Talk:Stephen K. Hayes/Archive 1

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)

I totally agree. This needs to be backed up with a reputable source. Lawyer2b 01:48, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Reversions

This article has been replaced by something that is obviously copied from some external source for several times now.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)

The external source Jikaku (talk · contribs) 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)

Questionable claims

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)

Corrections to blatant lies

I have, on several occassions edited this entry to correct the blatant lies left in it by questionable sources with dubious agendas. An-shu Hayes, I would assume, is the foremost authority on his own life story, and what I am posting is the only entry that has been reviewed and verified by him, and is supported as well by publically available media and publications.

I am working on a more "wikified" version, and until that is finished, out of respect for a living, breathing, person - I would appreciate it if you left this correct, if brief, version in place. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jikaku (talk • contribs)

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a free hosting service for autobiographies. We don't normally ask the subjects we are writing about their permission or verification or review of our articles, and such a review would be of no use because everything we write here must be verifiable from independent, secondary and tertiary sources. Mr. Hayes opinion, if any, about his entry in Wikipedia has no relevance whatsoever. Since you are obviously a newbie here, please take some time to become familiar with our policies, first and foremost with WP:NPOV. If there is something incorrect in the article, you are free to correct it, as long as you supply adequate references. What is not acceptable is your insistence of changing to your preferred version, when your version obviously is a regression to the article as it currently is. If you continue such edit warring, you risk of getting blocked from editing altogether. jni 16:12, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Jni: 1) While obviously any entry must be WP:NPOV, I believe you misspoke when you said Mr. Hayes opinion about his entry has no relevance whatsoever. Please see What if Wikipedia has an article about you where it states one "should feel free to correct mistaken or out-of-date facts about yourself, such as marital status, sexual orientation, criminal involvement or lack thereof, current employer, place of birth, work done in foreign countries, etc." 2) I agree that Stephen Hayes is not recognized as "one of the world's foremost authorites" on Buddhism, he is regarding Ninjutsu. I don't know what else you think is needed to support that other than Black Belt Magazine naming him "father of American Ninjustsu". 3) Rather than simply engage in an edit war, why don't you take advantage of the talk page and list exactly what Jukaku put in the article you perceive as dubious? This would give editors a chance to provide sources or see clearly what is unsourced, and therefore inappropriate. Lawyer2b 22:19, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

1) Point taken. If Mr. Hayes or his proxy (or anyone for that matter) finds any factual errors they can correct them of course. 2) I don't dispute Hayes is an authority of what is perceived as ninjutsu in Western martial arts circles. Note that Jikaku for some reason deleted the reference to Black Belt Magazine and replaced it with an unsourced reference to something called Black Belt Hall of Fame, which could refer to the Hall of Fame by Black Belt Magazine, or to something else. The exact issue/weblink mentioning Hayes as the "father of American ninjutsu" should be added to (yet nonexistent) references section 3) I'm not edit warring here, I'm just trying to maintain the existing version against unilateral regression to unformatted textdump by a newbie with some (undisclosed) agenda to push. It is Jikaku's job to explain what he calls "blatant lies" and to help correct them. Note that both versions contain mostly the same information, mine having the superset, Jikaku's having all the extra verbiage about "authentic ninjutsu" and "an-shu", whatever that is. Simply reverting all my changes back to unformatted and stylistically bad version is edit warring, not the repair of such vandalism. Please read the diffs for yourself! I'm going to revert back and try to locate some references. jni 08:47, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Unverified claims in this article:

• Claim that Masaaki Hatsumi is the 34 sōke of something called Togakure Ryu. Such a claim cannot be verified from any outside-Bujinkan sources, like academic research of Japanese martial traditions. It's worth noting, that in the third edition of the Bugei ryuha daijiten (encyclopedia of martial traditions) Watatani Kiyoshi stated that Toshitsugu Takamatsu (Hatsumi's teacher) had created his "ninpo" ryūha and teachings from "ninja-gokko" ("childhood ninja games").
• Claim that Mr. Hatsumi was able to instruct Mr. Hayes in "last authentic ninjutsu traditions" and that Mr. Hayes is teaching such a tradition (in comparison to his self-created modern martial art).

