Talk:Miura Gorō

message: This article was automatically  assessed because at least one article was rated and this bot brought all the other ratings up to at least that level. BetacommandBot 00:02, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject class rating

message: Soryy, I wrote "Is this primary source ?" is wrong. I wanted to wirte "Is not this primary source ?"
I think this is a primary source. What do you think ? Melonbarmonster2 ?--NAZONAZO (talk) 20:54, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It's a primary source. You are not allowed to engage in original research using primary sources in wikipedia. If you don't understand what I'm talking about please read WP:CIT and WP:OR.Melonbarmonster2 (talk) 21:04, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

text: I was reverted in the primary source by mistake. I've repaired the text. Thanks for the heads up.Melonbarmonster2 (talk) 21:23, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

text: OK, I search other sources.--NAZONAZO (talk) 06:03, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: There are no sources that claim that Queen Min is the proper title rather than Empress Myeongseong.Melonbarmonster2 (talk) 00:38, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Primary source 

message: Nazonnazo, the NYT article can't be used as a citation to support your use of "queen min" since the sentence you're trying support with the cite doesn't address that issue. The claim that's being made by the portion of the text is that there was international outrage over the assassination not that her title was "queen min". You need to address this edit issue of whether queen min is appropriate in the talk page or in a portion of text of the article that deals with this issue(obviously none exists). On top of that the NYT pdf doesn't even use the title "queen min".
Please read WP:CIT if you need more information on technical aspects of how to make citations.Melonbarmonster2 (talk) 22:00, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, I search other sources.--NAZONAZO (talk) 06:03, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: There are no sources that claim that Queen Min is the proper title rather than Empress Myeongseong.Melonbarmonster2 (talk) 00:38, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: nyt cite

message: At this point, the citations lack page numbers and lack credibility and need to be challenged. I suggest a reference check for the entire article and deletion of inaccurate and unverifiable citations. Please provide page numbers and convert to inline citations before unreferenced text and incomplete citations are deleted.  I suggest a week for editors to provide page numbers and inline citations before proceeding with deletions.Melonbarmonster2 (talk) 01:12, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: You are still trying to evade your responsibility by bringing up "other stuff". Why are you continue to add back the challenged edit? I restored the article. Please edit after finding the page numbers and direct quotes. Please note that even if your edit is properly cited, the issue of WP:NPOV should be solved as I pointed out above. ―― Phoenix7777 (talk) 02:12, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Is this what you are searching for? Page 327 summarizes the court's decision. --Kansas Bear (talk) 02:56, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: It seems to be. However direct quotes are still necessary after being disputed like this. ―― Phoenix7777 (talk) 04:14, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I've placed a direct quote in there since you don't seem to be able to read the text in the link provided above. Now, please stop your edit warring, Phoenix7777. ···日本穣? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 05:37, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

text: I'll leave that to the two of you, since you get along so well. ;p ···日本穣? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WikiProject Japan! 21:13, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Citations challenge