering how to number clan heads, like whether the numbering should restart with Chikatari? Normally, I'd just go along with whatever the Japanese Wiki is doing, as I assume they know better than I the subtleties of how these things are traditionally/typically numbered in Japanese historical reckoning. But, on the other hand, I don't really see why the numbering of clan heads should restart with Chikatari; if the clan name changed, that'd be one thing, but it doesn't seem to, and becoming daimyo of a han doesn't really make you "first" clan head. ... I guess if it were up to me, I would continue the numbering straight through. Does that address your question, or am I missing the point? Thanks. LordAmeth (talk) 21:19, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree with what you suggest here, i.e. to go with what the Japanese wiki is doing. The weird thing about Kuroishi is that apparently it proves that you don't have to be a daimyo to rule a han...so the rulers of Kuroishi 1 to 6 (6 being Chikatari) are kōtai-yoriai hatamoto, but then after Chikatari gets his income raised over the 10,000 koku threshold, he goes from being the hatamoto ruler number 6, to being the first daimyo of Kuroishi...the Japanese wiki just gives him two infoboxes, one for ruling Kuroishi as a hatamoto, the other for ruling it as a daimyo. Anyway, yeah, you're right, I'll just go with what the Japanese wiki is saying, and denote "6th Lord of Kuroishi (as hatamoto)" or something to that effect. -Tadakuni (talk) 06:12, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Project talk page tagging for WP:VIET
Blnguyen  had requested me for the service of TinucherianBot to tag articles in the categories in WikiProject Vietnam/Categories for the WikiProject Vietnam. I request the members to kindly have a look, carefully verify ALL the categories and remove all the possibly wrong categories. Please Dont misunderstand by being cautious here, as we have faced many issues with such huge scale bot tagging earlier. Once I get the final go ahead, I will start the bot with the final list. Thank you for choosing TinucherianBot for the project,. It is a pleasure working for this project...I have also left a note at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Vietnam and request your comments there. You are receiving this message as you are a member of the project. Thanks --  Tinu  Cherian  - 06:07, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Han Infobox?
LordAmeth- How does one design a new infobox? I want to see if I can design one for han; I think it'd certainly help. -Tadakuni (talk) 06:52, 23 July 2008 (UTC)


 * I gave it a shot using the template...how does this look? I used Aizu as an example. -Tadakuni (talk) 07:07, 23 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Looks great. I'd suggest a few tiny content changes, but anyway, the key thing is making it into a proper Infobox. Hmm.. I've always copied from other Infoboxes when making my own. I wonder how one specifies new terms and makes the coding understand how to format it. For example, changing "label7" and "data7" to "clan7" and "koku7" or whatever and having the code still work out... I apologize, I'm not actually that good at coding; I just copy from pre-created ones. Excellent work, though! Once this gets more fully off the ground, I'd be happy to help in adding it to articles. LordAmeth (talk) 13:54, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Proposal for standard infobox for History of [country] templates
Hi there! You're a member of WikiProject History, so I'm just informing you about a proposal I've made about standardizing History of [country] templates (like Template:History of France). The discussion is located at the talk page for WikiProject History—your comments and criticism are welcome. Thank you. Mr. Absurd (talk) 05:09, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Gokoku-ji (Okinawa) DYK

 * Thanks! I don't think I've ever gotten a DYK before without nominating it myself. LordAmeth (talk) 03:48, 26 July 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) 01:58, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Judaism Newsletter
This newsletter was automatically delivered because you are a member of one or more Judaism related WikiProjects. If you would like to opt out of future mailings, please remove your name from this list.


 * Newsletter delivery by xenobot  02:45, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Cleanup of Exiled Ambition's articles
LordAmeth- please see the updated list of EA's articles. I've gone through all of them (as per the list he had posted) and cut nearly all of them down to basic (legible and comprehensible) stubs without reference to Samurai Archives or Samurai Wiki. I think I'm going to take a little Wikibreak now, and then come back in a day or two and do what I can to start improving them beyond stub stage. -Tadakuni (talk) 01:03, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Well. What can I say but "excellent work!". Fantastic. Keep it up!! LordAmeth (talk) 15:28, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Shiseibyō DYK

 * Thanks! LordAmeth (talk) 02:32, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Pictures
LordAmeth- have a look at Iwamura Michitoshi; the picture in the infobox is kind of too big...how do I get it to be a little smaller? It was smaller when I just had the picture, but when I put it in the infobox it got huge! -Tadakuni (talk) 17:15, 9 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks. :) -Tadakuni (talk) 17:19, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
 * No problem. There's an "imagesize" option which can be used. I made it 100 pixels wide; you can change the "100px" attribute I put in to whatever you'd like. LordAmeth (talk) 17:20, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Talk:Masakari
Hello, LordAmeth. I wrote what I know about Masakari as I noticed your question on the discussion page. I would edit that page if I could find some books to reference. --210.237.247.228 (talk) 14:16, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Alright. Thanks much. LordAmeth (talk) 14:21, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Tsugaru clan (again)
Hi LordAmeth-- as you may know, I've nominated Tsugaru clan for Good Article status. I know you contributed, but I don't think you're disqualified from reviewing it, as you didn't contribute to it extensively. Please see here for my discussion with User:Fg2. Could you perhaps review the article? Either way, thanks for your help. -Tadakuni (talk) 15:25, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
 * LordAmeth-- well, it's done. The article has been promoted, thanks to an editor (seemingly unrelated to WikiProject Japan) who took the time to review it. Now I get to take a big sigh of relief, and move on to other things. Thanks so much for your help! -Tadakuni (talk) 06:13, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Nanbu clan
Hi LordAmeth, sorry to bother you again so soon, but could you have a look at Talk:Nanbu clan? I nominated this article for Good Article status today, after having spent most of the afternoon seriously expanding it (it's now longer than Tsugaru clan, actually). Your thoughts would be most welcome. -Tadakuni (talk) 02:40, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the review and comments. One tiny additional request, though-- could you please note that you've reviewed it here? Thanks again! -Tadakuni (talk) 06:49, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Frog's legs, thatch and all that
Hello LordAmeth,

