User talk:Knsn57

You appear to be correct. Sorry about my muddling. James^x12345 17:54, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello, Knsn57, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! Buster Seven Talk 21:15, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

November 2013

Please stop your disruptive editing. Your edits have been reverted or removed.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive until the dispute is resolved through consensus. Continuing to edit disruptively may result in your being blocked from editing. Please engage in proper communication with other editors, and do not make tenacious edits for the sake of making them. Please read other people's edit summaries, and provide adequate, detailed explanations within your own edit summaries. --benlisquare_T•C•E 16:06, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

About Japan-Korea war edit

Actually, I am not a Korean nor a Japanese. Thus,I really don't care about the loss in this war. The problem is the way you edit. You change many articles just for whitewash one-siede (Japanese side). Most of time you just delete the loss of Japanese. It is really unfair to other side of this war. This wiki is an encyclopedia. Can you keep neutral when you edit this article? Actually the Japanese loss in this war has been discussed in the talk page. Other editors get the conclusion which is 140000. You should not just delete the data without talking with other editors. Thus, actually I can just revert your edition without any reference but for your request, I spend lots of my time to find the sources and edit it. If you want to change some major data, you should discuss with other editors and keep neutral. Don't just delete the previous data. Actually I am really wonder why you just delete the Japanese loss. There are also lots of data about Korean loss without any citation in the same article. You should also delete them like you do for Japanese loss.

About Death of Hideyoshi

I delete some editions because of repetition not non-reference. Actually, at first I did not try to delete the data added and just deleted the non-reference thing. Then IP 159... noticed me all these information added has been mentioned in previous sections. These edition just about three battle but actually these three battles has three sections to describes. These sections gave the battle descriptions, the strength, casualties and even a link to articles. There is no necessary to repeat it again. The things I deleted are the battles of Suncheon Japanese Castle, the Sacheon Japanese Castle, and the Ulsan Japanese Castle. If check the articles, will see that there are three sections which named Battle of Sacheon, Siege of Suncheon and Siege of Ulsan which were just near this sections. Then these three battles did not have much relationship with the death of Hideyoshi. This article should be a profile article and someone even want to delete contents about some small battles. Thus. if a battle has been described in a specific section, there is no need to describe it again.

The three-revert rule

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Edit_warring#The_three-revert_rule Thus,you should not delete others' editions. Please respect others' efforts. Pay attention,these data were not edited by me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Miracle dream (talk • contribs) 02:18, 8 December 2013 (UTC) Things I did was to respect others' effort. Because I cannot prove it wrong, I added the citation needed.If I don't have evidence, I will not determine it is incorrect hastily.If you can give the evidence to show it is wrong, I will also respect your edition except the repeatable or unnecessary.Actually these data were edited before I started to edit in wiki. Thus, I don't know whether they have discussed with other editors before they added these data.If so, I think it should be kept in the page. For example, the 140000+ Japanese losses in 1592-1598 had been discussed by editors.Maybe we can discuss about something.—Miracle dream (talk • contribs)[reply]

"I hope not delete the casualties of either side. I think can just add a citation needed and wait others add reference. —Miracle dream (talk • contribs)”

—Miracle dream (talk • contribs
Can I talk about anime or manga with you in this page? Are you interested in anime?—Miracle dream (talk • contribs

3RR

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—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—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—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. Canterbury Tail talk 16:41, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:04, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]