1004:
the primary sources, and the temptation to feel that one is an expert on Yasuke after an hourâs reading is there. Additionally, a lot of the terminology is vague and broad, both in the primary sources as in the secondary sources. For example, some secondary sources describe him as a spear bearer, others as a sword bearer, but most as a weapon bearer. There is, however, little information, at least in
English, detailing what these roles are besides the obvious literal interpretation. Another problem I have realized, researching for this article and for the Samurai article, is that terminology used for Samurai history is unclear. When translated to English terms, the meanings donât quite match up, and some words donât have strict conventions. When the Japanese words are used, it is hard to look up the meaning without knowledge of Japanese. The word retainer can be the translation of several Japanese words, at least some of which have different meanings. The word that is probably the most difficult is samurai. Several experts have said, in the context of Yasuke, that the word was ambiguous or vague during this period. Even during the Edo Period, its meaning seems to have varied from domain to domain.
774:, who said we should be cautious in saying Yasuke was a samurai because the evidence for it is only from one version of a manuscript not found in other copies. The other source is Thomas Lockley who said 'there is debate as to whether Yasuke truly became a "samurai," but it is believed that, at least for his lifetime, he was undoubtedly appointed as a vassal of Nobunaga.' Both these sources came out after the closing of the previous RfC. (One was published before but not yet translated.) To be clear, I am a proponent of adding the view that some historians believe there is not enough information to conclude whether or not Yasuke was a samurai to the article. The opposing view says that there are not enough sources to warrant their inclusion. Note that the majority of academic sources just say he served Nobunaga or was his retainer and do not discuss whether he was a samurai, and almost every source says there is little information about Yasuke in general. (see
1040:
the same time, more understanding what that means. The main problem being the usage of the term samurai and that the conventual wisdom on its meaning is being challenged by historians. Thomas Conlan has even said that the samurai class probably wasnât a legally recognized class till the
Tokugawa period. The majority opinion seems to me to be "Yasuke was a samurai*". Gitz and Regalia Symphony have both falsely said that I supported the RfC to depict Yasuke´s status as disputed. I have criticized both sides of the Yasuke is a samurai dispute, and have consistently opposed describing his status as disputed. I also criticized the double standard that Regalia Symphony has towards "reliable sources" and his interpretation of the "Weasel Words" policy. The fact that those two so little understand what I said, shows how much they truly paid attention.
1036:
suspect. New editors are especially suspect. This seems to go against assume good faith and welcome newcomers. Editors such as myself are assumed to believe that Yasuke is not a samurai, just because we seek compromise, try to change sources, or otherwise improve the article. In retrospect, this explains why
Regalia Symphony followed me to the Samurai article and reverted my edits. My edits didnât appear to me to be related to Yasuke, but they were related to (insufficient, imho) arguments against Yasuke being a samurai. This also explains how Regalia Symphony could so easily use flimsy and shifting accusations to save himself during the ANI. RS especially has tried to use policy and proposed sanctions to stop discussions that he views as against the RfC. This happened at the cost of discussion and consensus building.
679:. I was not trying to engage in a culture war or trying to disprove Yasuke as a samurai, the RfC was agreed upon for dispute resolution to try to include the compromise that was reached. After the time requested had elapsed, I created the RfC since the other parties had not done so yet. I understand the RfC and the argumentation that arose from it was far from ideal, but I just wanted to explain why I even made it. Regardless, I no longer wish to participate in Yasuke going forward, but do believe some contentious topic policy for Yasuke is advisable. --
185:
1314:
conduct is also being mindful of precise context. That said, I think it would be good for the committee to take this case so as to further the template for handling these off-wiki "culture wars" that have been and will be in the future (unfortunately) brought on-wiki. If the evidence warrants it, you may even want to think hard on formulating principles that specifically address "culture wars".
669:. The result of the dispute was a compromise to create an RfC as users thought it was unfair to add Hirayama Yu without adding Goza, and it was agreed a second RfC would be needed to incldue Goza. It was requested by a disputing party who wanted to add Goza to wait at least a month before creating said RfC in case new publications came out or Goza retracted his statement.
787:, which seems to not be discussed here or ja wiki. I think that shows the sources have not been fully discussed, and there is no reason to preemptively end the discussion. edit2: and now another source just published by an official university newspaper today quoting an Assistant Professor, also mentioning that there is some ambiguity
1452:, for example, is one that is related to Yasuke and to the wider issue which has been described as "Gamergate 2.0". I'm tempted to tag the talkpage on those grounds, but it's a slight stretch under the current scope and I would feel silly tagging it as GENSEX when it has little to do with gender or sexuality.
