text:
Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Coolcat, Davenbelle and Stereotek

Please note that Coolcat has begun using the account. This may affect certain links, in most cases substituting Cool Cat for Coolcat will cause the link to go to the proper place.

Case Opened on 13:14, 24 July 2005 (UTC)

Case Closed on 23:24, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

Please do not edit this page directly unless you wish to become a participant in this request. (All participants are subject to Arbitration Committee decisions, and the ArbCom will consider each participant's role in the dispute.) Comments are very welcome on the Talk page, and will be read, in full. Evidence, no matter who can provide it, is very welcome at /Evidence. Evidence is more useful than comments.

Arbitrators will be working on evidence and suggesting proposed decisions at /Workshop and voting on proposed decisions at /Proposed decision.

Involved parties

 * Coolcat is still concerned that he is being stalked by two other editors.

Statement by Tony Sidaway
Cool Cat is still concerned, apparently with some justification, that Stereotek and Davenbelle are dogging his footsteps and making it very difficult for him to edit Wikipedia. It looks to me as if this is a deliberate campaign against Cool Cat. It seems to be impossible to persuade Davenbelle and Sterotek to cease. I recommended against arbitration earlier, but I think it's reached the point where the case should be examined. Perhaps a mentorship for Cool Cat would be a good outcome for this, because it would protect him from abuse while permitting any issues that may be identified in his behavior, which may be contributing to his problems, to be controlled.

I bring this case on my own behalf because, while Cool Cat's pleas tend to be wordy and miss the point, I believe there may be a case to answer here.

I have undeleted the earlier RfC which didn't make cert, was userfied and then deleted (by me). It contains comments by other editors expressing very much the same concerns that I have.

 * User:Coolcat/Davenbelle_and_Stereotek

Statement by Cool Cat
I am on vacation and am in a rather crowded net cafe so they give me 1 hr to use the internet. My apology for any spelling errors etc...

I would like to firstly point out to the ArbCom Requests for comment/Davenbelle and Stereotek

 * 1) One thing that may not be clear in the RfC case is that users assigned me a nationality, even though I want to stay anonymous. I have no reason to advertise any info on the internet since I started using the internet for over a decade. They clearly know this (assuming they bother reading
 * 2) For all my disputes with them, prior to my edits in all cases neither user had a single edit. Maybe with the exception of Armenian Genocide however I haven't checked.
 * 3) Please bear in mind the mini revert war in the RfC page of which I misquoted Davenbelle as I was typing/paraphrasing that quote from memory (when typing the rfc case). Such errors in an assume good faith enviorment is fixed without a redundent signature embaded in my section even though regardless of the material one presents no one should be editing each others section spesificaly if the case is filled by/against/for one another anyhow.
 * 4) I am out of time. That's all I got for now. OK, they gave me more time but I used it elsewhere. I don't think I need to present more evidence. I was told I have more meetings t attend, I intend to take losts of photos. I may vanish from the scenes for a while.

As far as I am concerned, the general flow of the conversation is more than enough evidence I can present. I am coping my points from the RfC case below for your conviniance. I did amend some.

