User talk:Sandtalon

A belated welcome!


Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, Sandtalon. I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may still benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:


 * Introductory tutorial
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * Writing an article
 * Five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Community portal
 * Task Center
 * Help pages
 * Newcomer help desk
 * Main help desk

If you don't already know, you should sign your posts on talk pages by using four tildes ( ~ ) to insert your username and the date.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Again, welcome! Opencooper (talk) 00:17, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

Wikimedia Discord server
Hello Sandtalon, I am just dropping a note here in case you're interested in joining the unofficial Wikimedia Discord server, which has a WP:ANIME project channel. It may be easier than communicating by edit summary for collaborative editing sessions, haha. — Goszei (talk) 06:30, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Alternatively, you could send me your Discord handle through the email attached to my Wikipedia account, if you like. — Goszei (talk) 06:59, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
 * That could work... I was aware of the Discord sever but kind of hesitant to join since I usually don't have time to keep up with most servers that I join... I might join at some point, though. That being said, I think I might be done with that page for tonight--I have more edits, but I think I've run up against the 3RR. Sandtalon (talk) 07:05, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
 * It was quite the whirlwind of edits today, and I wasn't aware that either of us was up against 3RR (I don't recall directly reverting you in the morass of Galbraith citations, and if I did it wasn't my intention: sorry!). — Goszei (talk) 07:13, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
 * So actually, I just joined the server. I don't know if you were reverting me, but I was partially reverting some of your older edits. Sandtalon (talk) 07:16, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thank you so much! I feel like a full Wikipedian now, haha. Sandtalon (talk) 19:46, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

Eroge Image Removal
My apologies for removing the image in question. I stumbled upon the page by accident and had a knee-jerk reaction. I understand that Wikipedia is for everyone. I even made the effort to take your advice on image configuration (at least, I think I did--I tried!). Apologies if my squeamishness got the better of me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elise727 (talk • contribs) 16:40, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

About your revert in Hentai article
About the reason for banning of Midnight68. Afaik, that the reason for banning of was not only sock puppetry but trying to add his images to articles. These are more recently examples, , (check image history),.

In any case in enwiki there was a discussion in enwiki not to use another image from Midnight68  as an example image for fan service, ,.

The general problem (even if we ignore that images are derived from larger work which is a depiction of child abuse and spamming) is that images heavily exaggerate nudity/panty/spanking of minors themes to the level that if it is not more good example for the themes like fanservice or eroge. Though images still could work as examples for burusera, lolicon, or panchira. -- Zache (talk) 07:08, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the notification
Hello. I just wanted to thank you for the notification you made on E-hentai. I'm not very familiar with English wiki rules (I'm working on a project in another language) and most of my edits are reverted here. I hope you accept my apologies for my mistakes And i wish i do not be blocked here for my mistakes :) LordProfo (talk) 17:07, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

Hello Sandtalon, do not remove or change the edits I made for the Ahegao article.
Hello, I'm fully Japanese and I have been recently speaking up on the negative stereotypes created by the Ahegao. Recently, katya sparrow, a popular east asian baiter has been claiming that the Ahegao has nothing to do with rape when it does. In Japan, many people are aware of it's relations to rape culture and more. I believe that this information and the controversial aspects are extremely crucial and needs to be discussed. I understand that you are an Otaku which I appreciate as a Japanese person because I love when foreigners learn about our media and arts but please listen to us when we find something controversial. Lots of love! Melodyherondale (talk) 04:01, 9 July 2022 (UTC)


 * I reverted your edit because it does not follow Wikipedia policies. Actually, I think the edit ends up breaking all three of Wikipedia's Core Content Policies. All information on Wikipedia needs to be cite reliable sources; there can be no "original research". Additionally, Wikipedia articles must maintain a neutral point of view and encyclopedic tone.
 * As a side note—this isn't relevant to Wikipedia policies but something I feel strongly about—while I recognize that some Japanese people certainly find ahegao distasteful and even offensive, not all Japanese people, and even not all Japanese feminists!, would agree that it necessarily perpetuates rape culture, as you argued in your edit. For example, a number of prominent Japanese feminist scholars and mangaka wrote that "sexual violence inflicted on fictional beings in manga and video games simply does not cause direct harm to actual people. We must focus on tackling actual, real violations of the human rights of real, flesh and blood women." I would also point to the fact that Japanese fujoshi also use ahegao expressions in ero-BL, so clearly some women don't mind the expression.
 * Wikipedia is not really the space for these kinds of debates, so I won't go further, but...please keep in mind Wikipedia's policies when you edit. If you want to add something, make sure that you are citing reliable sources. Sandtalon (talk) 06:22, 9 July 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:43, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Ahegao revertion
If you don't trust the source, check with an administrator before reverting, because that makes you seem authoritative. Aurelio de Sandoval (talk) 21:28, 30 May 2023 (UTC)


 * There are other reasons I reverted that edit, which are more important, and which I addressed elsewhere. But to address the sourcing issue: it's perfectly fine to revert if you think there is a sourcing issue—rather than being an issue of seeming "authoritative" or not, this goes along with being WP:BOLD, an important editing principle on Wikipedia. But also, administrators would not generally be the people to decide issues of what is a reliable source or not. If it's really contentious, it might get settled by the Arbitration Committee (not the same thing as administrators as a group), but most issues of sourcing are settled by consensus. For example, if sourcing was my main reason for reverting the edit, we could open it up to discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anime and manga/Online reliable sources. So rather than going to an administrator, it's better to talk it out. But as I said, I primarily reverted the comment for other reasons: synthesis of sources (which counts as original research and is no-go) and modifying a direct quotation of another author, which cannot be done. Sandtalon (talk) 22:51, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
 * so is it a lie that some ahegao images have heart-shaped pupils? Aurelio de Sandoval (talk) 00:03, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
 * That is a strawman. I am not claiming that, and I think you know that. I understand that you want to add that material to the article and that you're frustrated I reverted your edit. Assuming it has a reliable source (again, I'm not saying it is or not—I'm withholding judgement), then you can do so. However, you cannot do it in a way that modifies a quote from another source or otherwise synthesizes information with that source. Sandtalon (talk) 00:15, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
 * So please I ask for your help, since you know more, to add that description that the ahegao characters also have. Aurelio de Sandoval (talk) 00:20, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Pleace. Aurelio de Sandoval (talk) 02:28, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

Lolicon
Look up the meaning of portmanteau. You are simply wrong and must justify your edit with reliable sources or consensus on the talk page. It means two words are put together to make ONE word. Lolicon is does not combine Lolita and complex into lolicon. Nor is Lolita complex (TWO words) a portmanteau of Lolita and complex. As for the short description, your logic is nonsense. The topic is no more complex than many articles with SDs shorter than 40. There's nothing special about this article except you like it. Get consensus for an SD longer than 40 characters and don't edit war any more. Sundayclose (talk) 20:04, 19 July 2023 (UTC)


 * I've addressed the portmanteau issue on the article talk page. The SD reasoning was the result of watching another editor who I was working on the article with work through many variations of the description, trying to get the most accurate nuance. I will say, I'm hardly "edit warring" with one revert (just as I wouldn't accuse you of edit warring for your reversions of me). An isolated set of reversions in a dispute does not an edit war make. Sandtalon (talk) 21:27, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:58, 28 November 2023 (UTC)