1390:
over. I volunteered to be a drafter exactly because my term was ending and I knew once that decison came out I'd be done, but a decade later I'm still not sure I'd volunteer again, and that's even given that I got the flu in the middle of the whole thing and as a result David did most of the actual work.
1199:
I think that ArbCom has two choices as to how to deal with this topic. The first is the "traditional" ArbCom approach of a full case with evidence, to identify the editors who have been the most serious contributors to the disruption, and sanctioning those editors, and then turning the topic over to
1095:
My general impression as someone who has edited this area is very similar to Gitz and
Pinguinn. A page about a minor historical figure that was previously pretty stable and unremarkable has suddenly gotten a lot of attention due to Gamergate-adjacent types, and as a consequence a whole host of new or
1179:
The filing party has demonstrated that there are continuing disputes in this topic area that the community is not handling successfully. I think it is reasonably clear that the disputes involve conduct as well as content, and that conduct is preventing the orderly solution of content issues. Since
1031:
I think there was a problem with WP:OR, there was certainly a problem with using the talk page as a forum, but that stopped in July. I think that a lot of what is being considered OR, is a comparison of different secondary sources, with an occasional use of primary and tertiary sources. I also think
1007:
It also doesnât help that the main researcher, Thomas
Lockley seems to have overlooked some questions that he could have answered, but also doesnât communicate clearly. The fact that his book contains both fact and fictional dramatization is the biggest example, but he also makes statements that can
1003:
I think that there are some inherent difficulties with writing an article about Yasuke, he has received little academic attention until recently, and there are few academic works about him. The primary sources about him are few, so that means that it is relatively easy for an editor to have read all
1406:
I think we are long past the point where
Gamergate needs to be a separate CT from GENSEX or we need some sort of broader CT covering this topic area. While Gamergate may have started with a heavy focus on sexism and harassment of women, it has broadened in the decade since into any and all kinds of
1156:
Not involved with any of the talk discussions but I am fully aware that there is the issue that
Pinguinn has outlined, that there is a new wave of Gamergate type activity that a high profile video game is triggering, so it is not unreasonable to apply GG DS, as well to take input from new/IP with a
1039:
As I started this article, I was unsure if Yasuke was a samurai, but I first heard about Yasuke from
Anthony Cummins, who believes that Yasuke is a samurai and even interviewed Lockley about it. I have done research outside of Knowledge, and have less doubt about whether Yasuke is a samurai, but at
1389:
Although a different dispute, there are clearly some of the same underlying issues involving the toxicity that is sadly all too prevalent in gamer culture. We didn't go beyond the single issue at the time because it was a giant toxic monster that was consuming our lives and we just wanted it to be
1333:
When we handled the original GamerGate case, we really probably should have put in a remedy concerning video game "culture war" stuff in general, but the whole thing was such a godawful mess that I'm not surprised something got overlooked. I hope the current ArbCom will correct that, since clearly
778:
and search for "scholarly sources which mention Yasuke" for a list) To elaborate more on my point about more sources potentially coming out, just last week, a historian mainly of
Chinese history wrote that "In the end, due to the absolute lack of historical materials, it is impossible to determine
628:
I am commenting only to state that I wish to have no part in this. I do not wish to participate in editing the Yasuke article, or having anything to do with any of the ancillary elements of it going forward. As I am presently on a break and will be around infrequently, I wish to have nothing to do
1011:
This whole process is made more difficult by the single-minded focus on Yasuke´s status as a samurai by some editors. This group of hardliners, oppose any changing of Yasuke´s status as a samurai, but interpret every change as touching Yasuke´s status. One sees this in the response to attempts to
849:
While our article on Yasuke has been the subject of discussion in those groups; and there is evidence of IP editors & new accounts arriving to affect article content, to the extent that this has been disruptive, it has largely been dealt with using page protection & reverts of vandalistic
783:
One might argue that we shouldn't use that source because the author is not an expert in
Japanese history specifically, but in general it seems likely to me that more reliable sources will write about this topic in the future. Lastly, the whole idea of making every change through an RfC is flawed
1313:
I just looked at the article, for the first time and to be clear the article does not say "is/was", it says "served as". It sounds like there could be several ways to support that from what is said above (perhaps consider dropping a note) but I suggest in part, understanding the dispute and the
1035:
It also appears that the Yasuke page has a bad reputation among editors that arenât directly involved in it. This is probably due to the culture war going around. The assumption here is that every editor who wants to make a change is a gategamer and Japanese nationalist, and thus their edits are
770:
I hesitate to agree to moratorium to the discussion of Yasuke because 1. the current dispute about the new sources has not been resolved and more importantly 2. if more sources come out the moratorium will be used to not include them. For background, the entire reason for the discussion is about
717:
and in multiple threads). These discussions seem to be over now, but they went on for a long time despite various attempts to explain that this kind of source evaluation borders on original research. Secondly, the discussions concern whether to remove certain news sources (CNN, TIME, Smithsonian
1067:
CT sanctions. Yasuke and related pages have not been eligible for any CT because despite dealing with similar issues related to a similar dispute, they do not relate to gender or sexuality. In my opinion some kind of CT designation for Yasuke or a wider area such as "culture war issues in video
864:
I am particularly saddened by the withdrawal of BrocadeRiverPoems from the topic area. Though we have disagreed strongly at times, their contributions to this topic, while occasionally verbose, have been cogent and constructive. I apologise for any role I may have played in their decision to
54:
1354:, I can see that the "dumpster fire" has kept repeatedly going in flames since then, and that arbitration remedies are definitely needed at this point. Given how far removed this topic is from GENSEX, it would make more sense to consolidate it and GamerGate into a new, separate CT.
