User talk:Orugaberuteika

August 2018

Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia, as you did to Ryuho Okawa. While objective prose about beliefs, organisations, people, products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not intended to be a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion. Thank you. bonadea contributions talk 16:56, 31 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, Orugaberuteika. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, company, organization or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (see the {{request edit}} template);
disclose your COI when discussing affected articles (see WP:DISCLOSE);
avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Also please note that editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. bonadea contributions talk 17:38, 31 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ok!Thank you I would like to discuss constructive addition of articles Do you think that it may be added

Orugaberuteika, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Orugaberuteika! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like AmaryllisGardener (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:03, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

September 2018

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Ryuho Okawa. bonadea contributions talk 20:45, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your conflict of interest

Before you make any further edits, you must address your conflict of interest - you have already declared it, but as explained above you have to comply with. WP:PAID and make a formal declaration. Also, do not edit the article directly - this is at least the third time you are asked to stop doing that. Finally, please also see this information. Thank you. --bonadea contributions talk 07:10, 4 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You still have not addressed your conflict of interest in the required way. I'm sorry if I was being unclear above: you need to make a formal declaration, as described above, before you make any other edits, and you should not edit the article directly. You have made suggestions on the article's talk page, which is great - that's the way to edit when you have a conflict of interest. But then, for unknown reasons, you have chosen to ignore the repeated requests not to edit the article directly, which is not okay. If you want to attract the attention of other editors, you can use the template Template:Request edit (information about how to use it is given on the linked page), but please note that you must declare your conflict of interest first. --bonadea contributions talk 14:09, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

18-SEP-2018

I have reverted your requests on the Talk:Ryuho Okawa page, as you offered no actionable requests. Additionally, you have not disclosed your conflict of interest, which is needed for you to be able to use the COI edit request system. Please take a moment to review the materials at WP:PANDSCOI and WP:DISCLOSE in particular in order to help with these requirements. Thank you! spintendo 13:22, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

September 2018

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Talk:Ryuho Okawa.

You are now wasting the time of us volunteers by ignoring the repeated and clear requests that you declare your conflict of interest before making any more edit requests. In addition, your recent requests were incomprehensible. If you cannot communicate in comprehensible English, unfortunately you will not be able to edit the English version of Wikipedia. bonadea contributions talk 09:31, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion about you

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Orugaberuteika/Jizugatudo : COI and CIR concerns. --bonadea contributions talk 11:20, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

I'm afraid I've had to block you indefinitely from editing the English Wikipedia, both because you have still not declared your obvious conflict of interest, and because English-speaking editors have so much difficulty in understanding you, as well as in making themselves understood by you. Wikipedia is a collaborative project, and if language difficulties make communicatiuon impossible, collaboration becomes impossible too. I have also blocked User:Jizugatudo, which you have stated is also your account, and your IP 126.33.19.67. A block applies to the person, not merely to one account. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Bishonen | talk 20:55, 23 September 2018 (UTC).[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

Orugaberuteika (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I made a mistake because I am not accustomed to editing wiki, but my editing abilities are improving and arguing properly and discussing constructively. It is not vandalism at all. I will not make such a mistake in the future so can you cancel it?　In fact, I admitted honestly that I had two accounts. If I planned to cheat someone, I lied, but I have not done it like that.I want you to forgive the expulsion forever

Accept reason:

I have unblocked with some hesitation, see below. Bishonen | talk 15:57, 26 September 2018 (UTC).[reply]

Nobody thinks you are a vandal or trying to deceive us, Orugaberuteika. I'd like to unblock you, but we're just having great difficulty in communicating with you. Please answer these questions:

1. What is your relationship with the Happy Science religious organization?

2. What is your relationship with the Happiness Realization Party?

3. Are you a member of the religious organization?

4. Are you a member of the party?

5. Are you an employee of either the organization or the party?

6. What, if any, is your relationship with Ryuho Okawa?

7. Is anybody paying you to edit Wikipedia?

8. Do you now understand that you're not allowed to have more than one account, and are also not allowed to edit logged out?

