Talk:Stephen K. Hayes/Archive 1

message: In 1997, Shidoshi Hayes, seeking more control over his students who were leaving him to train under Masaak Hatusmi, founded the martial art of To-Shin Do, an art based in his experience of budo taijutsu and life experiences.
Is there documentation on this? I don't mind leaving it if it can be substantiated, but if not, it's a rather substantial POV statement and should be reverted.--MikeJ9919 20:04, 10 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I totally agree.  This needs to be backed up with a reputable source.  Lawyer2b 01:48, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

message: This article has been replaced by something that is obviously copied from some external source for several times now. This whole thing needs independent references and checking for any violations of POV and AUTO guidelines. jni 10:46, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The external source  is using is this site.  I've left a note on Jikaku's talk page about the unacceptability of the reversions.  The former version was better in format, wikification, and NPOV, so I'm going to change it back once again. -- Jonel | Speak 03:41, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Reversions

message: I removed the claim that said Hayes was one of the world's foremost authorities on Buddhist studies. Buddhist studies is a branch of religious studies and to be considered an authority in such field would require one to publish dozens of articles in peer reviewed journals and write a few scholarly treatises. I don't think his books quite match any scholarly standards. I have not seen any indication of Mr. Hayes being anything other than a gifted practitioner of the arts, not their academic researcher. 
I have also removed most references to an-shu, a some kind of title whose origins are unknown to me. Either it comes from esoteric Buddhism or is something he coined himself. It certainly is not a title commonly used in Japanese martial arts, so its meaning and origins should be researched for this article. jni 09:22, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Questionable claims

message: Also, some versions of this article could be thought of copyvios from . The page says they give explicit permission for Wikipedia to reproduce this article, but that is not enough. Our articles must be freely licensable under GFDL to all interested parties, not just wikipedia.org. And of course that external page cannot be used verbatim because it is very much POV and its tone is inappropriate for use in encyclopedia. jni 10:02, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Copyvio

message: Greetings. I've been asked to have a look at the debate here (at least there is one!) and see if I can be of help. I'm glad you are discussing the things here, remembering our assume good faith policy. Hayes is a well known figure, and I don't see that we can't keep most of the info about him. We should have qualifying language for various claims and a more neutral presentation, though. This won't imply that whatever is said isn't true, but it's a larger style issue. In the world of martial arts (especially "secret" martial arts) usually the only source for their pre-20th century histories are the schools themselves. Look at some of out other martial arts bios and you'll see some examples of this. People who are well documented and well regarded, sensationalist martial arts movie stars and even, erm, "teachers" like Ashida Kim are given (or we try to give) what you could call "dry" entries. For instance, you can mention the person's title, but not every time you mention them by name. In conversation it is polite to, in an encyclopaedia bio it is redundant. When I have more time I will try to post a compromise article and see what everyone thinks. --Fire Star 15:01, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Also, please see: Wikipedia:Manual of Style (biographies) --Fire Star 08:48, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Compromise 

message: The following text was added by User:12.210.27.45 : 
Recently, Stephen K. Hayes was expelled from Bujinkan by Grandmaster Hatsumi and stripped of Shihan status, and is no longer allowed to associate himself with ninjutsu.
That's a pretty bold statement and one which obviously needs a source for it to stay in the article.  Lawyer2b 04:16, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The article also says that he was a 10th dan black belt. Did Dr. Hatsumi take away Hayes' belt?--Peter Knutsen 15:34, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If soke has indeed removed his placard (as the article now claims), that would be the de facto implication. However saying he was "expelled" and "stripped of Shihan status" implies an official action which I don't think has occured yet. The current wording is fine, I think. --Rustedshuriken 08:08, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  SKH's supposed expulsion from the Bujinkan 

