User talk:Tokumas

Welcome!

Hello, Tokumas, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome!
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
 * Manual of Style

Senkaku Islands and Liancourt Rocks
Hi! Welcome to Wikipedia. I know you're probably getting frustrated because people (including me) keep reverting you at Senkaku Islands. The problem is, that page is heavily in dispute. Any major changes need to first be discussed on the article's talk page. However, I recommend reading some of the info in the welcome message above. Especially, please note that all information on Wikipedia must be verified by reliable sources. Furthermore, please note that Wikipedia is not the place where we argue about what is really "true" (i.e., who "really" owns the islands)--rather, the only thing we can do is summarize what reliable sources say. Currently, reliable sources disagree about who owns the islands, and we are required, by our policies, to report that. But you are welcome to join the discussion on the talk page. Also, if you have any questions, you can ask me on my talk page, or here. Thanks! Qwyrxian (talk) 14:06, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

It appears you've been adding unsourced materials to Liancourt Rocks as well. You should be aware that Wikipedia is not a place for you to advance your nationalistic ideals. Bobthefish2 (talk) 17:59, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

November 2010
Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to Senkaku Islands has been reverted, as it appears to have removed content from the page without explanation. 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. Alansohn (talk) 14:18, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Senkaku Islands. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been automatically reverted.
 * If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Note that human editors do monitor recent changes to Wikipedia articles, and administrators have the ability to block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism.
 * ClueBot produces very few false positives, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made should not have been detected as unconstructive, please report it here, remove this warning from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
 * The following is the log entry regarding this warning: Senkaku Islands was changed by Tokumas (u) (t) blanking the page on 2010-11-09T14:19:32+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot (talk) 14:19, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Please do not remove all content from pages without explanation, as you did with this edit to Senkaku Islands. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing. Alansohn (talk) 14:21, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

If you continue to make contentious changes to Senkaku Islands or other pages without first discussing on the articles talk page, you will be reported for edit warring. Wikipedia requires that everyone work together to discuss controversial topics. Again, as I said above, I can understand how someone may be frustrated when they see something they think is "wrong" on Wikipedia, you have to understand that we are not here to get it "right," but to get down what other sources say. If you cannot edit in a "collegial" fashion, you will be blocked. Qwyrxian (talk) 03:37, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Personally, I'd suggest you to refrain from saying "we are not here to get it 'right'", because this sounds as if Wikipedia editors are striving for the contrary. A better way of putting this is that the policy of Wikipedia does not permit contents that are not supported by reliable sources. Bobthefish2 (talk) 04:43, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I guess I should say that, quoting from Wikipedia's policy on verifiability, "The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth". This is the key, ultimate defense--it doesn't matter what is or is not true with respect to the islands (or any other topic)--our only goal is to show what is verifiable.  Qwyrxian (talk) 04:49, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
 * But of course... this guy's not even interested in the truth. If he was, then he would've started a discussion and laid down his arguments in an organized manner. Bobthefish2 (talk) 05:46, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Hara (field)


The article Hara (field) has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * WP:NOTDICT. This belongs on Wiktionary, if it isn't already there

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. The Blade of the Northern Lights ( 話して下さい ) 04:30, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Adding pov/unsourced content
Please stop adding unsourced content. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. OhNo itsJamie Talk 16:45, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

April 2018
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by adding your personal analysis or synthesis into articles, as you did at White people, you may be blocked from editing. Grayfell (talk) 05:14, 6 April 2018 (UTC)