Anosola

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Anosola, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! --Lionratz (talk) 13:10, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

August 2012

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page Momoiro Clover Z has been reverted.
Your edit here to Momoiro Clover Z was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline. The external link(s) you added or changed (http://www.youtube.com/user/stardustdigital/) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. If the external link you inserted or changed was to a media file (e.g. a sound or video file) on an external server, then note that linking to such files may be subject to Wikipedia's copyright policy, as well as other parts of our external links guideline. If the information you linked to is indeed in violation of copyright, then such information should not be linked to. Please consider using our upload facility to upload a suitable media file, or consider linking to the original.
If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 18:29, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:MCZ Battle and Romance cover.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:MCZ Battle and Romance cover.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 11:11, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use File:MCZ Battle and Romance cover.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:MCZ Battle and Romance cover.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails the first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could be found or created that provides substantially the same information or which could be adequately covered with text alone. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the media description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Peripitus (Talk) 12:21, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Momoiro Clover Z

This doesn't look like "organizing" the article. (I can't find the edit when you removed it but anyway a third of the article text is missing.) You really need to familiarize yourself with Wikipedia a little bit before deleting content. --Moscowconnection (talk) 11:24, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Read also this: Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Music and this: Wikipedia:Notability and this: Wikipedia:特筆性. And this: Wikipedia:Three-revert rule, just in case... :) --Moscowconnection (talk) 20:48, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

I admit that it was improper to change the article by a large margin. I refrain voluntarily from editing the passages in English Wikipedia for a while. I try to be familiar with the rules and so on. Thanks for your advice. --Anosola (talk) 03:43, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Momoiro Clover Z images

Hi! Why did you delete the images that Puramyun31 added to Momoclo pages? They are uploaded to Wikipedia Commons and seem properly licensed to me. --Moscow Connection (talk) 12:04, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Though I mentioned the reason when I edited Japanese pages, I'm sorry for not having done that here. In short, let's discuss which pictures to use on each page. I'd like Japanese editers to join the discussion, so could you move to ノート:ももいろクローバーZ(Japanese)?--Anosola (talk) 12:16, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Puramyun31 doesn't seem to be Japanese, so probably won't be able to discuss it. I understand your caution when adding images in the Japanese Wikipedia, but this is the English Wikipedia. Here in the English Wikipedia, let's just add them back. --Moscow Connection (talk) 12:39, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Okey, I got it. I didn't know that he's a foregner.--Anosola (talk) 12:41, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

So you don't mind me putting the images back? I will add them back (here in the English Wikipedia) then. --Moscow Connection (talk) 12:57, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Sure. --Anosola (talk) 13:01, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

By the way, I'm going to improve the hooks soon.--Anosola (talk) 12:43, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Please don't change them yourself. (I agree with you removing the word "partly", though.) Let's discuss them in the Japanese Wikipedia. One hook has been approved already: Template:Did you know nominations/Ikuze! Kaitō Shōjo, so we should not touch it now. It is good to go, it will appear on the main page (for one day, the DYK section is renewed every day). --Moscow Connection (talk) 12:57, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

So sorry, I've just noticed your message...--Anosola (talk) 13:01, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

No problem. By the way, I'm afraid we can't write "parodies the style" cause the source doesn't say "parodies". The fact must be sourced. If you find a reliable source that says it's a parody, then we can say "parodies". The other changes are okay, thank you very much for correcting! --Moscow Connection (talk) 13:05, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

I like the way you put it, by the way ("parodies the style"). I'm hesitant to change it back... Could you find a source that says they parody the sentai genre. That would probably be enough. --Moscow Connection (talk) 13:09, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

I won't change "parodies the style" back. It is much better like this, thank you very much! But still, we should find a source. It may be obvious it is a parody (and now I think that I was mistaken when I said the fact must de directly sourced), but still it's better be on the safe side and find a source... --Moscow Connection (talk) 13:20, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

I've been looking for it, but it was difficult.--Anosola (talk) 13:58, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Do you have any other corrections to the hooks? Now I think I shouldn't have stopped you, but I was afraid you didn't understand the rules or could change the hook that had been already approved. --Moscow Connection (talk) 13:34, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Don't worry. I understand what you mean. Here's another suggestion.

