User talk:Yukimasuka

October 2013
Your recent editing history at List of best-selling books shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing&mdash;especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring&mdash;even if you don't violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Mark Arsten (talk) 03:54, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

I asked the user why he/she reverted my edits but there was no response.
 * Ok, you could try asking for protection at WP:RFPP then. Mark Arsten (talk) 04:02, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Ok. I requested for protection.

The point is that the IP is 'right'. That page isn't supposed to include manga/anime. Please don't add it again, but raise it on the talk page. Ged UK  12:45, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Again, neither you nor the IP have give an argument as to why ONe Piece is not a book. The IP considers only novels, but did you know what mangas are called Graphic Novel? If you check the article, ther are many "books" that are not books such as Winnie the Pooh, dictionaries, guiness record, thesaurus, etc. What is your definition of a book, because if you look up BOOK in wikipedia, book is very broad. If you truly belive that a GRaphic Novel is not a book, then please allow me to edit out dictionaries, thesaurus, ect. At the very least, graphic novel have a story, making it more of a "book" by your defintion compared to dictionaries, and thesaurus. If you argue that it has illustration, then why is Winnie the Pook, Curios George, Clifford the big red dog on a list of best-selling books. based on your deinition, this should be the list of best-selling novels or best-selling non-manga related, which would become a whole issue of what is a book. According to New York time best-selling list, graphic novels are considered as books. According to bookstores, graphic novels are books. Just because it is manga (which is a type of book) does not take away from the FACT that it is a book. Please reconsider this. If you disagree, please define "book" that is accurate to what is on wikipedia and any dictionaries and edit out any neccessary according to your defintion. Please give me an argument that denounce the facts that I gave. --- a comic is not a graphic novel, graphic novel is handled differently narrative, check in graphic novel's article here on wikipedia under "Criticism of the term" is not the same a comic of a graphic novel, even in Japan do not recognize that, a graphic novel in Japan is totally different from a manga.

The interest of yours for putting One Piece is completely personal to your taste, but not it should be there by the kind of book it is, if you were to be fair, mangas oldest and should be there long, as Kochikame, Slam Dunk, Dragon Ball, JoJo, Naruto, etc, hundreds, but are not, because not part of the term of graphic novel. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.96.239.46 (talk) 15:09, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Again, you're ignoring my argument. What is a book according to this list? Look up book in wikipedia. This list have nothing to do with whether the books are novels or not. If it does, winnie the pooh, dictionaries, thesaurus shoudl not be on the list. So, does that mean I can remove those "books" from the list accoring to your definition. Just because some people might not agree that mangas are not graphic novels does not mean that they are not and vice versa so it is not a good argument from both sides. Like how we are disagreeing on what a book is. It is just your opinion stating that mangas are not graphics novel but I have credible sources (New York Times) to back up what I said. Again, what is a BOOK? This list would even consider the Bible as a book if there were data. You admit that manga is a kind of book, regardless whether it a novel or not it is a book. What funny is that the purpose of editting anything on wikipedia is personal to taste. My interest is not inferior to yours in anyway whatsoever. I don't see anyone edit out winnie the pooh, clifford the big red dog or curious george because the editors that add them do it for personal interest just like me. However, you dont are about those and only One Piece. If you actually are doing for the benefits of wikipedia, you should go through the whole list and edit out anything that is not a novel. You are avoiding my question because you cannot give a reasonable answer as what define a book. Look in a dictionary and see what a book is because manga/graphic novel is one of them. And this list speaks for book collectively and does not differentiate between novels and the rest. If it does, dictionaries should not be on the list.

-- When I referred to type of book, it not stated in its entirety which is a book, the comics are published mostly in magazines chapters in a more regular and is weekly or monthly, One Piece exactly in the Shonen Jump Magazine, what are recopilatorios volumes are released from these chapters, the Tankōbons, while you name the books that are published as a book with a beginning and an end concrete, they do not have an exact date for the author to launch it, he does when he wants to, that's the difference.

Besides the data is wrong, the data is copies of the Tankōbons, not total sales, publishers released the number of copies printed, Oricons total sales of copies and are not exactly Tankōbons 300 million that is only in Japan, while the data of the books on the lists are total sales worldwide.

You have the favor of reviewing the talk of the article, this is already discussed that are not.

________________________________________

First, you said it has to be a novel to be considered in this list. But then u changes your definition when I was able to find a something in the list that do not agree with what you said. A book is a book, regardless whether it was published weekly in an anthology. A collections of poems, short stories, speeches like "Top 100 greatest speeches for young adults" (that I read in high school) would be considered as a book even though each speech was given by different people at diffirent time published differrent media (e.g. newspaper, articles, ect). Thus, your arguement does not hold true.

About the data, you are just nippicking the series because you don't have anything else to make your point. Please tell me the exact copies of Harry Potter up to the ones place because I am sure this series did not sell exactly 450,000,000 copies. Did you look at the table? It said approximation not exact. And the 300 million copies are actually sold because the author Eiichiro Oda recieves loyalties from the copies printed like any American authors. Just because it is not the worldwide sales does not take away from the fact that it sold a lot. Please tell me the worldwide sales of all the series mentioned n the list to the exact figures. You can't because there is not such data, especially for old series in the early 1900's.

I dont understand what you mean by favor?

By the way, based on your contribution you just started editing yesterday. You immediately changed my edits as an IP instead of a user. No offense but you are just here to undo my edits because you are jealous of the success that One Piece has. If you are doing this for the benefit of wikipedia, you should sign up as instead. And your contributions says otherwise about your interest. It seems more like a personal interest/hatred for your actions. If you are a frequent editior (which you are not), you would have know about the 3 revert policy. I was new so I didn't know about it. (talk) -

Your recent edits
Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either: This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.
 * 1) Add four tildes  ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment; or
 * 2) With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button (Insert-signature.png or Signature icon.png) located above the edit window.

Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 05:17, 30 October 2013 (UTC)