Talk:Ryukyuan mon

It's mostly based on a single source now, but I'll be adding more soon. Also this article is the English version of this Japanese Wikipedia article, so I'll be borrowing more from there in the future. Donald Trung (talk) 13:24, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

In the Japanese article there are several images of these coins, unfortunately I don't own any Ryukyuan coin personally so I can't upload a photograph of one to Wikipedia Commons, if someone else has any of these lying around please take a picture 📷 to help this article illustrate them better, or if anyone would help me upload them from the Yamatophone article. Donald Trung (talk) 13:50, 1 June 2017 (UTC) Donald Trung (talk) 13:50, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

I found the template, disregard this message if the situation has already been resolved. Donald Trung (talk) 15:10, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

Done ✅ --58.187.168.230 (talk) 04:40, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

I found information on the Chuuzan Tsuuhoo coin, but it's in Castilian. --1.55.196.75 (talk) 05:23, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

@Ihimutefu:, I saw that you adjusted the spelling to be single words, but in English-language coin catalogues they are always separated, is there a reason for this change? Note that the words themselves are different, name of the reign era or country + circulating treasure. Likewise the Chinese cash coin is also "Yongle Tongbao" and not "Yongletongbao". --Donald Trung (talk) 15:30, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

@Nanshu and Sturmgewehr88:, this is turning into an edit war. Could be please discuss the legitimacy of the flag so we could reach an agreement on why to include or exclude it? You two are both good editors and it would be a shame to see y'all devolve into such pettiness. Kindly discuss the merits of your actions. --Donald Trung (talk) 05:47, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

@Donald Trung: This is just one topic of an ongoing edit war for about 6 or 7 years now, I doubt it will end any time soon. He does not work well with others. ミラー強斗武 (StG88ぬ会話) 06:06, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

@Sturmgewehr88: Yes, did you also provide all the historical sources to point to the flag's legitimacy as a court symbol? If so then it's vandalism to remove a symbol, if it (the evidence) is iffy then I'd argue that he might have a point, but talking things through is better than wasting each other's time like this. I was also convinced about the supposed flag of the Nguyễn Dynasty being illegitimate by good arguments and that prevented lots of edit wars among lots of editors. Once something becomes indisputable then people stop arguing about it. We had a similar argument about the legitimacy of the real, actual Dragon Star flag which turned out to be historically accurate. --Donald Trung (talk) 06:16, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

@Donald Trung: Actually he provided the sources, however he was trying to claim 300 year-old flag almanacs proved that the flag is a Wikipedia hoax about 2 or 3 years ago. He tries to discredit sources that he disagrees with and presents his interpretations of sources as facts. His edits range from POV-pushing (like how he likes to change "Ryukyu Kingdom" to "a highly centralized Okinawa-centered kingdom" in most articles) to straight vandalism (like turning whole articles, categories, or templates into redirects with zero discussion). If you challenge him or disagree with him he name-calls you as an idiot and then he disappears for 6-12 months before making mass reverts and unilateral rewrites of whole articles. He does not cooperate or collaborate with anyone to make these edits. He has stated multiple times that he believes only "experts" should be making edits, despite that it is highly unlikely that he himself is an ethno-linguist, archaeologist, historian, and a number of other fields that he likes to mess with. ミラー強斗武 (StG88ぬ会話) 06:39, 13 May 2022 (UTC)