Talk:バス

@Eirikr "Try discussing in future and adding informative notes before ripping out content" Okay, then add some informative notes explaining why is it not okay to format it as "Short for コントラバス (contrabass; double bass)" but it's okay to use "Short for コントラバス.; the double bass or contrabass"? "formatting" doesn't cut it either! After two reversions and you couldn't realize what you did wrong, so clearly you didn't even read any other revisions before reverting them, because I guess admin condescending privileges. What does the period do there? Also, the "or" can only be justified if you edit the entry for contrabass itself or explain how different it is from double bass. And also, I don't give a sh*t about what kind of instrument you grew up hugging, because that doesn't freaking matter as far as defining a Japanese word goes. ばかFumiko￥^talk 01:49, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

• Fumiko, your approach is confrontational and disruptive. Many of your edits are destructive in removing useful content, even references. Much of your formatting is odd and out of alignment with the rest of the JA entries. You've ignored advice in the past. When your content is edited to fix the formatting and add back content you've removed, you respond in very personalized ways, such as above. Please calm down. This behavior is inappropriate. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │^{Tala við mig} 04:56, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

• "When your content is edited to fix the formatting and add back content you've removed, you respond in very personalized ways, such as above." Oh come on. Now you're being way too petty for an admin. "Personalized"? Give me a break. There's absolutely nothing "personalized" in that only I see YOUR approaches as personalizing EVERYTHING in YOUR AND YOUR ALONE vision. I'm not just editing Japanese entries alone, and I can see how different the way you approach them from the rest. "Hey, we have to add Wikipedia links to every Japanese entry, even the entry for "water" because sometimes people want to read more about a common concept in English while they consult a Japanese dictionary for some reasons!", "Hey, we have to put the Alternative forms section under the pronunciation, not above the etymology, even though it's clearly the other way around for other entries of other languages", "Hey, we have to make full use of colons for no f*cking reasons, even though the templates allow you to display glosses more properly", "Hey, we have to make glosses as detailed as possible even though they're f*cking called GLOSSES", "Hey, only my arguments about the likelihood of a "sound" that occurs in Japanese are valid even though they makes absolutely no sense, and I personally think we should be as specific as possible even though the content I add is clearly self-evident, obvious, immaterial or unnecessary". It's not me who's personalizing here. I'm not so quick to overreact every time anyone removes the content I've added, in fact, for many times, I've just either not been bothered with those, or, thanked those other editors as I thought their revisions are better. But I'm so fed up with your insensible dictatorship, that's it. ばかFumiko￥^talk 06:00, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

"for many times, I've ... thanked those other editors"

The log of people thanked by you is public. [1] 12:35, 23 January 2017 (UTC)