87:
857:
A narrative focused solely on external "culture war", and a case with a corresponding scope, would both ignore that there is an historical personage about whom there is diversity of opinion, and fail to address the significant issues of behaviour by established editors.
817:
That the Community has been unable to find resolution on several aspects of this dispute is an important factor in the decision to accept, and, I suggest, where editor behaviour is the reason for that inability, that behaviour should be examined as part of the scope.
784:
because it requires uninvolved editors to read all the sources as a prerequisite, and in some cases to know the timeline of these sources. Edit: Just right now, I also found another source saying there may not be enough information, written by 渥é大é, a PhD in history:
82:
708:
Long and tedious discussions on the talk page. Since there are no sources denying Yasuke's samurai status or addressing the issue in depth, most discussions revolve around the critical analysis of 16th- and 17th-century Japanese and Portuguese sources (e.g.,
629:
with whatever is discussed or decided here, and am providing whatever notification might be necessary from me to the effect of stating I will not be keeping up to date with this. After the ANI discussion, I concluded it would be better for me to simply
76:
65:
1407:
bigotry. A lot of that recently does still involve things like attacking as many trans people as possible, yes, but it also has involved quite a lot of racism and a variety of general bigoted harassment that isn't covered specifically under GENSEX.
983:
Vandalism on the article is overall down which is a good thing (though that might change in a renewed news cycle), but I do think the above behavior is a strong of example of why EC protection and/or stronger RfC enforcement would be useful. Cheers
948:. Yvan Part is a new account that was created the day the trailer for the video game featuring Yasuke was released, and within 2 hours of account creation went on to argue on Yasuke-related talk pages to push the fringe POV that he is not a samurai
1132:
I do think "culture wars in video games" is a pretty good scope for any eventual CT, but would like to add the caveat that the majority of the recent disruption has been happening to Yasuke specifically. There were also some previous issues with
733:
opened by an inexperienced user notewithstanding the lack of significant new sources. Some editors active on the article, who are interested in debating Yasuke's samurai status, supported this new RfC, resulting in another significant waste of
103:
71:
60:
1290:
I agree with Captain Eek that the topic of conflict may be more generally "Culture wars in video games". For that reason, I think that a full case is in order, to identify both the scope of the conflict and the editors to be sanctioned.
575:) or between editors who have participated to discussions for a while and have apparently reached their boiling point against another. An assessment that the topic has problems is shared by uninvolved long time editors in offhand comments
908:
2. This is mostly in the form of new users drawn here by culture war issues removing mentions of "samurai" and replacing them with sometimes racially derogatory terms, calling him a "bodyguard" or a "retainer", endlessly conducting
43:
1382:
Well since we're talking GamerGate I thought I'd pop in. It's been a while since the committee accepted a case that revolved around basically one single article, but clearly the community is struggling here and needs some help.
920:, perhaps a category for culture war subjects based on diversity) would be potentially appropriate to prevent continued disruption. That being said, as mentioned editors were indeed able to establish a very clear RfC consensus
649:
I am updating my statement to briefly comment on my activity as this is about conduct and not content. I created the second RfC because when I tried to add a tweet by Hirayama Yu saying Yasuke was a Samurai, it was disputed
1008:
be interpreted different ways by different editors. It doesnât help that misinformation has spread in certain online echo chambers about him, that is both slanderous and stupid. So it can hard to determine what is factual.
