User talk:General Tojo
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Welcome!
Hello, General Tojo, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- How to edit a page
- Help pages
- Tutorial
- How to write a great article
- Manual of Style
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! -- GraemeL (talk) 13:15, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
I noticed that you had been doing a lot of good work on Parkinson's disease and that nobody had welcomed you. Drop me a note on my talk page if you need any help. --GraemeL (talk) 13:15, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for the offere and welcome --General Tojo 13:17, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
Contents |
Advice
Please try and work with the other users rather than throwing around 3RR accuasations. Jfdwolff is a very experienced Wikipedia administrator and I'm sure he's doing his best to reduce the conflict and produce the best (referenced) article possible. --GraemeL (talk) 18:33, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
He's just breached the 3RR rule. So are you going to enforce the Wikipedia regulations ? How is it not a breach of the 3RR as he has reverted three times in 24 hours ? --General Tojo 18:34, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
- "The policy states that an editor must not perform more than three reversions, in whole or in part, on a single Wikipedia article within a 24 hour period (emphasis mine)." RadioKirk (u|t|c) 18:41, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
- The policy doesn't mean three edits to an article. It means reverting to the same version of the text three times. I haven't actually looked to see if that is what happened, I just wanted to point out that you would be better trying to work with an experienced admin to produce the best possible article. --GraemeL (talk) 18:49, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
Paul Wicks wrote that he intended changes that would have decimated the article, removing most of it. That experienced administrators statements made it plain that he thought it was a good idea, and has since appeared to think that different rules and standards apply to different people. If he reverts he is being constructive. If I revert I am blocking and will cease being a user. If I change three times I am in breach of the 3RR. If he changes three times what is described as reverting is not reverting. If I criticise I am making a personal attack. If he makes a personal attack he is merely reminding me of the rules. I thought all were equal on Wikipedia. I now see that they aren't. --General Tojo 19:13, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
Block
You have been blocked for 24 hours. This is a culmination of your behaviour over the last two days with regards to Parkinson's disease.
Contrary to your claims, all Paul Wicks actually did was move material to subpages to make the article flow better. In contrast, you plainly removed material (several times) because you disagreed with it without any attempt of discussion on the talk page.
You have managed to level personal attacks against Paul, questioning his credentials. In response to my warnings you did random reverts on articles I'd edited recently. Now you remove material piecemeal from the PD article to escape the WP:3RR, a good example of gaming the system.
While my decision to block you is not based on off-site behaviour, I understand you were banned from Braintalk after similar poor behaviour. If you continue the same way you risk being blocked from Wikipedia for progressively longer periods of time. JFW | T@lk 23:28, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
- You yourself contravened the 3RR. It was claimed that you had not done this as you had made major amendedments rather than completely reverted. So I did the same. Check the above discussion. sS you object to it, I now know that there are two sets of rules, one for and another for others. I was not banned from BrainTalk for similar bad behaviour. You haven't checked your facts. One of the Moderators was banning people solely because of personal grievances. People were protesting about it. I went to their defence and was banned as well. That is the fault of the Moderator not me. I merely reregistered in another name. Readily obtained new e-mail addresses and anonoymous surfing made banning impossible in my case. I have added numerous times since then, and everyone has known when I did. The Moderator however, who I shamed over the whole of BrainTalk virtually abandoned BrfainTalk altogether. I totally discredited him. It looks like you are trying the same as him, by imposing different standards for yourself and others, merely because you can not tolerate having what you have written being altered. Paul Wicks described himself as having expertise in different subjects. An online check showed that he was lying, as he's a fresh out of college student. My criticism of him postdates it being pointed out that personal criticism is not allowed. So your banning is solely based on reverting you in exactly the same way you reverted me. Your continuing intolerance of contradictioin and double standards is going to make things very difficult for you.--General Tojo 09:13, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
You were not blocked because of Braintalk, so I am not going to discuss decisions made by other moderators on another forum. I am simply observing that other users have recognised your style and are concerned.
I did not breech the 3RR. You gamed the system by doing piecemeal removals instead of plainly reverting. You were abusive to Paul Wicks and threatened to revert for 20 years. Please start collaborating instead of complaining. Wikipedia has a low tolerance for people who show no ability to collaborate.
You reverted 3 times in 24 hours. I asked Administrators to take action but all of a sudden it was amendmnet not reverting. Yet when I did exactly the same it was bannable reverting. That's obvious double standards by you. One rule for you and another rule for others. If you, or others you approve of, make major changes you describe them as improvements. Yet when I do you describe it as gaming the system. That's double standards as well. If I don't discuss in detail and describe in detail you claim it as being wrong and complain about it. When others do it you write nothing. Two rules again. You claim that somebody should collaborate when you want somebody to agre with you, yet you don't collaborate when changes are made that you don't agree with. I wasn't abusive to PaulWicks. Abuse is when its false. Honesty is when its true. Some people who turn up at Wikipedia are quite plainly deluded about their knowledge of a subject. I have also never claimed that I would revert for 20 years. You're making that up. I wrote to Paul Wicks that instead of being a fresh out of college student he got about 20 years of experience, that then maybe he could start assuming some degree of expertise. However, if I see mistreatment or abuses of petty power, I will show those abusers precisely how powerless they are and precisely what extremes can be gone to.
