User talk:Ypacaraí/Fuss on Tsushima

Tsushima Islands

Could you come back to the article and explain your removal of the material about names? I'm afraid that I had to revert your edit, as an edit summary saying that the material was nonsense isn't enough. Also, I removed the PoV sentence about territoal claims; it might find a place if its language is toned down considerably.. Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 09:26, 2 May 2005 (UTC)

Syngman Rhee's request and Masan city's claim are both nonsense and baseless. It's perfectly out of the question. that's why even Korean Government reject it. So we don't need Japanese claim and Korean claim lined up. But anyway I won't edit that article again for a while and will leave it to other people those fluent in english and got more patience. --Ypacaraí 11:10, 2005 May 2 (UTC)

Hi! Wise move, there!. The article is in the middle of an edit war (revert-revert-revert...vert) with someone (MrTan 15 y.o.) a little too young to be counted on just yet. Unfortunately, you made your changes without being aware of the revert war in the history.

I stopped by to say more than, "Hi", as I see you made some major changes by introducing a lot of place names into square brackets and that generated this question: Can you please look over those you added (perhaps in history (diff) mode) and verify that each is a good article name (for it's own article) when rendered into English. In other words, do any need the pipe trick like: Fusan - an older place name in western reference literature

Mel wanted me to copy edit, but with so many red links I'd like confirmation that the names are all as correct as possible. Drop me a note when you can, and I'll go back to it. I'm going to add a better map as well, but that should only affect the source file imported into the article. Thank you very much. Frank Fabartus 22:32, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Translation

Can you help me to translate a few articles from [1], the names of the So clan in the Japanese wikipedia of the 歴代当主 section into the English article of So clan? Thanks. Tan 13:12, 15 May 2005 (UTC)

So you want to know how to write those names of lords in alphabet? It's easy. But I know you don't need all of them for editing Tsushima Islands, do you? Tell me which ones you need. --Ypacaraí 16:37, 15 May 2005 (UTC)

Anyway, Thanks for your job. What I want is having the So clan article exactly like those in the Japanese Wikipedia, nothing with editing the Tsushima Islands.

Another translation task for you, but this is probably the last one,

can you please translate the article of

1. [2] into the english So Haruyasu
2. [3] into the english So Yoshishige
3. [4] into the english So Yoshitoshi

Thanks! Tan 21:40, 15 May 2005 (UTC)

I don't think those articles are reliable enough as bases for translation. And I don't like to contribute under someone's direction. --Ypacaraí 14:17, 2005 May 15 (UTC)

Tsushima Islands

Aren't you "daft"? I have told you that I have already tried to finf neutral sources. However, there are little sources on Tsushima Islands from neutral areas, so we have to seek to popular Korean and Japanese sources as the next resort. Otherise, the page will technically be blank. If you don't believe me, there are very little neutral sources in the Internet. I have already included whatever neutral sources that I could.Tan 23:11, 26 May 2005 (UTC)

Then withdraw your claim. --Ypacaraí 17:02, 2005 May 26 (UTC)

I don't understand what you mean, but please do not provoke me further. I am already in enough trouble and have already explained everything. Go ahead, say whatever you like, but don't pose another threat to wikipedia's security like Mel. Tan 15:20, 28 May 2005 (UTC)

Why don't you realize that the fact you can't find reliable sources from any other country or organization about korean media's claim on tsushima shows the fact no one takes serious. Well, have a nice wikibreak. --Ypacaraí 01:08, 2005 May 31 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but don't know what are you trying to say, for I'm afraid that your English is very poor. I said that we have no choice but have to accept Korean and Japanese sources. There is little foreign sources on Tsushima. Full stop. Tan 02:54, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

Korean name

Hello again. The reason to add Korean name is found here, [5] I will be happy if you could post your objections to me. Thanks. Mr Tan 05:04, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Huh? I see nothing to support your claim there. Quote your "reason" here. I will remove bullshit bilingual infobox from the article.

Cool down. Please don't use vulgar language. If you notice, I add the Korean name with the reason of their contributions to the Islands' history, for the occasional territorial claims by Korea, and the Korean name "Daemado" has been known by Koreans since time in memorial. If you notice, even the Korean and Japanese encyclopedia made mention of their name.

And also, please post your messages on my talk page so that I am more aware of whatever messages that you will be posting. Thanks. [User:Mr Tan|Mr Tan]] 11:24, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Sorry, it's not my manner. Hey, paste the link to 'current' korean government's web page that claiming possession of that island(s). --Ypacaraí 12:06, 2005 Jun 15 (UTC)

Look here, I have added the appropriate information but why are you removing it off? I have already explained, but I cannot see why you are doing this. See this page: [6] or [7]. I cannot find that page, but a blog spot, which also give links to Korean news sources, serves the purpose.

And please be more polite. See my page for revert, let's do it slowly, one at a time. And please sign off your name with four tides like this: ~~~~ And please state your objections in retrospect to the content if you have any; don't just revert. Mr Tan 11:46, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Blogs are blogs, nothing more than that. Bring here official claim or keep that dumb infobox off. --Ypacaraí 12:06, 2005 Jun 15 (UTC)

How about the second link--A korean newslink[8]? Mr Tan 12:08, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

See this news as well: [9] and [10] and [11].

See this as well: [12] on "Another comment. As well as the dispute for Tsushima Islands has been defunct for many decades, there is a name of Tsushima Islands in Korean language. (Kanji/hanja is the same though.) --Puzzlet Chung 09:28, 2 May 2005 (UTC)" Mr Tan 12:11, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

And this link concerning the claim of Tsushima: [13]. Mr Tan 12:26, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Sorry about my language, but stop pasting links to valueless webpages here. I told you to show reliable source several times here and there. And another thing to tell you. Learn how to use discussion pages and users talk page, how to use preview function of wikipedia. ask the professor mel if you need. you are messing up many discussion pages, user talk pages including mine. --Ypacaraí 13:30, 2005 Jun 15 (UTC)

Thanks for your offer, but I have already developed a blanket of phobia on prof. Mel Etitis for his reverts, usually at the expense of the edits that he did not intend to eliminate. The links above are not at all useless, but OFFICIAL news from Korean news websites. They have already shown the images of the council meeting in one of the links, if you notice. I also do not see in anyway, how my usage of the discussion page is wrong, for I'm answering your questions. Thanks.

If you do not trust Korean sources, see this newspage from an American news organization:[14] Mr Tan 13:47, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

By the way, I can't believe that your skills on Espanol is only es-1--you have proved to be better than that--around es-2 in the Spanish wikipedia, I think. Never mind, that is just my opinion. Thanks. Mr Tan 13:59, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

We are talking on Tsushima. OK? And that article on Boston.com is about Liancourt rocks, and telling nothing but Masan city's account. Nothing about the korean government's official claim on Tsushima. I am already developping "a blanket" of disgusting on you. Please stop pasting useles links here. Please try to use preview function before you post. Use indentation when you put comment on discussion pages. --Ypacaraí 14:20, 2005 Jun 15 (UTC)

Please look carefully again at the article--look out for "Masan" and "Daemado". Yes, I did use the preview function, for your information. Mr Tan 15:43, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Masan city isn't the government of Korea. Why you don't understand this plain fact? Please do not use this talk page anymore and stop messing up. Let's use the articles discussion page from next time. Or I will ignore your msg on this page. OK? --Ypacaraí 16:05, 2005 Jun 15 (UTC)

Last point: I have already stated about the Koreans' contributions to the Islands, historically and culturally, and the territorial claims in 1950 and now (Masan), and Koreans traditionally called Tsushima "Daemado" (대마도) and not "Tsushima" (쓰시마 섬). This is why the Korean name should be added, for giving information. Okay? Mr Tan 16:10, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Nonsense. Didn't you read what I wrote in es:Tsushima?. Check Spain or Portugal, do you find arabic infobox there? Check any country's article in Balkan. Do you find turkish infobox? Koreans have never done in Tsushima more influence than moroccan/turkish had done in those countries. This is my last response to you in this page. I realized that arguing with you is just waste of time.--Ypacaraí 22:36, 2005 Jun 15 (UTC)

From Talk:Tsushima Islands, (It may help to know Tan is Circa 15 - see my talk or the RfC on Tan)

Ypacarai's objections

I have noticed that he strongly opposed to have the Korean name: He says that no other country claims Tsushima besides Japan. But the Korean name is widely known to Koreans since ancient times, but he has been removing it. See his [[:User talk:Ypacara%ED|talk page]] for more details; but just because Koreans do not claim Tsushima as its territory in national level-scale does not amount to have it removed. Mr Tan 04:37, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

The fact that the Korean name has been known to Koreans is irrelevant; the French name for England has been known to the French for centuries, but the article on England doesn't have a multilingual box. Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 11:35, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

The case on England and France in retrospect to Korea and Japan to Tsushima is different. While the Koreans has a long-standing claim on the islands, it would be relavant to add the Korean name than not to do so. Mr Tan 11:58, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I hate to jump in here, Tan, but those two references you tagged as Additonal Reading directly address this point at length - after repeated investigations by many parties, Japan's claim on the Islands goes back well before the 240s.

Those dates are rock solid as they are based on MULTIPLE references in the KOREAN court document to Japans possession and the historian commented on the clear lack of any counterclaim. There are further references that are unsupported by multiplicity even farther back, but I don't recollect a date, one may not have been given.

By Contrast, Englands claim to the French Throne date from the 1300s (iirc off the top of my head), and no credible authority would assert that England still claims Normandy.

In Sum, Any group today claiming Korean ownership pretty much has to be of the Wacko Fringe Variety, right up there in credibility with People claiming "They Saw ELVIS" (Presley) somewhere. (Elvis has suicided in the 1960s) Such people are not quite dangerous enough to be institutionalized, but not safe enough to be easy with as a neighbor either.

If you can't produce at least one credible historian asserting such a claim, you really have no legs to stand on and are wasting peoples time. If you like, I can cite page references, or scan the book pages and email them to you. Fabartus 13:01, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• I didn't scan your page above on my last visit, but now see that you are a serious scholar, so I withdraw my request for a fact check above. btw - you have two duplicate text blocks titled Tsushima Islands above.

Best regards. Fabartus 13:01, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• • Thanks. But you didn't need pasting above messages from the articles didcussion page, because I would check that page anyway. That text block duplication is Mr Tan's deed.

I have seen you removing the Korean names from Tsushima Islands. As a matter of courtesy, I will not revert anymore for the time being, so I would appreciate if you can look up at Talk:Tsushima Islands, and post your comments.

By the way--I do not care how old am I, nor do I expect any special treatment. There is a sizeable group of Users who are around the same age as me--or maybe even younger.

Mr Tan 15:01, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Since the above cut was directed to Mr Tan, the editor, and not Mr Tan, The User, you should have left it to him to remove the offending material. He broke it after all. Why did I not see your reply on MY talk page? I have no direct interest in the matter, I'm just trying to get people to take a breath and stop the revert wars. Fabartus 17:19, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Before I Vote on 'Move Tsushima Islands' Issue

