Rules for the user talk page of Tamawashi:

  1. My working language is English. If you don't write in English, I may simply remove your comment.
  2. If you want to talk about edits I made to an item, please post the question at the item's talk page and ping me.
    1. If you don't do that, I may move your question to another place
  3. If you claim something without providing evidence, e.g. an edit diff, I may ignore your claim.
  4. If a question started with a claim that has no evidence, I may ignore your question.

Could you please explain..Edit

.. this --Succu (talk) 21:48, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Succu, what did I tell you about posting here? I don't think it's necessary and he already explained his rationale. Also, Tamawashi, I would suggest not removing this.--Jasper Deng (talk) 21:50, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
@Succu: Probably you mean "explain". To my best knowledge: The 404 error page that I see is likely caused by non-existence of a PHP-file named "indx.php" at that directory. Tamawashi (talk) 21:56, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
Tell me, what is wrong. It i was your reference as far as I cant remember.... So give a you a liink? Succu (talk) 22:03, 21 July 2014 (UTC)


...try not to reply any more to and not to attack John or Jasper for their actions. Take a break for a few days, relax, and then - if you feel like it - come back again here.

If you do continue to find new reasons to get mad at them, this may end in a new block for you, and I'd like to avoid it. Cheers, --Sannita - not just another sysop 21:20, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

Arbitrary block of User:Tamawashi number 3Edit

You have been blocked for a period of 1 week for refusal to listen/acknowledge comments by users and to "drop the stick" in a discussion. Once this block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest it by editing this page and adding the following template with a suitable reason: {{unblock|1=<the reason for your unblock request>}}. If you are logged in, and the option has not been disabled, you may also email the blocking administrator (or any administrator from this list) by using this form.

English | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | বাংলা | Deutsch | español | français | galego | italiano | 日本語 | македонски | Nederlands | português | русский | українська | 中文 | +/−

⁠--Sannita - not just another sysop 21:46, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

Lie by Admin SannitaEdit

This: "You have been blocked for a period of 1 week for refusal to listen/acknowledge comments by users and to "drop the stick" in a discussion." is a lie. Tamawashi (talk) 21:50, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

As a matter of fact, you didn't "drop the stick", and you still don't. You are still trying to win an argument against Jasper Deng and John Lewis, by sticking to your point of view and not making the slightest attempt at understanding the counterpart. Moreover, you're plainly trying to find new evidences of Jasper's or John's misconduct. I provided you with a link about it: you mistook that "while he is mad", because Jasper plainly meant that you were angry, not that you were mad ("being mad at something/someone" is actually a phrase in English that means "being angry because of something/someone"), and it seems that you wanted to prove this way that Jasper isn't a good admin. In conclusion, you reverted my attempt at giving you an advice on how to deal with the issue. So, no, the reason why I blocked you is not "a lie". --Sannita - not just another sysop 22:03, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
A lie is a lie, Sannita. Grazie mille. But maybe not for believers in Goebbels' "Ripetete una bugia cento, mille, un milione di volte e diventerà una verità." [1]. Tamawashi (talk) 23:11, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

Content removal on Project Chat by User:SuccuEdit

  • [2] 21:40, 27 July 2014‎ Succu (talk | contribs)‎ m . . (258,636 bytes) (-324)‎ . . (Undid revision 147892104 by Tamawashi (talk) is this impotend?) (undo)
  • [3] 21:17, 27 July 2014‎ Succu (talk | contribs)‎ . . (258,476 bytes) (-324)‎ . . (Undid revision 147884370 by Tamawashi (talk) It) (undo)

Tamawashi (talk) 21:49, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

Message to Emw and MicruEdit

@Micru, Emw: could you take care of Wikidata:Database reports/Item classification? Maybe a bot could update it from time to time? Good bye. Tamawashi (talk) 21:54, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

You just lost the privilege of editing your own talk page with this personal attack to John, Jasper, AmaryllisGardener and me. Please, take a break for this week. You're risking a longer block, if you insist with this behaviour. --Sannita - not just another sysop 23:15, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

Of roles and instancesEdit

Tamawashi, I am very sorry to see that you have been blocked. All the problems can be traced to one single fact: you have one of the most powerful tools *in the whole universe* to analize reality, and you haven't been using it! And it is just right in front of you. Use it!

In your head you have the statement: "wonderful person A"<instance of>"bad admin", and "wonderful person B"<instance of>"good user". But if you were to model the wikidata community IN wikidata itself, how would that statement be? Totally wrong. It is the same as saying "wonderful person C"<instance of>"character in movie whatever", it is also wrong. What you have been missing all the time is the property "has role". Both "Wonderful person A" and "Wonderful person B" can take whichever role. It doesn't matter the culture, the origin, or anything else.

Here in Wikidata the role of "wikidata admin initial phase" appeared because of spammers, some basic rules where set up so they could act effectively against them. It was no-one's wish to be it that way, but the environment promted it that way. Then some users wanted more clear lines (you also wanted more clear rules), but clear lines do not work the expected way and cause "wikidata admin initial phase" to morph into "wikidata admin executor of rules", and that doesn't allow for wise decisions, just for the application of rules.

The same it could be said of your words lately. You have adopted the role of "user under oppression", and that haven't let you see that you were and you have been interpreting that role till the last consequences. I had invited you to participate in the Lounge, because I don't see you neither as good nor bad, just as a person that doesn't realize under which dynamic is acting.

It is exactly the same as in the w:Stanford prison experiment, good people are divided in two different groups and are assigned two opposing roles. Not only the guards grow into the role of guard, but the prisoners grow into the role of prisoners. That is what I have been trying to explain all the time, that harshness, or bad words, or whatever, cannot be answered in the same way because they make people grow more into their role, and they confuse the properties "has role" and "instance of".

Don't make the same mistake and realize that it is a lose-lose game. The only way out is not to play that game and realize that both "admin" and "user" can be wonderful people, it is just their role what can make others think that they are acting wrongly. You have not been blocked, just the role that you were playing.

If later on you realize about all this that I have been saying, then your input will be very much appreciated about how to avoid these dynamics in the future and how to make it understandable for other people. Everyone is needed in Wikidata, you too! --Micru (talk) 23:50, 27 July 2014 (UTC)


As you have been creating multiple accounts in violation of our multiple account policies, I have indefinitely blocked this account. Any appeal of this block should be made on this page. --Rschen7754 05:19, 15 May 2015 (UTC)