Gobusata itashimashita. Something vaguely remembered tells me you might be interested in Commons:Category:Architectural elements in Japan. Earlier this year I added Commons:Category:Roofs in Japan to it, and prior to that, Commons:Category:Kara-hafu. Today I started Commons:Category:Kaerumata. There are other categories in it too. If you have a mental list of good photos to put in those categories, they'd become more valuable. Castles, Buddhist temples, Shinto shrines, minka and many other topics to which you've contributed extensively lead me to hope you can add a few.

Best regards, Fg2 (talk) 05:06, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for letting me know about that. I did indeed contribute to a small handful of articles on architectural subjects at one point. I'm afraid I'm not quite so active on Commons as to have much in mind regarding particular images that were looking for a category, but I shall definitely keep that in mind - if I come across photos in need of a category, or an article in need of photos, now I know where to look. Much thanks. LordAmeth (talk) 10:45, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Satake clan
LordAmeth- I've completed my preliminary run-through of Satake clan, the third article in my list of clan articles to improve; as such, I've nominated it for peer review (I want to hold off on Good Article nomination for this one...it needs to be more detailed, and the Kamakura and Sengoku sections need to be waaaaaaaay longer). Would you mind reviewing it? Many thanks. Oh, and PS, next up on my list is Akita clan, which I've already begun preliminary work on.-Tadakuni (talk) 05:44, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
 * FYI- I've completed my second run-through of Satake clan. Cheers. -Tadakuni (talk) 01:25, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I hope you don't mind, I did a quick run-through of the article, and made a number of small edits. Any given term should be wikilinked only once, so I delinked several references to Honshu, karo, etc. Added macrons to Hōjō. Moved the romaji terms "Satake-hokke" and "Satake nishike" to go after "family" as they incorporate that ～家 ending. Otherwise, the article looks great. I apologize that I seem to be pretty bad at coming up with editing suggestions. LordAmeth (talk) 14:18, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Your attempts to hide and falsify British History
Good afternoon,

you tried to delete an article of mine, on the grounds of "anti-Britishness". Well, please note:

History is not about making you feel good about yourself and your country. It is about facts that happened, and depicting them the way they were. You are obviously persueing a censored history, filtered through the prisms of your nationalistic feelings. This is not what history is about, mate.

You wrote

"would like to inform you that the article British-India Holocaust, which you created, has been nominated for deletion. Its use of the word "holocaust" and references to conditions under the Nazis and Stalin make it obvious that you have an anti-British agenda, and are not approaching the topic from an objective point of view."

Well, first: What you say is just ridiculous. Because if anyone followed your logic, it would be anti-german to reveal the truth about the Nazi's genocide. And the consequence would be, that the facts would not be allowed to mention. If the Germans did the same that you demand to be done, than the Nazi's crimes would be swept under the carpet. However, what you demand for others - namely the unsparing truth, freed from nationalistic interests - you have to apply for all crimes, not just the ones you like. I know that you Allied people are most dishonest and try to depict your countries as "good" and "morally superior". However, if one has a closer look at what exactly you have done during the time of your racist and mass-murdering Empire, this claim can hardly be sustained. Just because people like you try to sweep the facts about British Genocides under the carpet, does not mean they never happened.

(By the way, i am not anti-British, but i am not blindfoldedly pro-British either, like you are. You, however, seem to be a nationalist, who tries to suppress inconvenient facts about your racist empire's history.)

You wrote:

"Please see WP:NPOV and Wikipedia is not a soapbox for further explanations of why what you are doing is impermissible. The subject which this article refers to is in any case already covered in a longer, more thorough, more objective article at Great Famine of 1876-78, making your article a duplicate, which is another thing we cannot have on Wikipedia."

I have had a look about the article. I think, this one is the one to be deleted, as it apparantly aims to belittle, to belie and to whitewash a large-scale genocide perpetrated by the British Empire.

"If there were anything objective or relevant in your article, I would have recommended a merge, however, I see nothing salvageable in your distinctively non-objective, biased attempts to accuse the British of pure evil akin to the actions of the Nazis."

The Nazis had one role-model: It was the British Empire. You try to measure with two standards, this is called double-standard. Because you seem to be British, of course only the Nazi-crimes are crimes, and the British crimes aren't. You try to sweep the truth about your Empire under the carpet, alas, you can delay the truth from leaking out, but not prevent it.

Listen, please: EVERYTHING i wrote in this article, i have proven with scientific sources. None of them comes from German sources, all of them are British and American sources. So how can you accuse me of being "anti-british", when i use sources only from your country and countries that are allied with Britain? In Germany, the atroticies and crimes of your British Empire are not even known (due to the fact that your country and Mr. Bush still control German media and schools, which makes it very obvious why Germans do not know anything about Allied crimes and still think Allied nations were "better" than they are).

I am not Anti-British, however your country is extremely anti-german and you personally seem to be a fierce nationalist and anti-truth. But history, my dear, is not about getting drunk and yelling "rule britannia". It is about depicting things, as they were.

And now please note: All sources that i have used, used explicetely the term "Holocaust". It is not me who has created this term. If you look at all the Genocides of your country, you will notice that many scientists use the term "holocaust" not only for the German holocaust (which you apparantly wish), but for all large-scale genocides, like the MAAFA which is often referred to as "African Holocaust", or the Lord-Lytton Genocide. Davis referres to it as "late-victorian holocaust", and Monbiot uses "british holocaust"; an Indian scientists from Wisconsin University USA used the term "British-India Holocaust". You know very well, that the history of your country has been written by your country only. I think its time, to hear the voice of those who are concerned - the Indians - in that case, too. History is not about making you feel good about yourself - but about facts, about science, and about truth.

I have changed the word "murdered" (even though it was murder,due to British law) to killed. You can make more suggestions, if you like. But i am not willing to sweep facts under the carpet, now matter how great your desire for that may be. I will not change the title, because this term has been used by all scientific sources i consulted. I think you try to falsify history and to hide facts. I think you should try to become a little honest about your country.

your sincerely

Peter —Preceding unsigned comment added by PeterBln (talk • contribs) 15:35, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Even more attempts to hide facts about history
"You accuse the British of being dishonest. You accuse them of censoring history. You allude to dishonesty and censorship on the part of President Bush. .."

Oh yes, i do that. Have you ever seen a German schoolbook? Have you ever listened to, or watched German media? They are still under Allied control, and if depicting history in a filtered, nationalist way is not "dishonesty", i dont know what dishonesty is. In Germany, everbody is taught: The only heinous crime in world history is the evil German Nazi-Genocide - others do not exist. Your country preaches the same fraudulent history, by adding a loud "Rule Britannia" to it. However, i found out through thorough scientific research that your filtered view of history is dishonest. So why are none of your allied crimes known in Germany? Because you write history not in a truthful way, but filtered through your sentiments of nationalism. As soon as somebody tries to reveal British crimes, you accuse him of being "anti-British". This is not what history is about, my dear. Because in that case, you would have to censor the heinous Allied crime of "operation keelhaul" too, in which Churchill betrayed 2 Million people and sent them to Stalin's concentration camps.

I cannot believe you studied history, and try to whitewash all these heinous atrocities? How disgusting.

You wrote:

"Whether these allegations are true or not, they reflect a political agenda, a bias, which is something we on Wikipedia cannot abide. LordAmeth (talk) 05:48, 19 August 2008 (UTC)"

It is YOU who is biased, it is YOU who has a political agenda, namely your heinous nationalist views on the grounds that Britain never committed any atrocities and genocidies. You know that it is a lie, don't you? You try to hide the fact that your "good" and benevolent Empire went and invaded half the world by not dishing out candies and stroking children's heads, like you try to make believe. But much rather by torturing them to death (Transatlantic Slave trade), eleminating their leaders (India,. "blow up'" with canons, ever seen that?), carrying out the biggest Ethnic Cleansing in mankind's history (nearly complete extermination of Native Americans), causing intentional famines (Lord Lytton), and setting up racist regimes all over the world (Apartheit, Segregation as result of British MAAFA, oppression of Aboriginees in Australia and many more). Don't try to hide it, mate, and don't try to tell me Britain is not responsible for all these heinous crimes and atroticies. Just because they do not appear in your schoolbooks (and certainly not in ours), does not mean they never happened.
 * First of all, I'm not British. So let's get that out of the way. I'm not defending MY country, or anything like that. Secondly, putting the bias issue aside completely, your article addresses a topic already covered by another article. That makes it a duplicate article, and automatically worthy of being nominated for AfD. Give it up already, please. LordAmeth (talk) 05:22, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Nanbu clan GA review
Hello! I was looking through the articles at the GA nomination page to find one to review, and I clicked on the link for the Nanbu clan article. It appears that you have reviewed this article and found it passes GA standards. Do you have more issues that the main editor needs to address, or is this article ready to become a GA? If it is ready to become a GA, the steps needed to actually pass the article are listed on the top of the GA nominations page. Dana boomer (talk) 15:56, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the note. I was waiting for second opinions. Though I did not directly play an active role in editing that article, it is a topic within my field of interest, something that I should love to see pass, written by an editor I have great respect for; this makes me somewhat biased. More to the point, this is only my second GA review, and I am sure there are more experienced reviewers out there with a better sense of (a) technical formatting requirements such as are contained in WP:MOS and elsewhere, and (b) issues that have come up in past GA reviews, i.e. editors with a better innate sense of what should and should not pass, based in part at least upon knowledge of what has and has not passed in the past. If it is indeed the case that a single reviewer (me) is allowed to serve as judge, jury, and executioner, reviewing the article and passing it with no second opinions, and most people are fine with that, give me a go ahead and I'll do what needs be done as for formally listing it as a Good Article. Thanks. LordAmeth (talk) 05:28, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Ah, I see! In that case, I'll give the article a quick run over today and post any comments I have on the review page.  In the future, when you are looking for a second opinion on an article:  On the nomination page, under the article heading, where now you have the GA review tag, add "|status=2nd opinion" to the tag.  This will make the tag show up differently, and make it say specifically that you are looking for a second opinion.  Generally, when you just leave the GA review tag on there, people just think you are still working on the review, but that things are being taken care of, and don't bother looking at the article or its review page.  I'll post any comments I have later today.  Thanks for the response! Dana boomer (talk) 12:15, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Alright. Much thanks. GA apparently works very differently from most other polls/discussions. Now I know... and I'll keep such in mind for next time. LordAmeth (talk) 13:30, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, GA works differently from most other WP things in that it only becomes a community consensus issue if the main reviewer and the main editor begin to have serious problems with each other. I've just posted my comments on the review page, if you'd like to have a look at them.  Overall, it's a good article, but needs a few things as far as referencing and MOS styling. Dana boomer (talk) 13:51, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

I've finished my GA review of the article, and the nominator has addressed all of my concerns. I would now concur with your opinion that the article is of GA status. If you wish to pass the article, the instructions can be found near the top of the nominations page. If you wish me to pass the article, please just let me know.

Now, the rest of this advice you can take or leave as you wish...and please realize that it is meant in the nicest, most positive way possible. I would suggest that you do not conduct GA reviews on articles that you even think you might be biased on, either for or against, when going into the review, at least until you become more experienced as a reviewer. I would also suggest avoiding articles written by editors that you interact with a lot on Wikipedia in the course of writing articles. This is simply to avoid any accusations of conflict of interest that might come up, rather than because you'd purposely conduct a faulty GA review. Now, that said, we can always use more reviewers in the GA project. If you don't feel comfortable conducting a full GA review of the article yourself, and passing it with no other editor looking at it, you are always welcome to put a second opinion clause on your review tag on the nominating page. This will allow other editors to see that you wish to have them take a look through the article. I promise, it gets easier as it goes along and you feel more comfortable being, as you put it, judge, jury and executioner for the GA review process. Hope this helps, and I didn't offend. Dana boomer (talk) 00:46, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
 * No offense taken. Thanks for your help. I'll look at the GA passing instructions in the morning and take care of it. LordAmeth (talk) 01:35, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Concerning PeterBln
I have noticed that you have had regular conversations with PeterBln, concerning his POV pushing. I have observed many times when this user has broken WP:NPOV, and WP:CIVIL. I tried to teach him about following Wikipedia guidelines, and employed formal warnings to try and get him to follow WP:NPOV and WP:CIVIL, but it does not seem to have taken him off the course he is currently on. As a result, I have reported him on the admin noticeboard. Since you have been involved with the user, perhaps you might be interested in observing the discussion on the noticeboard, or maybe contributing to it as well. The discussion can be found here:. Thank you for reading. JEdgarFreeman (talk) 21:06, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Some Questions
My recent push of work on Wikipedia has got me wondering about additions/changes that might be made to some of the Edo-related information. In a perfect world, there would be a WikiProject Edo or a WikiProject Samurai, but we don't have that, so we've got to make do. Anyway, I was wondering about Aizu. Awhile ago someone added stuff to it so that it would cover the modern region of Aizu in Fukushima-ken as well as the historic region of Aizu-han. My question is this-- do you think it'd be okay to spin off the Aizu-han related stuff into its own article? I think I could do a lot for it. Ideally I'd also want to finish the article on Sendai-han as well, since Sendai was after all the biggest han in the Tohoku. Also, do you think it'd be wise to start creating articles for specific branches of the Matsudaira clan? The current article kind of covers most of 'em in general, but I don't think it's capable of covering them all without becoming ridiculously long. I say this partly because another one of the Tohoku clans that I think I can cover well is the Matsudaira clan (Aizu), and to a lesser extent Matsudaira clan (Moriyama). It'll be tricky to write said articles though, because I'd have to be sure the main focus was on the family and not on the domain. However, by virtue of it being the family, it would go past 1868/1871 and into the present day.

Another thing I'm wondering about is Category:Tokugawa clan. Might it perhaps be too general/too inclusive? Could it perhaps be better to have a hypothetical Category:Matsudaira clan within that category, since the Matsudaira surname was usually given to cadet branches?

At any rate, thanks for your help lately. Cheers, Tadakuni (talk) 16:07, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I like all of those suggestions. In particular, I'm a big fan of having things consistent across a given subject or article type. By which I mean to say that I think we should have articles of somewhat similar format for each of the han; Aizu, describing a region, doesn't quite fit the format - as long as there's enough to be said, there should be an Aizu Domain article I think. If you think you have enough to say about one of the Matsudaira branches, then by all means create an article for it; though, you might want to start by expanding upon the core Matsudaira clan article, which is right now a stub and in sore need of expansion. Once it becomes long enough, unmanageable enough, then we can split it off. But I think it might be better to start with that. What do you think? LordAmeth (talk) 04:08, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
 * LordAmeth- Excellent idea; I shall commence momentarily. Will also create an independent Aizu Domain article before long, too. (Oh, and I also replied to your question on my talk page) I'll see what I can do with Matsudaira clan, and then we'll take it from there. Thanks! -Tadakuni (talk) 04:11, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Joseon Tongsinsa
The initial exchange in this thread has been copied to Talk:Korean missions to Edo.

LordAmeth -- I'd guess that you're likly to want to scan Korean missions to Edo? A helpful Korean editor pointed out that Korean missions to Edo is redundant because Joseon Tongsinsa and Joseon tongsinsa already exist. The proposed merge of all three articles is reasonable, of course; but the ultimate name of the merged article may not be so easily resolved?

I tentatively suggested Joseon missions to Japan as a plausible name for an umbrella article which incorporates and links the Korean missions to Edo and also the diplomatic exchanges between the Joseon Dynasty and Japan in that period before the establishment of the Tokugawa shogunate; but I'm not encouraged that this potential olive branch was understood in that context.

Perhaps this small problem is not entirely unexpected? --Tenmei (talk) 02:19, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Where did this exchange take place between you and the Korean editor? I don't see anything. In any case, I'd prefer Korean missions to Edo as it parallels Ryukyuan missions to Edo. Since there was no other Korea contemporary to Edo other than Korea under the Joseon Dynasty, I see no reason to call it "Joseon missions" or anything of the sort; the word "Joseon" is also unknown to just about anyone who is not an East Asian history specialist (though, admittedly, Ryukyu and Edo aren't particularly commonly known terms either), so I think "Korean" is better.


 * That said, Korean missions to Japan during the Joseon period do extend before (and after?) the Joseon period, so I suppose the argument for an article incorporating these earlier (and later?) events might be merited. It's all a matter of perspective, really.


 * As a Japan scholar focusing on Ryukyuan missions during the Edo period, I'm looking for a title that parallels Ryukyuan missions to Edo, creating a set (even if it a set of only two items). If someone were approaching this from a "History of Korean foreign relations" or "Aspects of Joseon history" perspective, I can understand arguments towards another title.


 * In any case, however, I think the non-English title Joseon tongsinsa is no good. I resisted the urge to title the Okinawa-related article Ryūkyū Edo Nobori, knowing that it violates WP:Use English, and that it would not be comprehensible to any non-Japan specialists, such as China or Korea specialists, or anyone else interested in the subject but not familiar with the Japanese language. LordAmeth (talk) 02:50, 24 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Let me add, also, thank you very much for your contributions to both the Ryukyuan and Korean missions topics; I am also really happy to see that others (incl. Korea specialists) have created articles for the Korean missions, as it's admittedly not really a topic that intrigues me too much. I'll add what I can from Ron Toby's book, and other sources I have, and to help out with the merge (unless you or someone else would like to captain the effort), but I'm very happy to discover that there's a foundation to work with. LordAmeth (talk) 02:53, 24 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Sorry -- the link was wrong. It should have been User talk:Tenmei. In any case, I'm moving this exchange to Talk:Korean missions to Edo.  This subject does interest me, but I have zero willingness to tolerate the kind of pointless exercise in futility which characterizes anything to do with Liancourt rocks.


 * My strategic plan is (a) to merge the Edo period articles within the quite impossible Korean name ..., and then (b) to place this carefully-focused subject under another, larger "umbrella" article ..., and then (c) to re-establish the Edo period diplomatic exchanges in a "new" article which I predict becomes necessary as the scale, scope and focus of that more fully-researched aspect of the broad narrative develops.  Otherwise, I would imagine that projected umbrella article will come to seem unbalanced by the quality and depth of coverage pertaining to a mere 300-year period in the context of a longer historic timespan. As for what the article is named this week or next, this month or next -- I don't care.  Let someone else focus on that chimera while my strategic plan unfolds quietly, effectively, slowly, inevitably ....


 * Of course, WP:Use English is a practical, plausible, appropriate and necessary fulcrum; but I'm persuaded that there is likely to be no lever or force to make good use of that fulcrum. I could not agree more with the analysis and sentiments you express in the last paragraph you wrote above. In my view, your conclusions are so obvious, plain, necessary that they hardly bear repeating; but merest hint of Dokdo-type logic already causes me to feel wary, sceptical, regretful.  --Tenmei (talk) 04:37, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm against the parallel to Ryukyuan missions to Edo. Who knows what Edo is except few people knowledgeable of Japanese culture? Whether Joseon is unknown term to people, that is the official title of the state. Besides, Ryukyu was a vassal state of Japan, and the parallel can imply false connotation that Korea was as such. I think Joseon Tongsinsa is not that bad title after reading this.--Caspian blue (talk) 05:03, 24 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Of course, WP:Use English is a practical, plausible, appropriate and necessary fulcrum; but I'm persuaded that there is likely to be no lever or force to make good use of that fulcrum. I could not agree more with the analysis and sentiments you express in the last paragraph you wrote above. In my view, your conclusions are so obvious, plain, necessary that they hardly bear repeating; but merest hint of Dokdo-type logic already causes me to feel wary, sceptical, regretful.  --Tenmei (talk) 04:37, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm against the parallel to Ryukyuan missions to Edo. Who knows what Edo is except few people knowledgeable of Japanese culture? Whether Joseon is unknown term to people, that is the official title of the state. Besides, Ryukyu was a vassal state of Japan, and the parallel can imply false connotation that Korea was as such. I think Joseon Tongsinsa is not that bad title after reading this.--Caspian blue (talk) 05:03, 24 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I have added the following at (1)-Joseon Tongsinsa, (2)-Joseon tongsinsa and (3)-Korean missions to Edo:
 *  "As I construe LordAmeth's comments at Talk:Korean missions to Edo, it becomes plain that any merge which is inconsistent with Naming conventions (use English) would not be uncontroversial." 
 * In my view, this thread can be brought to a close; and further discussion would be better continued at Talk:Korean missions to Edo. However, I do want to ameliorate a modest problem before it grows any bigger. It may be clarifying to underscore just one explicit point-of-view in this closing context.


 * Today, now, at this moment: there is no correct or incorrect, no pro- or con-, no right or wrong, nothing to be "against" -- no dispute at all; and in my opinion, it would be a needless mistake to begin down any path which leads towards controversy rather than consensus. In that broad sense only, Caspian blue's word-choice of "against" within the narrow confines of a single sentence appears somewhat unhelpful, premature, discouraging. --Tenmei (talk) 16:19, 24 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Be civil--Caspian blue (talk) 16:11, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Fostering scholarly collaboration -- analysis, text and source development
I invite your attention and possible comment here: In my view, the only aspect worthy of your time would be, perhaps, something to do with this over-arching aspect of a broader set of issues and problems. In general, this is nominally beyond the scope of this limited-focus venue, but a broader audience may be following this thread. Maybe a level-headed comment from you can leverage something more broadly useful in terms of collaboration between WikiProject Korea and WikiProject Japan? --Tenmei (talk) 20:51, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Articles for deletion/Joseon tongsinsa.