Did you know that Akari Hayami, the former member of Momoiro Clover, struggled with being known as an idol because she had been dreaming to be an actress as a matter of fact? --Anosola (talk) 13:58, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

I'm afraid no one outside Japan knows what's an idol. I think the current hook is better. By the way, I'm not sure if an editor is allowed to change a hook that has already been reviewed or to edit someone else's nomination, so I asked a question about the DYK rules here. (I think it's allowed, though.) --Moscow Connection (talk) 14:09, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

OK. I got it. Now I am going to write about the photo choice on ノート:ももいろクローバーZ(Japanese). --Anosola (talk) 14:14, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

OK. By the way, in the Akari Hayami hook, do you think it would be better if we changed it from "left the girl group" to "left the group"? It would sound better. But I added the word "girl" because I thought that "girl group" sounds intriguing. --Moscow Connection (talk) 14:26, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Or even to "Akari Hayami left". It may be even better cause people will click on Momoiro Clover to see what it is. I think I will change it to "Akari Hayami left". --Moscow Connection (talk) 14:28, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

That's fine.--Anosola (talk) 14:32, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Look at this DYK nomination for inspiration! I saw it and understood that the fact that almost no one here knows what's "a momoiro clover" doesn't mean we should explain. Let them click and find out for themselves! --Moscow Connection (talk) 14:42, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

I understand we don't have to explain so much!

By the way, Look at this picture.[1] If we use this picture for Kanako's page, are you able to crop Shiori and even Momoka?

Shiori yes, Momoka no. (I can't draw a natural-looking background myself.) Do you want me to do it? (But not now, in a day or two.) I actually think the current image is better. --Moscow Connection (talk) 15:03, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Let's discuss later on ノート:ももいろクローバーZ(Japanese). When this picture is chosen, I'll ask you to do it if you don't mind.--Anosola (talk) 15:08, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Okay, I will do it. I can also crop the currently used photo. --Moscow Connection (talk) 15:12, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

August 2013

Please do not use styles that are unusual, inappropriate or difficult to understand in articles, as you did in Tarento. There is a Manual of Style, and edits should not deliberately go against it without special reason. Thank you. --DAJF (talk) 12:20, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

I've read through the manual and now understand it. Thank you for informing me. --Anosola (talk) 12:36, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Photo of Momoiro Clover Z

Hi! Please look at the discussion here: User talk:Da Vynci#Momoiro Clover Z. It's about the photo you added. I think you did a good job and it didn't spoil any articles. By the way, Da Vynchi is right saying that Wikipedia articles shouldn't use words like "current". The description should have said "As of 2013, ..." or something like that. --Moscow Connection (talk) 20:28, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

I understand. I'll use appropriate terms. Thanks for informing me. --Anosola (talk) 10:42, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

September 2013

Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of published material to articles as you apparently did to Comedy music. Please cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. --DAJF (talk) 14:22, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

I've understood what you mean. I'm sorry to have bothered you again. --Anosola (talk) 10:58, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Discography section

If there's a separate article for the band's discography, there is no need to have an extensive discography section on the band's main page. All that needs to be there are the studio albums. Do not restore the content, again.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 15:41, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

OK, I got it. --Anosola (talk) 15:50, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

March 2014

Thank you for your contributions. Please mark your edits, such as your recent edits to Momoiro Clover Z, as "minor" only if they are minor edits. In accordance with Help:Minor edit, a minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. Minor edits consist of things such as typographical corrections, formatting changes or rearrangement of text without modification of content. Additionally, the reversion of clear-cut vandalism and test edits may be labeled "minor". Thank you. DAJF (talk) 01:23, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

I'm sorry for bothering you. I've read through the manual and now understand it.--Anosola (talk) 13:55, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Genres

