User talk:Eyagi

Welcome

Hi Eyagi, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like it here and decide to stay. Our intro page provides helpful information for new users—please check it out! If you have any questions, you can get help from experienced editors at the Teahouse. Happy editing! ミラー強斗武 (StG88ぬ会話) 00:25, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

Your thread has been archived

Hi Eyagi! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse, How to rewrite head sentence, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still read the archived discussion. If you have follow-up questions, please . See also the help page about the archival process. The archival was done by Lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} on top of the current page (your user talk page). Muninnbot (talk) 19:01, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

Request

Eyagi, this recent comment by you appears to have been placed in a section to which it has little connection. That section where the comment was placed appears to have no connection to the preceding section, and that preceding section seems to be what concerns you there. To avoid confusing both or either of the discussions in those sections, I request that you consider removing that comment before it is fixed in place by responses (see WP:REDACT). I'm making this request here instead of on that article talk page because the procedure outlined in WP:MUTUAL seems overly complicated to me. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 06:45, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for your comment. I was mistaken. I deleted it immediately. Eyagi (talk) 07:47, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

Notice

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in gender-related disputes or controversies or in people associated with them. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place {{Ds/aware}} on your user talk page and specify in the template the topic areas that you would like to opt out of alerts about. For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Acroterion (talk) 12:22, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

I was not aware of this Notice. This Talk on the comfort women issue is a discussion of facts or not, and has nothing to do with gender issues. Eyagi (talk) 06:13, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

I will pursue arbitration enforcement if your tendentious conduct continues in this topic. Acroterion (talk) 04:00, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Please request. My argument is quite simple. There are two opinions on comfort women: sex slaves or licensed prostitutes. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. I am requesting that editors not exclude the claims of licensed prostitutes, as it is against WP:NPOV. A long Talk is a discussion about factual recognition with the editor. No one, except Binksternet, has disputed my claims. Why don't you argue on the talk page? Eyagi (talk) 00:32, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

The reason that "No one, except Binksternet, has disputed [your] claims" in the last thread is that you are engaging in exactly the same WP:OR that has already been commented on by multiple people, in multiple places, and nobody except Binksternet is willing to engage any further with your repetitious behaviour. You have no support anywhere, from anyone. AndyTheGrump (talk) 01:13, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Acroterion has again closed the Talk page, although I have no intention of discussing you here. I would like to refute you because I don't want to be misunderstood as having agreed if I keep silent. Please specify the basis, persons and places for claiming WP:OR.

I have specifically pointed out the issue of comfort women and insist that the lead sentence be rewritten. Replies by labeling are proof that you cannot be refuted. The reason why you cannot be refuted is that there is no evidence to claim sexual slavery other than the testimony of former comfort women. Please refute this in concrete terms, not in the abstract. Eyagi (talk) 07:25, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia policy on original research applies to you, regardless of whether you understand the policy or not. AndyTheGrump (talk) 14:01, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Why don't you specifically refute above?　You, Binksternet and Acroterion are far too uninformed. There are numerous documents that deny the sex slave claim. I am presenting these in summary form. To avoid going in circles, please answer the following:

1. Regarding the claim of 200,000 Korean former comfort women, do you accept the fact that there were 240 South Korean former comfort women, or not? Grounds for disapproval.

2. The Kono Statement states that the ethnic majority was Japanese. Do you accept this fact or not? If no, the grounds.

3. The basis for the sex slave theory is UN report. Do you accept this fact or not? If no, the grounds therefor.

Reference materials(in no particular order)

Comfort Women: The North Korean Connection by J. Mark Ramseyer, Tetsuo Arima :: SSRN

Behind The Comfort Women Controversy: How Lies Became Truth HISTORY

[Bookmark] Controversy Over Harvard Article Can’t Erase the Facts of Comfort Women Contracts

Contracting for Sex in the Pacific War: A Response to My Critics

Waseda Professor Offers Evidence of Comfort Women Working Under Contract. Now Come the Attacks | JAPAN Forward (japan-forward.com)

Recovering the Truth about the Comfort Women

[Book]“Ianfu” ha mina gouikeiyaku siteita (“Comfort Women” All Signed a Contract of Agreement) by T. Arima (2021)

“Sex-Slave” Report: The UN’s Global Hoax (Jiyu-sha) No.1: Foreword, Table of Contents, List of Contributors By Fujioka Nobukatsu,

Comfort Women and Sex in the Battle Zone (English Edition) by Ikuhiko Hata Eyagi (talk) 05:46, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

email

Please discuss content issues on the relevant article talk page. I'm not interested in getting into private discussions regarding matters that other people may wish to comment on. AndyTheGrump (talk) 13:50, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

I agree with you too. Eyagi (talk) 01:48, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Notice of Arbitration Enforcement noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a report involving you at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement regarding a possible violation of an Arbitration Committee decision. The thread is Eyagi. Thank you. Acroterion (talk) 03:25, 18 December 2022 (UTC)