User:Tenmei
Hello, LordAmeth, you have been involved in the discussion for merging/renaming of the tree articles on Joseon Tongsinsa, you can guide the user in question how to behave to other editors in civil way. Let me ask you; is this user a Japanese? The user accused me with various insulting languages and drags irrelevant matters to the AFD. I warned him about his insanely rude behaviors, but at Articles for deletion/Joseon tongsinsa, the user could not stop himself doing so. I think it would be better if you can warn him about his behaviors and ramblings before I seeking a formal administrative action like WikiEtiquett. I could not cooperate with such user who resorts to absurd personal attacks such as the section.. Thanks.--Caspian blue (talk) 23:12, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid I know nothing about his ethnicity or national origin. I apologize, but I think it would be best for me to stay out of this conflict. I was sooo hoping this would not explode out of control as it did, both of you being, most of the time, very responsible and mature editors, but he does have a tendency to start with these massive paragraphs of unnecessarily snooty academic-level language, and to turn content disputes into personal attacks, while you seem to have a tendency to be overly sensitive about taking offense at things you perceive to be pro-Japanese/anti-Korean. Not that I'm blameless; by no means. I have my own tendencies, my own bias, my own faults. But I was soooo hoping we could work together on this peaceably without it coming to this. I apologize, but I refuse to get any further involved. If you wish to report him to formal administrative action or whatever, please do. He is one of a very few editors who contributes extensively and with quality content on Japan-related subjects, but he does also have this tendency to make personal attacks, and to escalate situations as has happened here. As for me, I do Wikipedia for fun, as a hobby, and when it stops being fun, such as when we have to deal with this kind of nonsense, I have to stop doing it. LordAmeth (talk) 01:18, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the input, but just for courtesy, I could not put up with his false accusations. I filed his behaviors to WP:ANI. I just visit him as expecting to seek a normal procedure for merging, nothing else. I don't know why he does research my contributions and Liancourt Rocks and Comfort women should be brought to the AFD. I really tried to save the valuable content from the AFD, so added a reliable Korean source (because I also have a life and don't have time to research English academic sources in the ongoing AFD). Well, I do Wikipedia for fun, (history is my least fun place for editing, so I avoided editing there). You happen to be an admin, and seems to know him more than I do and edit Japanese related article from a fairly neural point of view, so I just wanted you to stop him making personal attacks further. That's all. Thank you anyway.--Caspian blue (talk) 01:35, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I thank you for your confidence in me, and for saying that I contribute relatively neutrally. We do tend to get along fairly well, you and I, don't we? I'm glad to hear that you came into this with the same attitude - that we just want to seek to merge the articles, that no one is looking for trouble. Hopefully we can resolve this soon, and with relatively little trouble. I shall leave Tenmei a comment. LordAmeth (talk) 03:00, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Hmm, let me explain why I was against the parallel to Ryukyu and pointed out on the Japanese year. First, I've seen the subject has been used for some colonialism scholars and Japanese ultra-nationalists active at 2channel and a Japan-Korean forum of Naver as falsifying the history. I'm worrying the the article would be a place for the case again (well, that happened already in Korean/Japanese wikipedias as inserting a bashing image by Japanese IP users.) I'm also very bothered by Tenmei's false accusation that the contents of two articles created by seemingly Korean editors are in original research and have no value. On the contrary, he used the one of the articles to fix the wrong info. So please don't assume that I have a pro/anti Japanese-Korean agenda. Thanks.--Caspian blue (talk) 03:52, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Shō Tai

 * Wow. That's fantastic. Especially since I didn't consider that article complete. Thanks!! LordAmeth (talk) 14:25, 30 August 2008 (UTC)


 * You're welcome, LordAmeth. ... My thesis?  It's about endothelial gene regulation.  Hope this helps. Cheers! --PFHLai (talk) 23:05, 30 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) 22:48, 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) 23:38, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Hey:
Great to see you're still active. How's everything going? : ) Spawn Man (talk) 06:03, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Glad to see you're back. Funnily enough, I'm actually doing more or less the same as you - returning and trying to keep a lower profile than before. I was driven off by the endless bickering, and by the simple fact that I think I bit off more than I could chew in terms of administrative tasks and such. So, I'm back to writing articles - I've been writing a lot about Okinawan topics lately, something I'm really interested in, and is so obscure and non-controversial that hopefully people won't bother me. And that's about it. How are you doing? LordAmeth (talk) 12:46, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Ethnic group articles
Hi. In light of the failure to reach consensus at Articles for deletion/Afghan British‎ I've suggested that there be a discussion of the various issues raised, here. Your input would be appreciated. Cordless Larry (talk) 17:53, 13 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) 22:41, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

A Question
Hi LordAmeth, I have a bit of a question...I was wondering how one becomes an admin. I've been thinking it might be helpful, especially if I'm going to be keeping an eye out for the potential return of ExiledAbition, as well as just helping to organize samurai/premodern Japan stuff in general. -Tadakuni (talk) 15:19, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I would be happy to nominate you, or you can nominate yourself. Then users (admins and non-admins both; whoever feels like contributing) vote for whether or not to approve the nomination, based on their experiences working with you, and upon looking at your contributions, talk pages, etc. Considering your attitude and your contributions, I can't imagine that this wouldn't go smoothly.
 * Take a look at the formal explanation at Requests_for_adminship, and let me know if you'll accept my nomination, or you can just go ahead and nominate yourself over at that page. Good luck! I think adminship is long overdue for you; you definitely deserve it. LordAmeth (talk) 01:48, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
 * LordAmeth-- many thanks; I think it might be wiser if you nominated me, rather than me nominating myself-- you're an established admin, and I'd rather if you expressed your honest opinion first. Thanks for explaining, and for all your help thus far in our work together here. -Tadakuni (talk) 01:40, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I've created the nomination here. You need to go over there and officially accept the nomination, and answer a few general generic questions about your intentions should you become an admin. Good luck! I'm rooting for you. LordAmeth (talk) 16:54, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Done. Many thanks. -Tadakuni (talk) 05:37, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
 * LordAmeth-- once again, many thanks for nominating me. I have a question, though-- I noticed that the process was "scheduled to end" at 16:52 today, and we're past that now...what happens next? Tadakuni (talk) 19:18, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
 * That's bizarre. You'd think the bureaucrats in charge of such things would have taken note of it and done something. ... It's also strange that your nomination doesn't appear at RfA. ... I'm pretty sure I followed all the instructions given for nominating someone... Seems bizarre. LordAmeth (talk) 23:00, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Perhaps it should've been transcluded on Requests for adminship? Tadakuni (talk) 23:28, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Ah, yes. I see. Well, I guess maybe the best thing to do is notify a bureaucrat. Hopefully this won't be a big problem. LordAmeth (talk) 00:01, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Kochina or Kochinda?
Hi LordAmeth, and thanks for the article on Jahana Noboru. One quick question. The article displays the text "Kochina" and it links to Kochinda, Okinawa. I'm not expert enough to know if "Kochina" might have been an older spelling... so, is it all right as it is, or does it need a "d"? Fg2 (talk) 14:12, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
 * That's a typo. It needs a "d" just like the modern spelling. Thanks for catching that, and for checking with me. It certainly is an unusual reading for those kanji, isn't it? LordAmeth (talk) 14:54, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Suspected a typo, but having driven through the town 20 years ago doesn't give me the confidence to correct it. It is an unexpected reading, all right! Fg2 (talk) 15:04, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