38:
29:
558:
All of this leads to frequent ANI visits, either for obvious vandals, harassers and povpushers which are frequently attracted to the topic and led to the page being protected four times in the last five months
718:
magazine) that refer to Yasuke as a samurai. Some editors consider these sources to be of lesser quality and want to remove them, even though they are not contradicted by academic sources (see second part of
893:
1020:. Added to this, interesting interpretations of Knowledge policy were asserted in chat, such as that "scholarly" was a weasel word, in the context of which sources were more appropriate/reliable.
963:
On August 2nd Yvan Part went on to attempt to sidestep the RfC consensus by adding "despite the ambiguous definition of samurai during this period" to water down the assertion in an undue fashion
406:
1052:
and his portrayal as a samurai in that game. Ultimately it all stems from online disputes about diversity in video games that have bled onto Knowledge, in a manner similar to what prompted the
1351:
443:
275:
1024:
The extremity to which the focus on samurai status and neglect of the bigger picture of the article is visible in the lead. A recent example was that a sentence was repeated twice in a row
814:
Firstly, the Committee seems inclined to accept the request. I believe that is the right decision, and both thank the Committee for their decision and apologise for the burden in advance.
208:
861:
Where editors, new or old, make reasonable, policy aligned contributions to discussions, those contributions should be addressed in good faith. In some cases, they have not been.
437:
1411:
is only one example of many of this. And since the Gamergate group has also gotten significantly involved in general conservative culture war issues, such as anything involving
1103:
attempts to discredit the sources that disagree with them. Because of this, they lost an RFC on the issue already, and are now attempting to run a second RFC on the same issue
771:
whether to include specific points mentioned by mainly two sources. One source is a historian, Yuichi Goza, who according to his research page specializes in studying samurai
1444:
I don't believe this needs to be a full case. The best option would be to spin Gamergate back out of GENSEX and into its own case, along with redefining the scope to include
1111:
but has spiraled out to all sorts of other noticeboards, which have very much failed to do anything serious about this problem, therefore ArbCom intervention is necessary.
633:
from all things Yasuke, and I believe other editors more experienced than I held the same sentiment that it would be better for me to leave such contentious topics alone.--
1460:
1434:
1396:
1372:
1340:
1323:
1300:
1250:
1228:
1169:
1146:
1123:
1085:
993:
874:
801:
760:
738:
I have no opinion on what actions ArbCom might take to address these issues, but in the ongoing RfC, I proposed a one-year moratorium on new RfCs regarding the same topic
687:
641:
401:
613:
433:
229:
221:
375:
1032:
it is appropriate to use oneâs basic knowledge of the time period as a starting point for investigation. Of course, this should be followed up by sources.
395:
240:
218:
1048:
I have not edited in this area but I am familiar with the nature of the dispute and why it is so contentious. This all started with Yasuke's inclusion in
428:
366:
285:
213:
536:
has completely broken down and the talkpage has become rife with endless debates about rules interpretations, bludgeoning and extreme entrenchment.
502:
371:
1063:
The GamerGate case authorized discretionary sanctions for pages related to GamerGate or gender related controversies, which were later replaced by
381:
361:
244:
916:
The Yasuke article saw an absurd amount of vandalism when said video game trailer came out and if anything I think general sanctions (not unlike
96:
Opened 26 September 2024 ⢠Evidence closes 10 October 2024 ⢠Workshop closes 17 October 2024 ⢠Proposed decision to be posted by 24 October 2024
1180:
the community has not been successful in resolving the disputes, ArbCom should take action. That action should include declaring the topic of
723:
543:
386:
299:
280:
825:
of involved parties. I suggest that there is ample evidence that conduct has fallen short of our accepted standards, particularly as regards:
954:
On July 1st, one day after the previous RfC closed with an overwhelming consensus, Yvan Part demonstrated intent to violate it and called it
917:
594:
420:
311:
344:
1283:
with regard to that question, and that is a conduct matter that ArbCom should deal with, either with a full case or by delegating it to
697:
The problem with the article, as I see it, is that many editors (often IPs and newly created accounts) do not accept the outcome of the
516:
270:
199:
25:
1219:
whether they are ready and willing to identify and sanction the offenders, or whether they want a traditional evidentiary phase first.
792:
I am not sure what steps arbitration could take to resolve this dispute. Hopefully this background is helpful to someone who reads it.
1368:
1241:. This request was closed for various procedural reasons, as well as because an RFC in process appeared to overlap the DRN request.
