User talk:Ansei/Archive 1

This is a Wikipedia user page.

This is not an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user to whom this page belongs may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia itself. The original page is located at

This page has been removed from search engines' indexes.

Daruma in a public place

Like a chicken talking to a duck

Talking past each other is like a chicken talking to a duck (鸡同鸭讲 or 雞同鴨講). --Ansei (talk) 20:36, 1 October 2012 (UTC)


Can you please help me understand why you are removing data from date pages? For instance Emperor Fushimi was removed from page 1317. The page 1317 is there to help people know what happened during that year. Having a link to this Emperor is a good thing.

On the other hand, unlinking the dates in articles like Emperor Fushimi is a good thing. Dates should only be linked if they are helpful in better understanding the article. Thanks, --Tbennert (talk) 01:09, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for your question. Please share your opinion at User talk:Macdonald-ross#Dates. My small changes were not made without discussing it first, but I see now that more discussion is necessary.

It is helpful that you select Emperor Fushimi as an sample subject. A closer look at the article about this emperor may help you begin to appreciate the thinking which informed my edits. For example, please notice that the article about Emperor Fushimi cites Jinnō Shōtōki, which explains that Jitō, Yōzei, Go-Toba, and Fushimi did not have senso and sokui in the same year . Compare, for example, Imperial Household Agency (Kunaichō) website which features the most recent Ceremony of Accession (Sokui-no-Rei); retrieved 2012-10-5.<p>In pre-Meiji history, the birth dates of those who later became Emperors -- or the birth dates of the eight women who became Empresses -- were not generally considered significant in the same way as the birth of Queen Victoria. In terms of world history or Japanese history, these biographical dates are not consequential in the same way as events like the appearances of American warships in Tokyo bay in 1853 and 1854.<p>The date of death of an Emperor will be sometimes, but not always helpful in the context of these list articles. Did you know, for example, that in the pre-Meiji period, monarchs conventionally abdicated many years before their deaths? In retirement, these former-emperors sometimes retired to a Buddhist temple where they were called "cloistered emperors". In general, many -- but not all -- continued to exercise the powers of the monarch while a puppet-successor performed ceremonial functions. In other words, the Imperial succession practices before the late 19th-century were complicated; and they were very different than, for example, succession among European monarchs. This makes automatic, robot-like decision-making more difficult problematic.<p>There are biographical dates which are important in world history and in Japanese history; and I want to join you in adding them in the list articles you have created.<p>The few dates that I have removed are arguably not among the ones which help improve the usefulness of these lists. --Ansei (talk) 03:47, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

That makes sense. I certainly trust your knowledge of Japan and appreciate the additional information. Thanks for the explanation :) --Tbennert (talk) 04:57, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
Yes, there are important death dates -- at 1185, I added inline cite support for the Battle of Dan-no-ura here and the death of Emperor Antoku here. I see that both the battle and the death of the emperor are already listed as red links. In the next week, perhaps you may notice when I create stubs for this battle and the emperor who died in it. --Ansei (talk) 13:03, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Solving disputes

Hello Ansei, thanks for your addition to our Solving disputes page. The addition makes a lot of sense; as to the other change to my talk page (that you removed again), I did take a look, but I do not really know what you were trying to say. So if it is important, please do so again (if you fear that it's not for everyone to read, you can also send me an email about it).--Eptalon (talk) 17:10, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Infobox format problem

Greetings I saw you created a Medal of Honor recipient article and then deleted the infobox due to a problem with formatting. What was the problem? It seemed like it was displaying ok? Kumioko (talk) 14:45, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

{{Infobox military person |name=Jack Williams |birth_date= {{birth date|1924|10|18}} |death_date= {{death date and age|1945|3|3|1924|10|18}} |birth_place=[[Harrison, Arkansas]] |death_place=[[Iwo Jima]] |placeofburial= [[Springfield National Cemetery]], [[Springfield, Missouri]] |placeofburial_label= Place of burial |image=[[File:Jack Williams, MOH.jpg|200px|Pharmacist's Mate Third Class Jack Williams]]  [[File:Moh right.gif|90px|alt=A light blue neck ribbon with a gold star shaped medallion hanging from it. The ribbon is similar in shape to a bowtie with 13 white stars in the center of the ribbon.]] |caption=Pharmacist's Mate Third Class Jack Williams |nickname= |allegiance={{flag|United States of America}} |branch=[[File:United States Department of the Navy Seal.svg|25px]] [[United States Navy]] |serviceyears=1943-1945 |rank=[[Pharmacist's Mate]] [[Petty Officer Third Class|Third Class]] |commands= |unit=[[3rd Battalion 28th Marines|3rd Battalion]], [[28th Marine Regiment (United States)|28th Marine Regiment]] |battles=[[World War II]]<br/>*[[Battle of Iwo Jima]] |awards=[[Medal of Honor]] |relations= |laterwork= }}