9. Do you now understand that promotional editing is not allowed?

Please answer all the questions specifically and separately. Bishonen | talk 12:10, 24 September 2018 (UTC).[reply]

Came here following Alex Shih (talk · contribs)'s ping on ANI. I read through the thread and I think I've got a fairly good handle on the situation, although I'm not sure what more there is to do at this point beyond translate the above questions.

Origaberuteikaさんの幸福の科学という宗教団体との関係をご説明いただけますでしょうか。
幸福実現党との関係をご説明いただけますでしょうか。
幸福の科学の一員でしょうか。
幸福実現党の一員でしょうか。
幸福の科学又は幸福実現党に雇用されていますか。
大川隆法氏との関係をご説明いただけますでしょうか。（個人的な関係はありますか。）
ウィキペディアを編集することで収入を得ていらっしゃいますか。
２つ以上のアカウントを使用したり、ログアウトしたまま投稿したりすることが認められないことについて、ご理解いただけましたでしょうか。
広告、ＰＲに類する編集が許されないことについてご理解いただけましたでしょうか。

Please understand (both Bish and Orugaberuteika, and anyone else) that the above is not exactly a "publishable" translation. I translated "edit" two different ways based on how it's used on ja.wiki (編集 vs. 投稿, the latter of which I think more properly describes posts on talk pages, etc.), and my Japanese verb-endings are probably much more "polite" than Bish's original, primarily because I'm not used to dealing with this stuff on ja.wiki. It doesn't actually change the meaning at all, but I need to clarify this since, last time I tried to communicate with someone in Japanese on here, I was repeatedly accused of "mistranslating in order to push an agenda" or something.

Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 21:42, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much, Hijiri. So now we're waiting for Orugaberuteika to answer the questions. Bishonen | talk 10:46, 25 September 2018 (UTC).[reply]

thank you for your generous treatment. The following is the answer. If insufficient, answer as much as you want.

1. What is your relationship with the Happy Science religious organization? There is no relation. But I am familiar with Japanese religion and political groups

2. What is your relationship with the Happiness Realization Party? There is no relation.

3. Are you a member of the religious organization? No.But I have read his book.

4. Are you a member of the party? No

5. Are you an employee of either the organization or the party? No

6. What, if any, is your relationship with Ryuho Okawa? No

7. Is anybody paying you to edit Wikipedia? No.I know that money interactions with the wiki are in violation of the rules.

8. Do you now understand that you're not allowed to have more than one account, and are also not allowed to edit logged out? I apologize for this matter. I'm sorry.

9. Do you now understand that promotional editing is not allowed? I understand.Translating Japanese sites became a propaganda sentence, so be careful not to become advertising in the future. I do not feel like wanting to advertise it

Orugaberuteika | talk 10:46, 26 September 2018 (UTC).[reply]

All right, I believe in your good faith, and have unblocked you, with some hesitation, as you really have to be able to communicate in English in order to edit the English Wikipedia. Please ask if there are things you don't understand, edit collaboratively and listen carefully to the advice of more experienced editors, or I'm afraid you may end up blocked again. Before you edit the article or its talkpage again, please study our guideline on reliable sources. Generally, you must use independent secondary sources, not primary sources. @Hijiri88:, if you will keep an eye on how it goes, it would be a kindness. Bishonen | talk 15:57, 26 September 2018 (UTC).[reply]

@Bishonen: Shit. I read the other comment in which you pinged me and replied there first. I didn't see the above specific request to keep an eye on how it goes. I'd be happy to check any Japanese-language sources O wants to cite or whatever to make sure they say what they claim they do, etc. As long as I know it's not going to get to the point where a number of editors looking for an excuse to assume bad faith on my part (I could email you the names of several active ones who are probably gunning for me to be blocked at the moment, but none of them are ANI regulars so it would be pretty easy to discredit them) manage to show up should this come to ANI, and I wind up holding the metaphorical bag, I don't mind helping. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 22:01, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much, I appreciate your cooperation and generosity. Orugaberuteika | talk 22:36, 28 September 2018 (UTC).[reply]