• I would appreciate a rational explaination (after you read my Comments in the subject dispute Talk:Tsushima Islands), of the arguement or arguments you consider vital and germane to the discusion and vote. Frankly, MOST all of you are being silly over nothing of particular importance, since both names can be redirected into the one used. I have left a comment concerning my contribution to the article, which contribution — seems to have triggered the current edit and revision wars. For that I apologize, but see the Comments on the vote. I am also taking the liberty of putting the vote section AFTER the Comments about same.
• Still, I have just spent over four hours of valuable spare time, and would welcome your thoughts after you read and understand the distinction I put forth between a governments termonology as a governing body and a geographical reference like an archepelego, which it certainly is.
• More to the point, I'd like to see your defense regarding your favorite POV of what I had to say viz a viz the mergest attitude of the senior editors and administrators that frequent the Wikipedia:VfD discussions. To my recollection, I don't recollect any of you hotheads in this dispute ever spending anytime thereon, possibly excepting Mel Etitis, but rarely even then.
• In any event, I'm neutral here, and have asked that the article be kept EDIT FREE for the next three days by placing The Inuse template into it — I'd copyedited over two and half hours before I suspended that effort the other night because this shameful fued was going on — proper English grammer does depend, unfortunately, on whether one uses the plural or the singular. I saved that on my hard drive, but I don't need to wade through yet another 70 edits to finish the job. As it is, this matter will probably double the time it takes for such a simple job.
• If you are local to Japan, some history of the canals or Sea-channel is certainly germane to the ongoing discussion, moreover, any cogent arguement you condsider being particularly telling needs to be clearly repeated in the current on going comments if you want them counted on in the vote.
• I will make sure this message goes to each contributor to the article the past month, so you are not being singled out. Now is the time to take a deep breath, for rational concise summaries, not all the arguing that is so wearisome in 66 printed pages - half a novelette, I'd guess! It's certainly a lot to ask your fellow editors to wade through on a minor issue.
• I will also personally be making sure that at least a dozen other Administrators I'm acquainted with take a look at the debate after the time below. I will in fact ask for twenty commitments, so be clear and respectful of our time!!!
• Thankyou for your time, attention, and good professional behaviour. I'll check the Talk state again no sooner than Monday around Noon (UTC), And ask the uninvolved others to do the same. PLEASE BE CONCISE. [[User:Fabartus| FrankB || TalktoMe]] 23:14, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• Just checked in the Tsushima Islands... you do realize that Mr Tans 12-15 y.o.? Let's please try to settle this article down. See Lushun and Dalian for other compromise ways of handling multilingual names. I see no harm in having an article with alternate names, so long as they are widely known in some populous. Perhaps one of the Japanese citizens (Are you one?) I have contacted can find us a nice picture to push the language box down; perhaps you can ask for an RFC to settle policy on the question of when they are necessary. Do they really matter compared to all the man hours wasted so far on this single small article? Ditto Mel Etitis's actions, right or wrong. He seems to have let emotion cloud good judgement as well — but the picture from outside it that that sad picture applies to all of you!
  • Whether You or Ms. (or Mr.) Tan is (I wonder which -- See his talk, I've spent hours trying to get him to settle down — make that days!) right or not is hardly germane to stopping the edit war. Please cease-fire!!!
• If we let the article settle, correct the grammer, then wait a few weeks, he will go off and be distracted by some other youthful passion. Then we can finalize copy. Responding to him just goads him into more defiant behaviour. I'm sure your time is more valuable than this, as he is happy with the arguing, the process, not the merits. He/she thrives on it — the attention, the fight. Any arguement. You and I would be better off beating our head against the wall... At least when we stopped it would stop hurting. <G> He's thriving on the attention — He loves it. Please stop giving it to him. Do you know what 'Rope-A-Dope' means? Rope-A-Dope for a few weeks and he'll punch himself out in a few days, and find something else to pee into; someone else to argue with.
  • I'm trying my best to get him into taking on requested articles, empty stubs, 1911 Britanica articles to Wiki, Red Links, et al, to harness that energy on (that endless list of missing articles); something where he will control, at least in the early stages, rather than let it (the edit war) continue. If he is busy with something else, he will not be harrassing editors that don't understand his joy in combat. If you like the arguements, then respond in kind, but I personally believe and would suggest that a instant messaging system would be a better way of scratching such an itch.
• Give it some thought — I've two teens of my own, and there is something that goes on with their hormones that brings out defiance once they really learn how to start thinking for themselves. It's a growth phase thing — it takes them a while longer to learn to compromise, that's all. It takes them even longer to learn how to evaluate when a reference is good, or suspect.
  • In the meantime, make some notes on a todo list, or notepad — you can just paste your changes back into it in a few weeks when he's gone off to play elsewhere. You might want to add to your annotations the W:RfC\Mr Tan as well. Let's all get on with a happier Wiki-Life, but recognize that arguing with such a person is giving them exactly what they want.
• I've called in a lot of horsepower as I consider this matter to be an embarrasment for Wiki, and the edit war will be stopped. Please do your part to be professional and ESPECIALLY defuse the situation by not reacting — he wants the arguement!
• May I suggest that if he comes snooping, that this 'frank' discussion between us two should be absent — or it may criple my ability to influence him — as a personal favor to me, either delete it entirely (except perhaps the second paragraph))), or cut it and paste it into a private local file on your HDD. Thanks in advance!