1416:
336:
176:
756:
322:
265:
21:
741:. If there were a consensus on this, I believe it would be very helpful. I expect that editors from the gamer community and
257:
1394:
495:
307:
205:
552:
has been massively bludgeoned (over 30000 words in two weeks) leading to very few uninvolved editors participating. My
903:
317:
235:
1267:?" is a content question, but it is a content question that Knowledge does not answer, because the question is: "Do
102:: What breaches of Knowledge policies have happened over the past year on the Yasuke article and talk page? See also
785:
989:
356:
1449:
1319:
1296:
1246:
1224:
1049:
460:
1096:
inexperienced editors now want to remove the word "samurai" from the article in contravention of the sources.
971:. This was opposed by me and he did it again with a misleading edit summary, calling it a "slight modification"
946:
1114:
I agree with Pinguinn's proposed solution of spinning out a second CT from Gamergate instead of just GENSEX.
1391:
1386:
This doesn't fit under the current CTOP but I could certainly see expanding it in order to accomplish that.
797:
676:
673:
670:
666:
663:
660:
657:
654:
651:
617:
609:
584:
580:
576:
573:
571:
569:
566:
564:
562:
560:
553:
488:
788:
1429:
1364:
681:
635:
129:
118:
1157:
lot of salt if they are trying to push against the established academic literature on a cultural figure.
1142:
1119:
985:
775:
710:
698:
195:
17:
519:
to arbitrate this dispute, and serve as verbatim copies; therefore, they may not be edited or removed.
968:
On August 6th Yvan Part outright removed "samurai" from the lede in violation of the spirit of the RfC
821:
I am heartened by the acceptance statements of Guerillero & Primefac; that the focus should be on
1412:
1315:
1292:
1242:
1220:
143:
1234:
Another attempt to resolve this dispute besides those listed by the filing editor was a request at
630:
842:
I am disheartened, however, by comments which focus on external commentary by "Gamergaters" &
705:
Frequent attempts to remove the word "samurai" from the article, especially from the lead section.
1454:
1335:
1077:
871:
793:
752:
601:
which see some petty vandalism, pov pushing and edit warring though to a much lesser degree than
154:
945:
As for Yvan Part's comment toward me, it was indeed heard and editors did not find it convincing
977:
On August 20th he attempted to remove "samurai" from the lede yet again in violation of the RfC
1424:
1355:
556:
on it after it had been open for only a week was already very critical about the bludgeoning.
124:
113:
1068:
games" is needed. It could potentially solve the problems in this area without a full case.
811:
In the time since the case request was made, I have considered carefully what to write here.
538:
One example is a discussion around the replacement of one tertiary source which has led to a
1205:
1189:
1185:
1138:
1115:
1064:
926:
I'm not sure what the threshold for a full arbcom case is, but my recommendations would be:
462:
1099:
When asked what sources support their position, they cannot give any and insist instead on
1445:
1193:
1165:
1129:
1057:
1053:
1016:
Small uncontroversial changes were undone, based on association with controversial changes
165:
138:
923:, so I do think that demonstrates overall that the community was able to come together.
620:) but decided not to pursue further at ANI after making the decision to come to ArbCom.
465:
1134:
902:, or because they read it as a part of the aforementioned culture war over a video game
590:
1235:
1070:
772:
748:
546:
mentioned earlier which itself seems to be leading nowhere due to general vagueness.
149:
905:
push the fringe POV that Yasuke was not a samurai in contrast to reliable sourcing.
701:, which concluded that Yasuke should be described as a "samurai". This has led to:
1284:
1280:
1268:
1216:
1209:
1201:
1100:
910:
1137:
but I think those have mostly blown over by themselves, though I'm not 100% sure.
184:
1279:?" The multiple RFCs on various forms of that question illustrate that there is
868:
Again, I thank the Committee for their time & effort in taking on this case.
1108:
843:
743:
730:
719:
714:
549:
539:
515:
Statements on this page are copies of the statements submitted in the original
1158:
829:
misinterpretation &/or misapplication of core policy (WP:OR, WP:NPOV, etc)
160:
464:
938:
921:
885:
1107:
under three months later. Furthermore, this has not been limited to just
1448:'s suggestion of "culture wars in video games". The current flare-up at
1276:
1264:
937:
A moratorium on redundant RfCs, as well as stricter enforcement of the
598:
1408:
1272:
1260:
1192:
is defined as a separate topic, or defined to be within the scope of
1184:, broadly construed, including video games featuring Yasuke, to be a
1181:
941:
which is frequently disregarded by new users and culture war vandals.
931:
889:
602:
533:
780:
898:
1. That people who are convinced he isn't one, because they just
1420:
589:
Some of the problems spill over into connected articles such as
1215:
My suggestion is that ArbCom should ask the administrators at
466:
1204:. The second approach would be to declare the topic to be
892:
has been the target of the right-wing culture warrior crowd
1423:" in general, we really need a broader CT coverage area.
