User talk:Northwest1202

Hello

Welcome!

Hello, Northwest1202, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using 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 {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! --Watermint 04:49, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

I've blocked you for 24 hours for revert-warring on Liancourt Rocks. As is very clearly stated both in the article text and on the talk page, this article is under a special zero-tolerance regime against edit-warring. Fut.Perf. ☼ 00:37, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think your blocking is not proper, because User:Ehyunwoo is cleary breaking an agreement on Liancourt Rocks. See it's note, many persons said not to break alphabetical order, and Ehyunwoo is clealy aiming to break it as he broke several times after my warning. So I think he is one of vandal or a Korean nationalist. And further more, you should suspect Ehyunwoo is one of sock puppets of some banned editor, for Ehyunwoo registered in Oct 2007. Ok, you banned me, but then who and how stop Ehyunwoo's vandal acts??? Northwest1202 07:09, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I read Ehyunwoo's note and I know you suspect Ehyunwoo too. But so you should settle this dispute by punishing both. Now Ehyunwoo, suspected a vandal is left in uncontrolled situation.Northwest1202 07:46, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Short grain rice

Hello, Northwest1202, I revert your edit because that is not new since Korean people also prefer short grain rice over longer grain rice due to its lack of glutinousness. The term "prejudice" does not hold only "bad connotation". That is a kind of cultural preference existing in any country. For example, rice cakes are commonly eaten in Asia in various forms. Mochi, Japanese rice cake is stickier than Chinese and Korean rice cakes. That difference depends on cultural differences. It is also known that East Asian people (Japan/Korea/ some regions of China) do not like long grain rice. So I hope you're satisfied with my rationale. Thanks--Caspian blue (talk) 20:38, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm? I replaced the "prejudice against" that you don't like, with "preference than". I thought that is a fine compromise. Since Japan cultivated rice in their land, due to the convention and diet, Japanese prefer short-grain rice. People tend to seek familiar one. However, as you revert with the claim that the passage has no source is utterly untrue. Either you did not catch the <ref> tag attached at the end of the paragraph or you just don't want the information included in the article. Also, the practice is very similar to yesterday's IP vandal on the article. I hope you're not him/her who was obsessed with rice cultivation. --Caspian blue (talk) 20:59, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your second edit is thougt fair bit to be NPOV. But in ancient Japan long-grain wasn't cultivatied, so they couldn't like or hate them. If you have a source, I can obey you. But I think it wouldn't. Northwest1202 (talk) 21:01, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That passage defines why Japanese prefer short-grain rice because of the long history of their diet with the rice. I don't think the information is either biased, or no source. --Caspian blue (talk) 21:05, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Before the maiji-era all most all Japanse didn't know long-grain rice under seclusion policy, and couldn't eat them until recently under ban on import for conservation policy. So modern Japanse don't know the manner to eat long-grain rice with pleasure, yet. And this was recent event that long-grain rice was imported, in 1993 for bad harvest. It's only the problem of absence know-how to eat them. Before very long, they will eat it delectably.Northwest1202 (talk) 21:19, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

=ㅅ=;; You know what? Your answer is almost same one as mine. The passage from the book written by Kipel is an analysis by his academic research and also describes why Japanese people do not like long grain rice. My reasoning that "Long history of Japanese people eating short-grain rice since its first cultivation" is not much different from your argument. People do not tend to change their habit and convention easily as long as new things are so good to them. Long rice grain is not favorable unlike eating meat after Meiji period. I don't know why you're so upset at the passage. --Caspian blue (talk) 21:36, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Prejudice is not equal to bias

I think you misunderstand the meaning of "prejudice". In the context, the word does not mean "bias" of Japanese people against long-grain rice. According to the article of prejudice, "The word prejudice refers to prejudgment: making a decision before becoming aware of the relevant facts of a case or event." Japanese people had eaten only short grain rice since its cultivation. They could not know the existence of long-grain rice until Meiji era. So it is so natural for them to have a "pre-judgment before even tasting the new rice. The passage says that info. Besides, Japanese people prefer glutinous and chewy texture than Chinese and Southeast people such as rice cake and noodles. So I really don't get why you try to remove the sentence.--Caspian blue (talk) 22:59, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is impossibile for people to have prejudice against a diet before they know it. It's weird expression, and it feels like it has politically-incorrect, though you say above. Or you write every tooth of all country are "prejudice"? Then I can think wiki and you are no bias. :-).Northwest1202 (talk) 13:51, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think you would better refer to English dictionaries, or ask any native speaker of English about the meaning.--Caspian blue (talk) 14:16, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, thank you. It's only a logical problem. But I have explained them already. Please read it again. Northwest1202 (talk) 14:27, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Prejudice = prejudgment in the context. Frankly speaking, your object to the usage of the word is induced from your English.--Caspian blue (talk) 14:34, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's only a logical problem. But I have explained them already. Please read it again. :-) Thanks a lot.Northwest1202 (talk) 14:47, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is like a never-ending story. If you still feel that the usage of "preference than the long-grain rice" (not prejudice) is not proper, you can request for comment at the talk page. WP:RFC. People who would be interested in the matter would respond to your inquiry. --Caspian blue (talk) 14:51, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is impossibile for people to have ""preference"" against a diet before they know it. It's weird expression, and it feels like it has politically-incorrect, though you say above. Or you write every tooth of all country are "preference"? Then I can think wiki and you are no bias. Can you see? Thanks.Northwest1202 (talk) 15:05, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Japanese cuisine

Please stop reverting the properly sourced information on short-grained rice on Japanese cuisine. If you continue this revert you may be blocked as per the three revert rule. --Chef Tanner (talk) 04:00, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, for your advice. Please think it again. Northwest1202 (talk) 13:34, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What is your rationale for reverting on Comfort women?

Unless you give me a good reason, your revert constitutes to "blind reverting". You must take a participation in the open discussion at the talk page. I would not expect to hear again your repeated insistence that you showed me on "long-grain rice" at Japanese cuisine. I look forward to hearing your reasoning which is one of your responsibilities for your edit. --Caspian blue (talk) 14:16, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can't you read my edit summary of Comfort women? That's all. The edits you made are not NPOV for confirct of testimoniy, and you deleteded well sourced edit of Korean Comfort women. Those are vandalization of Wiki. Don't insistent me, any more. Write them in the talk page.Northwest1202 (talk) 15:44, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You did not give your reason why Yasuji Kaneko's testimony for his conflict of evidence and the "well-sourced information" should be deleted according to your theory. That is your vandalism if you're logic is consistent. Not only that, your blind revert is going far from NPOV. So do not insist at this time without any reason. Besides, if I vandalised the page, I already would've get a waring from editors, or admin, Future, which case has never occurred to me unlike you. Your edit is a conflict of interest for yourself or content dispute, all of which you do not realize what they are. Your false accusation me of doing vandalism is nothing but a personal attack and unwarranted. Besides, you have not given any single reason for your addition without discussion. You should not do this disruption again. Your edit summary is nothing but the notice that "I revert this". You must take the responsibility for your action. FYI, I already wrote my reason at the talk page, you did not. --Caspian blue (talk) 15:57, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I copy your edit to the talk page, go on in it for more discuss. In this page is not seen by all. Northwest1202 (talk) 16:03, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Northwest,

I have not actually looked into the details of your problems with Caspian blue but, on the basis of my experience, I would caution you against becoming dragged into any heated debate with the editor as it will be likely used against you. You will end up in a downward spiral of increasing threats, complaints, admin involvement which ... if nothing else ... will waste your time and energy. IMHO, it may all just be designed discouraging anyone from editing on topics of their interest. I tried suggesting mediation and my approach was misinterpreted as a personal attack ... what more do I need to say?

I have started to take this issue to meditation and will go to arbitration if necessary. If you are interested, please join me. If you are also willing to raise the issue of their editing/summary style on their talk page, then I can take it to WP:RFC.

Request for Mediation regarding Caspian blue--Lucyintheskywithdada (talk) 06:51, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot for your advice. I will pay attention on your attempt, and if I can, I will join your attempt. Northwest1202 (talk) 07:22, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, can you clarify your answer?

At Talk:Comfort women#Meditaton, I don't quite understand your reasoning like your change on Kaneko's testimony and "no doubt" on the inclusion of 70's sex tourism. That does not make a good sense, so would you clarify your statement in detail? Thanks--Caspian blue (talk) 18:42, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Burden of proof

It is too obvious that you're following me, starting from Japanese cuisine, Comfort women, and Prostitution in Japan, all of which you had not edited before. I hope you're not related to 2channel's disruptive wikistalking and meatpuppetry campaign. Regardless, when you want to insert a claim, you have to find relevant citations, not just a source or incident, seemingly related one. The source says 6 people's arrest and they're involved in sex-relate business, not a prostitution. That source does not also say that Koreans are among the most foreign prostitutes. That is a big different. You must try harder than just adding a "bogus" source. --Caspian blue (talk) 19:36, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Could you also insert the relevant "page number(s)" and "quote" because the PDF file has 27 pages, and it is hard to find the specific one. Thanks.--Caspian blue (talk) 04:24, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank, however, would you also paste the paragraph in a quote and translate them for English readers? Because my computer does not support some of Japanese kanji (they look broken), I could not paste the passage.--Caspian blue (talk) 04:40, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Relevant section is a table. You can see the word "韓国" in it. That is it.--Northwest1202 (talk) 05:00, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, I mean the whole paragraph, not just the table. According to the source, most of prostitutes arrested are Chinese, Thai people, Taiwanese, and Columbian people, not Koreans. I think you will still need more sources for the claim that Koreans, Philippine, Eastern Europeans are also "the most" foreigners working in prostitue in Japan.

８ *春事犯. * (manybe "sell" in kanji?) does not show properly on my computer, so I can't paste the paragraph as a quote. However, you can do that with no hardship.--Caspian blue (talk) 05:12, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]