Please stop adding a billion genres to the infobox. And if you are going to provide references like that, add them such that anyone can easily verify your claims. Because 3 year old magazines that are out of print are not suitable references. Also, we don't need seven different types of "pop", particularly when all those variations have been subsumed by "J-Pop". Limit the list to the 3 or 4 most pertinent.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 09:24, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi, Ryulong. (いきなりPlease stop...は失礼ですよ)　I think it is a matter of opinion. I could not find the rule to limit the list to the 3 or 4. If you like to do so, why don't you start the discussion on the project page? That's because it influences many articles.--Anosola (talk) 09:37, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

I agree with Anosola. The genres that are sourced should stay. J-pop is a very broad genre. "J-pop" doesn't mean anything, except that it's not enka/kayokyoku or classical music. --Moscow Connection (talk) 09:49, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Why are you talking to me in Japanese? And I'm starting a discussion with you here because you are the one editing this crap in. We do not need fifty different variations of "pop" when being broad enough with J-pop is perfectly fine.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 10:35, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

I kindly ask you to use appropriate words here. I'd like to talk with you in a courteous attitude. I thought I would send this brief note to let you know that. Sorry, I will reply to you later.--Anosola (talk) 11:12, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

英語日本語翻訳校正のお願い

こんにちは、Anosolaさん

忙しいですか？Angkor Watの和訳をご完成いたしましたけど、一つのお願いがあります。多分今ご覧になっているように、私は日本語が母国語ではなく、和訳された記事を校正していただきたいと思います。あまり迷惑が懸からないことを祈ります。

先週、すでにウィキペディア日本語版のユーザーにご連絡いたしましたけど、そのうち二人は丁重に断り、その他はまだ返信していません。

原文はウィキペディア英語版の秀逸な記事ですが、訂正をたくさんいたしました。2005年に秀逸な記事として指定されましたから、時代遅れな情報がありますし、引用方式も雑然としていますし。とにかく、各陳述を自分でご検証いたして、この日本語版はもっと上質だと思います。今は文章の質は唯一の問題です。校正後、実際のアンコール・ワットの記事に移転いして秀逸な記事の選考に推薦するつもりでございます。

既存の日本語版アンコール・ワットに接合するのを私に任せてください。もちろん、以前に他のユーザーと合意を形成してみますが、ja:アンコール・ワット、ja:プロジェクト:建築、ja:プロジェクト:仏教の三つは全部が休止中ですから、論争を招くと思いません。

もし校正する気があるなら、ご連絡ください。

ご読了ありがとうございました。舎利弗 (talk) 20:02, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

お返事が遅くなり申し訳ございません。あまり時間が取れないため、少ない範囲での校正でしたら承ります。--Anosola (talk) 11:45, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Japanese box office

Hi there. Since you're Japanese, you may be able to help me with something. I've found two sources for Japanese box office: [2] and [3]. Their numbers seem to match from 2000 onwards, but for films form 1999 and before they don't. For example, eiren.org has Pokémon: The Movie 2000 with 3.5 billion yen but kogyotsushin.com has it will 6.4 billion. Do the sites say something to explain this? Maybe the second source has the numbers adjusted for inflation? I want to add the box office to the articles, but I'm not sure which one I should add... --Cattus ^talk 14:32, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Cattus. I appreciate your edit on Maku ga Agaru. As for kogyotsushin.com, there is a sign (当社調べ), which means an original research by the company. While, eiren.org is an incorporated association and seems to be reliable in my opinion. --Anosola (talk) 15:33, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks.--Cattus ^talk 21:45, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

Replace removed categories

You removed categories that I placed on Nogizaka46. Please note that you edit was incorrect and left the category with no categorisations at all. Categories should be categorised. If two categories share the same categorisation, then fine they will both appear in the owning categories - nothing wrong in that. I have replaced the categories but will not edit these again in future. 81.159.156.59 (talk) 16:27, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi. I'm afraid I have a different opinion. It seems to be better to hear other editors' advice. --Anosola (talk) 04:14, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

Do not edit my talk page and about your fan edits

Don't try to edit my talk page anymore, and your fan POV edits and intention about Momoiro Clover Z are obvious as you added that information on Music of Japan article, [4], on 5 September 2013. It is against WP:NPOV, as already stated, and although at the J-Pop article are mentioned the "Momoiro Clover Z surveys popularity", you can not accept that in reality are not popular and significant as you wish for. Sorry, it will not go.--Crovata (talk) 14:53, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

