User talk:Janggeom

I welcome polite and constructive messages consistent with Wikipedia's behavioural policies and guidelines. Please refer to the links in the box below if you need further information. Thank you. — Janggeom

Dead links

Hi, I'm relatively new to editing. I was wondering why your style of noting dead links or updating them was different from what I've seen elsewhere - for example on Rhee_Taekwon-Do. Should we not just replace dead links with appropriate 'live' ones, and delete the 'dead link' template? This would help to get the list of articles with dead links down :) Any clarification appreciated! Synae (talk) 01:15, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Hello Synae, it is not always possible to find a new or updated link; often, a website (or part of a website) goes down and is simply not replaced by the author. Preserving the previous link shows where the original information came from, and there is the possibility that the website might republish the information later, so keeping the link helps maximise the likelihood of restoring the information at some point in the future. Janggeom (talk) 13:53, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Hector Waller

Hi, I don't think we've been introduced, as it were, but I do a lot of work on Australian military biography. Most of that is Air Force stuff, but I've done some on Navy people as well and Waller was one I'd started researching when it was still a stub. I see you've improved it a good deal since then but I felt it could be expanded to GA, MilHist A-Class, and perhaps even FA standard, so I've tried to do that just now. I wasn't aiming for a wholesale rewrite of what was there because I don't believe in reinventing the wheel, however I've naturally had to modify some of the existing wording and have also replaced a couple of references with ones I felt were more obviously 'reliable', as well as finding some brand new sources. I'm planning to nom for GA and A-Class shortly -- if you'd like to join me on those, feel free, as I was building on groundwork that you laid... ;-) Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 05:49, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Hello Ian Rose, thanks for your note. I appreciate you letting me know about the progress on the Hector Waller article, and can see that you have expanded and improved it significantly. Within the limitations of available time and knowledge, I would certainly be interested in helping the article be promoted. Military history is not one of my areas of expertise, but I have helped with a few articles (e.g., Daniel J. Callaghan with Kumioko, William M. Callaghan, Caleb Shang with L42A1, Billy Sing). I will aim to help with the Waller article as best I can. Thanks again for your note. Janggeom (talk) 11:40, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi mate, tks for that and for going over the expanded article. Re. formatting, there are a few things I think best left as is simply because I've used that style in many FAs and they've been accepted, for instance a common or shortened form of the first name in parentheses rather than quotes (Goldrick does that too), name in infobox in the same format as the name in bold in the first sentence, no need for year as well as title in citations -- see Frank Bladin as an example. I also don't think we need "later to become known as 'Hec'" because Hec is a common shortened form of Hector (if you feel strongly we could just say "The boy was named...", perhaps). The change to Citations and Bibliography under References is certainly accepted at FAC but the Notes and References form I use is the style you see in many GA/A/FA-Class military bios (not simply mine) and would be nice to keep for consistency. Any probs with those? Like to resolve quickly as I've nominated for GA and we should have it stable for that review... ;-) Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 13:15, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

I'd only gone through part of the article (short on time) before you replied, but have now finished reading through (and editing a bit more). I've reverted some of my changes so that the article is more consistent with your writing style or the conventions you've noted above. To address the inclusion of publication year in citations: every academic referencing system I've worked with either includes a publication year or a reference number so that it's immediately clear which source is being referred to. In this article, the Stevens references have very similar titles, so the publication year helps the reader to identify the precise reference very quickly (rather than having to read to the end of the article title in each citation). To address the References/Citations/Bibliography formatting: I prefer this format because it leaves scope for adding footnotes (e.g., see Billy Sing), which I suspect will become the case if the article develops further—but having said that, I do acknowledge there are no footnotes currently. I feel there is a case for the conventions I've used in the article on those two points, but wouldn't have any objections if you feel strongly on one or both of them. Any thoughts? Janggeom (talk) 16:30, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

No that's okay, we can leave the citation year and the Citations/Bibliography style, the other things were more important to me. Tks/cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 22:38, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your note. I'd noticed the "age of thirteen" phrase and edited it (reverted to spelling it out rather than using digits) but due to link problems my edits weren't being saved; must have missed that one when re-editing. I think the article looks good. Janggeom (talk) 05:25, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Greetings

Thank you - in a minor way this time but its good to be back.Peter Rehse (talk) 11:23, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Moni_Aizik for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Moni_Aizik is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Moni_Aizik_(3rd_nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. jmcw (talk) 08:03, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your note, but I don't believe AfD is the means to "establish community consensus" unless someone is actually nominating the article for deletion (which it seems you are not). A discussion on the WPMA talk page would seem the appropriate way. There is also a time limit on AfD, which would not be the case with a regular discussion. Just a few thoughts. Janggeom (talk) 12:11, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

I asked an admin for advice on how to handle the POI edit warring of late: they recommended taking it to AFD User_talk:Gwen_Gale#Article Moni_Aizik, so I have. jmcw (talk) 13:45, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for that note. Janggeom (talk) 14:30, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Notability question

I came across some newly created articles on Japanese martial artists and I was wondering if you could shine any light on their notability. They seem to be high ranking, but that's not sufficient to show notability. The artists are Motokatsu Inoue, Seiko Fujita, Manzo Iwata, and Fujitani Masatoshi. I'm afraid I don't have a good feel for the notability of traditional Japanese martial artists.

