User talk:Bukubku: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 08:58, 27 December 2008

Welcome!

Hello, Bukubku, 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! --Caspian blue (talk) 13:17, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome, Caspian blue. You are the first person on my page. And you gave me helpful message. Thank you! --Bukubku (talk) 10:40, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

3RR warning

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Empress Myeongseong. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution.

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Kumdo. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. --Caspian blue (talk) 16:11, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your advice, Caspian blue. But Kao no nai tsuki deleted non-disputed article in the lump, such as On December 28, some Korean Army and Palace Guard officers were sentenced to death for treason in superior court, then they were executed. and On October 10, 1895 King Gojong divested Queen Min of her peerage and busted to plebeian by his royal decree.--Bukubku (talk) 01:04, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

October 2008

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages by deliberately introducing incorrect information, as you did to Empress Myeongseong , you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Do not falsify the Korean history, besides, the Gojong Silok and Sunjong Silok and any royal court document written during the Japanese occupation are regarded "manipulated unreliable info" by scholars. If you keep continues, administrative intervention might be needed. --Caspian blue (talk) 13:01, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your message. You felt concern for me. I add more reliable sources.--Bukubku (talk) 10:50, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dishonesty

I'm Korean reader and you're being very funny about Korean ability. I checked the sources and you lied that the murder was Korean order. You're obviously somebody's sock per your knowledge of English Wikipedia and have been stalking me per your self evidence at Sennen goroshi's talk page. You also lied the sources written by Japanese order during the occupation period are "reliable". Those are regarded by scholars as "forged unreliable documents". That's why those sillok are not designated as National treasures of Korea and UNESCO's Memory of the World unlike other sillok. Shame on you.--Caspian blue (talk) 14:04, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think some Korean and Japanese troops killed her, so I didn't delete Miura Goro. At the time, many foreigners encroached Korea. And some Koreans collaborated with foreigners for their expedient. The incident was occured by Koreans collaborated with Japanese and Japanese. I know Annals of Joseon Dynasty is not reliable sources in South Korea, but every document was same Official Gazette of Korea in this case. So I land Annals of Joseon Dynasty with Official Gazette of Korea in this article. and I think King didn't know Japanese criminals name, so he said criminals name only Koreans. I didn't lie.--Bukubku (talk) 14:48, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You forged that the order is from Jo Yeon-u. He was charged for the collaboration but the order. Besides, Annals of Joseon Dynasty is regarded reliable sources in South Korea and in the world, except Gojong Sillok and Sunjong Sillok. Do not distort my commnet and you used the forged documents. You lie.--Caspian blue (talk) 14:51, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't forge. If you think the order was from Jo Yeon-u, you would improve the article. I wrote the article from the Official Gazette of Korea, so I didn't find Jo Yeon-u. And I'm sorry, I didn't know the Annals of Joseon Dynasty is regarded reliable sources in South Korea, except Gojong Sillok and Sunjong Sillok. Thank you for your information. Anyway, every article was same the Official Gazette of Korea in this case. Don't mind.--Bukubku (talk) 15:36, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're making fun of me with my typo of Jo Hui-yeon. You inserted as if the order is from Jo. Did you even understand what am saying? Did you even read the sources? You attached ko:조희연 to the article. Obvious, you're making inconsistent excuses for yourself. You said Annals of Joseon dynasty is not reliable sources. So funny. To improve the quality of the article, I should remove your forged info.--Caspian blue (talk) 16:06, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, now I understand what you mean, and I didn't fun of you with your typo of Jo Hui-yeon.--Bukubku (talk) 16:47, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Empress Myeongseong

Hi Bukubku!

I see you're having a dispute with CaspianBlue over whether Jo Huiyeon ordered the assassination of Empress Myeongseong. Would you mind quoting the passage in your sources that support this allegation? Sorry for the trouble. kwami (talk) 01:08, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your message, Kwamikagami. Jo Hui yeon was former Military Minister at that time. After the success of coup he became Military Minister again. But soon King refuged the Russian Legation. Then King said Jo Hui yeon was one of criminals. He was the highest rank person in the criminals. Japanese troops must have been under the order of Japanese high official in this case Miura Goro. Similarly, Korean troops must have been under the order of Korean high official. So I wrote former Military Minister of Korea Jo Hui yeon and Miura Goro ordered. If you feel not good. Shall I write the all person's name who King said the criminals or Shall I write Several Korean Officers? And I have a petition what discussions should be discussed in Talk:Empress Myeongseong. Some people didn't discuss in Talk:Empress Myeongseong, and they deleted the article without consensus.--Bukubku (talk) 01:45, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

When alleging that someone is guilty of a crime, it's best to have a source that actually says so. Assuming that the Korean troops "must have" been under the command of Jo, and further that therefore he "must have" given certain orders, is your own thesis. We need a source that names him and explicitly says that he did this. If there are no such sources, then the passage should be deleted. For example, we don't say that the Rape of Nanking was committed "under the orders of" Emperor Hirohito just because he was the man in charge. kwami (talk) 02:50, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for being so cooperative, Bukubku. We don't always need to be so careful, but there are so many claims around for historical happenings that it can be a difficult subject. Accusations of criminality make it much more sensitive, especially in cases of international conflict, where "patriots" from both sides want their country to look good and the other to look bad. Passions run high for Israel, Kosovo, Kashmir, Ireland, the Opium War, Armenia, and dozens of other recent or current conflicts. In such cases, it's best to have an explicit, reliable, and verifiable source for every claim—not always an easy task. With the Israel-Palestinian conflict, I think it took a year of very passioned debate for a consensus to emerge. kwami (talk) 19:07, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rather than removing sourced content unilaterally, please discuss on the talk page first. — Rlevse • Talk • 16:07, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism and Personal attack warning

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Empress Myeongseong, you will be blocked from editing. --Caspian blue 00:50, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not attack other editors, which you did here: Empress Myeongseong. If you continue, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. --Caspian blue 00:50, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Caspian, tell the reason of template and answer my question about your falesely citation source in "Korea under Japanese rule" write also Min as Queen. Don't template my page. Your template vandalise my talk page appearance. Calm down, please.--Bukubku (talk) 00:59, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You make me a chuckle. You're not a regular but a (suspicious) newbie. So, the warning is very much reasonable and you falsely attack me. You earn the waring. If you call me "vandal", I will report you.--Caspian blue 01:07, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Caspian, you insult me. Answer me When I chuckled you. Answer me When I falsely attacked you. and I call you Caspian. Tell me where you would report?--Bukubku (talk) 01:16, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please, you two. Neither of you type English fluently, and I think there's some serious miscommunication going on. Caspian, I know where you and I stand, but I also know you constructively contribute to Wikipedia, so I have to count on you to be the mature one here and deal with this appropriately. Taking it to WP:AIV is not the answer - if you can't work things out with Bukubku, then take your concerns to WP:ANI. Tan | 39 01:24, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The conversation moved to User talk:Tanthalas39 by Caspian.

I strongly encourage all editors on Japan-Korea articles to discuss issues calmly on talk pages not edit war. And stay civil and cease the personal attacks. — Rlevse • Talk • 22:51, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rlevse, I strongly approve of your calm proposal. and Please keep in mind this[1].--Bukubku (talk) 01:04, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What is your rationale for your blanking

The article title is "Empress Myeongseong", so it should be consistent. Queen "Min" is the very rude style for King/Emperor's consort. The introduction should be a summary, but you put all spurious and unreliable gazette written under the Japanese control. The unreliable Gazette has its own section. You also intentionally made the image "red link". Besides, do not delete the properly cited "sources" which Sennen goroshi falsely labeled and you blanked out. Besides, sources there clearly say "the assassions holding swords and killed the empress are "Japanese". So the order of the country Japan and Korea should be kept as well as it is "alphabetical order" that you guys so favor.--Caspian blue 23:34, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Caspian, talk in Talk:Empress Myeongseong, this is my page. this controversy is not only mine and yours, but also other people.--Bukubku (talk) 01:08, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You have a lot to learn about WP:TALK policy. Read it. What controversy? By whom? In this case, "dispute" is a correct term. You're responsible for your edit, so you are obliged to answer for the query. Stop making nonsense.--Caspian blue 01:18, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Administrator kwami created new section on Talk:Empress Myeongseong, why you reluctant to talk in the page, me and one person getting in the controversy. Caspian, please join in.

