User talk:Yamaguchi先生/Archives/2016/January

Hey
I was wondering if you would remove my intervention request for user:68.134.238.153 please? The editor was stopped vandalizing since I posted that. Thank you. 2602:304:CDC0:D470:C07B:65AE:97D4:9298 (talk) 19:53, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Yamaguchi先生!


Happy New Year! Yamaguchi先生, Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. Dat GuyTalkContribs 22:34, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Happy New Year, Yamaguchi先生!


Happy New Year! Yamaguchi先生, Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. Rubbish computer (Merry Christmas!: ...And a Happy New Year!) 22:56, 31 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

--Rubbish computer (Merry Christmas!: ...And a Happy New Year!) 22:56, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

Best wishes
== Happy New Year, Yamaguchi先生! == 

Happy New Year! Yamaguchi先生, Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. GABHello! 23:40, 31 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Happy New Year 2016}} to send this message

Best of luck for 2016,

GABHello! 23:40, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Yamaguchi先生!


Happy New Year! Yamaguchi先生, Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. — k6ka  🍁 ( Talk ·  Contributions ) 00:22, 1 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Happy New Year 2016}} to send this message


 * By the way, did you know that this edit was the last edit made in 2015, and this is the first edit of 2016? (Times in UTC, of course). — k6ka  🍁 ( Talk ·  Contributions ) 00:22, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Yamaguchi先生
  Pr at yya  (Hello!) — is wishing you a  Happy New Year ! Welcome the  2016 . Wishing you a happy and fruitful 2016 with good health and your wishes come true! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year! May the 2016 go well for you.

Spread the New Year cheer by adding to their talk page with a Happy New Year message.

Happy New Year, Yamaguchi先生!


Happy New Year! Yamaguchi先生, Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. – Davey 2010 Merry Xmas / Happy New Year 12:21, 1 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Categories for discussion
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Categories for discussion. Legobot (talk) 00:05, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

Belated Happy New Year
I think it is still appropriate to wish you a (belated) Happy New Year and to thank you for the New Year's greeting. Sorry I am a little late. Best wishes for the New Year. Donner60 (talk) 04:51, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

Admin assistance
Hello, can you email me a copy of the speedy deleted Sam Ryder page? For reasons that escape me, I'm going to try and reason with the creator, who's posting on my page asking why it was deleted. Gonna have a last try at explaining the ropes to them. Valenciano (talk) 18:53, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks
For your kind self revert. I will try to develop the text with more sources. --141.196.196.116 (talk) 21:24, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 06 January 2016

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:48, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Militia occupation of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Militia occupation of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge. Legobot (talk) 00:08, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

anushasana parva
greetings.

on my talk page, i received the message from you "I have reversed your recent changes to the Anushasana Parva due to the extensive overuse of quotations".

Cluebot (2492487) was dealing with 8036 bytes. (objection to 10.89 percent) and I appealed against it. However, the entire section 3 of contents is deleted (65762 bytes of the page) (89.11 percent). The section 3 (of contents menu), existed before i added a few subsections. These were edited by other persons. Obviously, the section was contributed to by others besides me. Why was the entire section deleted. Deleting parts of the page not written by me, should be done with consent of other authors, by writing a notice on their talk pages. That is "consensus".

Anushasana Parva is a large book, a part of Mahabharata, the holy book of the Hindus. Summarizing the key points of Bheesma's message is what the page is all about. The key issues discussed were discussed citing references from "sacred-texts.com". I have not deleted a single word written by anyone else.

For a casual reader, authentic quotations from the book would be more authentic than my interpretations. Paraphrasing text sometimes changes the meaning of the original text. . Authentic quotations are safer as a way of summarizing the key message of Bheeshma.

If you, as an editor, want to paraphrase the message by removing quotations, that would be constructive criticism. However, in paraphrasing there would be a risk of change in meaning and hurting the sentiments of the followers of Hindu religion. These are "Sacred-Texts".

I think that adding text and summarising chapters, is constructive, and I do not think it is vandalism. I fail to understand how deleting section 3 of contents (deleting 89.11 percent of the page) improves the understanding of anusasana parva.

I hope i can convince you to restore the deleted section 3 (from contents menu) Deleting a word or a line, or a paragraph or some paragraphs is a matter of interpretation. Deleting the entire section is not "constructive criticism". Deleting the entire summary of the book is, I think, akin to censorship. ≈≈≈≈ User talk:37.217.133.213

````

blocked
why blocked?--Sennaitgebremariam (talk) 19:48, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

Greetings Yamaguchi先生. It was unfortunate that you removed my link on the modular housing page. I suggest that you take the time to look over the reference site that I setup a link to on the page. It is a very complete online reference that covers modular construction. with no advertising. Anyone who is interesting in modular housing would benefit from the reference. Sadly, your removal will be their loss. Also, referenced the Wiki page on external links: "Some acceptable links include those that contain further research that is accurate and on-topic, ..." As noted, my external link does contain further research. I conclusion, you should not have removed the link. Please add it back. Best Regards, A44perterson. A44peterson (talk) 21:02, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

User:Vicvance1
Hey Yamaguchi, I saw you reverted and warned Vicvance1 for his persistent disruptive edits to both Iyaz and Sean Kingston discography. It looks like he's not going to stop, as sometimes mere minutes after our reverts he restores his revision. Can he be blocked yet? I really feel it won't stop otherwise and he has been given sufficient warning.  Ss 112  13:49, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Also, just in addition, I'm quite sure is connected. Either Vicvance1 is his sockpuppet or vice versa. James Duggins's edits usually seem to follow Vicvance1's and it's happened too often to be mere coincidence. James Duggins's editing style is much the same (numerous edits to remove/restore singles as they see fit) as well.  Ss  112  06:47, 10 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Hello Ss112, thank you for contacting me. It appears that Materialscientist has blocked this account while I was offline.  At your convenience, would you mind submitting a report to Sockpuppet investigations outlining the parallels between the two accounts?  Regards, Yamaguchi先生 (talk) 19:09, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the blocks on 86.175.143.169 and 78.146.82.162
I should have figured there was coordination going on with these - thank you for blocking these addresses.

KNHaw (talk) 22:35, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

User talk: From Ponypown
I would like to ask why you reverted 97.89.20.145's changes on watermelon. I am not mad at all, but I am kind of curious, because the watermelon that 97.89.20.145 wrote on the page was completely relevant to the page. I do understand there isn't a page for what he put there, but still, could you explain all reasons that you have for reverting 97.89.20.145's changes?

Ponypown (talk) 02:41, 12 January 2016 (UTC) Ponypown

Question --
03:25, 14 January 2016 (UTC)pntedr1 Hi, umm, was wondering why you reverted a bunch of work that was done in the entry for "paint." I even went to the trouble to look up textbook citations to clarify some terms in the article that were used in contradictory ways in different locations in the article, and added the citations.

Blocked content on Fakhar Zaman page
Hello Yamaguchi,

I have no objections with you removing the edited content on "Fakhar Zaman" Wikipedia page. The concern to put in your notice is that Fakhar Zaman himself authorized me to add content on his page. And that edit was performed by his permission; Though i was not understanding how to cite and refer the content i added. But i will add content with proper citation and references according to Wikipedia policies. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arsirabbani (talk • contribs)


 * Hi, I just wanted to let you know that no one owns the articles at Wikipedia. We follow The rules regarding articles and content, and the subject of an article generally does not dictate what can or cannot go into the article. SQL Query me!  21:21, 12 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Hello Arsirabbani, thank you for contacting me. You are welcome to make changes to this WP:BLP article provided that all changes are attributed to a reliable source.  There is no "block" in place, as the page is unprotected and open to all editors.  You may also wish to review Conflict of interest as a guideline to contribution, as you have declared a connection to the subject.  Please do not hesitate to contact me should you have any additional questions or concerns.  Regards, Yamaguchi先生 (talk) 22:40, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Lagao (HUM TV)
Hi Yama,

My reliable source is the facebook page for Lagao, I cannot cite that as a source but believe me, the content I put in the page is fully correct, please kindly undo your action.

are you the one who commented to me? Roseness 12 (talk) 05:21, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:ExxonMobil
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:ExxonMobil. Legobot (talk) 00:11, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

Excuse you?! Roseness 12 (talk) 05:20, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

Sorry if I made a mistake ! Roseness 12 (talk) 05:21, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 13 January 2016

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:17, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Mesh blocks
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Mesh blocks. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

User:68.36.180.74
Please block user:68.36.180.74 before the report goes stale. CLCStudent (talk) 20:31, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

Consider shortening protection time for TFA
Per standard practice, we usually don't apply long-term protections to the TFA, and 2 weeks is pretty excessive for only a few minutes of vandalism. Please review the relevant passages at WP:PROT, to wit "Today's featured article may be semi-protected just like any other article. But since this article is subject to sudden spurts of vandalism during certain times of day, administrators should semi-protect it for brief periods in most instances." I'm not sure 2 weeks is warranted based on the current situation. Consider backing it off to only an hour or two, and let it expire then to see what happens. It's a HEAVILY watched article, and vandalism is usually caught within a few seconds at most, if it becomes unmanagable at any time, we can always return the protection for a few hours more until the rolls off the main page. It certainly won't be getting much attention after that anyways, so a Feb 4 expiration date seems a bit much. Thanks! -- Jayron 32</b> 01:53, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:List of oldest living people
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:List of oldest living people. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

Kasaragod
Thank you for the kind letter. The page on Kasaragod was created by the combined effort of many editors over a period of time. As I am familiar with the place, most of the material given are seen to be authentic. Please avoid removing large chunks of data as a lot of handwork by other editors can go wasted. But I appreciate your interest in Kasaragod and thank you for devoting time for this area. --Prof TPMS (talk) 01:10, 23 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Hello Prof TPMS, thank you for contacting me. It is evident that the Kasaragod article has been the recipient of years of compounded unsourced additions, original research, and attribution to non-reliable sources.  Unfortunately this is not congruent with our core policies as they pertain to Verifiability and No original research.  Please do not add or restore content unless there is a corresponding reliable source which may be verified by others, as required.  In the interest of transparency, I have requested further review of this article at Administrators' noticeboard.  If you have any other questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact me.  Regards, Yamaguchi先生 (talk) 01:16, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
 * OK. Prof TPMS (talk) 02:13, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 January 2016
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:22, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Cannabis dispensaries in the United States
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Cannabis dispensaries in the United States. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 25 January 2016 (UTC)