I like bold face. It looks better. There's nothing wrong with it. People that think it implies something will assume that anything, no matter how trivial, implies something. --General Tojo 10:48, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
Also, please have the common sense to stop posting all your talkpage entries in boldface. JFW | T@lk 09:41, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
Unacceptable username
Your username is in violation of Wikipedia:Username ("Names that promote or imply hatred") — it is identical to General Tojo. You must apply for Wikipedia:Changing username or this account will be blocked indefinitely. You have 48 hours to do so. El_C 10:33, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
Explain to me precisely and not in vague terms how the name General Tojo promotes hatred. There is no need for you to explain who he was. I know that. Given that he has been dead for nearly sixty years, and has no political movement based on him, nullfies the claim that he promotes anything.
I view the name as being entirely facetious. On a WW2 site concerning decisions to end the Pacific War I pointed out some highly relevant historical facts. They claimed that they need a more original source. So, I changed to "General Tojo" from "Daffy Duck" as General Tojo actually made the decision.
At present, it looks to me like you are just being intolerant - offended by anything when it suits you. When some people disagree with somebody they try to get at them by any means when they can't contradict the content of what that person is stating. What were you doing on the PD page in order to know about me. We will then see if your thinking is based on prejudice or reasoning ?
El C, short for El Cid - somebody who took part in the slaughter of thousands of people. Try claiming to Moorish people that he did not indulge in hatred. Are you going to change your name, or are you yet another person who has double standards - one rule for you and another rule for others ?
--General Tojo 11:01, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
- ElC is not short for El Cid and this is not subject to debate. Tread lightly. El_C 11:23, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
Most people will consider that it is short for El Cid somebody whose slaughter of the Moors is constantly glorified. So if it affects you it is not a subject to debate, but when it concerns other people it is. General Jojo is not the Genral Tojo you claim it to be. So its OK is it ? There have been a number of General Tojo's. Double standards again. You have failed to answer any of the questions I have asked. I will assume that if you can't fully explain the issues I have raised that it is because you can't. You will then be guilty of double standards and actions without justification. Any arrogance on the part of an Administrator will be responded to very fully and endlessly until it is corrected. --General Tojo 11:31, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
- ElC stands for El Commandante. We already have a User:El Cid, and killing thousands 1,000 years ago hardly compares to the genocide of millions or tens of millions 60 years ago. I personally know survivors of these war crimes that Tojo was convicted of and executed for. Feel free to appeal this however you see fit, but make sure to do so before the 48 hours lapse. That is all. El_C 11:41, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
It only stands for El Commandante in your mind. If its is meant to be Commandante why haven't you written that ? There is no restriction on namespace. It can onlky be interpreted as El Cid. That's the assumption people will make. Nobody except you will assume it to be Commandante instead. I personally know people of Moorish descent who are very offended by the constant glorification of El Cid's slaughter of thousands of people. So if somebody dies some time ago it becomes insignificant does it. That is very heartles and arrogant. That's not how they view it. It constantly demeans a people to have the slaughter of their race glorified regardless of when it took place. So unless you have double standards change your name to represent what you mean it to be rather than what people will assume it to be. General Tojo never took part in the genocide of millions of people. That was the Nazis. So you blatantly have fabricated the figures and the facts - no doubt never having studied in detail as I have the history of Japan. Every single major nation involved in WWII was involved in similar acts. The only reason why Churchill or the US atomic bombers were not convicted was that they were on the winning side. NO doubt the people you know actually supported their actions and the war crimes they committed. We therefore have one sided nationalism and racism in your attitudes. You take the side of one lot of war criminal supporters against another lot of war criminals. And if you want to set deadlines without justifying your actions then I will set one myself whose interminable consequences will make you greatly regret having acted with arrogance and double standards. --General Tojo 11:58, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
- Actually, I taught Japanese history in university. Tojo most definitely took part in the Asian_Holocaust. Notwithstanding the Allies' own warcrimes, your various historical fabrications & distortions, personal attacks, and threats, reflect extremely poorly on you. You've been blocked indefinitely for disruption. And I'm protecting this page to prevent you from making any further "arrogance" and "racism" diatribes. El_C 19:11, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
3RR and Parkinson's Disease
G'day GT,
thanks for your message. I have posted a comment on Jfdwolff's talkpage which might interest you. Happy editing, fuddlemark (befuddle me!) 12:03, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