Best Wishes. Frank

[[User:Fabartus|FrankB || TalktoMe]] 00:57, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Tsushima Islands Again and again and again

I just looked into the history for Tsushima Islands. You are as bad an offender as Mr Tan! For heavens sake find another project to play in while this article settles down. Did you notice you reintroduced errors (see reversion by SlimVirgin in History:Tsushima Islands ). Please, Limit yourself to zero edits while the vote is in progress — ONE OF YOU has to start acting mature and responsible first, so show some professionalism rather than this juvenile display of over-produced Testosterone.

• THINK professionally, what reputation are you building for yourself? If the point is disputed, put your version together with Tans version and call for a formal vote. All you are doing is wasted time until consensus is reached.
• If you aren't grown up (and from where I sit you must only be 12 or 13 because of your rash and inappropriate actions), try acting like it for the moment. (An older kid usually learns to share his toys and compromise, or leave aside battles that aren't worth fighting)
• Perhaps you should goto the Japan Interest BB and see if there is something else you can contribute to. I'm trying to rein in Tan, but he likes an arguement — so you are just throwing gasoline onto a fire (dangerous and foolish act) — see his talk page from 'Tsushima Islands - A heads up' down... but be prepared to take a lot of time reading there.
  • This edit war has got to stop. PERIOD [[User:Fabartus|FrankB || TalktoMe]] 15:12, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

That bilingual name is only supported by Mr Tan and he can't explain it's necessity even though he insists de did. Look at the history of spanish edition of Tsushima. Creator of the article (he translated this article from english edition) Taichi removed bilingual part of infobox after revert war and the war terminated as soon as he did. --Ypacaraí 07:16, 2005 Jun 22 (UTC)

Links

I have seen that you have removed the links on Tsushima, just because they are Korean. I do not understand or know what is your main motive or reason behind this move, but please provide me a good reason for your edit. You have removed some links once by providing the summary that they are "unreliable sources", but links are links, they do not add to the content of the article. All my links that I had added are related to Tsushima.

Just because they are written in Korean doesn't mean that they should be excluded. We accepted Japanese-language links, too. They provide additional information, and benefit readers. I would appreciate if you could give me a good reason behind your removal of those links, and nor removing them explicitely at your own will. Thanks. Mr Tan 06:15, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

• Not just because of languange, couldn't open one of them properly. Yes, Korean or Japanese sources can't be used by most users of this Wikipedia so they have no value as sources. This is the reason. Also personal websites are not reliable and not suitable for use as sourses. --Ypacaraí 08:00, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

You have a point here. I don't really like it, yet I find it relatively logical. Allow me to make my summary: This is English wikipedia. Even if some users can read Japanese or Korean, they could refer to the Japanese of Korean version. By the way, the donga link you remove is not a personal website, it is the website of a South Korean newspaper.

However, previous edits showed that you remove Korean language and Korean-based English info links. It does not matter now, but be forewarned that users may mistook you for this edit of being a Japanese ultranationalist, and being biased like this is not good, honestly. If your intention is to keep only English links, then you should have removed both. But never mind, take my words as a good lesson. Cheers and Hapy New Year! Mr Tan 12:54, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Amazing! You grown up and much improved as a wikipedian. Have a happy vacation! --Ypacaraí 22:53, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Sorting our differences

It's time that our long standing differences of our opinions on Tsushima Island be sorted now at this point of time. I must apologise that the message is delayed as I was unaware of your contradicting opinion and I needed time to analyse your point of view. It's a bit messy though, but please run through my message and post your comments and objections. For my part in Tsushima, I have posted my comments at Talk:Tsushima_Island#Reply_to_naming_conventions. I hope to hear about your comments and objections soon. Thanks. Mr Tan 14:16, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

I have checked your contributions page and noticed that you're edits since three days ago; that states that you are back. For my part I have posted my comments on the talk page stated above, and I have yet to receive a reply from you. Please give your comments to the topic in talk page stated above. I hope to hear about your comments and objections soon. Thanks. Mr Tan 12:29, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

I am just fed up with unproductive discussions with you. Do not foul up my talk page again with your message. --Ypacaraí 22:14, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Hello, please see Talk:Tsushima_Island#Reply_to_naming_conventions for my reply. Mr Tan 05:39, 4 August 2006 (UTC)