Copying the infobox from en:Jack Williams (Medal of Honor) created an odd category -- see Category:Infobox military person image param needs updating at the bottom of this page. I didn't know how to solve the problem. Perhaps you may want to figure it out? Please feel free to replicate the the infobox from the Andrews article. That would have been my next step. --Ansei (talk) 15:06, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
Ok thanks, i'll get that fixed. Kumioko (talk) 14:51, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
All fixed now. Kumioko (talk) 14:56, 23 November 2012 (UTC)


110px The Article Creation Barnstar
In recognition of your near-perfect new pages. I never have to fix anything on your articles when patrolling new pages. Please keep up the good work. Osiris (talk) 03:22, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
Thank you. With regret, I still seem to have trouble with an odd stumbling block -- remembering to use the phrase "Other websites" instead of "External links". For example, I see that I did it again here. Your encouragement may help me to do better. --Ansei (talk) 16:32, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
And I see that Kumioko's bot finds the small mistakes which have been overlooked. --Ansei (talk) 18:06, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

Quick deletion of Category:George Cross holder

The page you wrote, Category:George Cross holder, has been selected for quick deletion. If you think this page should be kept, please add {{wait}} below the line {{QD}} and say why on the talk page. If the page is already gone, but you think this was an error, you can ask for it to be undeleted. You can find more information about the reason here. Auntof6 (talk) 02:04, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
@ Auntof6 -- Aha, yes. I see. A narrowed focus on the Simple English Wiktionary definition of "holder" caused me to overlook the important differences between singular and plural. Of course, yes, it it is easy to understand that a category is always plural --Ansei (talk) 17:22, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Quick deletion of Category:George Cross

The page you wrote, Category:George Cross, has been selected for quick deletion. If you think this page should be kept, please add {{wait}} below the line {{QD}} and say why on the talk page. If the page is already gone, but you think this was an error, you can ask for it to be undeleted. You can find more information about the reason here. Auntof6 (talk) 02:05, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
@ Auntof6 -- no, this is not easy to understand.<p>I guess that I need to have a better grasp of this. I don't quite understand how this array of related subjects is categorized. I'm alert to the ways this may help me understand how to simplify articles which are not yet written. Is this not obvious? Did I need to make my forward-looking point-of-view explicit?
I do not see how decision-making about Category:George Cross is mirrored in the way similar subjects are categorized, including
In these subjects, the categories of people are subcategories of something, yes?
In contrast, the relationship between George Cross and the people in Category:George Cross holders is a little different. I see that this pattern is mirrored elsewhere, including
Perhaps all of these categories do not need to be parsed in the same way? Perhaps the seeming inconsistency is a non-issue? a non-problem? --Ansei (talk) 19:53, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Recent edits to Daniel Inouye

Greetings, I noticed you made some edits to Daniel Inouye. He was actually presented his medal by the president with his family present. He just died last week. Kumioko (talk) 18:34, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Yes, the cut-and-paste diff here was corrected here. In the context of Nisei in Category:United States Army Medal of Honor recipients, please take a closer look at the text template language of the soldier section:
  • 14 articles need to explain "... his surviving family was presented with the Medal of Honor ..." -- for example Kazuo Otani
  • 7 articles need to explain "... his surviving family he was presented with the Medal of Honor ..." -- for example, Daniel Inouye
My current plan is to develop the set of Nisei Medal of Honor articles to a basic "start" status; and then I will step away from the subject for a while. At some point in the Spring, I may re-visit the citation sections. I'm a little uneasy about how to go about summarizing the official citation language. --Ansei (talk) 19:09, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
I brought over the List of Asian American Medal of Honor recipients article list earlier today. I already simplified somethings and pruned some but there is more to do. As far as the citation simplification its here in short form for each one. You could use that or something in between that and the full citation I would think. Kumioko (talk) 19:39, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
Yes, good, thank you. --Ansei (talk) 22:49, 28 December 2012 (UTC)