Talk:Soka School System#c-Kelvintjy-20250219094900-Simonm223-20250218123700

Many sources referenced here are impossible to verify since there aren't quoted.

@Kelvintjy it's fine if you want to quote books but please give detailed quotes, not only titles, thanks.

Examples :

- "The underlying educational philosophy and curriculum perspectives of the Soka School System has influenced the work of many educators in Japan and abroad." : none of the sources is quoted, so that it's impossible to check what the source says.

- "The Soka School System's educational philosophy, labeled “Soka education” or “value-creative education,” sets the goal of education as the realization of students' happiness. Realizing this vision on a broader scale, according to Ikeda, requires a paradigmatic shift from education being seen as supporting society to a vision of society serving the essential needs of education." : same problem Raoul mishima (talk) 19:31, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

@Kelvintjy can you please come talk here before removing everything on this page ? I'm pretty sure we can work together toward making a better page, and fixing its numerous problems and sentences.

Examples :

*"The underlying educational philosophy and curriculum perspectives of the Soka School System has influenced the work of many educators in Japan and abroad" : whom ? can you name one ? If not we should not keep this information.

*"Realizing this vision on a broader scale, according to Ikeda, requires a paradigmatic shift from education being seen as supporting society to a vision of society serving the essential needs of education." : this sentence is c/c from [https://www.daisakuikeda.org/main/educator/edu/edu-09.html this website], which is forbidden by WP and is also illegal.

*"Qualitative research has emerged in the form of books, articles, and dissertations." : can you quote some ? If not we should not keep this information.

*"The Soka Gakkai sponsors several research institutes" : Amazon Ecological Conservation Center is not a research institute, neither is The International Committee of Artists for Peace, and the others don't seem to publish anything.

I'm waiting for your cooperation.

[User talk:Raoul mishima|talk]]) 15:31, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

:{{Ping|Raoul mishima}} can you please start by advising why you think Value Creation as the Aim of Education: Tsunesaburo Makiguchi and Soka Education is not a RS. It was well reviewed in Educational Studies, Mar/Apr2009, Vol. 45, Issue 2. Simonm223 (talk) 17:12, 6 February 2025 (UTC)

:You also deleted {{tq|The Soka Education Research Initiative on Global Citizenship (SERI-GC) is a five-year research project launching at the University of Guelph-Humber in Canada the promotes study of the philosophy and practices of Soka education and its connection to global citizenship which is funded by the Japan-based Makiguchi Foundation for Education. An annual student-led conference about applications of Soka education takes place annually at Soka University of America.}} which was cited to [https://www.guelphhumber.ca/news-events/news/soka-education-research-initiative-launches-uofgh the University of Guelph] website. Can you advise why? Simonm223 (talk) 17:19, 6 February 2025 (UTC)

:@Simonm223 Value Creation as the Aim of Education: Tsunesaburo Makiguchi and Soka Education is not a RS to me because it's authors are both employed by the Soka Gakkai University of Japan... Raoul mishima (talk) 20:27, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

::It's a chapter in an academic book published by Teacher's College Press. Your rationale is out of keeping with Wikipedia policy. Simonm223 (talk) 20:30, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

:::Can you elaborate further on this part? Kelvintjy (talk) 02:46, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

@Raoul mishima and @Kelvintjy you are both engaged in a slow-motion edit war. I am going to revert this page into whatever version it was in before the two of you started. If you continue edit warring after that point I will be filing a report to WP:ANEW regarding both of you. Please come to talk and discuss your edits. Simonm223 (talk) 12:37, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

:It is not my intention to go into slow-motion edit war. Even the previous incident report lodge against me did not have any editor making comment after I have input my view. Instead you all let it be archived into the incident log. Btw, I have made a minor edit where I have update the article with the latest news. If you think that the news is primary source, feel free to revert it back. Kelvintjy (talk) 00:38, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

::@Simonm223 : @Kelvintjy has been engaged in different edit wars the past years and was banned from at least one of those pages. He seems to be promoting a religious organization by adding promotional links or references everywhere possible, and never agrees to talk or debate over it in the talk sections. @Kelvintjy why don't you talk and discuss ? Raoul mishima (talk) 08:35, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

::: Raoul mishima : Will you ever listen what the previous editor who had tried to discuss with you especially those who discuss with you on Talk:Daisaku Ikeda?

