User talk:LilAhok

Please avoid misleading edit summaries

The rationale given for your blanket deletion of well-sourced content here is misrepresenting both the authorship of that content and the state of discussion on the article's talk page. Please see also WP:NPOV. Regards, HaeB (talk) 14:10, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@LilAHok, It turns out you didn't quite undo Fobtown's edit. Looking at history logs, it was HaeB himself who originally wrote that final edit in, and so you had undid his edit.[1] And that is why he knows that Fobtown didn't write it originally because he done that Edit. Prior to him, the original words used to be Claims of Sri Lanka being part of a Chinese debt trap have been made as China was the major source of loans for many megaprojects whose viability have been questioned[46][47] but the existence of a debt-trap have been disputed. [48][49]. Which is far more neutral. Later on, Haeb added the extra words, causing many to argue that "Sri Lanka's economic relations with China are the main driver behind the crisis".[41][42] as if it was the scholarly consensus. Except what is many and what are their credentials? It's silly when actual professional scholars strongly refuted such accusations that China is the main driver of the crisis.[2] Just like Fobtown, Haeb appears to also edit to contradict the academics' assertions that China is not the largest reason behind the crisis. [3] Simpleshooter99 (talk) 03:08, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed 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 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:55, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

December 2022

Thank you for your contributions. It seems that you may have added public domain content to one or more Wikipedia articles, such as Japanese war crimes. You are welcome to import appropriate public domain content to articles, but in order to meet the Wikipedia guideline on plagiarism, such content must be fully attributed. This requires not only acknowledging the source, but acknowledging that the source is copied. There are several methods to do this described at Wikipedia:Plagiarism#Public-domain sources, including the usage of an attribution template. Please make sure that any public domain content you have already imported is fully attributed. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 16:41, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

November 2023

Your edit to Samurai has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. — Diannaa (talk) 13:20, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed 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 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:53, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your Opinion Needed

Hello there, this is Yaujj13. I don't know you remember but we had a brief encounter over NmW... user name discussion over his edit.

I heard that you are editing on Japanese war crimes so I was wondering on your opinion on my edits, whether you agree or disagree with my edits

Here let me provide the edits (my edits were reverted by the user in question):

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Moro_people&diff=1187106286&oldid=1186717380

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Japanese_migration_to_Indonesia&diff=prev&oldid=1187104411

I also have to inform you about NmW user, I believe he is a pro Japan vandal who remove edits that humiliate Japan. Here is one of his edit example before reverted by another user: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Anti-Catholicism&diff=prev&oldid=1171656739

He remove Japan defeats along the fact they prosecute their own people (killing their own troops with biological weapons and prostituting their own women) because he believe it humiliates Japan, not because he doesn't think that Japan is victimless. More what he think humiliation include Moro defeat and cannibalize the Japanese.

All my edits is merely transcribing the source material as per the links. My liver edit shows that many different people committed liver cannibalism.

Yaujj13 (talk) 17:48, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 14

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Hokkaido, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Native American.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:10, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to know better context on the edit you made against my own on Japans war crimes

I intended to ad a second citation on the bare minimum of how many people were killed by the Japanese empire during and before world war 2. You seem to want to include only one estimate however I respectfully insist that at least a varied estimate ranging from 10 million to 30 million be included. Obviously RJ Rummels estimate is way too low, but for the sake of Wikipedia standards. The link I included before yours seems to be said to be broken down however there is speculation I have that includes not only those killed via state policy via massacres, state sanctioned famine, diseases spread from field testing of bio weapons, vs non preventable famine and non intentional diseases(not from bio weapons units). Considering that Japan launched these invasions I can empathize somewhat on your decision to take into account the number dead from non state causes, but there is a discussion and debate over that. The citation I added that you removed was from a forum interview on Sterling Seagrave on his book Gold Warriors(second citation below). In the interview he puts Japans causality count at 10-14 million. I want to state that measuring Japans body

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Japanese_war_crimes#Fatalities

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=9196

While one could make the argument that no direct citations are used, Seagrave is a well respected historian and he isn't the only historian with an estimate on Japans body count. The one and only estimate included is by Bryan Mark Rigg whom aside from being somewhat controversial I somehow are uncertain on what his book, Japan's Holocaust: History of Imperial Japan's Mass Murder and Rape During World War II actually says contextwise. Can you upload a few pictures of what his book says on the tally, both here and on the discussion page on Japan war crimes. It's worth mentioning that in China's case 15 to 22 million died from all causes with the later estimate common among Chinese historican with even Mark Felton mentioning this in his book, however it includes not just those killed in state policy, but also the total dead from famine whether preventable or otherwise, and combat deaths with 5 to 10 million being from famine and disease. The casualties on Japans body count from state policy generally run from 10-20 million which is provided by M.D.R Foot with the later of the estimate being that of Werner Gruhl, Herbert Flix, and John Dower. I also watched a live stream from Richard B. Frank whom, in the interview cited his book, Tower of Skulls that Japans body count is from 18 or 19 million to 25 million(citation 5 below). May we discuss this

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bryan_Mark_Rigg#Criticism

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_casualties#Japanese_war_crimes

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_casualties#Total_deaths_by_country

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_war_crimes#cite_note-80

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DrTS3lsjLWA

--undeadmerc3 — Preceding undated comment added 19:20, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

i think it would be more productive if you posted your arguments on the article's talk page. the info was removed because it did not comply with wikipedia's guidelines. WP:RSSELF - generally, self-published information is considered unreliable, but "Self-published expert sources may be considered reliable when produced by an established expert on the subject matter, whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable, independent publications." you can take your case to the article's talk page where a consensus could be built around the credbility of your source. LilAhok (talk) 21:03, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's been nearly two days since I posted on the talk page. I'm not getting any replies. Can we please discuss this. Do you have the details on Bryan Mark Rigg's book. I would like to include multiple estimates by all means. Undeadmerc3 (talk) 11:11, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm really considering contacting once of the Wikipedia admins about this. I'm not getting any reply on the talk page. In addition to that Bryan Rigg's book which you cite hasn't had a very good reception on Goodreads. 77 reviews with a 2.18 score. This isn't being objective by showing only one estimate. While a few negative reviews are questioning the atrocities many are critiquing many citations and sources that are used. Please give an update.

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/194574831-japan-s-holocaust Undeadmerc3 (talk) 16:51, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

August 2024

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Pizzigs (talk) 07:30, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unsigned talk page comments

Please be sure to sign talk page messages, even template-based ones like this 3RR notice or this ANEW notice. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when, and also so that [[archiving works properly. Thank you. - Aoidh (talk) 19:51, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 12

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Tomokazu Harimoto, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Chinese.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 20:17, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hirohito's wartime responsibility

If you read MOS:WEASEL further, making a broad statement like "experts declare" is likewise a weasel word and should likewise be avoided. Seeing as how the section goes on to enumerate which historians are of the opinion that Hirohito is culpable for Japanese war crimes, any harm caused by a statement such as "a significant number of historians" is mitigated if not outright undone. The same cannot be said for using the phrase "Historians have stated" which is a far more misleading statement because it implies that the historians referenced in section are representative of the entire historian community on the subject which is not true. Emiya1980 (talk) 22:16, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

take this to talk. i've already stated that the article, header and several sentences have made it clear that his role in the war is under debate. LilAhok (talk) 01:18, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]