議論が終了していないにも関わらず、一方的に編集をしてしまうことは問題があると考えております。また、以下の内容にしっかりとお答えください。

I agree with the general fact that record sales are the only relevant and objective representation of popularity. But it is not the case in Japan because there exists 「特典商法」 (cf., http://www.cyzo.com/2014/12/post_19994.html). According to Oricon, over the half of Japanese people are against this kind of gimmick. (cf., http://www.oricon.co.jp/special/1467/) --Anosola (talk) 17:28, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

The annual number of audience represents popularity. (cf., http://www.nikkei.com/article/DGXMZO79804640X11C14A1000000/)　--Anosola (talk) 18:11, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

No, you do NOT agree and you are unwilling to understand how Wikipedia work! As First, don't you dare reverting my talk page for the fourth time as with third you already violated the Wikipedia principle (three-revert-rule). Second, understand how Wikipedia works! Third, understand and accept how that survey is NOT an evidence for your ridiclious argument or proof for your non-constructive fan edit which is against NPOV. You clearly do not understand and as such should stop abusing Wikipedia as a promotinal page for that music group! Fourth, stop acting as an ignorant about Wikipedia principles and ignoring my warnings.--Crovata (talk) 18:16, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

I'd appreciate if you could express your opinion about 「特典商法」.--Anosola (talk) 18:19, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

The discussion on my talk page finished and I am not willing to continue it because, simply, there is no point. You simply ignore and do no understand and that's it. I previously commented at the User talk:Moscow Connection#J-pop, and ask Moscow Connection where You are wrong!

And do you know what 「特典商法」 is? Nothing, it is nothing. It is a non existing proof from foreign Japanese language which other editors do not understand and as such you are intentionally using against Wikipedia principles. You must read WP:NPOV article and learn about Neutrality on Wikipedia.--Crovata (talk) 18:28, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

Just, explain yourself to us what this 「特典商法」 is. Use Google Translate or any other translator to help you, because, otherwise your edits are just suspicious, do you understand that?--Crovata (talk) 18:37, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

Stop reverting my talk page, and answer what 「特典商法」 means!--Crovata (talk) 18:57, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

OK, I understand what you mean. Sorry for your incomprehensibility. I'll try to explain that soon. --Anosola (talk) 18:57, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

This page precisely explains 「特典商法」. Google translation into English is this.

That has nothing to do with Wikipedia principles, it is on the edge of Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources?!--Crovata (talk) 19:27, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

Explain what it means, I barely understand and it does not make any sense. Why it should be reliable and relevant for Wikipedia?--Crovata (talk) 19:41, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

@Moscow Connection: do you have anything else to say about 「特典商法」 and User Anosola edits intentions, because as according your final comment ([5]) "After reading this, I agree with Crovata, it's just too much... (Now when the article is reverted to the mid-January state, you and Anosola should start discussing the changes you propose.)", Anosola neither discuss neither accepts my edits, neither I understand his intentions besides giving me suspicion that he is a fan of that group (Momoiro Clover) and his neutrality is almost non existing. He was first to [6] undo your edit. I am waiting for your answer.--Crovata (talk) 19:52, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

• @Crovata: Hi! I'm very sorry, but I have to say this... :) You are the one who is in the wrong here. :)
  What happened is:
  a. The photo of Momoclo has been there for a long time, unopposed. It had a correct description, backed up by reliable sources. (At least, by one reliable source. The second source is not online, but the first one is.)
  b. You came and removed the picture and put there a picture of AKB48 [7]. You also accused Kyary Pamyu Pamyu fans of promoting her through Wikipedia [8].
  But just think about it. Here's the diff once again: [9]. You removed some sourced information and replaced it with an unsourced claim that "Since 2011, AKB48 according sales is the most popular music act in Japan." (By the way, your sentence is not grammatically correct.)
  c. Anosola reverted you. He had all the right to do it. He didn't agree and reverted. That's all.
  d. Read WP:BRD. When you were reverted, you should have have tried to find consensus on what picture should be there and how the section should look. Instead, you reverted your change back [10]. You started an WP:EDITWAR.
  e. On March 30, you repeated the same edit again [11]. I'm sorry, but again, what you do is called an WP:EDITWAR. You should try to find consensus on what picture should be there.
  f. Anosola is just trying to prove to you that Momoclo is more popular and that AKB48 sells more cause AKB48 has used unfair sales techniques. Their releases include handshake event lottery tickets or voting tickets and have too many editions with different songs on them. (I personally think that Momoclo uses this so-called "特典商法" ("additional value") technique too, but to a much lesser extent.)
  I think Anosola is acting very polite. Cause the thing is that he doesn't really have to prove anything to you. The picture of Momoclo was there before you came and removed it. You don't have a consensus for removing it.
  Now, here's my opinion.
  1. I think it's an editorial decision as to which picture stays. You can't just remove it because you don't like it. The picture was there before you came and now you should try and convince other editors that the picture should be removed.
  2. A picture of Momoclo has all the right to be there. I personally don't really know which idol group is more popular. I think Anosola's case is good. The links he provided convinced me that Momoclo is not less popular than AKB48.
  3. Why should we fight about this? Who cares who is more popural. Both groups are popular. They both deserve a picture. Why not have both?
  2. I personally think that the part about Kyary Pamyu Pamyu you removed can be put back too. I didn't revert you simply because I did not want to annoy you.
  That's all. :) I'm sorry I had to say this. I didn't want to annoy a fan of Jin Akanishi or anything. :) Especially since you are from Croatia and the Croatian Wikipedia and Croatian people in general would profit from more information on Japanese idols. But Momoclo deserves to have a photo in this article and in any other related article. Especially since the photo is really good. (I personally like it more than the one of AKB48.)
  By the way, I think that the fans of Japanese culture should not fight with each other. You, too, should be happy Anosola is here with us on the English Wikipedia and writes about Momoiro Clover. Cause, as I've said, Wikipedia has too few editors and too few information about Japanese idols. And just think about it... Today someone likes Momoclo and today he/she will switch to Arashi. It's a win-win situation. :) (Like, really, you are just annoying a friendly editor. You could have just asked him to add a photo of AKB48. But instead, you started fighting with him and removed a good photo of an immensely popular group, a photo that actually makes the J-pop article look better.) --Moscow Connection (talk) 03:05, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

@Moscow Connection: thanks for your fast answer, this will be a long reply, but first to clarify something - editing an article of any worldwide musician or whatever subject/object does not make that editor a fan or listener, in this case, of Japanese music. I already said that in the previous discussion on my talk page. I am not interested in any way editing any article because of some personal reasons besides the impulse when see that an article needs to be work done, and if think I can help, was it by finding sources or previous knowledge or experience, I will try my best.

a-f. I will try my best to explain it, but still it is incredible that it needs to be explained. On the article no one worked and that's the sole reason no one removed the information and image of the act Momoiro Clover Z from both J-pop and Music of Japan article added by user Anosola. The J-pop article is all about sales and most famous and important artists, and that's it. What a mess it would be if we used surveys instead of sales? How surveys can be 100% objective when their credibility is doubtful. Just take a look of all the surveys or top-lists we stuble every day and not to say they are prone to manipulation by the managmenet, record companies or other third parties. Even if we take them seriously, they are still not more important than sales, they are just surveys, notable for artist article, but not music of Japan in general.

Unsourced claim or not, when something is obvious and easy to prove, it can stay. Go again back to my talk page and see my review about the yearly sales from 2010, it features yearly sales list from Tokyohive. In the 2011, the yearly album ranking featured AKB48 and Arashi in Top 2, while in the single ranking Top 7 were featured only AKB48 and Arashi singles. In short, none, really, none single or album by Momoiro Clover from 2010 to 2014 reached Top 50 besides only one time (#22 album 5th Dimension in 2013). What does that say? That Momoiro Clover Z by any mean is not a notable music act which should be highlighted on the J-pop and especially not Music of Japan article. There are countless other more notable music acts in Japan. And what to say about Kyary Pamyu Pamyu, I just don't want to waste time. So many artists who are more known internationally than her and are better selling in Japan.

We are not talking who is more popular, but about objectivity and following the article patern - sales and only most famous and important are highlighted. In my revision [12] still mentioned Momoiro Clover Z survey results only because was sure that Anosola will react, but still, he undo it and showed his a fan of Momoiro Clover Z who can't stand the truth. It is just incredible we are at all discussing it.--Crovata (talk) 21:17, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

Sales are not representative of popularity. In the Nikkei rating, Momoclo won.
And even if AKB48 were in some other ratings more popular than Momoclo, Momoclo is still up there with the very best.
And I'm not even saying that AKB48 is largely ignored by Rolling Stone (here's an exception [13]), while Momoiro Clover (one review, but it's detailed and it's 4/5 [14]) and Team Syachihoko ([15], [16], [17], [18], [19]) and Babymetal ([20], [21], [22]) and Kyary Pamyu Pamyu ([23], [24], [25]) are either rated favorably or reviewed regularly or both. Who's more popular among music critics?
This just means that there are many possible ways to measure popularity.
And about Arashi... I have a strong suspicion that Arashi and other Johnnys are not even close to AKB48 and Momoclo in terms of "the most discussed topics", "hottest on Twitter", etc. Just because you can't even post a photo of them without risking that you will be hunted down. :) I remember Arashi had a music video with 3 million views on a fake VEVO account on YouTube. I think it maraculously survived, like, for years. And now it has been deleted, too. While the most popular music video by AKB48 has 114 million views [26], the most popular music video by Momoiro Clover — 33 million [27], the most popular video by Kyary Pamyu Pamyu — 78 million [28]. The most popular video by Arashi — like, zero. Who's the most popular now? :)
Conclusion: Let the picture be. Momoclo is one of the most popular groups and is more popular than Arashi. :) --Moscow Connection (talk) 22:40, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

You are again off topic, we are not talking about popularity. There many types of popularity, while according the most objective pattern - sales, they are not. You are mistaking sales with trend or name, for example many tarentos, idols, or known musicians are well known and popular on certain surveys, reviews, or on TV and in public, but their sales are unworthy of mention. You'are contradicting yourself with YouTube views as already answered that not every famous Japanese music act (for example best selling B'z) have copyright contract with YouTube. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and not a news or tabloid website. Your claim that Momoiro Clover Z is more popular than Arashi (and every other music act which at least has more than one (?!) Top 50, actually have regular Top 40, Top 30, Top 20, Top 10 records) is your personal POV and pure nonsense. We can't be so superficial and unobjective on Wikipedia. Neutrality is #1 principle here, we do not mix pears with apples, and neither forget the difference between pears and apples.

Conclusion: If it stays like this we are breaking NPOV principles, and also the article cohesion.--Crovata (talk) 23:58, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

The opinion that Momoiro Clover Z is more popular than AKB48 is not nonsence. It's backed up by a reliable source. Everything Anosola added was reliably sourced. You deleted sourced information, deleted a picture you didn't like, added an unsourced sentence saying that AKB48 was "the most popular music act in Japan sales-wise" and you are accusing other people of breaking some rules. It's just not fair. By the way, you broke the 3RR rule (4 reverts in 24 hours: [29], [30], [31], [32]).
That's all. There's no consensus to remove the picture. Even more, I would even say that there's a consensus to leave the picture in the article cause you have been reverted by 3 different editors. You should stop obsessing about this photo and switch to other things. Actually, the discussion had been a WP:DEADHORSE since February, but for some reason you tried to delete the picture again.
(And you actually succeded in putting a picture of AKB48 there. What more do you want? It's a good compromise. Please, could you be nice and switch to other things? :-))) Let's just stop, okay?) --Moscow Connection (talk) 00:46, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

