User talk:Theozilla

Reference errors on 8 November
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. as follows: Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/RBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/RBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=ReferenceBot%20–%20&section=new report it to my operator]. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:19, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
 * On the A Bride's Story page, [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=689617421 your edit] caused a broken reference name (help) . ([ Fix] | [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&preload=User:ReferenceBot/helpform&preloadtitle=Referencing%20errors%20on%20%5B%5BSpecial%3ADiff%2F689617421%7CA Bride's Story%5D%5D Ask for help])

Hi there
Nice to see you with Heavenly Delusion here. In case you are interested, I suggest you writing the summmaries from the manga. I'm not sure if it's possible but considering Ishiguro's aimed goal of volumes, it might be easy to create a "List of Heavenly Delusion chapters" with all the chapters. Tintor2 (talk) 19:18, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

Hi Theozilla! I noticed that you have reverted to restore your preferred version of an article several times. The impulse to undo an edit you disagree with is understandable, but I wanted to make sure you're aware that the edit warring policy disallows repeated reversions even if they are justifiable.

All editors are expected to discuss content disputes on article talk pages to try to reach consensus. If you are unable to agree, please use one of the dispute resolution options to seek input from others. Using this approach instead of reverting can help you avoid getting drawn into an edit war. Thank you. Muddybasilisk (talk) 18:35, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

Yasuke
Stop removing edits regarding sources that prove Yasuke wasn't a Samurai but a retainer. TabahiKaBhagwan (talk) 19:19, 15 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Retainer can be considered a form of samurai, and this addition was only added this day because racist video gamers got into a tizzy, it was an entry that didn't before and doesn't need to be added, especially when the Japanese language wikipedia already lists Yasuke under foreign born samurai. Theozilla (talk) 19:21, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
 * A daimyo's "retainers" included the samurai serving him, civil officers, spies, strategists and pretty much everyone else with duties in their territory and army. You didn't have to be a samurai to be counted as a daimyo's retainer, you could also be a commoner, so long as your contributions were important enough, such as being a resourceful merchant.
 * This was ESPECIALLY true with Oda Nobunaga, who was considered eccentric in no small part because of the large number of non-samurai retainers he had among his upper echelon, including Hideyoshi who was given the position of samurai due to his accomplishments both in and out of battle. Without accolades, one didn't simply "become a samurai" - tradition was paramount among Japanese (and still is), and that particular tradition was so deeply rooted even Nobunaga couldn't defy it and had to wait to present his title to Hideyoshi until after he'd accumulated accolades.
 * Even afterwards, Hideyoshi's humble origins prevented him from actually claiming the position of shogun hence why he instead founded his own clan and renamed himself Toyotomi, taking a position in the imperial court. He was the de facto ruler, but officially, his title was lower.
 * So yeah, given the utter lack of recorded accolades in Yasuke's name, it's unlikely he moved past his position as page in Oda's court. 151.71.75.227 (talk) 19:34, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
 * It's still something not known for sure either way, and thus does not warrant a statement explicitly stating he wasn't one, especially when modern colloquial usage of the term is broad and the entry I keep removing was only added today after the Assassin's Creed video game reveal occurred. And again, the Japanese language wikipedia already lists Yasuke under foreign born samurai. Theozilla (talk) 19:39, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia's rules and source acknowledgments vary between versions of the site. What has been added to one language page does not mean that it is true and that it should be automatically added to another page. Russiaoniichan (talk) 21:52, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I am not saying different language versions should automatically reflect one another. The point was that other sources have categorized Yasuke as a samurai, including ones from the country this historical figure is concerned with, and thus is evidence that a statement that explicitly claims negation of categorizing Yasuke as a samurai is unnecessary. If one wanted to add a sentence saying that there is debate among historians over whether Yasuke's status as a retainer/vassal to Oda Nobunaga made him formally (or informally) recognized as a samurai or not, that would be a completely different and not something I would object to including in this entry. Theozilla (talk) 22:03, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
 * There is no evidence of Yasuke being assigned the title of samurai not even the jesuits had any mentions of it, Wikipedia is a place that tries to be as accurate & unbiased as it can possible be not a place to please your bias when you feel upset about something you know is not accurate, stop trying to pretend "racists are changing the wiki because they're ignorant" the only one ignoring facts is you, stop trying to temper with the wikipedia page. Hopefull Innformer (talk) 10:15, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I'd like to point out that the Japanese Wikipedia does not list Yasuke as a foreign-born samurai.
 * @Theozilla, I presume you are talking about the page at ja:海外出身の武士の一覧 (Kaigai susshin no bushi no ichiran, "List of foreign-born bushi"). That page does indeed include Yasuke.  However, it is also significant that the Japanese page is a list of 武士 (bushi), which were "warriors" or "soldiers" (a job or profession), and who were not necessarily 侍 (samurai), which was a hereditary social class of Japanese nobility.
 * The Japanese page is erroneously cross-linked to the List of foreign-born samurai in Japan. I say "erroneously", because the Japanese page is a list of foreign-born bushi, not samurai.  The Japanese page starts with the |#定義 (Teigi) or "Definition" section, which clearly explains that this is a list of bushi, not samurai.  The content on the List of foreign-born samurai in Japan appears to be a lightly-altered translation of the Japanese page, with the important — and incorrect — replacement of the Japanese word bushi with the word samurai.
 * The section at Samurai clearly lays out the samurai ↔ bushi distinction. As our Samurai page defines the term samurai, the List of foreign-born samurai in Japan page is mis-titled. I would like to see this page moved to a title such as List of foreign-born bushi in Japan, with the content reworked to correctly use the word "bushi" instead of "samurai".  ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 19:30, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Then you would have to remove all reference of samurai from the other entries on that same list too. Like William Adams and his crew-mate being counted as samurai.
 * And as I have mentioned not all historians agree with the narrower definition that samurai should only be used for people born, adopted, and/or married into Japanese noble families. Theozilla (talk) 20:57, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I would be fine with a fuller reworking of the list, to include or exclude various people, so long as any such reworking clearly defines how "samurai" is being used on the page, in a way that makes it clear how that definition applies to the people being added or removed as appropriate. Ideally, any such definition would also align with what we have on other pages, such as at [[Samurai]]. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 01:32, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
 * The difference is that William Adams’ life is much better documented than Yasuke, and by all accounts was actually a samurai appointed by Tokugawa Ieyasu to the rank of Hatamoto with all of the privileges that apply. 128.22.62.223 (talk) 06:18, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

May 2024
Hello, I'm MuffinHunter0. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions&#32;to Yasuke have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. Muffin(Spreading Democracy, one edit at a time) 19:20, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Yasuke and List of foreign-born samurai in Japan. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note: If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Abandonee (talk) 14:16, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
 * 1) Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

ANI for Talk:Yasuke
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Chaotıċ Enby  (talk · contribs) 16:07, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

I'll drop this here--I saw what you were doing with edits like this, but if you do not include an edit summary with an explanation, you are simply being disruptive, no matter how inappropriate the content. I note that you didn't bother to explain what was wrong with the edit, or to warn the editor and explain it to them--and then a new account did the same thing, and you continued simply reverting. We can't have that: the article is a mess already and such reverts add fuel to the fire and crap to the history. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 22:42, 16 May 2024 (UTC)