1060:
has been another page caught up in this "culture war".
1239:
1025:
1021:
1017:
1013:
978:
972:
969:
964:
958:
949:
739:
616:
section was not properly evaluated (reasoning provided
476:
391:
349:
225:
1334:
the disruption is spilling outside the GENSEX area.
1012:remove repetition and clunkiness from the lead.
850:edits. This aspect, while certainly present, is
587:and that additional remedies might be required.
542:(over 14000 words and over a month old) and the
1188:. I do not think that it matters whether the
532:Normal consensus building around the article
496:
8:
888:was done excellently in my opinion, however
913:on talk pages, or starting redundant RfCs.
884:I agree with Gitz, Loki, and Pinguinn. The
568:) as well as three times for its talkpage (
854:what the Community has failed to resolve.
503:
489:
172:
175:
955:
747:will soon lose interest in the topic.
1212:identify and sanction the offenders.
779:whether Yasuke was a samurai or not."
595:List of foreign-born samurai in Japan
7:
276:Clarification and Amendment requests
1208:, and to let the administrators at
30:Backlash to diversity and inclusion
1352:the first ANI thread on this topic
1236:the dispute resolution noticeboard
610:complaint against Symphony Regalia
36:
183:
1378:Statement by Just Step Sideways
540:still going talkpage discussion
1461:23:15, 25 September 2024 (UTC)
1435:04:06, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
1397:20:22, 21 September 2024 (UTC)
1373:04:30, 21 September 2024 (UTC)
1341:20:14, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
1324:12:05, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
1301:21:34, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
1251:05:27, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
1229:05:15, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
1170:23:23, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
1147:20:59, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
1124:20:45, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
1086:18:05, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
994:01:17, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
875:02:26, 23 September 2024 (UTC)
802:15:18, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
761:12:55, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
688:21:32, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
683:Brocade River Poems (She/They)
642:11:37, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
637:Brocade River Poems (She/They)
624:Statement by BrocadeRiverPoems
1:
880:Statement by Symphony Regalia
1309:Statement by Alanscottwalker
1175:Statement by Robert McClenon
832:tendentious source selection
407:Conflict of interest reports
999:Statement by Tinynanorobots
236:Search archived proceedings
1476:
1440:Statement by The Wordsmith
1329:Statement by Seraphimblade
835:bludgeoning of discussions
807:Statement by Rotary Engine
766:Statement by J2UDY7r00CRjH
281:Arbitrator motion requests
1350:As the person who opened
1346:Statement by Chaotic Enby
1450:Assassin's Creed Shadows
1402:Statement by Silverseren
1091:Statement by LokiTheLiar
1050:Assassin's Creed Shadows
838:derailing of discussions
104:two additional questions
1285:Arbitration Enforcement
1217:Arbitration Enforcement
1210:Arbitration Enforcement
1202:Arbitration Enforcement
895:. The main issues are:
677:Special:Diff/1237877741
674:Special:Diff/1237869174
671:Special:Diff/1237866505
667:Special:Diff/1237852447
664:Special:Diff/1237852447
661:Special:Diff/1237850766
658:Special:Diff/1237849580
655:Special:Diff/1237846490
652:Special:Diff/1237845246
1238:on 14 September 2024:
1200:the administrators at
528:Statement by Yvan Part
523:Preliminary statements
50:Preliminary statements
1044:Statement by Pinguinn
776:Talk:Yasuke/Archive 5
693:Statement by Gitz6666
477:Track related changes
337:Arbitration Committee
177:Knowledge Arbitration
18:Knowledge:Arbitration
939:recent RfC consensus
781:(source in Japanese)
286:Enforcement requests
214:Guide to arbitration
135:Drafting arbitrators
1281:tendentious editing
1105:under a month later
918:Gamergate sanctions
1392:Just Step Sideways
1259:I agree that "Was
1194:the Gamergate case
1152:Statement by Masem
1106:
608:I also believe my
308:Contentious topics
206:Arbitration policy
1339:
1190:contentious topic
1186:contentious topic
1104:
930:EC protection on
513:
512:
480:
448:
318:General sanctions
266:All open requests
196:About arbitration
169:
158:
147:
133:
122:
91:
83:Proposed decision
80:
69:
58:
47:
1467:
1459:
1432:
1427:
1419:, and anything "
1361:
1360:
1338:
1269:reliable sources
1162:
1082:
1081:
1075:
1074:
986:Symphony Regalia
684:
638:
505:
498:
491:
479:
474:
467:
446:
402:Clerk procedures
394:
352:
323:Editor sanctions
300:Active sanctions
258:Open proceedings
228:
187:
173:
163:
152:
141:
127:
116:
85:
74:
63:
52:
41:
1475:
1474:
1470:
1469:
1468:
1466:
1465:
1464:
1453:
1442:
1430:
1425:
1404:
1380:
1358:
1356:
1348:
1331:
1316:Alanscottwalker
1311:
1293:Robert McClenon
1243:Robert McClenon
1221:Robert McClenon
1177:
1160:
1154:
1093:
1079:
1078:
1072:
1071:
1058:Sweet Baby Inc.