message: I'm a former student of Hayes from the late 1980s, and I invite any moderator to email me privately to verify my credentials and original documents. I can speak confidentally on SKH's being stripped of his Shihan title from Grandmaster Hatsumi. Hatsumi and Hayes were inseparable in those days, with SKH flying monthly to Japan to see his Master. While SKH never missed an opportunity to have a photo taken with Hatsumi, there seem to be no recent photos of Hatsumi and Hayes. Let me explain:
Hayes was an outstanding teacher and one of the most learned Martial Artists I've ever met (paradoxically, he is a very private man). During the time of Hayes and the spread of Ninjutsu, a cult seemed to have sprung up around Hayes. Things were great for SKH until the annual Shadows of Iga festival held at Camp Campbell Gard (sic) in Hamilton Ohio on September 4-9, 1987. This was the 7th festival SKH had held. People from all over had mailed in $250 to go the the festival. But when we got there, we were told at the registration desk that we had to cough up an additional $100 because Grandmaster Hatsumi was there with three of his black belts.
The registration desk was manned by a member of SKH's inner circle, Cpl Brin Morgan of the British Royal Marines. Despite the fact that many of us had come from all over the world to be here, Cpl Morgan brusquely told us that anyone who didn't have the extra cash on them had to go home.  The demands of the extra $100 went very badly on many of us (about 230 were in attendance, typical for the festival, many had saved months to get there). To make matters worse, the first night in the auditorium Hayes told us that we were forbidden to take pictures of Hatsumi, and were enouraged to purchase official photographs instead. (Many people were angry at our treatment by SKH, and there were many thefts, including wallets and even SKH's Ninjutsu flag.)
On Sunday evening, September 6th, there was a Q&A with Grandmaster Hatsumi. At that time Grandmaster Hatsumi spoke, through his translator (SKH's wife) at great length AGAINST obtaining a blackbelt solely via videotapes. He was particularly passionate on this subject (Hatsumi then told us that his own videotapes had deliberate errors in the techniques so force people to attend his seminars, which also went over very badly with the crowd).
In 2004, SKH started selling a DVD set on his website which, on completion, would earn someone a black belt in Ninjutsu. There seem to be no later photos of SKH with Grandmaster Hatsumi after this time. It is also after the DVD blackbelt was released that SKH stopped calling himself Shihan, or a Ninja, or even claiming to have a present black belt in Nunjutsu, and instead started using the obscure An-shu.
In order for Stephen K. Hayes to call himself a ninja, a Shihan or claim to have a present black-belt ranking, requires the consent of Grandmaster Hatsumi, both traditionally and legally. If Grandmaster Hatsumi stripped SKH's Shihan status, that's like the AMA stripping a doctor of his credentials - the man can no longer call himself a doctor, practice medicine, or use Dr. before his name.
I've heard that the truth is that Grandmaster Hatsumi had a final falling out with SKH in 2006 and stripped him of Shihan status, and SKH is no longer allowed to associate himself with Bujinkan Ninjutsu or Masaaki Hatsumi, partially because of the DVD blackbelt (there are also rumors that Grandmaster  Hatsumi demanded and was denied royalties for SKH's present teachings. While I don't have direct knowledge of this, SKH and Grandmaster Hatsumi were clearly financially linked from the first time they met). SKH can not and does not call his system Ninjutsu, but now calls his system To-Shin Do. He can not, and does not, refer to himself as a black belt. Most importantly, he can not and does not call himself Shihan, and now uses An-shu.
While SKH's marketing materials always heavily emphasized his existing relationship with Grandmaster Hatsumi, his present materials only refer to his past relationship.
There is a page on his website that is very defensive of his  relationship with Grandmaster Hatsumi. At the very end of this page, SKH mentions his banishment rumors but never says that he is a present student of Grandmaster Masaaki Hatsumi, nor does he say the rumors are false.  SKH does not directly call himself a black belt, but most importantly he does not directly call himself Shihan - that's like an M.D. not calling himself a doctor!
It's very clear to anyone that has known SKH personally, that his website also proves that Grandmaster Hatsumi has stripped Hayes of his ability to teach Bujinkan Ninjutsu and that Hayes, unfortunately, is no longer a Shihan.
From a grander perspective, this does not take away from Hayes' style or skill. It's more of a marketing setback for Steve.
As an aside - in 1986, SKH started WIN, the Warrior Information Network. This was to be a confidential mailing list for all members to communicate with. Membership was $7.50 for a lifetime membership, and we were allowed to use aliases. After emphasising the confidentiality of the information, SKH sold his list of names in 1989 and many of us started getting mailing adverts for martial arts magazines and equipment under our alias, which further upset his students. This, along with a few other incidents, including people not being mailed their belt diplomas, contributed to a lack of trust in SKH and enrollment in his events plummeted. The Shadows of Iga festival was finally cancelled in 1989 due to lack of interest and SKH's career as a mass market martial arts trainer ended. --Corwin8 23:16, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Words from a former Student

message: I have some questions, I will start with two:
# Are there currently any copyvios in the article?
# Was Jikaku reported for 3RR violation?
KillerChihuahua?!? 06:02, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I reported Jikaku's 3RR (4RR now?) violation on the talk page for User:Fire Star, because no admin was involved at the time and it looked like admin Fire Star had participated here before. I was dissapointed when Jikaku constantly reverted my initial edits without engaging me in useful dialog until this article was finally protected. --Corwin8 16:31, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Next time, use WP:AN3. KillerChihuahua?!? 21:17, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Article protected

message: It appears that there's a consensus (however small) of at least two editors and one admin that Corwin8's contributions are at a minimum OR, and therefore don't belong in this article. If Corwin8 can agree to stop inserting them (unless/until there are cited sources, of course), or any other POV/OR material, we can probably end this fairly easily, no? --Jikaku 18:44, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Now you are speaking for the Admins? A "small" consensus? Do you admit that you violated the 3RR rule? Look, this discussion was the Admin's attempts to reach a solution. Regardless of your insults, I have suggested areas of compromise, while you seem completley unwilling to consider any viewpoint that contradicts your own bias. You seem totally unwilling to accept anything I have referenced, and are totally against any compromise. But let me ask you this - what cited sources are presently referenced in the article as it is locked today? Because I want to know what sources you reference (which include, oddly enough, some forum posts) that are in the present article, that would also be considered acceptable for my position. --Corwin8 20:07, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Understood. I will comply. --Corwin8 21:30, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Consensus

message: Clarification question for KillerChihuahua - did I (Jikaku) *need* to be reported for a 3RR violation? I've contended that I haven't, in fact, violated the 3RR, referring to: "Potentially libellous material - All users are encouraged to remove any unsourced or poorly sourced derogatory information present on a biography of a living person or the associated talk page. As with vandalism, the repeated addition of such material is best dealt with by blocking and page protection."
This is why *I* originally requested (and received) the full-page protection for this article.
Also for KillerChihuahua - when you said to Corwin8 "please limit yourself to specifying what parts of the article are unreferenced, and which references are unacceptable." - did you mean to address that to me, or...? 
I don't believe Corwin8's complaint was that there were unreferenced things in/being added to the article, or that current references were unacceptable - rather, *he* was adding material that people (me included) were viewing as either un-referenced, OR, or POV and then removing them (with comments here, and on his talk page). His complaint was that this material *was* being removed. Or have I missed something? --Jikaku 03:25, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Questions for KillerChihuahua

message: What is the situation here? I protected, but the talk page went virtually silent. If I unprotect, will edit wars start again? If you wish to proceed from a protected status, then start entering disputed content and suggested edits for discussion. Let me know which way you wish to proceed. IMHO, all unsourced and poorly sourced content should be removed or sourced, for a start. KillerChihuahua?!? 11:33, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm hoping that the edit wars won't start up all over again, but it depends primarily on Corwin8 at this point. If he refrains from re-inserting the material, we won't have to edit it out again. :-)  It would appear he's agreed to your requests for keeping out OR and POV material - if he holds to that, the article should be fine.--Jikaku 00:48, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

text: Ok, unprotecting. KillerChihuahua?!? 15:38, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Moving forward

message: For some reason, user "124.155.12.239" continues to delete the section of this article that he doesn't happen to like - while refusing to discuss the matter at all, though he's been asked to address this on this talk page by two people now. What's to be done? --8.8.197.169 14:42, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks good. --Jikaku 01:44, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Reversions

message: He looks just like Terry Pratchett ! Magic Pickle 16:05, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Lookalike