Reaper Eternal, if you have the time take a look at just these two comments by Nishidani as well as his talk page were, who by the way was called upon by Hijiri 88 to help attack CurtisNaito several times, are these condesending and insulting comments acceptable? How is what I said any worse? 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Nishidani#CurtisNaito_needs_to_be_banned_from_edits_related_to_pre-1868_Japanese_history
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Nishidani#Little_help
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Nishidani#Curtis.27s_still_at_it

Whatever, no one need take my word for anything. I know the topics fairly thoroughly, through primary and secondary sources in Japanese and Western languages. I try however to avoid the topic area because of the need to WP:AGF, and all I can see is puerile bickering and dumb-ignorant edits based on an inability to see good sources and evaluate reliable evidence. I see only POV passions, googling for evidence to support them, and above, all, the tolerance on the page of sheer bad edits or nonsense that anyone with the slightest BA competence in Japanese studies would find laughable (I'm thinking of CurtisNaito in this regard). There are massive corrections to be made, but, as Ubikwit says, one simply doesn't have the time (at least for now), except to note that the litigants who do edit those pages, can't see the obvious (citing outdated sources like Fenellosa et al. from a century back,etc. I gave details a year ago why none of them are reliable, and suggested how to fix the sourcing: almost nothing done, and my edits are invariably to replace bad edits by giving several good sources, which, however anyone could do, if they had the foggiest idea of what Japanese scholarship knows). If there is competent area specialists available to review these messes, by all means get a third opinion from her, them. Nishidani (talk) 

Well, I also know this topic very thoroughly.' Sigh. I've had to correct virtually every edit I've seen you make, or revert every revert. True, you eventually accept nearly all of these improvements, after persisting on the talk page in justifying the trash you added, but, had you known the material, you wouldn't have dumped in the trash in the first place. I can document this at great length, but suffice it to read the relevant talk pages, and examine each time you've been reverted by a knowledgeable editor.Nishidani (talk) 
202.71.190.26