This claim can be read a number of ways, so please correct me if I'm interpreting incorrectly.

There's no question within the Bujinkan that Hayes was taught the 9 schools of the organization by Hatsumi, and is himself licensed to teach. His name sits among the other 10-dans at honbu dojo in Japan (see my other response below if you don't get what I mean). Whether the Bujinkan itself represents "authentic ninjutsu traditions" is outside of my ability to prove.

However there IS controversy over To-Shin Do, the art taught by Hayes. It is not recognized by the Bujinkan. Unfortuneately I don't think you'd be able to find a source on this. --63.193.241.64 01:55, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

• That Mr. Hayes is an ordained teacher of some Buddhist sect (I'm not saying he isn't, just need a reference).
• The reference to unknown concept/term an-shu and its constant repetition as a title to Mr. Hayes.
• I dispute that Bujinkan ju-dan is "exceptionally rare" achievement. To my knowledge the Bujinkan system uses 15 ranks, not 10. In any case any extra praise needs to be toned down.

The ranks 11-15 are further clarifications of 10-dan, and were added well after the Bujinkan unofficially broke with Hayes. At the time 10-dan might have been rare (I really don't know). At the honbu dojo there are displays on the walls where the names of most 10-dan instructors are written. I count about 175 in a video taken in 2004 (Source--watch the "tour of the hombu dojo in Noda-shi, Japan"). Within driving distance of where I live (outside of Japan) there are at least three 10-dan (or higher) level instructors. Given the small size of the Bujinkan, I'm not sure anyone can call that an "exceptionally rare" achievement. --63.193.241.64 01:55, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

• Was he born in Ohio or in Delaware? Different versions have different information.

Well, pretty much everything else would benefit from additional sources. jni 09:06, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Copyvio

Also, some versions of this article could be thought of copyvios from [1]. 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)

Compromise

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)

Also, please see: Wikipedia:Manual of Style (biographies) --Fire Star 08:48, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

SKH's supposed expulsion from the Bujinkan

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)

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)

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)

Words from a former Student

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)

Words from a former Student - response

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,

This is conjecture. Jikaku 15:26, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

there seem to be no recent photos of Hatsumi and Hayes.

This is incorrect. There are several photos of Hatsumi and Hayes together, several of which were taken just this year. Jikaku 15:26, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

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).

This is conjecture. Jikaku 15:26,21 June 2006 (UTC)

During the time of Hayes and the spread of Ninjutsu, a cult seemed to have sprung up around Hayes.

This is conjecture. Jikaku 15:26, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

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 is conjecture. Jikaku 15:26, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

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.

This is completely false. I'm not sure if you simply don't understand his DVD program, or are intentionally misleading, but I'm happy to give you the benefit of the doubt. Jikaku 15:26, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

There seem to be no later photos of SKH with Grandmaster Hatsumi after this time.

This is false. There are numerous photos of Stephen Hayes and the Hayes family with Hatsumi from this year, last year, the year before that, etc. Jikaku 15:26, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

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.

This is conjecture. Jikaku 15:26, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

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.

Conjecture and untrue. Jikaku 15:26, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

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.

Conjecture and untrue. Jikaku 15:26, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

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).

Libelous conjecture. Jikaku 15:26, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

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.

Conjecture and untrue. Jikaku 15:26, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Most importantly, he can not and does not call himself Shihan, and now uses An-shu.

It would appear that his using An-Shu is for technical accuracy, and likely personal preference. That he can not use Shihan is conjecture. Jikaku 15:26, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

While SKH's marketing materials always heavily emphasized his existing relationship with Grandmaster Hatsumi, his present materials only refer to his past relationship.

This is incorrect. Jikaku 15:26, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

There is a page on his website that is very defensive of his relationship with Grandmaster Hatsumi.