In "Korea under Japanese rule", I read your source but I don't believe it. 1500 Palace Guards run out on Queen, and they are safe. And also written the existance of much more Korean Army participant than Japanese with father of King (you disguising this). You want me to believe that most Korean dislike Queen, isn't it.--Bukubku (talk) 02:32, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You make me laugh again. So you're asserting that you're in academic with more notability than Prof. Park who was a retired prof of Korea-Russian relation and history department at Moscow University? The source is "secondary source unlike your usage of biased and dubious primary source". Whether you don't believe it or not, my source is published in "reliable source" by the "reputable academic" who has studied and researched in the field over than 40 years. Your feeling has absolutely unrelated to the topic. If you can't stick to WP:V, but relying on WP:IDONTLIKEIT is a fast way of you digging your hole.--Caspian blue 02:41, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Caspian, you insult me, again. I didn't make you laugh. Answer me When I made you laugh.

Answer me why you don't talk Talk:Empress Myeongseong(Administrator kwami created).

"Korea under Japanese rule", O.K. I think your this source is accetable, but your another source looks like citing from e-mail is not. And If you cite this source, I add father of King and Korean Army participants, and add 1500 Palace Guards run out on Queen, Russian Guards sabotaged, too. However it is only my opinion not other users.--Bukubku (talk) 04:13, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're changing the subject again with such threat. Where did I insult you? I honestly had a laugh because of your continued "funny" discussion. The e-mail source that I did not add to the article initially is actually from a very reputable academic of Korean history, Gari Keith Ledyard. The source and my new source are almost holding a same content, but "written language" is different. I will add the falsification and coverups by the Japanese, all which are addressed in the source. Don't ever threat me again. You're already warned for your incivility by Rlevse.--12:06, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

your word "You make me laugh again.". OK, I don't say about your insult, this is petty thing.--Bukubku (talk) 12:16, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

give me your opinion

do you think the edits made by caspian blue were correct?

I would be interested in your opinion on the article

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empress_Myeongseong

Sennen goroshi (talk) 14:44, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're trying to skipp out many procedures

Let me tell you about WP:DR process. WP:Meditation is almost a last resolution method for a long-term dispute between editors. If all required DR method are failed, your suggestion would work such as 1) discuss on the article talk page or users' talk page 2) if the discussion is not successful, file for WP:RFC for specific question on disputed contents or seek a third opinion for a third party such as WP:3O. 3) if all are failed, then WP:Meditation would work because disputers would already acknowledge what opponents would think or claim. However, we have not even tried the No.1. Moreover, this dispute is neither held for long term, but also you have not even addressed what is your problem with the content that you labeled as "racist". You just kept removing contents you don't like. You have not opened any discussion for that at the talk page at all. That would be considered WP:IDONTLIKEIT because "I said so". No logic found in your argument as well as disruptive. Rlevse and other admin may suggest you to take your concern to WP:Meditation because they seemed to think that you tried above all methods before, however you did not do anything.

The article was written in 2006 and as far as I've known, at that time, "inline citation" was not strictly required. I also checked on the history of the article, that much of contents was written by Wikimachine (talk · contribs) and his last version[2] is almost identical to the current version. Besides, the discrimination is well explained in his biography "Woongjin Great People #30 Woo Jang-Choon by Baek Sukgi. (C) Woongjin Publishing Co., Ltd. 1987" and this link. Racial discrimination is nothing new in Japan and well-known "fact". He was mistreated at that time, so what is a big deal to address the "fact"? You also tried to distort that the assassination by the Japanese mob was largely responsible for Woo Beom-jin or other collaborater. That is called "history revisionism". That is not quite "cute attempt". So open a discussion at the Talk:Woo Jang-choon first.--Caspian blue 18:43, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive489#User: Caspian blue (second) and now MedCab--Bukubku (talk) 05:42, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I love your userpage!