:::@Simonm223 : If you notice User talk:Raoul mishima page, there are a lot of editor trying to discuss with him but he still insist on his side of his story. In the end, eveeryone just give up and let him made to edit to all the article that is related to Soka Gakkai and Daisaku Ikeda. Kelvintjy (talk) 09:38, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

::::I want you both to stop. Please learn to collaborate just a little. Simonm223 (talk) 10:51, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

: Daveler166, Daveler16,Augmented Seventh, Tacktician, Aaron Liu, QuotidianAl Kelvintjy (talk) 09:49, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

::@Kelvintjy it is very simple to verify that you just don't use the talk section though I proposed many times...

::- Zadankai page : no answer from Kelvin

::- Dissidence in Japanese Empire : no answer from Kelvin

::- Soka School System (this page) : just one short answer on Feb. 19th 2025 but no discussion

::- Soka Gakkai International : just twho short answers but no discussion.

::Can you please try to collaborate ? Prove it by coming on one of those talk pages, don't be shy ! Many thanks for your cooperation ! Raoul mishima (talk) 13:58, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

:::OK, seriously, both of you are just talking past each other and casting aspersions. Frankly I'm starting to wonder if the best solution would be for both of you to accept a voluntary edit restriction from anything to do with Japanese New Religious Movements. Now there is an edit which @Kelvintjy made. @Raoul mishima is it acceptable? If not please provide a policy driven reason why not. Simonm223 (talk) 14:00, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

::::Well it would acceptable if @Kelvintjy proposed arguments on the talk page, but he keeps remaining silent, which raises questions. It looks like @Kelvintjy works for the Soka School System, and his edit is like someone from Nike edited the Nike page. His edits make WP loose credit. Raoul mishima (talk) 18:31, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

:::::OK that's not an answer to the question. The question is do you have any policy objection to [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Soka_School_System&diff=1276466751&oldid=1276365920 this edit?] Simonm223 (talk) 18:32, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

:@Simonm223 : Can you revert back the article that Raoul mishima have change again? Kelvintjy (talk) 00:47, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

::Well take a little time to read the page @Kelvintjy.

::Your last edit makes the page laudatory and promotionnal. It's full of unsourced affirmations like "The underlying educational philosophy and curriculum perspectives of the Soka School System has influenced the work of many educators in Japan and abroad" (whom ?) or the funny "Qualitative research has emerged in the form of books, articles, and dissertations". You also quote a lot of primary sources, and a some of your sentences are 90% copy/pasted from the [https://www.daisakuikeda.org/main/educator/edu/edu-09.html Soka Gakkai website]... Eventually, this page looks like an advertising, and WP is not made for that. Raoul mishima (talk) 01:02, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

::No. I am not going to make the edit war worse by adding another participant. Simonm223 (talk) 01:06, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

:::Noted. I will then revert it back to your version. Kelvintjy (talk) 01:28, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

::::It's not @Simonm223's version it's yours @Kelvintjy... Raoul mishima (talk) 02:39, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

:::::Both of you need to stop reverting each other and learn a little patience. There is no deadline. Discuss your proposed edits on good faith here first. Simonm223 (talk) 12:25, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

::::::I don't mind discussing in the talk page but what is the point of it when so many editor try to discuss with him, he either MIA for quite some time before making the changes. Hence the slow-motion edit war happened as he keep insisting on his version. Kelvintjy (talk) 02:15, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

:::::::If you don't mind discussing in the talk page why have you avoided doing it for so long ?

:::::::You have been engaged in other edit wars before so please, don't blame me for you've been doing Kelvin.

:::::::Now if you're ready to discuss go to the talk page and let's do it. Raoul mishima (talk 08:28, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

::::::::Please answer Simonm223 questions first. You until have yet to answer his question. There is no point talking with you since you keep avoiding answering other editors' question. Kelvintjy (talk) 09:08, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

While you editors sort this out in talk, I'm locking the page. I could be convinced to unprotect if I see a meaningful discussion among the parties moving towards an agreement. I might choose to renew or extend the full protection if I don't see movement. I'm taking no position on sides of the discussion, or I might have merely semi- or ec- protected to effectively do so. I am taking a position on this lengthy childishness. Smart people often disagree; this is a monumental good thing. Hash it out like adults, wikipedians. BusterD (talk) 14:01, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

:Thank you very much BusterD - hopefully this will help. I'm going to pull out key cited statements from the disputed material and maybe the disputants can discuss these items individually and see if we can figure out where key problems are. Simonm223 (talk) Simonm223 (talk) 15:05, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

:Thank You very much! Kelvintjy (talk) 16:36, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

::I want to thank the editors working in the thread below. If I continue to see these vital disagreements argued vigorously in talk, I'll be happy to relax the unneeded protection. For now, I'll watch. Thanks again editors for acting collegially. BusterD (talk) 13:52, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

Ok the first one:

Also, one of Japan's largest correspondence education programs is administered by Soka University in Tokyo.Goulah, Jason (2016). Daisaku Ikeda, Language and Education, pp. 14, 88.