WikiChevrons with Oak Leaves


By the order of the coordinators of the Military history WikiProject, you are hereby awarded the WikiChevrons with Oak Leaves in recognition of your long and distinguished service as a Coordinator of the Military history WikiProject from August 2006 to September 2008. For the coordinators, Kirill (prof) 01:41, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh, wow. Thank you. It has been a privilege and an honor. LordAmeth (talk) 01:52, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Many thanks
LordAmeth-- well, it seems that the nomination was a success, and I have just been promoted to administrator. Thank you for your nomination, and I look forward to a new chapter in our cooperative work. Tadakuni (talk) 01:08, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Congratulations!! I'm sorry for the confusion with the transclusion, resulting in you having to go through the process twice over. But in the end, I knew you'd succeed! LordAmeth (talk) 03:40, 4 October 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) 23:11, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Tanaka
Hi, I have removed 's edits to Tanaka as per the discussion on the talk page. They have not provided any form of WP:V. Thank you.  fr33k man   -s-  19:48, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you. LordAmeth (talk) 19:54, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
 * You're welcome.  fr33k man   -s-  20:22, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Keiko
Hi! お久しぶり、紫水晶殿. お元気ですか？ I removed Keiko entry and. What is Keiko armor? See. The word Keikō/けいこう/挂甲 is similar to Keiko/けいこ. But it's an ancient armor and not kendo bōgu. Besides, there's no article for the ancient armor. So I think this redirect is unnecessary. What do you think? BTW, how's your life in Yokohama? Regards. Oda Mari (talk) 18:46, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I think that the intention of referring to bôgu as "keiko armor" refers to the fact that it is armor used in 稽古. So, no, "keiko armor" isn't really a kind of armor. But, as it is armor used in keiko, "keiko armor" can be used to refer to bôgu.
 * I had a fantastic time in Yokohama, thank you for asking. I have now returned home to New York, though I hope to return to Japan soon. LordAmeth (talk) 20:10, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

As far as I know and checked on the web, there's no kendo armor only used in 稽古. See ja:剣道. If there's such a special armor, it must be mentioned in the section. Sometimes kendo players do not use bogu when they practice by him/her-self. But they always use bogu when they practice with other player. Some contact martial arts use special bogu for practice only in lesson like this though, but not in kendo lesson. I still think the word keiko armor is some mistake. Please think about RfD. Oda Mari (talk) 04:59, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh, I didn't know you returned to NY. Come back soon!
 * Please read kendo too. Oda Mari (talk) 05:02, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh, duh. You're right. Bogu are of course used in competition as well; there's nothing they use only for practice. Sorry; I wasn't thinking. LordAmeth (talk) 13:00, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

RfD nomination of Keiko armor
I have nominated for discussion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. Oda Mari (talk) 14:45, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Israel
Hi LordAmeth! As part of the memberlist 'cleanup' process on WikiProject Israel, I am sending you this message to ask whether you still wish to be active on the project (not having edited Israel-related articles in a reasonably long time). The project appreciates your past contributions and would like to see you editing its articles again :) Also, I personally urge you to watch the project and talk page in order to be involved in project discussions. On the other hand, if you no longer have an interest in this project, please let me know. Cheers, Ynhockey (Talk) 18:27, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, please remove me from the list of active members. I have been far less active on Wikipedia in general lately, and certainly not on Israel-related issues. I support you in spirit :) Keep up the good work! Thanks. LordAmeth (talk) 18:45, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

DYK for Shinbashi Enbujō

 * Thanks! LordAmeth (talk) 11:48, 7 November 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) 00:23, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Akashi Was A Painter? Where Can I Find Info ?
Dear LordAmeth,

I need your help and your value opinions on this subject: I have an old painting that signed and sealed by someone with the name 明石 in Japanese that translated to Akashi in English, and I had been told that a Japanese General painted this painting during his staying in China during the war, possible long before War Word I. I did check all internet sites, librairies, National Diet Library of Japan for this painter but nothing came up until I came across the info from Wikipedia that General Akashi Motojiro (明石元 二郎 Akashi Motojirō) was also known for his talents as a poet and as a painter, interests that he shared with fellow spy and close friend General Fukushima Yasumasa. I did search for his art works on the internet, but again nothing came back. Is there a conspiracy or cover up on his artworks or they had been exhibited somewhere?

Many thanks in advance.