Sorry, I was getting tired of all those discussions where Japan is vilified in articles. Chris (クリス • フィッチ) (talk) 02:40, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Chris. I understand this message is one of cheer. Thank you.--Bukubku (talk) 03:23, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A plausibly calming thought?

The seasonal colors of autumn leaves -- perennially expected, but always a bit of a surprise ....

Caspian blue explains here: "One thing about myself, I really don't like "orange color"[3] which is the complementary color to blue."

Are you familiar with the Latin phrase, Caveat lector -- perennially expected, but always a bit of a surprise? --Tenmei (talk) 19:40, 5 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Translation

Hi. I got your message on the article. I will look over it when I have time; it will probably be sometime this weekend. It's a pretty contentious topic but I'll do what I can. Konamaiki (talk) 19:10, 5 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Don't worry about it, it's not a really painful topic. I'm not the nationalistic type so it won't be a problem. What might be a problem is time -- right now I'm super busy because I'm applying for graduate schools. But if I have some free time somewhere I will take a look at it.Konamaiki (talk) 21:53, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mediation

Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2008-11-06 Woo Jang-choon Here's hoping it helps your dispute. Best wishes, Durova^Charge! 01:03, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

MedCab

Hi. A MedCab case has been opened here, regarding Woo Jang-choon. You have been named as a participant. Please visit the case page and indicate whether or not you will participate. Thank you. [roux » x] 23:03, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You are probably sock of Someone

Well, anyone can revert your POV pushing, distorted Content POV forking, poory interpret, poory written... Kao no Nai Tsuki (talk) 20:23, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

no sock. no POV. Poory, yes so what?--Bukubku (talk) 05:42, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

3rr & vandalism

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Empress Myeongseong, Woo Jang Chun. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution.

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages by deliberately introducing incorrect information, as you did to Empress Myeongseong ,Woo Jang Chun you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Do not falsify the Korean history, besides, the Gojong Silok and Sunjong Silok and any royal court document written during the Japanese occupation are regarded "manipulated unreliable info" by scholars. If you keep continues, administrative intervention might be needed.

No 3rr & vandalism. Don't templete my page. Don't lie--Bukubku (talk) 05:42, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

3RR Block

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for violating the three-revert rule at Korea under Japanese rule. Please be more careful to discuss controversial changes or seek dispute resolution rather than engaging in an edit war. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 16:24, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Email

I'm not going to read any more ranting emails that protest about Wikipedia presenting one point of view over another. If you can't edit constructively, or Wikipedia bothers you, find something else to do. Thanks, Deiz talk 05:35, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Deiz. You keep neutral. You are good Administrator.--Bukubku (talk) 10:25, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Translate all the primary sources that you've used

Since you've inserted many primary sources without any translation to the article or to the talk page of Empress Myeongseong and many other related articles, you're responsible for introducing all contents. So translate all the contents in English. I see that many of your edits are "WP:Original research and WP:SYNTHESIS to make a false point that the main charge for the assassination is not Japanese. You only selectively chose the primary sources to illustrate the incident. You also missed "the restoration of her class and name" after the plot of the cover up was discovered by eye-witnesses and foregin diplomats and the "new" candidate never became the next queen. Besides, the plug-in is only effective for Internet Explorer users, and not every one can understand the old Korean language mixed with old hangul and hanja. I wonder how you found the site and you said you can't read Korean, but anyway you managed to insert it to the article. Therefore, if you want to keep the content, translate the whole content into English. That is quite a logical ask for you. Of course, if the contents were irrelevant or forged or written forcefully which are proven by academic sources, your sources would be gone though. --Caspian blue 07:54, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Read Annals of Joseon Dynasty, same contents, citing from National Institute of Korean History. There is present Korean translation.　

