Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Signpost/2016-01-06/Arbitration report

FWIW, and spilling over to other articles in the Japanese culture topic area is an accurate description of ArbCom's finding of fact, but it was not actually supported by any evidence presented during the case, is completely inaccurate, and was challenged a few months afterward. CurtisNaito was also found to have edit warred. is also a pretty gross misrepresentation of CurtisNaito's actual involvement in the case -- Curtis hounded me over several years as revenge for me having nominated an article of his for deletion in 2012 (note how much of that predates the "Kenji incident", some by more than a year) and ArbCom did nothing about it because ArbCom doesn't handle harassment well; yes, as a description of what ArbCom recognized it is not a total lie, but is the Signpost supposed to be a mouthpiece for ArbCom, or is it supposed to be uninvolved and objective journalism? (FTR, I recently found out about the Signpost due to the ongoing ArbCom request, in which several Arbs have actually stated that they want to take the case because ArbCom has a reputation for not handling harassment cases well. I Googled "Signpost Hijiri88" and found this article. That's why I'm "late to the party".) Hijiri 88 ( 聖やや ) 23:59, 2 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Also, and has issued a threat of on-wiki retaliation was and is completely untrue, and it is my intention to eventually get that statement amended. Hijiri 88 ( 聖やや ) 01:50, 3 July 2019 (UTC)