The second one:

Its educational program is non-sectarian despite the Soka Gakkai's relationship to Nichiren Buddhism. Its buildings and campuses have been noted as architecturally supportive of the schools’ stated philosophy, designed to be bright and expansive with scenic views.White, James William (1970). The Sokagakkai and Mass Society, pp. 103-104. Stanford University Press. {{ISBN|9780804707282}}.Gross, Carl H. (1970). Soka Gakkai and Education. Michigan State University Press: East Lansing, MI.Metraux, Daniel A. The Soka Gakkai Revolution (1994), pp. 102-104. University Press of America. {{ISBN|9780819197337}}Metraux, Daniel A. (2016). Soka Gakkai International: Nichiren Japanese Buddhism, p. 94. In Cherry, Stephen M. & Ebaugh, Helen R. (eds). Global Religious Movements Across Borders: Sacred Service. Routledge. {{ISBN|9781317127338}}.

The third one:

The mission of schools, according to Soka education, should be to protect the dignity of human life and human rights. Its methodology is based on “human education” rather than the more popularly used term “humanistic education.” Here, the teacher serves as a role model of pacifism, assuming the Buddhist function of a bodhisattva. The teacher's role is to help students realize the inner dignity of their lives, nurture the will to live more strongly, and empathize with the pain of others. The curriculum has a strong focus on peace, human rights, sustainable development, and environmental education.Jason Goulah (2011). Environmental Displacement, English Learners, and Value Creation: Considering Daisaku Ikeda in the East-West Ecology of Education” in Jing Lin and Rebecca L. Oxford (eds). Transformative Eco-Education for Human and Planetary Survival:Transforming Education for the Future, p. 54. IAP. {{ISBN|9781617355042}}.Joffee, Monte (2006). Value-Creating Education: A Nichiren Buddhist Perspective, p. 318. In Karen-Marie Yust, Aostre N. Johnson, Sandy Eisenberg Sasso, Eugene Roehlkepartain (Eds). Nurturing Child and Adolescent Spirituality: Perspectives from the World's Religious Traditions. Rowman & Littlefield, {{ISBN|9780742544635}}.

The fourth one is odd in that only the references are contested with the opposing edits supporting an uncited paragraph that says the same thing:

Heffron, John M. The Transnational Context of Schooling (2015), pp. 180-192. In Papa, Rosemary & English, Fenwick W. (eds.). Educational Leaders Without Borders: Rising to Global Challenges to Educate All. Springer. {{ISBN|9783319123585}}Heffron, John M. (2017). In the Shadow of Totalitarianism: Tsunesaburo Makiguchi and the Struggle for Value-Creating Educational Leadership. In Brooks, Jeffrey S. & Normore, Anthony H. (eds). In Leading Against the Grain: Lessons for Creating Just and Equitable Schools. Teachers College Press, New York. {{ISBN|9780807758717}}Gebert, Andrew & Joffee, Monte (2007). Value creation as the aim of education: Tsunesaburo Makiguchi and Soka education, pp. 65-88. In Hansen, David T. (Ed.), Ethical visions of education: Philosophies in practice Teachers College Press, New York. In founding the Soka School System, Ikeda modernized and broadened Makiguchi's vision of Soka educationGoulah, Jason (2016). Daisaku Ikeda, Language and Education. pp: 2, 46, 52, 61. Routledge On his many visits to the Soka schools Ikeda modeled the types of caring for students he hoped staff members would embrace.Nagashima, Julie (2016). Daisaku Ikeda’s Philosophy of Soka Education in Practice: A Narrative Analysis of Culturally Specific Language, p. 132. In Goulah, Jason (2016). Daisaku Ikeda, Language and Education. Routledge

Fifth sourced statement contested:

One of the first western scholars to research Soka education and its applications was Dayle M. Bethel who wrote a biography of Makiguchi and who edited and translated his “Geography of Human Life” and “Value-Creating Education.”Bethel, Dayle M. Makiguchi, the value creator: Revolutionary Japanese educator and founder of Soka Gakkai (1973). Weatherhill. {{ISBN|9780834800779}}Bethel, Dayle M. (ed) A Geography of Human Life (2002). Caddo Gap Press. {{ISBN|9781880192429}}Bethel, Dayle M. (Ed.), Education for creative living: Ideas and proposals of Tsunesaburo Makiguchi (1989). Ames, Iowa: State University Press: Ames, Iowa. {{ISBN|0813803918}}

Sixth sourced statement contested:

This was followed by Carl H. Gross’ anecdotal report on his visit to the newly formed Soka High School in Tokyo.Gross, Carl H. Soka Gakkai and Education. East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University Press, 1970

Seventh sourced statement contested:

Qualitative research has emerged in the form of books, articles, and dissertations. Considerable textual analysis of the Ikeda corpus is taking place at the Institute for Daisaku Ikeda Studies at DePaul University's College of Education. The Soka Education Research Initiative on Global Citizenship (SERI-GC) is a five-year research project launching at the University of Guelph-Humber in Canada the promotes study of the philosophy and practices of Soka education and its connection to global citizenship which is funded by the Japan-based Makiguchi Foundation for Education. An annual student-led conference about applications of Soka education takes place annually at Soka University of America.Ikeda Center for Peace, Dialogue, and Learning,http://ikedacenter.org/about/education-fellows/bibliography.University of Guelph-Humber Soka Education Research Initiative launches at UofGH,https://www.guelphhumber.ca/news/soka-education-research-initiative-launches-uofghSoka University of America, Soka Education Student Research Project,http://www.soka.edu/student_life/student-activities/soka-education-student-research-project/default.aspxSharma, Namrata Value-Creating Global Citizenship Education: Engaging Gandhi, Makiguchi, and Ikeda as Examples (2018). Palgrave Pivot. {{ISBN|978-3-319-78243-0}}

Eighth sourced statement contested:

• The International Committee of Artists for Peace (ICAP) - United States, founded in 2002{{Cite web|url=https://icapeace.org/?page_id=393|title=About Us | ICAP-International Committee of Artist for Peace}}

I've left out anything that is clearly unsourced - unsourced material can be deleted without much discussion generally. But in each of these eight statements I have the following questions:

1. Is the source reliable? If so why not?
2. Does the text accurately summarize the source?
3. Does the text introduce POV language that should be attributed?
4. In the case where a text indicates opinion to what extent is that opinion due?

If those people who are disputing the inclusion of these sources either for or against can answer these four questions for each of these eight statements I think we might be able to make some progress. The only one a bit different is statement four. That is odd as the text for the statement is not contested, only the sources used to support it. We don't generally want to replace a reliable source with no source at all. If there are problems with those sources we should either remove the section or improve the sources. Simonm223 (talk) 15:27, 4 March 2025 (UTC) Simonm223 (talk) 15:27, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

:Thanks @Simonm223

:I will answer your questions first, and hope @Kelvintjy will do the same.

:Is the source reliable? If so why not? I think it's not reliable if it's a primary source, that comes from a Soka school professor or a professor funded by the Soka Gakkai.

:Does the text accurately summarize the source? It should, but most of the sources mentionned in this page are not quoted and are impossible to verify.

:Does the text introduce POV language that should be attributed? I think so, many sentences in this page are adaptated from Soka Gakkai related websites.

:In the case where a text indicates opinion to what extent is that opinion due? It can fit the page but it has to be not the majority of the texts + it needs other POVs and critics so that the page remains objective.

:First statement : "Also, one of Japan's largest correspondence education programs is administered by Soka University in Tokyo" : the book is not quoted, and its a primary source since Jason Goulah is [https://www.sgi-usa.org/about-global-citizenship/ director of the Institute for Daisaku Ikeda Studies].

:Second statement : "Its educational program is non-sectarian despite the Soka Gakkai's relationship to Nichiren Buddhism" : This sentence seems abusive according to the lawsuits filed by certain teachers. "In reality the curriculum is intended to reflect cult beliefs and perspectives" said Linda Southwell, a fired fine arts professor. "Soka U insists it is an independent, nonsectarian school not even as religiously influenced as, say, Brigham Young or Notre Dame universities. But at least a majority of Soka U's trustees have direct Soka Gakkai connections. Today 70% of matriculants are Soka Gakkai members", says a [https://www.forbes.com/forbes/2004/0906/126/ Forbes article] in 2004.

:Third statement : "The mission of schools" paragraph is inspired from primary sources, authors (Jason Goulah and Joffee Monte) that are both employed and paid by the Soka School System.

:Fourth statement : same remark, primary sources all the way...