Just...? Backed up by reliable source? Since when personal POV is reliable source? That AKB48 is the most selling act is unsourced claim? What is all this ignorance now? Since when objectivity, neutrality, truth and following Wikipedia principles became obsession? If something is wrong, it is wrong. This is for now, without any work, the best revision possible, and if your really want, then ok, I will waste my time on the 2010s section while have to work on other articles unrelated to Japan, and will add all other Top 50 more notable music acts than Momoiro Clover Z only because that's the truth. Anosola worked on the Momoiro Clover Z article, and that's is just fine, but everything else - the promotion of Momoiro Clover Z at J-pop and Music of Japan articles - it is wrong. Wikipedia is not a fanpage, promotional, news, tabloid, forum, YouTube or any kind of other website. Sorry, it has to be put into a context. @Moscow Connection: one advice, do not ever compromise with truth. Ever. That's why exist NPOV.--Crovata (talk) 01:46, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

I am not going to discuss this anymore. You should just revert everything to how it was before you came. Everything. --Moscow Connection (talk) 02:14, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

@Moscow Connection: I am already working on the section, nothing will be reverted, especially not lies and fans wishful thinking, it has no place on Wikipedia.--Crovata (talk) 04:47, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

Music of Japan

Surely, the user is just being disruptive [33] and it's okay to revert her as long as she acts like she does now. But you should rewrite the part about Momoiro Clover. It looks a bit out of place in the article like it is now. --Moscow Connection (talk) 18:22, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

Intentionally accusing the editor (who follows the rules and logic), of being a fan, a she, disruptive, unconstructive and doing vandalism, everything with which has nothing to do with, and your acting of being "respectful" but ignoring his warnings about the violation of the principles, and even now saying that "it looks a bit out of place", but still supporting the fan promotion of a music act totally unimportant for the article Music of Japan, it lead to say this is my last, and final warning. If you want to act friendly to Anosola then tell him the truth so in the future won't be any misunderstanding.-Crovata (talk) 20:21, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

Please leave the editor alone. And me too, for this matter. I will now send you a warning again. And it will again tell you where you should discuss the matter.
Are you a he? Many people would assume that, because your nickname ends with an "a", you must be female. --Moscow Connection (talk) 21:02, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

The matter could have been only discussed here because Anosola is an editor misusing the (un)reliable source for exceptional claims, and when checked with what sources and knowledge he is backing his exceptional claims there's no reason to discuss it anymore. If is more important to discuss what an editor's name mean (Cro - Croatia, vata - Kravata) than to discuss the violation of the principles...--Crovata (talk) 21:18, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

Use of non-free image in Cool Japan article

Hi. I had to revert your recent edit to the Cool Japan article because it added a non-free image. You might want to read the guidelines for using non-free images at Wikipedia:Non-free content, as there are limitations on how and where such images can be used under "fair use" criteria. Feel free to drop us a line if you are still unclear. --DAJF (talk) 09:47, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

Sorry for having corrected my several edits. As for images, I'll read the guidelines carefully and give a lot of attention. Thank you for informing me.--Anosola (talk) 09:56, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:56, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Anosola

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, introducing inappropriate pages, such as User:Anosola, is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Under section G3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, the page has been nominated for deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. 184.254.44.81 (talk) 20:46, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

I have removed the CSD tag as vandalism of a user page. — Maile (talk) 21:44, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Anosola. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

The Golden History

Hi! I need your help with this:

• Template:Did you know nominations/The Golden History.

Could you please look at the "The Golden History" article? It would be nice if you checked and maybe even expanded it a little bit. (And the hook could be better, too. Can you think of a better one?)
By the way, I will add you to the DYK credits if you help even a little. :-) --Moscow Connection (talk)

Sorry for the late reply. I went through the article and corrected a little bit. Do I still have to expand it now? If needed, I'll give it a try. --Anosola (talk) 14:39, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

As you wish. It is not urgently needed now. But, surely, if you expand it a bit, it will make the article better. If there's something else that you want the readers of the English Wikipedia to know, then it's time to add it now. Cause the article will soon be on the main page and it will be viewed a lot..
By the way, you should probably remove your comment [34] from the DYK discussion page to avoid confusion. Cause the hook has already been approved by the reviewer, there's no need to repeat the same thing again. (I'm just afraid your comment may confuse people who are promoting hooks.)
And thank you very much for the correction! --Moscow Connection (talk) 17:40, 26 December 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Anosola. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Anosola. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 2 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Anosola. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)