Nokia2610

November 2007

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Yasukuni Shrine, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Oda Mari (talk) 14:27, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to Japan. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Oda Mari (talk) 14:27, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

January 2008

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did to Ramen, you will be blocked from editing. -Amake (talk) 11:38, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
The next time you violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by inserting commentary or your personal analysis into an article, as you did to Secondary education in Japan, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. ~Eliz81^(C) 09:56, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

This unwarranted personal attack on another editor hardly qualifies as adding your knowledge to Wikipedia. If you continue to insert your personal, unsourced opinion about Japan into articles and harass other users, you will be blocked. Personal attacks and POV pushing are not tolerated. Please acquaint yourself with our policies and basic principles if you wish to continue to contribute. ~Eliz81^(C) 10:03, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Please read our policies on reliable sources and verifiability. Just because an editor says something is true, doesn't make it true. That's why we have a policy against original research. It is vitally important to back up contentious claims with cited sources. And it is never appropriate to vandalize another editor's userpage when you are in disagreement with them. Article talk pages and the user's talk page are the correct venues for civilly discussing the issue at hand. ~Eliz81^(C) 10:14, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for cleaning up my user page, Eliz81. This guy's a repeat vandal. Let's just have him banned and be done with it. -Amake (talk) 10:31, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

-- Well thats what you Japanese people do is it? Ignoring the truth becuase you are ashame of it.

"The Truth"

Here's a tip for you. We all have our opinions, but that's for blogs and personal websites. Wikipedia can't manage opinion as it would be impossible to deal with all the conflicting views - it's difficult enough as it is. So that's why we need citations and NPOV statements that keep things calm.

You obviously are very emotional about the subjects you've been writing on, which doesn't help. If you want to add something in on a controversial subject, the best thing to do is get independent sources (so not people from extreme positions on either side) to support your motion and then raise the matter on the articles' talk pages. Throwing in POV material which is clearly personal and emotional will not get you anywhere. John Smith's (talk) 14:27, 20 January 2008 (UTC)