The defensive characteristic is conjecture. Jikaku 15:26, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

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.

This is incorrect. [[2]] Hatsumi Sensei will always be my sensei and as always I accord him my highest respect and gratitude for all he has shared with me. Jikaku 15:26, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

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!

This is conjecture. Jikaku 15:26, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

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.

This is conjecture. Jikaku 15:26, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

From a grander perspective, this does not take away from Hayes' style or skill. It's more of a marketing setback for Steve.

This is conjecture. Jikaku 15:26, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

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)

This is conjecture. Jikaku 15:26, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

I need to comment on your use of the word "conjecture". To quote The Princess Bride, "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means"! --Corwin8 04:58, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

No, I'm very clear on what conjecture means - however we may want to re-visit the definition, since further down below you seem to think it means I'm calling you a liar, (though politely) which simply isn't the case. When I say "This is conjecture" - I mean "This is your opinion or interpretation of the facts, which may or may not be supported by the facts themselves."

con·jec·ture ( P ) Pronunciation Key (kn-jkchr) n. Inference or judgment based on inconclusive or incomplete evidence; guesswork. To infer from inconclusive evidence; guess. -- Jikaku 13:53, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Article Dispute

Corwin8 insists on adding information that is simple a re-hash of material already on the page (Hatsumi having Hayes' placard removed from the judan board) only through his assumption of just what that action meant; as well as patently false statement regarding selling an "instructional DVD set that would let someone become a black belt in Ninjutsu." I don't know he/she is intentionally lying, or honestly thinks that what the To-Shin Do DVD program is... but it doesn't matter, either way this person is wrong and their misinformation needs to stop.

I'm taking out the "interpretive" text (let's stick to the facts, and not our interpretation of what those facts might or might not mean - see Rustedshuriken's comments of 25 May) as well as the false information regarding the DVD "Black Belt Issue."

Finally - the diatribe here on the discussion page is little more than a rant against Mr. Hayes, filled with unverifiable information, speculation, and hearsay. Certainly this person is entitled to their opinion... but is this the forum to air it? --Jikaku

Again, with the personal attacks. You've violated the 3RR rule, which can get you a ban. Are you a steve cultist? This is not YOUR article. And stop with the personal attacks. --Corwin8 15:12, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Not sure what you're taking as a "personal attack" here - I'm simply correcting the two pieces of information you're placing in the bio. And considering that this information is either a) easily verifiable as incorrect (note - saying you're incorrect is not an "attack") as in the case of the DVD program, or b) interpretive and inflammatory, and not yet explicitly verified... AND already dealt with in the article (bujinkan relationship) - my edits are *not* violations of the 3RR rule:

"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. The three-revert rule does not apply to users making a good-faith effort to enforce this provision on articles where they are not already involved in a content dispute." Jikaku 14:26, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Insults... let's see, you've called me a liar, and said that I am spreading misinformation. You called my statement is a diatribe, and accused me of "ranting against Mr. Hayes", called my information "unverifiable... speculation and heresay". After my first edit, you then accused me of being "someone with an axe to grind". You then threw in some rhetoric with "saying it over and over doesn't make it true" (which you wrote over and over) which you used as the title of your discussion, further insisting on your intolerance to discussing this. One thing that you seem afrid of discussing is my firsthand evidence. I've been pleading for an Admin to get involved, and even at this late date you STILL refuse to discuss the issue - instead resorting to more personal attacked than discussing my evidence. Look, I can prove that was was at SOI in 1987 - I've got the program & schedule, plenty of photographs, and even a group photo with everyone there. I achieved a green belt in Ninjutsu during that time. I heard Hatsumi Sensei speak on the evening I referenced and heard what he said. The connection I drew is more than reasonable - it is extremely logical, unless you believe that Hatsumi Sensei would compromise on his principles. You, on the other hand, appear to be a student of SKH living in Cincinnati Ohio (you do live in Cincinnati, don't you?) and I suspect that you if applied your own rules against yourself then you would be forced to disqualify yourself. The 3RR? This is my first edit on this article and I have not been involved in a content dispute. You, on the other hand, clearly have a history of content dispute with this article, don't you? But the real question is, how do you suggest we proceed? Your attitude seems to be that you will not tolderate any changes to this article that is not in line with your Ohio bias, and that's not how things work here. So, how finely documented do you want to see my evidence? Or are you going to call me a liar again? Look, Wikipedia is here to shine a light of truth upon the darkness. Experiences and evidence that might otherwise have gone unnoticed find a safe home here. But I'm willing to compromise if you are. I stick by my evidence of what Hatsumi Sensei said that night. However, I'm willing to compromise on the conclusion. What of I added "It is possible" to my conclusion? I admit that I will choke on the bile of those words, but I'm looking for a way for us to meet together here. --Corwin8 04:44, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Gee, I should call you "Mr. Conjecture". I just noticed that you were rude enough to edit my discussion post here? That you actually edited my discussion post? Look, this is for everyone. It's not your own personal reponse board where you can break up my post. You clearly have a bias towards SKH, and anything that you do not like you call "conjecture", which is a polite way of calling me a liar. I restored my original discussion here. Please don't go editing other people's discussions. Or I can submit another magazine article, this time on this issue. I'd rather keep it here on Wiki, but pros are here too. How do you want to do this? Do you want to be intolerant, or do you want to compromise? --Corwin8 04:52, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Corwin8 - you seem to be taking this very personally, and I'm sorry for that. I'm merely trying to make sure that the information presented here is factual. Can you explain what you mean when you say "I'd rather keep it here on Wiki, but pros are here too."? I'm assuming that's not some sort of threat, but it might be best to make that explicitly clear. -- Jikaku 13:53, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Some people here are PROfessional writers, and so am I. I was hoping to just make this a quick Wiki contribution and then move on, but I not only resent your indirect personal attacks on me, I especially deeply resent you calling me a liar. I sincerely and deeply resent that. I am also upset by you actually editing my own discussion post here - how dare you? How dare you? if I am taking this personally it's because you went way out of your way to make this personal. I have tried to maintain a professional attitude about this and you dare to edit my own post. Don't you know that, to a professional writer, that's the equivalent of taking someone's black belt away? We are already way past the point of any apology from you having any meaning, because you clearly have no interest in compromise and only want your own way, don't you? If you really want a cite, sometime this fall I can easily get a magazine article published with my experiences that I can then cite as proof. But then you, Jikaku, would be responsible for having a minor issue be brought into more publicity, which, believe me, I do not want. I have no axe to grind, and I have no wish to disrespect Steve, but I feel that your intolerance to anyone violating your dogma is one of the things that damaged the 1980's Ninjutsu movement in the first place (and I unfortunately believed in that dogma in 1986). --Corwin8 16:48, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Details Discussion

I didn't want to get involved in this war (who the heck would?) but some important points not being said, and I believe the wrong person under investigation by the admins. Corwin8, by my analysis you made the following significant changes in your original edits of this article on June 19, 00:35-40, interspliced with my own commentary

1. removed the title "Grandmaster" from Masaaki Hatsumi's name

Is there a reason for this?

2. asserted that Stephen K. Hayes set off the ninja boom of the 80's "with his close friend Bud Malmstrom"

Source?

3. rearranged the list of American budoka so as to put Bud Malmstrom before Jack Hoban.

Why?

4. switched the wording "Hayes earned the judan" -> "Hayes was awarded the judan"

There is a subtle distinction in meaning here. Why did you see this change as necessary?

5. added the title "Grandmaster" to Hatsumi's name later in the article

I see no problem with this... but how is this consistent with #1 above?