:Fifth statement : the sentence is intended to show that Makiguchi was an influential and widely studied theorist.

:Yet, who are those "western scholars to research Soka education and its applications" ?

:The author quoted, Dayle Bethel is, again, associated to the Soka Gakkai. And [https://brill.com/previewpdf/journals/jaas/10/3-4/article-p225_17.xml one of the few reviews of Bethel's book] says "Makiguchi was, as Bethel admits, ignored in his lifetime, and he made no appreciable impact on Japanese education (...) Bethel can be faulted on a number of grounds. First, he is somewhat naive in his treatment of the Soka Gakkai, tending to accept the speeches and writings of Ikeda, and the Gakkai's stated goals, as synonymous with actual accomplishment".

:Sixth statement : it's impossible to find any information about this report.

:Seventh statement : "Qualitative research has emerged in the form of books, articles, and dissertations. Considerable textual analysis of the Ikeda corpus is taking place at the Institute for Daisaku Ikeda Studies at DePaul University's College of Education"

:This is all unsourced, and those books and analysis seem all funded by centers linked to Soka Gakkai, which does not make it objective or scientific.

:[https://education.depaul.edu/about/centers-and-initiatives/institute-for-daisaku-ikeda-studies/Pages/scholarships.aspx The Institute for Daisaku Ikeda Studies says] himself it "provides up to $15,000 in tuition support" to "students (...) who demonstrate a record of service and commitment to the ideals of Tsunesaburo Makiguchi, Josei Toda, and Daisaku Ikeda". That does not look like objective researches. And there is no source or evidence of those "Considerable textual analysis of the Ikeda corpus".

:Eighth statement : The International Committee of Artists for Peace (ICAP) does not seem to be part of any school system and may not belong to this page. Raoul mishima (talk) 23:39, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

::@Raoul mishima please read WP:PRIMARY I think you are making a few mistakes in interpretation here. Simonm223 (talk) 01:26, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

:::OK now that I'm at a computer I can respond more fulsomely. So regarding excerpt 1: The publication in question is an academic monograph published by a reputable academic publisher. It includes {{tq| analysis, evaluation, interpretation, or synthesis of facts, evidence, concepts, and ideas}} and as such constitutes a WP:SECONDARY source by Wikipedia policy. However even if this were not the case, it would be covered by WP:ABOUTSELF which allows use of a primary, even self-published, source to describe the subject in their own words.

:::Regarding excerpt 2 - this is supported by no less than four sources of which three are peer-reviewed. A Forbes artice from 10 years ago that has no author information is not sufficiently due to override these sources. Frankly I'm uncertain that the Forbes article is reliable at all. I will look at your responses to the other six when I have time later. Simonm223 (talk) 13:02, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

::::Regarding excerpt three The Goulah chapter is part of a book published by Information Age Publishing - an imprint of Emerald Publishing The Monte chapter was from an academic book pubished by Rowman & Littlefield - these are all respected academic publishers. The assertion that these constitute primary sources based on your statement that these people are employed by Sokka Gakkai is not in line with our policy on source reliability and original research.
Regarding excerpt four, again, we see these sources all come from academic WP:BESTSOURCES with books and peer reviewed articles associated with Springer, Routledge and Teachers College Press - to remove these academic sources, especially when the text they were cited to was retained, seems out of line with Wikipedia policy on citations.
Regarding excerpt 5 This again is an WP:ABOUTSELF issue. Some minor rewording might be in order so as to properly attribute the claim to Bethel however what it actually says is that Bethel was one of the first western scholars to study this organization; I am concerned that removing this seems based on reading something into the article that isn't actually there.

::::Regarding Excerpt 6 I was able to access bibliograpical information at this url [https://books.google.ca/books?id=4RmUGQAACAAJ&printsec=front_cover&redir_esc=y] an editor's personal access to a source does not affect its reliability. If you feel a need to verify its statements I would recommend consulting your local library.

::::Regarding Excerpt 7 It's not at all clear that the material you refer to is unsourced. This is a lengthy paragraph but it does contain four references at the end. While this probably deserves greater scrutiny than the other excerpts in order to ensure there's no WP:SYNT going on, this is a matter of article improvement, not mass-reversion.

::::Regarding Excerpt 8 You may have a point in that it is described as a research institute. I do not see any indication, from the cited source, that ICAP is a research institute - it appears to be an advocacy group / arts NGO. As this fails verification it is likely appropriate for removal. Simonm223 (talk) 13:40, 5 March 2025 (UTC)