User:Enkyo2/Sandbox-Credo

Edits developed from Credo Reference sources

 * Kansei
 * Sakata Tōjūrō, Sakata Tōjūrō I
 * Gosei
 * Yonsei, Garrett Hongo, Kristi Yamaguchi
 * Sansei, Philip Kan Gotanda, Patsy Mink, Janice Mirikitani


 * Nisei
 * Issei


 * Japanese language

<!-- Lvhis poses the wrong question. The approach is alluring, but it offers a logical fallacy which turns the fundamentals our collaborative editing project upside down? Lvhis argues that the title of this article is what? Biased? Non-neutral? Indefensible? We don't specifically know what the problem is, but we know that it's a dispute because of why? We don't specifically know the answer to this question either. The unstated premises are a conventional rhetorical pitfall -- "after this, therefore because of this"; However, the threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth – ... not whether editors think it is true. In other words, as explained here:
 * All material included in Wikipedia must be able to be verified in a published, reliable source. This means it is not enough for information to be true; readers must be able to check that a reputable source says it is true. Verifiability is a threshold for inclusion—a necessary condition that must be met before other considerations come into play.  This policy does not mean that any edit which is verifiable must be included; other considerations such as length, relevance, weight, point of view, availability of better sources, and editorial discretion are also considered when determining if information should be added.  Editors should consider all aspects of a source before using it, so long as they do not engage in original research when doing so."

The premise of Lvhis and others is that the title of this article is disputed because ... what? why? how? The premise of the NPOV-claim begs questions which continue to remain unaddressed across the span of many months. In the absence of any attempt whatsoever to address any one of these questions, something crucial is missing which renders WP:AGF meaningless. Absent the keystone of WP:AGF, the otherwise reasonable analysis of Magog the Ogre fall tumbling down like a house of cards. Lvhis converts our Wikipedia project into a game. Without acknowledging and parsing the facts at hand, Magog the Ogre recites abstract principles which perversely functions to validate gaming the system. Wikipedia is converted from an encyclopedia building project into a proxy game. Lvhis is wrong. Magog the Ogre is not unreasonable, but it becomes wrong nonetheless. Lvhis helpfully distills the issues in an appealing way here and here. The NPOV-tag is a compromise at the wrong time and in the wrong place and for the wrong reasons. --~ -->

Marius Jansen

 * 1) Tsuki no wa no misasagi
 * 2) Japanese propaganda during World War II

DKY + In the news

 * In the News