6. inserted the paragraph which claims

a) Hayes began selling a black belt dvd set in 2004,

Source?

b) Hatsumi disapproves of this

IMHO, likely true. But I'll need a source.

c) Hatsumi stripped Hayes of rank

Source? Removing a placard, despite its symbolic meaning, does not equate to any official action like stripping of rank or expulsion. See the prior discussion here on this point.

d) this prevents Hayes from calling himself shihan, ninja, black belt in ninjutsu, or associating with the Bujinkan

If Hayes were expelled from the organization (see 6.c), that last point would be true. But what about the first three? To the best of my knowledge Hatsumi has not registered the title shihan, and he certainly does not own the terms ninja, black belt, ninjutsu, or any combination of these. You'll need sources to back this claim up.

Simply stating these 'facts' does not make them true. Jikaku felt (as I did and still do) that you need to do a better job of backing them up these claims with verifiable sources. A personal story does not count: that's original research. --Rustedshuriken 08:23, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Concur. If there is no cite, it is OR. KillerChihuahua^?!? 09:23, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. Let me directly address Rustedshuriken's concerns:

1. If I did remove Grandmaster from Hatsumi's name, please believe me it was an editing mistake. I would never intentionally do anything that disrespectful and I hope you corrected it for me.

2.Bud Malmstrom was instrumental in supporting Hayes. During the closing of the 1986 Shadows of Iga festival, we had this amazing bonfire. At that time, Steve praised Bud and called him his best friend. I think he gave Bud an award, but I can't be sure. Steve was the one with the passion, Bud was the one with the tactical knowledge - they were a classic left brain/right brain team, Steve seemed to embody the "spirit" of Ninjutsu and fascinated us with his philosophy, Bud was more the business planner and really had a brain for details. Bud was the one interviewed by 60 Minutes (who screwed Bud when they selectively edited his interview).

3. I rearranged the list to put Bud in front out Jack because I feel that Bud had more to do with the roots of Ninjutsu in America, given his friendship with Steve. But I admit that while I knew Bud in those days, I never met Jack. If he is presently devoting more of himself to the Arts than Bud is, then I'm sure someone will change it later.

4. Hayes was awarded the Judan - Judan (red belt) is traditionally an honorary title. It is awarded to a 9th degree out of deep respect and to honor a person's contribution to the chosen martial art. It is more than an earned belt, it is an awarded honor. I felt that the word award best conveyed the respect and honor of the title.

5. Added Grandmaster title - as previously stated, if I removed Grandmaster from Hatsumi Sensei in the article, it was an aggegious mistake on my part.

6. Hayes selling his black belt DVD in 2004 - I got that date from SKH's website, either directly or the Google cache, I can't recall. If you want a stronger cite I can look it up later today when I have the time. Also, "Hayes from calling himself shihan, ninja, black belt in ninjutsu" - in the USA, martial arts titles can carry with them specific copyrights (violations are admittedly difficult to enforce). For example, the belts I was awarded in Okinawan Kenpo Karate, from the authorized head of this branch of karate, carry with it legally granted rights (not assignable rights) to the title. I can give more more details if you'd like. --Corwin8 16:25, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

In regards to "a" above, the DVD selling - I do think that's the year that Stephen Hayes made his DVD's available (no source, just relying on memory) - and before that he had his curriculum available on VHS for quite some time. Nothing new or shocking or out of the norm in the MA field here. The claim that one could earn their Black Belt through the DVD's (or even the previous VHS tapes) is what's incorrect. This has never been the case. While one may test for certain kyu ranks at a distance by sending in VHS tapes of themselves performing the techniques in the curriculum, the highest one can possibly go with this is brown belt, and according to SKHQuest that's "Very rare, and only for exceptionally gifted students, who already have significant experience in the Martial Arts." It's so rare, in fact, that as far as I know - it's never happened. So not only is it not possible to "get your black belt" through the DVD program, it's not even likely to get to or past green belt without getting into a Dojo and working face to face with an instructor. -- Jikaku 13:53, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Either way, both are uncited and as long as that is the case, neither belongs in the article. KillerChihuahua^?!? 14:34, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

I absolutely agree. --Jikaku 15:30, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

