Wikipedia talk:Requests for mediation/Karate

message: A few things before I can begin.
===Consent to Daniel.Bryant being the mediator===
Just to be sure that things don't fall off the rails later due to someone raising an objection to me being the mediator, either due to a prior conflict or whateverelse, can the parties listed please just note "Agree" or "Disagree" below. 
Declining my mediation does not mean that your mediation request will be rejected. Most likely, another mediator from the Mediation Committee will be along within a week and things will be taken from there. Cheers, Daniel Bryant 04:23, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Last call. Will close down in a couple of hours' time, if no response or activity by Melonbarmonster. Daniel Bryant 06:25, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, closing now. Thanks to all for their input, to different degrees. Daniel Bryant 11:40, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Housekeeping tasks

message: Just to be sure that things don't fall off the rails later due to someone raising an objection to me being the mediator, either due to a prior conflict or whateverelse, can the parties listed please just note "Agree" or "Disagree" below. 
Declining my mediation does not mean that your mediation request will be rejected. Most likely, another mediator from the Mediation Committee will be along within a week and things will be taken from there. Cheers, Daniel Bryant 04:23, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Consent to Daniel.Bryant being the mediator

message: Melonbarmonster has now been inactive for five days now, and non-responsive to this mediation in around about fifteen days. I have pinged him asking to give his input. If he does not shortly (ie. by Friday), then I will have to close this mediation due to inactivity of the parties. Presumably as he has withdrawn from the dispute/Wikipedia, you would be free to find a comprimise between yourselves. At the moment, #Comprimise version II looks like it could do quite nicely. Until Friday (ACST) then. Cheers, Daniel Bryant 10:07, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Last call. Will close down in a couple of hours' time, if no response or activity by Melonbarmonster. Daniel Bryant 06:25, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, closing now. Thanks to all for their input, to different degrees. Daniel Bryant 11:40, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Inactivity

message: (Blatantly copied from a fellow mediator) I would like to hear both parties' views without complicated discussion in the first instance. To that end, I'd like you both to put a statement below, under your named section. Please don't engage in a detailed rebuttal of the other editor's points for now. I want to get an overview of the situation first.
When we have got to this place, we can then decide exactly what issues are under contest. From there we will hopefully be able to find a solution you can all be happy with.
Basically, a short (couple of paragraphs, maximum) summary of what your opinion is on the inclusion/exclusion of the content under mediation, why you have this viewpoint, and if applicable, what policies and guidelines you believe are relevant. Once this is established, then we can start to work on a comprimise version.
I'm sorry that this may seem complex and drawn-out, but the first 3-4 days are always the worst. After that, it shouldn't take long (only another week, I'm guessing, at maxium) to reach a resolution.
Cheers, Daniel Bryant 12:17, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Initial Statements

message: In a section about karate's influence on taekwondo, the historical context behind HOW the early taekwondo masters were exposed to karate is topically relevant and very interesting! The negative aspects of Japanese occupation in Korea(regardless of how we may personally feel about this) is what drove immigration stemming from "economic and social" hardships.  This is a historical fact regardless of our personal POV.
I've already compromised my previous edits by reducing my edits to just half a sentence of text and have even included references from University of Tokyo and Japanfocus to document that my half a sentence is existing academic fact: 
1. brutality of Japanese rule, please see http://www.cgs.c.u-tokyo.ac.jp/workshops_e/w_2004_02_23_e
2. migration caused by social and economic impact of Japanese policies, please see http://www.japanfocus.org/products/details/2220
Korean taekwondo masters were part of this Korean Migration as documented in above references and this allowed early Korean masters to learn karate and other Japanese martial arts during colonial times. This fact is historically interesting and relevant to the topic of this sub-section and I fail to see the logic behind anyone claiming this is topically irrelevant! Deleting this historical context from the text is unnatural and decreases info content and accuracy of this wiki article. 
It seems to me that what's really going on is that some feel uncomfortable about negative mentioning of Japanese rule in Korea period. And while I sympathize with reasons for such sensitivity, historical context(regardless of our personal feelings about this) that can be properly attributed(WP:A)should be included.
And lastly let's not engage in NPOV finger pointing and the like.  Certainly, feelings are mutual in this regard which is why mediation was needed in the first place.melonbarmonster 23:25, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Melonbarmonster