1046:
1001:
882:
809:
768:
720:this discussion
695:
682:
636:
626:
614:most recent ANI
530:
525:
509:
475:
469:
468:
463:
453:
452:
451:
440:
423:
413:
412:
411:
398:
390:
378:
353:
348:
339:
329:
328:
327:
302:
292:
291:
290:
260:
250:
247:
232:
224:
202:
171:
34:
33:
32:
12:
11:
5:
1473:
1471:
1441:
1438:
1403:
1400:
1379:
1376:
1347:
1344:
1330:
1327:
1310:
1307:
1306:
1305:
1304:
1303:
1288:
1254:
1253:
1176:
1173:
1153:
1150:
1135:Sweet Baby Inc
1092:
1089:
1054:GamerGate case
1045:
1042:
1000:
997:
943:
942:
935:
881:
878:
840:
839:
836:
833:
830:
808:
805:
767:
764:
736:
735:
727:
706:
694:
691:
625:
622:
591:Thomas Lockley
588:
557:
547:
537:
529:
526:
524:
521:
511:
510:
508:
507:
500:
493:
485:
482:
481:
471:
470:
461:
459:
458:
455:
454:
450:
449:
441:
436:
431:
425:
424:
419:
418:
415:
414:
410:
409:
404:
399:
389:
384:
379:
374:
369:
364:
359:
354:
347:
341:
340:
335:
334:
331:
330:
326:
325:
320:
315:
304:
303:
298:
297:
294:
293:
289:
288:
283:
278:
273:
268:
262:
261:
256:
255:
252:
251:
249:
248:
243:
238:
233:
223:
216:
211:
203:
198:
192:
189:
188:
180:
179:
39:Main case page
37:
35:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1472:
1463:
1462:
1458:
1457:
1456:The Wordsmith
1451:
1447:
1439:
1437:
1436:
1433:
1428:
1422:
1418:
1414:
1410:
1401:
1399:
1398:
1395:
1393:
1387:
1384:
1377:
1375:
1374:
1370:
1366:
1362:
1353:
1345:
1343:
1342:
1337:
1336:Seraphimblade
1328:
1326:
1325:
1321:
1317:
1308:
1302:
1298:
1294:
1289:
1286:
1282:
1278:
1274:
1270:
1266:
1262:
1258:
1257:
1256:
1255:
1252:
1248:
1244:
1240:
1237:
1233:
1232:
1231:
1230:
1226:
1222:
1218:
1213:
1211:
1207:
1203:
1197:
1195:
1191:
1187:
1183:
1174:
1172:
1171:
1167:
1163:
1151:
1149:
1148:
1144:
1140:
1136:
1131:
1126:
1125:
1121:
1117:
1112:
1110:
1102:
1097:
1090:
1088:
1087:
1084:
1083:
1076:
1066:
1061:
1059:
1055:
1051:
1043:
1041:
1037:
1033:
1029:
1027:
1023:
1019:
1015:
1009:
1005:
998:
996:
995:
991:
987:
981:
979:
975:
973:
970:
966:
965:
961:
959:
957:
952:
950:
947:
940:
936:
933:
929:
928:
927:
924:
922:
919:
914:
912:
906:
904:
901:
896:
894:
891:
887:
879:
877:
876:
873:
872:Rotary Engine
869:
866:
862:
859:
855:
853:
847:
845:
837:
834:
831:
828:
827:
826:
824:
819:
815:
812:
806:
804:
803:
799:
795:
794:J2UDY7r00CRjH
790:
789:
786:
782:
777:
773:
765:
763:
762:
758:
754:
750:
746:
745:
740:
732:
728:
725:
724:thread at RSN
721:
716:
712:
707:
704:
703:
702:
700:
692:
690:
689:
686:
685:
678:
675:
672:
668:
665:
662:
659:
656:
653:
648:
644:
643:
640:
639:
632:
623:
621:
619:
615:
611:
606:
604:
600:
596:
592:
586:
582:
578:
574:
572:
570:
567:
565:
563:
561:
555:
551:
545:
541:
535:
527:
522:
520:
518:
506:
501:
499:
494:
492:
487:
486:
484:
483:
478:
473:
472:
457:
456:
445:
442:
439:
435:
432:
430:
427:
426:
422:
417:
416:
408:
405:
403:
400:
397:
393:
388:
385:
383:
380:
377:
373:
370:
368:
365:
363:
360:
358:
355:
351:
346:
343:
342:
338:
333:
332:
324:
321:
319:
316:
313:
309:
306:
305:
301:
296:
295:
287:
284:
282:
279:
277:
274:
272:
271:Case requests
269:
267:
264:
263:
259:
254:
253:
246:
242:
239:
237:
234:
231:
227:
222:
220:
217:
215:
212:
210:
207:
204:
201:
197:
194:
193:
191:
190:
186:
182:
181:
178:
174:
170:
167:
162:
156:
151:
145:
140:
136:
131:
126:
120:
115:
111:
107:
105:
101:
97:
95:
94:Target dates:
89:
84:
78:
73:
67:
62:
56:
51:
45:
40:
31:
27:
23:
19:
1455:
1443:
1405:
1388:
1385:
1381:
1349:
1332:
1312:
1214:
1198:
1178:
1155:
1127:
1113:
1098:
1094:
1069:
1062:
1047:
1038:
1034:
1030:
1010:
1006:
1002:
982:
976:
967:
962:
953:
944:
925:
915:
907:
899:
897:
883:
870:
867:
863:
860:
856:
851:
848:
841:
822:
820:
816:
813:
810:
791:
769:
742:
737:
696:
680:
646:
645:
634:
631:WP:DISENGAGE
627:
607:
531:
514:
134:
125:HouseBlaster
114:SilverLocust
109:
108:
99:
98:
93:
92:
49:
1206:contentious
1109:Talk:Yasuke
844:Netto-uyoku
554:own comment
550:ongoing RfC
544:ongoing RSN
241:Ban appeals
219:Noticeboard
110:Case clerks
1446:CaptainEek
1130:CaptainEek
956:disgusting
886:recent RfC
865:withdraw.
699:recent RfC
447:(pre-2016)
434:Statistics
367:Procedures
139:Guerillero
1271:describe
372:Elections
1369:contribs
1357:Chaotic
1073:Pinguinn
757:contribs
744:neto-uyo
722:and the
150:Primefac
72:Workshop
61:Evidence
28: |
24: |
22:Requests
20: |
1277:samurai
1265:samurai
823:conduct
731:new RfC
612:in the
599:Samurai
517:request
444:Reports
382:History
362:Members
357:Contact
345:Discuss
209:(CU/OS)
1426:Silver
1409:Yasuke
1273:Yasuke
1261:Yasuke
1182:Yasuke
1065:GENSEX
932:Yasuke
890:Yasuke
603:Yasuke
534:Yasuke
387:Clerks
245:Report
159:&
148:&
123:&
1431:seren
1275:as a
1101:WP:OR
911:WP:OR
734:time.
647:Edit:
421:Audit
161:Aoidh
100:Scope
16:<
1421:woke
1365:talk
1359:Enby
1320:talk
1297:talk
1247:talk
1225:talk
1196:.
1161:asem
1143:talk
1139:Loki
1120:talk
1116:Loki
1026:diff
1022:diff
1018:diff
1014:diff
990:talk
900:know
798:talk
753:talk
749:Gitz
715:here
711:here
618:here
597:and
585:here
583:and
581:here
577:here
548:The
438:Talk
429:Talk
396:Talk
376:Talk
230:Talk
200:Talk
166:Talk
155:Talk
144:Talk
130:Talk
119:Talk
88:Talk
77:Talk
66:Talk
55:Talk
44:Talk
26:Case
1417:DEI
1413:CRT
960:.
852:not
755:) (
312:Log
1415:,
1371:)
1367:¡
1322:)
1299:)
1263:a
1249:)
1227:)
1168:)
1145:)
1122:)
1080:đ§
1056:.
1028:.
992:)
980:.
974:.
951:.
846:.
800:)
759:)
729:A
726:).
713:,
605:.
593:,
579:,
137::
112::
81:â
70:â
59:â
48:â
1363:(
1318:(
1295:(
1287:.
1245:(
1223:(
1166:t
1164:(
1159:M
1141:(
1128:@
1118:(
988:(
934:.
796:(
751:(
559:(
504:e
497:t
490:v
392:+
350:+
314:)
310:(
226:+
168:)
164:(
157:)
153:(
146:)
142:(
132:)
128:(
121:)
117:(
106:.
90:)
86:(
79:)
75:(
68:)
64:(
57:)
53:(
46:)
42:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