This is from the Internet Archives, September 23, 2004:[3] "12 DVD Black Belt Home Study Course"..."Our Flagship Course! 15-hour DVD program leading to 1st Degree Black Belt in To-Shin Do 21st Century Ninja Self-Protection" This is absolutely the first time it is publicly on SKH's website. On the same date in 2004, look at [4]. Go to the very bottom of the page. TRAINING IS DONE AT HOME. Testing up to brown belt is done at home. Only final black belt testing may be done in person, but black belt training, as cited in 2004, is done at home. This page is essentially unchanged from today. This is my cite. Jikaku, I see no cite on this page as to how rare it would be to earn a belt (are you applying the same standards to your "rareness" quote as you are to mine?). This is how it is publicly promoted, and this is how it has been promoted since 2004. Can we first agree that this is an acceptable cite for training for a black belt at home? --Corwin8 20:25, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

RE: Hatsumi and "Grandmaster" (#1 and #5)

I figured this was an honest mistake; I just had to make sure. Somebody make sure the first reference gets back into the compromise edit.

RE: Bud Malmstrom (#2 and #3)

If you can find that 60 minutes interview it'd make a great source. It's certainly true today that Jack Hoban is more active and more well known in the art and organization than Bud Malmstrom is (it is Hoban who hosts the Buyu Camps, filling in for what was once Hatsumi's role at the Tai Kais). But that's today; the quote in question is in a historical context, and you would know better than I would what it was like in the late 80's and early 90's.

RE: earned -> awarded (#4)

The unfortunate nature of ninjutsu-related articles, and this one in particular, is that they are subject to a great deal of vandalism. This change could be interpreted in two ways (bear with me): either that you did not feel "earned" conveyed the appropriate amount of respect and honor granted to Hayes by the Bujinkan, or that you felt that Hayes didn't earn his 10-dan, it was something just given to him. Obviously from what you have said this last interpretation is not what you meant at all. But given how often I have to deal with vandals here, I must say that it is the first thing that came to my mind (and probably others here). I think we can all benefit by remembering to assume good faith.

But you're right. I agree with you that "earned" does not convey the appropriate amount of deep respect and honor that 10-dan represents. The word "awarded" should be used.

RE: expulsion, and reason for such

This is something we hashed over about a month ago when word first broke about this. The concensus we came to then is that although the removal of Hayes placard has significant symbolic meaning, there's no indication so far that Hayes has been officially stripped of rank or expelled from the organization. And therefore, we should mention the incident, but be careful not the speculate beyond what is known for certain. --Rustedshuriken 22:27, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Agreed - and like I've said, since the bare facts of the incident are already included in the article, it seemed best to leave it at that. Is there still a concensus that this is the more prudent course of action? --Jikaku 03:28, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

I see no dissents: Jikaku, please post precisely what changes you propose here? Thanks much. KillerChihuahua^?!? 11:36, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm proposing no changes - I think the article should stand exactly as is. --Jikaku 15:59, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Anyone else? KillerChihuahua^?!? 16:03, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Article protected

I have some questions, I will start with two:

1. Are there currently any copyvios in the article?
2. Was Jikaku reported for 3RR violation?

KillerChihuahua^?!? 06:02, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

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)

Next time, use WP:AN3. KillerChihuahua^?!? 21:17, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Consensus

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)

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)

The forum posts are going to have to go, too. Corwin8, please limit yourself to specifying what parts of the article are unreferenced, and which references are unacceptable. Cease such adversarial comments as "Regardless of your insults" they are non-productive. Thanks - KillerChihuahua^?!? 21:22, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

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

Questions for KillerChihuahua

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)

1. Nope, was just asking.
2. Corwin8 was addressing editors merits, not the merits of the article, either in part or in whole. That said, it is good to keep in mind for everyone.
3. Not being able to read Corwin8s mind, I cannot know what all of his complaints may or may not be. It is most probable that as a regular editor you have a far better understanding of the situation than I. I ended up here due to the RFPP. KillerChihuahua^?!? 11:24, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Affiliation with the Bujinkan (again)

Sorry to jump in to this discussion. I'm the user that originally added the links and text discussing the incident at the Hombu dojo (4.21.128.2). Jikaku and Corwin8's disagreements aside, I feel that an additional edit from a NPOV would be helpful to the article. I would propose the addition of the following text:

According to Shihan Richard Van Donk, Soke Hatsumi, in response to an inquiry relating to the issuance of diplomas by Stephen Hayes, stated that "Stephen Hayes has not really been a Bujinkan member for many, many years (he has not paid any Shidoshi-kai fees, nor has done much training with us) and Steve has created his own system of Toshindo and has really left the Bujinkan by his actions."