On October 10, King Gojong divested Queen Min of her peerage and busted to plebeian by his royal decree^[1]. On October 11, 1895 King Gojong confered a peerage of Court Lady on Min for the reason of dutiful Dauphin’s petition by his royal decree ^[2]. On October 24, King Gojong ordered selection of his new wives among the age of 15 to 20 virgins^[3]. On December 28, Employee of Japanese Park Seon (朴銑), Korean Army Officer Lee Ju Hoe(李周會) and Korean Palace Guard Officer Yun Seok U (尹錫禹) were sentenced to death for treason in superior court, then they were executed^[4]. On February 11, 1896, King Gojong refuged in the Russian Legation. Then King Gojong said the criminals were Military Minister of Korea Jo Hui Yeon (趙羲淵)^[5], Yu Kil-chun (兪吉濬) , Zhang Park (張博), Gwon Yeong Jin (權濚鎭), Lee Du Hwang (李斗璜), U Beom Seon (禹範善), Lee Beom Rae (李範來), Lee Jin Ho (李軫鎬) and others. And King Gojong ordered that cutting their heads off and bringing their heads to the Russian Legation^[6].

No, not that links. I need your "direct translation" of all primary sources" because you've inserted many original research and false translation to articles a lot. The contents are not that short, so you need to show real translation one by one.--Caspian blue 08:58, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

[1] Official Gazette of Korea, Oct. 10, 1895 (韓国官報開國五百四年八月二十二日號外). Kyujanggak
Annals of Joseon Dynasty 高宗實錄 33卷, 32年(1895 乙未 / 청 광서(光緖) 21年) 8月 22日(庚寅) 1번째기사. National Institute of Korean History

[2] Official Gazette of Korea, Oct. 11, 1895 (韓国官報開國五百四年八月二十二日號外). Kyujanggak
Annals of Joseon Dynasty　高宗 33卷, 32年(1895 乙未 / 청 광서(光緖) 21年) 8月 23日(辛卯) 2번째기사. National Institute of Korean History

[3] Official Gazette of Korea, Oct. 25, 1895 (韓国官報開國五百四年九月八日號外). Kyujanggak
Annals of Joseon Dynasty 高宗實錄 33卷, 32年(1895 乙未 / 청 광서(光緖) 21年) 9月 7日(甲辰) 1번째기사. National Institute of Korean History

[4] "Official Gazette of Korea, N. 14, 1891(1895?) 韓国官報資料請求番号奎17289 GK17289_00I0006　開國五百年(五百四年?)十一月十四日號外 1. 裁判宣告書" (in Korean). Kyujanggak.
"Official Gazette of Korea, N. 14, 1891(1895?) 韓國官報開國五百年(五百四年?)十一月十四日號外" (in Korean). Kyujanggak.

[5] Official Gazette of Korea, Oct. 8, 1895 (韓國官報開國五百四年八月二十日號外). Kyujanggak
Annals of Joseon Dynasty 高宗 33卷, 32年(1895 乙未 / 청 광서(光緖) 21年) 8月 20日(戊子) 4번째기사. National Institute of Korean History
Official Gazette of Korea, Feb. 12, 1896 (韓国官報建陽元年二月十二日號外) 2 3 4. Kyujanggak
Annals of Joseon Dynasty 高宗實錄 34卷, 33年(1896 丙申 / 대한 건양(建陽) 1年) 2月 11日(陽曆) 3번째기사. National Institute of Korean History

[6] Official Gazette of Korea, Feb. 12, 1896 (韓国官報建陽元年二月十二日號外)1. Kyujanggak
Annals of Joseon Dynasty 高宗實錄 34卷, 33年(1896 丙申 / 대한 건양(建陽) 1年) 2月 11日(陽曆) 6번째기사. National Institute of Korean History

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

Revision as of 08:54, 27 December 2008 edit Bukubku (talk \| contribs) 2,327 edits →Translate all the primary sources that you've used ← Previous edit		Revision as of 08:58, 27 December 2008 edit undo Caspian blue (talk \| contribs) Autopatrolled, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers 35,434 edits →Translate all the primary sources that you've used: not the mere links Next edit →
Line 142:		Line 142:

	<references/>		<references/>
			:No, not that links. I need your "direct translation" of all primary sources" because you've inserted many original research and false translation to articles a lot. The contents are not that short, so you need to show real translation one by one.--[[User talk:Caspian blue\|'''Caspian''' blue]] 08:58, 27 December 2008 (UTC)