User talk:Ypacaraí/2005

Welcome to the Wikipedia

Welcome, newcomer!

Here are some useful tips to ease you into the Wikipedia experience:

First, take a look at the Wikipedia Tutorial, and perhaps dabble a bit in the test area.
When you have some free time, take a look at the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines. They can come in very handy!
Remember to use a neutral point of view!
If you need any help, feel free to post a question at the Help Desk
Explore, be bold in editing pages, and, most importantly, have fun!

Also, here are some odds and ends that I find useful from time to time:

Feel free to ask me anything the links and talk pages don't answer. You can most easily reach me by posting on my talk page.

You can sign your name on any page by typing 4 tildes, likes this: ~~~~.

Best of luck, and have fun!

Clockwork Soul 06:37, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Japanese-Portuguese Dictionary

Thanks for adding a link to my article from the Japanese Wikipedia. I'm glad somebody read the article --- as far as I know, you're the first! Fg2 07:04, May 3, 2005 (UTC)

You are welcome. I tried to find same article in portuguese Wikipedia but there wasn't. --Ypacaraí

Bismarck battleship

In English usage all ships are 'she'. Even the ones with male names. GraemeLeggett 16:03, 25 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Actually I'm not sure about Bismarck, but in Kriegsmarine some ships were called with masculine gender. I'll check it later. --Ypacaraí 16:12, 2005 May 25 (UTC)

Then the German language article would use the Masculine gender Der, Den, Des, Dem etc, but in an English language article about it, usage would be feminine.GraemeLeggett 13:23, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Aye, you r right. Thank you. --Ypacaraí 13:28, 2005 Jun 24 (UTC)

Butting In on Topic

(This to Ypacarai):

If I Can shove nose in where doesn't belong, on the above, IIRC, the Nazi Kriegsmarine had explicit orders from Uncle Adolf to use Masculine gender for such virile warships. Which they shut up shuddering and soldiered about, but implimented anyway. So I think you are correct in all respects, despite thousands of years seafarer of tradition. Don't recollect whether Hitler applied to all warships, or just battleships. I wouldn't be surprised if snopes.com has something on that oddity. I have a dutch contact, if that helps — assuming someone may need to read german. (I'll co-post to GraemeLeggett)

In additon to that, just wanted to say 'Hi!', it seems we have a common interest. I'm getting ready to do a severe upgrade of Russo-Japanese War artys, so you may be a resource or lead provider. Aw, don't feel abused, I'm also naturally friendly and gregarious!

I want to do a section or perhaps a seperate article of Ships of the R-JW variety. Protected Cruisers, Armored Cruisers, both have a pretty good article herein, tho' each could use a bit of historical expansion (and I notice the PC arty is a little US-centric, i.e. no mention of when British navy, or others, dropped the class), but the pre-Dreadnought BB... s.a. the ones Japan bought from the U.K. need some elaboration and color, just for the monumental importance of the Battle of Tsushima.

If you've got personal knowledge, a reference recommendation, or such, I'd really be grateful. Wouldn't mind a co-writer/editor either — Want to come on board?

Ypacari: After posting the above on Greme's page, I'd returned to yours and customized and addressed this invitation on these naval affairs we apparently share to you as well, noted that Tan shouldn't be a cause we can't deal with one another, but then went on to ask you about the Korean language thing, and the Mr Tan stuff. I apparently lost it, as I couldn't back to it on any webpage I had open. I left it 'Suspended' while I went to check something or other, I think the Tsushima disambig page, as I diverted myself without finishing it, but did post the straw poll — which I had to deal with an edit conflict on as well, which I suspect was your post to me and Mel... (FrankB -- cont'd below Header)

Proposed Compromise

Hence, I'll have to be even more careful to finish stuff before being lazy and using a link in preview to check a fact. My key point, relavant to the message I just posted to your 'For Mel and Frank' subsection, was this proposed compromise:

Would it be acceptable to you to trash-can the langage boxes, but to allow some Korean place names in-line, along the lines of the four/five placenames handled in line within articles such as: Russo-Japanese War , Liaodong , Lushun, Dalian. I understand there is a cultural objection, but OTOH, there is a lot of indirect evidence that the Korea Strait has been a highway for cultural (and presumably, therefore, sexual) interchanges (including genes).

Suggest you add your answer under our comments, as I will link this sub-head there on Talk:Tsushima Islands for the record. Best Regards,

[[User:Fabartus|FrankB || TalktoMe]] 17:06, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Heads Up on Tsushimas

Sorry to add more grist for your 'fuss on Tsushima', but...
Just a friendly heads up— through some magic I don't understand the Talk:Tsushima Islands is up for a Final Vote. Get there soon, and pop into Talk:Tsushima Strait as well. The Koreans seem to be counterattacking.

Thanks Fra nkB 7 July 2005 00:33 (UTC)

Tan

Each account starts editing as the previous one finishes; they make the same sorts of edit, have the same uncooperative, aggressive manner (for example, holding a debate by trying to wear down other editors, and then slipping in the same old claim with the comment "if no-one responds within a day/three days/a week I'll assume that everyone agrees and make the changes"), and use fractured English. If someone could do an IP check,that would be good support, but I think that the evidence is pretty strong already. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 16:51, 30 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Vasco da Gama

An article that you've edited before (Vasco da Gama) is nominated for Article Improvement Drive. If you want go there and vote. Thanks. Gameiro 02:58, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sea of Japan

I have given up trying to reason with Appleby and am stepping away from the Sea of Japan naming dispute article for a while. My wiki-stress was too much. I just don't understand how he thinks an undated and unverifiable source can be used. It is beyond me. Anyways, thanks for your support in this matter. Masterhatch 04:17, 17 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I received your message, and had a look at the article, and the archived discussion. It's complicated, and often acrimonious on both sides,but the present disagreement (based on the most recent edits) is simple — am I missing something? Appleby seems to be saying that the Korean government makes certain claims, and giving a citation; Masterhatch's complaint is that their claims are false. If he had presented the claims himself, as if Wikipedia was supporting them, the addition would have had to go, but as it is I don't really see the objection I'm afraid. If I have missed something, could you let me know on my Talk page? --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 09:29, 17 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Your votes on photo of Nanking Massacre

Hi Ypacaraí, Thanks for your vote(s) on the above-mentioned vote. We're trying to gauge each voter's rationale for supporting/opposing each proposed plan of action, and since you've voted but did not provide a reason and/or elaboration to your vote, I would appreciate it if you could return to that page and tell us. If you do not wish to comment on your choice, please make that known either on that page or to me. Thanks again.
-- Миборовский ^U|T|C|E 06:01, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that you had been removing some vandalism and you are not a member of Wikipedia:Counter Vandalism Unit You might want to join it. Also there is a bot that finds vandalism the bot is in #wikipedia-en-vandalism on freenode.net

By the way if you join you will be the 100th member --Adam1213 Talk + 08:11, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]