The source for this statement would be the following post made on Van Donk's forum:

http://www.ninjutsuforum.com/showpost.php?p=1691&postcount=14

Forums are almost always unacceptable sources per WP:RS. KillerChihuahua^?!? 11:25, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Added new information from SKH Website regarding receiving bujinkan rank certificates (this would go towards establishing whether Mr. Hayes is "in" or "out" with the Bujinkan, I assume, as someone "kicked out" would no longer be authorized to give rank in the org). I've personally verified this with students in Dayton who have received the certificates - is this tentatively "good enough" for inclusion, or should more follow-up work be done before this information was included? --Jikaku 03:06, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Has anyone confirmed with Masaaki Hatsumi in Japan that he is issuing certificates to Stephen Hayes? And are we sure that the certificates that Hayes passes out are genuine and he recieved them, and not someone else that passed it on to him? If no one has contacted Hatsumi, then to be totally factual you can't point to this as any sort of "proof." There is the very real possibility that one of the many Toshindo black belts who also hold instructor's rank in the Bujinkan pick up the certificates for him while in Japan.

Hi there - can you please sign your name to your comments? It makes them easier to follow in long, detailed discussion like this page. Regarding the certificates - of course, he could have also used magic, or had space aliens bring them to him, or... c'mon. Let's try getting some evidence together before we start publically calling public figures liars. Since that affects his business, there might be legal ramifications (not a lawyer, not studying to become one, just seen too many bad TV shows) without proof.

Perhaps if someone fluent in japanese, but impartial (verifiably neither Bujinkan, nor To-Shin do) were to speak to Hatsumi directly, and ask him if he issued these Bujinkan rank certificates to Mr. Hayes... *and* if Hatsumi were to deny having done so, we might be able to approach Mr. Hayes and ask for scans or photographs of the mailing, or the certificates? Of course, without a direct denial from Hatsumi (assuming he would deny it), I think it might be rude to ask for such "proof" from Mr. Hayes - but it would reasonable to ask for it *after* such a thing. No? --Jikaku 17:13, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Moving forward

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)

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)

Ok, unprotecting. KillerChihuahua^?!? 15:38, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, it became pretty obvious to me that I don't have the experience to compete with the bullying, flames, and insults I received here. I did post references from the Internet Archives that SKH is selling diplomas, and you guys completely ignored it. I'm trying to learn more so that I can compete with the lifers here. But when I called Jikaku on the 3RRR rule, and no one took me up on it, I just realized that experience does not count here. On the upside, I am having an article published on my experiences in Ninjutsu based on some of the material I mentioned here. Assuming that you will let me reference a print publication - this issue will receive publicity. --Corwin8 19:29, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Reversions

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)

I have removed the addition about diplomas. I don't see how the text is relevant to SKH's status in the Bujinkan. The conclusion accompanying the text is pure speculation. Speculation that Hatsumi expelled SKH for selling black belts by video was rightfully removed. By the same token, speculation that SKH is still "in" the Bujinkan should also be removed. Dammokles 15:49, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

It does seem though that the non-speculative receipt of the diplomas should stay - no? Just like the removal of the placard at Noda stayed - while the speculation around its meaning was removed.

I agree with you - I'll add back the bare facts, minus the speculation. --Jikaku 00:43, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Agreed - I edited the section to add the facts about the diplomas at the end of the section, though. It places them in better context. Dammokles 15:11, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Looks good. --Jikaku 01:44, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Lookalike

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