message: Our discussion in Talk:Karate centered around this edit by Melonbarmonster, and his unilateral revert-warring.  Most people there agreed that Melonbarmonster's use of the word "brutal" is either too strong or is an WP:NPOV violation.  In addition, his source uses controversial terminology such as cultural genocide, which I believe may also be a WP:NPOV violation.
All we need to do in the Karate article is to simply mention Korea under Japanese rule with a wikilink, so that interested people will jump to that article.  Words such as "brutal" and "cultural genocide" aren't even mentioned in Korea under Japanese rule, and shouldn't belong in any related article anyways.  Melonbarmonster shouldn't go around inserting phrases and sources which violate our WP:NPOV policy.--Endroit 20:23, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Endroit

message: OK, that's very helpful (those above statements), thanks. I've proposed a couple of simple comprimised versions below. Basically, can the three parties list whether they "agree", "strongly agree", "neutral", "oppose", or "strong oppose" with each of the versions. If we reach a version we all agree on, then lovely, this was a simple fix and we can all move on. If we don't, we'll work on those suggestions which have "support" and "oppose" votes and try and reach a version where we will all support. If you oppose, please briefly note your objection in the discussion section. Suggestions from the parties are more than welcome! Cheers, and thanks again, Daniel Bryant 06:16, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Comprimise versions, Round 1

message: ----
====Mediator notes====
Simply the original version. Daniel Bryant 06:41, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Original version

message: Simply the original version. Daniel Bryant 06:41, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Mediator notes

message: *This is obviously, the reason we are here, so of course I oppose it. RogueNinjatalk 02:36, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion

message: ----
====Mediator notes====
This version is simply the original one, without the word "brutal" which Endroit identified as being his main issue (NPOV). Daniel Bryant 06:41, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Comprimise version I

message: This version is simply the original one, without the word "brutal" which Endroit identified as being his main issue (NPOV). Daniel Bryant 06:41, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Mediator notes

message: *Yes, its a bit less NPOV, but its still not about Karate RogueNinjatalk 02:39, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion

message: ----
====Mediator notes====
Implements the  template, as suggested by RogueNinja. Because of the more prominent link to the main article using further, the wikilink of occupation is removed. In this version, also removed the whole second part of the introductory sentence that is under dispute. Daniel Bryant 06:41, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Comprimise version II

message: Implements the  template, as suggested by RogueNinja. Because of the more prominent link to the main article using further, the wikilink of occupation is removed. In this version, also removed the whole second part of the introductory sentence that is under dispute. Daniel Bryant 06:41, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Mediator notes

message: ----
====Mediator notes====
Combination of Comprimise versions II and III.
====Discussion====
While the spirit of compromise here is commendable, and the proposed text is NPOV, the cited source is centered around a neologism, "cultural genocide".  "Cultural genocide" is not listed in the major English dictionaries, and therefore may be a WP:NEO violation.  "Cultural genocide" may also be a WP:NPOV violation, because genocide is listed in all major English dictionaries with a completely different connotation, involving "mass killings".  There were no "mass killings" involved in Korea under Japanese rule.
There is no need to advocate the use of such a neologism ("cultural genocide") to describe Korea under Japanese rule, especially in the Karate article.  If a more relevant or balanced source is cited, I will change my mind.  I suggest a source such as the following:
* Tae Kwon Do Techniques & Tactics By YEON HWAN. PARK, p. 12, Published 1997 Human Kinetics, 
--Endroit 22:17, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Comprimise version III

message: While the spirit of compromise here is commendable, and the proposed text is NPOV, the cited source is centered around a neologism, "cultural genocide".  "Cultural genocide" is not listed in the major English dictionaries, and therefore may be a WP:NEO violation.  "Cultural genocide" may also be a WP:NPOV violation, because genocide is listed in all major English dictionaries with a completely different connotation, involving "mass killings".  There were no "mass killings" involved in Korea under Japanese rule.
There is no need to advocate the use of such a neologism ("cultural genocide") to describe Korea under Japanese rule, especially in the Karate article.  If a more relevant or balanced source is cited, I will change my mind.  I suggest a source such as the following:
* Tae Kwon Do Techniques & Tactics By YEON HWAN. PARK, p. 12, Published 1997 Human Kinetics, 
--Endroit 22:17, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion