User talk:Oticu

Utsusemi
Hi. Although I understand the reasons for your frustration, the reason I changed your article was not a problem with what you had written per se, but that the article didn't follow Wikipedia guidelines.

Wikipedia has never been intended as an "encyclopedia of everything", despite some public perception of it as a collection of never-heard-of films, slurs against policitians, and Pokemon articles. In order to retain some sort of control over the content, the organisers created a set of rules and guidelines for people adding or amending articles - these contain information not only on what should be included in an article, and guidelines on layout (so we end up with the same rough style throughout), but also guidelines on what sort of articles are suitable for inclusion. These guidelines have grown, multiplied and changed, but I believe your article as it stands violates several of them.

In this particular instance, we're talking about a fictional character - there are certain additional recommendations here which, whilst not being official policy, are regarded by the community as a consensus on article content. Have a look at WP:FICT - especially the "elements of fiction" section which relates to the notability of fictional characters - "Elements of a work of fiction, including individual stories, episodes, characters, settings, and other topics, are presumed to be notable if there is significant coverage of the element(s) in reliable secondary sources - nothing in your article indicated significant coverage.

Secondly, your article was phrased and structured in such a way that it appeared to me to violate Wikipedia's policy on Original research - the whole thing appeared to be written as a desciption of your thoughts on a character, their development, motivation and thoughts, all of which are unsupported.

Thirdly, the article also appeared to largely be a plot description - whilst I agree that writing about a character from a work that most people may not be familiar with often requires a degree of plot exposition, I considered that the amount of pure plot included was excessive, considering that the work itself is not about this person, and a description of the plot is already contained within the The Tale of Genji article itself.

Please don't take it personally - I'm sure you spent a lot of time creating the article, but I believe that at the moment, the article just doesn't meet Wikipedia's guidelines. That doesn't mean that no such article can exist - I suggest you read Wikipedia;s guidelines on writing about fiction - here.

Regards CultureDrone (talk) 10:57, 1 November 2008 (UTC)


 * No problem - we were all wiki newbie's once (and there are still vast areas I'm unsure about even after 16 months of editing !) - if you need any help, don't be afraid to ask :-) CultureDrone (talk) 07:47, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

November 2008
Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to Kiritsubo Consort has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you.  Marlith  (Talk)   03:25, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

The recent edit you made to Lady Fujitsubo constitutes vandalism, and has been reverted. Please do not continue to remove content. Thank you. - NuclearWarfare  contact me My work  03:44, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

University of Massachusetts WikiProject
I noticed that you have attended the University of Massachusetts system. You are welcomed to join the WikiProject University of Massachusetts at your own convenience. If you have any questions for me, I will respond as soon as possible. Your participation is appreciated. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 02:02, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Romania
--Codrin.B (talk) 05:23, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

ヨーロッパという語の歴史的な意味について、中傷にあらず
５という言語レベルの意味について、おごりならぬ理性と常識に基づいたご再考を、切にお願い申し上げます. 底より知り尽くしたUBCカナダの中国人日本語教員、その学生と思しい閣下ですから. 69.127.115.72 (talk) 05:38, 10 August 2021 (UTC)