I also posted a question about world records and notability on the martial arts project's talk page. Papaursa (talk) 18:38, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

I am no expert on Japanese martial arts, but looking at those articles: (1) Inoue and Fujita both lay claim to being martial arts authors, which might indicate notability; (2) Iwata might be notable through martial arts leadership; and (3) Masatoshi does not seem particularly notable from the article as it stands. I tend to look at what the subject has done or achieved for his/her martial art as a quick indicator of notability, rather than qualifications. Going by the contents of the articles as they are now, my opinion is that Iwata probably comes closest to being notable in the Wikipedia sense. Janggeom (talk) 07:12, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Suggestions for Strozzi-Heckler article

Hi Janggeom - You recently assessed the Richard Strozzi-Heckler article as start-class. This is my first article and I've been using it to learn how to write for Wikipedia. I'm very interested in any suggestions you might have for improving it. Thanks!SympatheticResonance (talk) 05:16, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Hello SympatheticResonance, you will probably find the WPMA article quality scale useful. The main ways to improve an article are usually to make the content more substantial ('fleshing out' the article) with relevant information and reliable sources, improving the quality of the text (e.g., making it succinct and objective), adding suitable and relevant images, and making all style/formatting consistent (both internally, e.g., consistent American or British spelling, and following Wikipedia style). Looking through the Richard Strozzi-Heckler article just now, a few minor changes that could be made are: (1) there should be no spaces between a closing word within a phrase (or period) and a footnote reference marker immediately after it; (2) names of martial arts should be in lowercase in the body of the article; and (3) reference 8 should have authorship, date of publication, and other details (rather than being a bare URL). Janggeom (talk) 07:12, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, I appreciate the feedback.SympatheticResonance (talk) 06:38, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Hope it helps, and all the best for your time on Wikipedia. Janggeom (talk) 13:51, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Germans

Hi. I found an error in the article (see photo). Copernicus was not a German, he was from Poland. --Top811 my talk —Preceding undated comment added 13:44, 12 May 2012 (UTC).

Taekwondo.

I've known Bill Wallace to teach Taekwondo in his seminars. Wikipedia doesn't cite the information because it wasn't added or it was ignored.

I guess Bruce Lee shouldn't be added, but keep in mind, he learned Taekwondo from Jhoon Rhee. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Snugglbunny (talk • contribs) 08:54, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Hello Snugglbunny, thank you for your note. Feel welcome to add references and material (whether to Taekwondo or Bill Wallace (martial artist), or both) if Wallace does have a significant background in taekwondo. As my edit description said, I'm not aware of him having a significant taekwondo background. Janggeom (talk) 13:18, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

WP Martial Arts in the Signpost

The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Martial Arts for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions, so be sure to sign your answers. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. -Mabeenot (talk) 01:11, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Choi Hong Hi

• Hello! Don't you think it would be useful for readers if we note that his birthplace is located in Hamgyong-Pukto Province and provide official names of the county and province used by the Japanese in times of colonial rule? Elmor (talk) 13:22, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Hello Elmor, thank you for your note. My understanding is that infoboxes are for summary information and details should go into the main text and (where appropriate) footnotes. A few contributors in the past have changed the infobox to reflect Japanese rule at the time of the subject's birth, but since the subject was ethnically Korean, is best known for a Korean martial art, and the geographical area in which he was born/died is known as Korea generally, the Japanese names are probably better placed in the main text. If there is a Wikipedia policy on infobox details reflecting the political status at the relevant historical time, please do point me to it. (I have not looked yet, and genuinely do not know if there is such a policy, but if there is then I would be interested to know about it.) I cannot vouch for the Japanese names myself, otherwise I would have just transferred the information to the main text. Janggeom (talk) 15:17, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

AFAIK, there is no policy, but my experience tells me that it is common to mention both historical and current names of birthplace in an infobox. For example, Manfred von Richthofen was born in Breslau, which is now called Wrocław, and, as you can see, both names are present in the infobox. In case of colonial Korea as you probably know, contemporary sources used to call Korean cities, towns etc. according to the Japanese reading of the characters (thus Pusan became Fuzan, Pyongyang became Heijo etc.). See this map, for example. Nevertheless, I do not insist of putting the Japanese name in the infobox, if you agree to put it to the main text. However, I think it would still be necessary to clarify that Choi was born in Hamgyong-Pukto and that Korea was not independent in 1912. Elmor (talk) 08:37, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

I understand your example, but in that case what we have is a German pilot, so it makes sense to note the historical place name to avoid confusion for the reader. Choi, on the other hand, has never identified as Japanese (quite the contrary, of course), as far as I am aware. From my point of view, the text is clear enough about Japanese rule at the time: "Choi was born on 9 November 1918 in Hwa Dae, Myŏngch'ŏn county, in what is now North Korea, which was then under Japanese rule." I agree, though, that it could be useful and of interest to have the Japanese place names in the main text. Thanks. Janggeom (talk) 12:30, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

I agree, and I think that the province should be mentioned as well. One more question - currently Myŏngch'ŏn and Hwadae are separate counties. Was Hwadae a part of Myŏngch'ŏn in 1912? Elmor (talk) 16:00, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

I do not know. Incidentally, I assume you mean 1918 rather than 1912; Choi was born in 1918. Janggeom (talk) 05:31, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I'm sorry. Elmor (talk) 16:37, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Taegeuk

Hello.In WTF the patterns began with TAEGEUK not with Poomsae... The first 8 patterns are called Taegeuk Il Jang(The first),Taegeuk Ee jang(The second) etc etc etc. After you complete the Taegeuk patterns you continue with 9 more patterns that called Poomsae! I dont understand why you delete it...

