Your personal attackEdit

Avoid personal attacks like this; they are punishable. Boris Tsirelson (talk) 14:27, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

Here to say the same thing. YohanN7 (talk) 14:46, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

For example, isn't this personal attack?[1] --Takahiro4 (talk) 19:58, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

June 2016Edit

  Hello, I'm DVdm. I noticed that you recently removed some content from William McCoy (mutineer)  with this edit, without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. DVdm (talk) 20:33, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

Note: the content that you removed is explicitly mentioned in two sources and is not written in "Incomprehensive English" at all. If you don't like it, you can open an entry on the article take page and discuss. - DVdm (talk) 20:35, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
No your reply against Pointy to me.--Takahiro4 (talk) 20:39, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
My reply against Pointy to you? What does that mean? - DVdm (talk) 20:43, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
Why did you come to my edit, again? Happenly? I don't think so.--Takahiro4 (talk) 20:47, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
Because you removed properly sourced content, and said in your summary that a perfectly written English sentence was "Incomprehensive English". Do you use Google Translate between English and your own language to read and write text on the English Wikipedia? - DVdm (talk) 20:53, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
Pointy is why you concern about my edit like this article. Why I edit this article, I saw this youtube video [2] 23:25. Now, I got it "with stone around neck" this means he sink in the sea.--Takahiro4 (talk) 21:04, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
Your edits need to be followed and checked because your mastering of the English language seems to be inadequate. To edit the English Wikipedia a minimal level of competence is required. Frankly, I have never seen you formulate a single sentence in proper English. See also User talk:DVdm#Do not use capitals for emphasis where I made a suggestion about the Babel userbox on your user page. Another user seems to agree, and proposes to go even further. Please have a look at the paragraph about Language difficulty in the wp:CIR essay. - DVdm (talk) 21:17, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
It's ok. I have fixed strange japanese article of english wikipedia many times. You have never seen my formal sentences. haha, it's correct, I forgot some spaces. You may format my all sentences, I don't care. Just you are a little critical user for others.--Takahiro4 (talk) 21:56, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

administrator commentEdit

I decided to post here after responding to your comment on my talk page, which is barely comprehensible, much like many of your edits, and I have to agree with DVdm's sentiments above. While boldness in editing is a positive trait, I do not believe that you have the ability to write in English at a level that is necessary for adding substantive prose to articles. While this is an issue that can be dealt with by copy-editing, it appears we do need to check a majority of your edits, as pointed out above. The real problem, however, is that whenever someone points out a mistake you made, your assessment is to take it personally and accuse them of some sort of ill intent, and many of your comments have been outright personal attacks (you seem to have an axe to grind with certain editors in particular). This is an issue that you must fix on your own, and I'm leaving it to you and trust you to figure out how to do that, as failure to do and continuing the same line of personal attacks is certainly not something that will be tolerated. --Kinu t/c 16:06, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

This message has some good faith. I don't get angry with mistakes. Why I got angry with DVdm are small mistake or something and my reply is "I got it", but he complained even this reply. Well, I have ever heard these messages many times. I never attack person if there is no reason, but I definitely attack if there is a reason, also in real world. I have ever persued american military soldiers in jeep by my bicycle, and they got away. Because they pranked me. So there was a reason. Also I have ever helped american soldier.--Takahiro4 (talk) 02:18, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
"I never attack person if there is no reason, but I definitely attack if there is a reason, also in real world." This suggests a battleground approach, and this has no place here. Your edits to my talk page (i.e., [3]) only confirm that. Given that and your latest edits, which only confirm your inability to edit in English, I do not feel that allowing you to edit Wikipedia is a net benefit to the project, and therefore I am blocking your account. You are welcome to appeal if you desire. --Kinu t/c 04:58, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

June 2016Edit

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for a lack of ability to constructively edit in English and for having a battleground approach to editing Wikipedia. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Kinu t/c 04:59, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
You would be best unconstructive user, your reverts are all nonsense, and involving administrator.--Takahiro4 (talk) 22:59, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!Edit

 Hello, Takahiro4. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!Edit

 Hello, Takahiro4. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)