October 2018

Please stop your disruptive editing.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Ryuho Okawa, you may be blocked from editing. bonadea contributions talk 06:51, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The specific reason for this warning is that you posted an edit request about 10 days ago to add some text to Ryuho Okawa about the organisation he founded; you have made this request before and it has been declined based on the fact that the info a) is not well-sourced and b) doesn't belong in this article anyway but in the article about the organisation (where it is mentioned with a marginally better source and appropriately hedged). This request was declined on Oct 7 without further discussion since there had been no new arguments forthcoming, but today you added the text to the article anyway claiming there had been "no opposition". You also used a reference that had been brought up on the talk page before and shown not to meet WP:RS. I know you have said that you do not have any connection with Okawa or his organisations, but your actions are indistinguishable from COI editing, and disruptive. --bonadea contributions talk 11:09, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Language issue

Your questions about the articles on Happy Science and its founder have been answered several times. You have asked the same questions and made the same statements repeatedly, for a month now. I have closed the discussion thread at Talk:Ryuho Okawa. You agreed above that you would not promote Happy Science or Okawa, but your repeated requests to have well-sourced criticism removed are promotional, and you have not shown any interest in any other area of Wikipedia. There seems to be a language issue. It often looks like you do not understand what people write in English, and sometimes your English is impossible to understand, such as in this post. Writing perfect English is not a requirement at English Wikipedia, but at the same time communication has to be possible. Have you considered contributing to the Japanese Wikipedia? Regards --bonadea contributions talk 07:31, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked again

Orugaberuteika seemed to be arguing in a a reasonable way, and in fairly good English, for being unblocked above, and so, with some hesitation (as I said at the time) I did unblock him. I don't know if perhaps he was getting help in expressing himself when requesting unblock; in any case, his English has now relapsed into being again very difficult to understand, and, from reading the dialogue on Talk:Happy Science, he is insisting on answers to questions that have already been answered several times. Perhaps he doesn't understand what people tell him. Compare both Bonadea's posts above. So, I don't know whether the problem is linguistic, or a too great keenness to promote Happy Science; but it doesn't really matter which. Orugaberuteika, you got a second chance and blew it. I'm sorry, but you have again been blocked indefinitely, as a net negative to Wikipedia. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Bishonen | talk 15:24, 20 November 2018 (UTC).[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Orugaberuteika (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I'm sorry. I did not know that my English was hard to understand. I am sorry. I am regretting my actions. Your reactions are also natural if you think so. I will improve the following points afterwards. 1) My friend has an English specialist. Ask him to check that English is correct before posting. 2) Keep sentences as short as possible and use plain expressions I thought that long sentences were easier to understand. Sorry. 3) Read your English more carefully than ever. Talk to an English specialist to read. I apologize again for having written insufficient English. Sorry.

Decline reason:

Duplicate request. 331dot (talk) 13:35, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

unblock please

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Orugaberuteika (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I'm sorry. I did not know that my English was hard to understand. I am sorry. I am regretting my actions. Your reactions are also natural if you think so. I will improve the following points afterwards. 1) My friend has an English specialist. Ask him to check that English is correct before posting. 2) Keep sentences as short as possible and use plain expressions I thought that long sentences were easier to understand. Sorry. 3) Read your English more carefully than ever. Talk to an English specialist to read. I apologize again for having written insufficient English. Sorry.

Decline reason:

I think that you should improve your English skills before asking to be unblocked. You are not able to understand what is going on here. In the meantime, you may edit the Japanese Wikipedia. I am declining your request. 331dot (talk) 13:41, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Orugaberuteika (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I am very reflective. I am sorry using my poor English. That is not because my English skill is low. I know what they were saying. However, there was a dare use of broken English. I regret it very much. I will not do such a thing twice. Will you give me a chance again? I am accustomed to WIKI and English. Forgive me.

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you
1. understand what you have been blocked for,
2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. -- Scott (talk) 04:56, 9 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.