Please see Taeguk (Taekwondo). The list that you (Kardinalios) were adding "Taegeuk" to is a list of words that mean "pattern." Taegeuk refers to a particular set of patterns; the word "Taegeuk" itself does not mean "pattern," so it does not belong in that list. Incidentally, I have posted a welcome message on your talk page with some information that I hope will be of help. Janggeom (talk) 17:53, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Main Page appearance: Hector Waller

This is a note to let the main editors of Hector Waller know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on January 19, 2014. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask Bencherlite (talk · contribs). You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/January 19, 2014. If it needs tweaking, or if it needs rewording to match improvements to the article between now and its main page appearance, please edit it, following the instructions at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. The blurb as it stands now is below:

Hector Waller (1900–42) was a senior officer in the Royal Australian Navy who served in both world wars. After studying at the Royal Australian Naval College, he served with the Royal Navy in the closing stages of World War I. Between the wars, he was posted as signals officer to various British and Australian warships. He gained his first seagoing command in 1937, as captain of HMS Brazen. In September 1939, he took charge of HMAS Stuart and four other obsolete destroyers that together became known as the "Scrap Iron Flotilla". In 1940, these and other ships formed the 10th Destroyer Flotilla, supporting Allied troops in North Africa. Waller was awarded the Distinguished Service Order and Bar, and twice mentioned in despatches, for his achievements. In October 1941, he transferred to the South West Pacific as captain of the light cruiser HMAS Perth, and went down with his ship against heavy odds during the Battle of Sunda Strait in early 1942. He received a third mention in despatches posthumously, and in 2011 came under formal consideration for the award of the Victoria Cross for his performance as Perth's captain. The submarine HMAS Waller is named in his honour. (Full article...)

UcuchaBot (talk) 23:01, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Taekwondo Article - Sun Hwan Chung

Hello. I have written an article for creation for Sun Hwan Chung. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Sun_Hwan_Chung I have been working with editors in other fields and they have directed me to you. They needed evidence that Chung was a 9th dan Kukkiwon. The Kukkiwon website no longer publishes lists, but they have an interactive "Dan / Poom Search" function that confirms that Chung is a 9th Dan (in fact, in the old Kukkiwon web format, it showed him as among the top five most senior WTF black belts in the world today). They also challenged photos of Chung in early black belt tests in Detroit in 1970 with Chuck Norris and other Tang Soo Do legends. There are articles out there on Chung, with tons of photographs, but some are in blog form. How do you reference or source those photographs? Also have issues with multiple phonetic misspellings of his name over the years in secondary articles (i.e. Sung or Song instead of Sun, or Hwang instead of Hwan, or Chong instead of Chung). The man actually ran Moo Do Kwan founder Hwang Kee's headquarters dojang at the Seoul train station for several years. He developed one of the essential basic forms for Tang Soo Do (Kicho Hyeong Sa Bu - poomsae #4). He is founder of his own form of martial arts and published several books on it. He presented Chuck Norris with his 9th dan belt in Tang Soo Do. It is sad that because Chung has trouble with speaking perfect English and he shies away from self-promotion and has relatively few secondary articles written about him. Still, he has earned several awards and honors. His contributions on so many levels is very significant to taekwondo. Any thoughts or assistance with be great. Thanks! Tom 2601:5:1C00:29A:D53F:EF48:CF9F:453 (talk) 14:26, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Hello Tom, thank you for your note. I have limited time available currently. If you would like prompt advice, it is probably better for you to post a request at WPMA. If you are not in a hurry and are happy to post a link (or links) to any relevant earlier discussions on Wikipedia, I will take a look as soon as I can (probably in the next week or two). Janggeom (talk) 12:03, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

I wanted to thank you for the helpful links you posted for me a couple years ago. I see that the article I had issues with has been significantly altered. I appreciate the changes, as the article is much more accurate now. The dates that are expressed are still largely inaccurate but a year or two here or there is of no real concern.

Cheers!

Rnjbilliards (talk) 08:03, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for your kind note. Janggeom (talk) 12:39, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Who are you

Who are you to take GM Kim, Yun-sik section off? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 179.153.22.217 (talk) 07:05, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

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) 17:33, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Janggeom. 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 2018 election voter message

Hello, Janggeom. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of Seiichi Akamine for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Seiichi Akamine, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Seiichi Akamine until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:03, 11 June 2021 (UTC)