PS: Please forward to whomever might have the info or answer on this. Thanks --Fortilv (talk) 22:44, 17 November 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm afraid I really don't know anything about it. Sounds like a really interesting story, though. Whatever the story is, I would hazard to guess that there is no such conspiracy, but simply that he's an obscure artist. Maybe few of his works survive. Maybe they're mostly in private collections, and not in museums where they could be exhibited. Maybe scholarship just doesn't have an interest in him for some reason. A lot of people in the upper classes of society at that time - and in the top ranks of the government and military - painted, composed poems, wrote calligraphy... and so his artworks may be more significant or valuable for their connection to him, and his military/historical significance, as a general and a spy, rather than as an artist.
 * But that's all guesses. I found this blog that seems to relate large parts of his life story: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3.
 * I apologize to not take the time and energy right now to translate this for you. But I shall print it out and take it with me, and try to find time to look at it. I am in any case very excited for you to have such an object. I hope to myself acquire antiques and artworks and to research their origins. LordAmeth (talk) 03:28, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Dab page?
Hi 紫水晶殿. Please take a look at the changes here. There are two articles. Byōbu and Folding Screen. I think the bigger Byobu article is more important. Is it better to create a dab page? Or put an 'Other uses' template on both article? I have no idea what is the most appropriate way to make things straight on this matter and don't know what to do. Please advise me or do whatever you think the best. Thank you. Oda Mari (talk) 06:38, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

P.S. See this page too. Oda Mari (talk) 06:42, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, the folding screen article already has a link to byōbu in See Also; the opening sentence of Byōbu links to folding screen. So I think it's okay just the way it is. That's just about the equivalent to using "Other uses" templates or the like; as long as the links exist. That's what I think. If you'd like to do something different with it, feel free. LordAmeth (talk) 11:14, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I see. It's OK. Thank you very much. Cheers! Oda Mari (talk) 14:31, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

下総
Just a quick comment about 下総. It is Shimōsa, not Shimousa. You can verify this in 日本国語大辞典 or 新明解日本語アクセント辞典 where they specifically lists the pronunciation as シモーサ. Alternatively, you could check out a number of JR stations in Chiba: Commons even has a sample image showing Shimōsa Kōzaki Station. Our article Shimousa Province is wrong, and so is the discussion on the talk page. FYI Bendono (talk) 15:28, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Shimōsa-Manzaki Station (下総松崎駅)
 * Shimōsa-Toyosato Station (下総豊里駅)
 * Shimōsa-Nakayama Station (下総中山駅)
 * Shimōsa-Tachibana Station (下総橘駅)
 * Shimōsa-Kōzaki Station (下総神崎駅)
 * Oh, really? I had no idea. Well, I guess that shows what I know. I always thought 下 was pronounced しも, not しもう, and that 総 was pronounced ふさ (or in this case, うさ) and not さ. Thus, the argument about Shimousa (shimo|usa) being different from Shimōsa (shimō|sa). I guess I was wrong. Thanks for pointing that out. LordAmeth (talk) 15:57, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Please do not misunderstand: 下 is shimo and 総 is fusa. The full phonological changes are /simopusa/ > /simoɸusa/ > */simowusa/ > /simousa/ > /simoːsa/. Specifically, the medial voiceless bilabial fricative /ɸ/ weakens into /w/ due to the surrounding vowels. Japanese has never distinguished /u/ and /wu/ thus automatically becoming /u/. Finally, /ou/ -> [oː] is another common regular sound change. Ultimately, 総 is fusa, and even if you special-case it as usa for this case for spelling purposes, you can not actually pronounce it as such. Bendono (talk) 16:33, 19 November 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) 16:55, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Copy Vio image
Hi 紫水晶殿! I think is copy vio. See the linked pages. and. If I'm not wrong, speedy delete, please. Thank you. Oda Mari (talk) 16:33, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I hate to have to do it, but you're right. Even though Moronobu (the creator and thus holder of the copyright) died over 300 years ago, the TNM claims the rights. Personally, I see this as a major problem in the art & museum world, but even so, as policies and laws stand right now, the TNM does have the right to claim copyright over its photography, and thus its digital images on the web as well. I do not believe I have admin powers on the Commons, but I will see if I can find the proper procedure to nominate it for speedy deletion there. Thanks for the notice. LordAmeth (talk) 18:40, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you for tagging. Considering the beauty of the image, it's sad. But...copy vio is copy vio. (sigh). Best Regards. Oda Mari (talk) 05:59, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Japanese art
Hi, LordAmeth, long time no see. Could you leave your opinion on a dispute after blanked out contents regarding Korean influence on the early Japanese Buddhist sculpture from Japanese art? Since your expertise is art history of East Asia, your input would be great help for it. Both left our claim respectively to the Talk:Japanese art, so please visit there. Thanks.--Caspian blue 18:59, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Cantonese→Yue Chinese move discussion reopened
Hello Lord Ameth,

I've reopened the discussion about moving Cantonese to Yue Chinese to see if a consensus can be reached (as we failed to do so the last time creating lengthy argument). As you showed some interest in the discussion following the original move, I wanted to inform you of it's continuation. Feel free to join in if you wish, though I saw you don't like to involve yourself in debates. :) You can view my proposal and comment here. Thank you!

Cheers, The Fiddly Leprechaun  ·  Catch Me!  21:32, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your kindness
Thank you for the retouch to the Talk:Japanese art

Caspian blue has changed the topic of conversation into the influence of a Korean peninsula though I requested an accurate quotation of the source from him. I part from this article for a while because I cannot persuade him in my unskilled English.

Because you can read Japanese, I introduce Japanese encyclopedia If this site is useful for you, I am glad.

Thank you for your kindness. --Eichikiyama (talk) 11:45, 12 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Thank you. I think it was partially my fault that the topic of conversation got changed; as I was trying to figure out what you two were talking about. I apologize for not being a better help. LordAmeth (talk) 15:17, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Re: Talk:Vladivostok
See my comment at Talk:Vladivostok Vmenkov (talk) 08:54, 19 December 2008 (UTC)