 * Excuse of dismissing governmental data: "Governments have been known to lie...".
 * user:Davenbelle definately has a personal issue with me and probably with Turkey as well.
 * Nanking massacre: Image sizes are a good excuse to start rever war. Standard Thumbnail size (180px) vs 280px . I expect decency in the article. If people want to see full sized corpses they can click on the image. The Holocaust entry uses thumbnail sized images. Reverts should be evaded and things should be discussed. They had no edits on this article prior to my arrival as well. I was trying to mediate this thing in hopes that I learn better ways to mediate, their and User:Fadix's "contribution" made a mediation impossible. They had no edits prior to my arrival as well.
 * I abuse wikipedia templates: . User did not voice an opinion in articles talk page or in my talk page or in any talk page aside from a 3rd parties. (ammended - RFC)
 * Davenbelle marked GAP project a copy vio. Material was PD and is used on 11 websites of which two are PD. Copyvio people deleted the page anyway as copy vio people if they are marking pages as a copy vio make sure material is not on a PD source. I rewrote the page from scratch the page still is not there as the "copy vio" issues are still discussed. The page is rewritten from scratch twice so far. It is yet another stressful and unnecessary case which would be easily avoided. I don't enjoy red tape sorry. SO as to satisfy User:Duk... --Cool Cat My Talk 16:44, 26 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Another assume bad faith case in Greco-Turkish_relations. I do not know what the user was trying to prove. Topic stayed locked because of his intervention (trolling). See how the discussion went on (or lack of discussion). . Check the revert war in on going in archived discussion. I am doing spelling corrections. They cannot even tolerate that.
 * I was asked to mediate Javier Solana (via IRC). Which I accepted but Davenbelle for one removed my mediation guidelines to the users (which I later forced back in). His interference is visible in talk archive 3. I have every right to push a few rules to hopefully force people to discuss the matter rather than them continue their revert war. At least that was my intention which they again made impossible.
 * For instance I listed Antiwar.com on Votes for deletion/Log/2005 June 16 as Votes_for_deletion/Antiwar.com at 16/06/2005, 15:39:55, Davenbelle oppsed it on 16/06/2005, 15:41:10 . In other words 1:15 minutes later of it being listed he opposed it. Granted people can suggest whatever the wish I am not criticising that remotely. But the fact that they are so efficent in oposing any and every suggestion or edit I can this easily and fast bothers me (times were my local time). On many other instances such as recent deletation of Template:CVIP and Template:RWIP they were also in the opposing corner. (ammended - RFC)
 * Another example will be in Abortion. Article is contraversial yes, my edits were not. My edits (bear in mind I have two blocks of edits and some changes were not my doing): All edits from my last edit till just before Stereotek's first edit (mostly links being removed/added):  Stereotek's edits as follows: . From my first edit till the end of Stereotek's first block: . Granted Not every thing I did is gone, but the majority is. Aside from the links (which was not my doing) almost all of my edits are gone. I was doing cleanup duty. Bear in mind that he used no Talk: . I was talking to User:Tznkai on IRC. Infact he invited me to clean the article. While the discussion of which version is better is open to debate, like any edit. I wouldn't be as buged if someone else than the two (Davenbelle and Stereotek) appeared.
 * I'm not sure where the best place to put this is, but here it goes. I did infact invite coolcat via IRC to help clean up the abortion article, and I think he did a good job of it in some places, and I disagree with others. In the time I worked with him, he made his edits in good faith. While he may have been incorrect in doing somethings, he did his best to do what I asked him: improve the article.--Tznkai 7 July 2005 17:03 (UTC)
 * PKK: Users have not contributed to this article prior to my edit. They just abusively revert. No discussion no talk no assume good faith...
 * POV delete or is it? PKK's drug ties is well known. So says the Turkish government and so confirms the US government. Bear in mind user posted nothing to talk. just do a google search with this string: pkk drug site:.gov google search. That's a ridiculously simple search. Users however ignore common knowledge, stick to their "governments tend to lie" ideology... rv to last NPoV version by Bobblewik
 * Example of double standard. Bear in mind that restore of "removed material" removed about 5182 bytes of data. (assume bad faith and discard the work of others out of hand) revert; don't discard the work of others out of hand
 * Users NPoVise articles by stubisizing:

Statement by Stereotek
Cool Cat has disrupted Wikipedia by refusing to follow Wikipedias policies regarding NPOV in many articles, and has been pushing a pro-Turkish government/Genocide denialist PoV in many articles such as Armenian Genocide, PKK and Nanking Massacre.

Cool Cat has frequently violated Wikipedias policies regarding No personal attacks, and has exposed several users to extreme personal attack across several pages. Examples include: User:Stereotek and User:Davenbelle just SHUT UP and GO SCREW yourselves. and Stereotek + Fadix = Death

Cool Cat has shown complete discontempt for the opinion of other editors and Wikipedias rules regarding concensus. Examples include insisting on redirecting the Abdullah Öcalan article to the PKK article, disregarding the clear consensus on the talkpage not to merge the mentioned articles.

Cool Cat has also been a frequent violator of wikipedias policies regarding civility, and has among other things used edit summaries such as: "Stop being silly, do you have some sort of sick wet dream to stare at a dead naked woman? Or do you enjoy staring at dead chineese?..." and comments such as: "You cant read either, the color format is discussed above"

Cool Cat has frequently been violating wikipedias policies regaring copyright. Examples include the GAP Project article which he insisted on recreating unitarily, despite consensus not to do so on the votes for undeletion. Other examples of copyvios that Coolcat has been insisting on including are his now deleted version of the Diagnosis: Murder article. More evidence regarding Coolcats dishonest use of copyrighted material is available here:

Another one of Wikipedias policies that Cool Cat has frequently violated is the 3 revert rule, and according to Cool Cat's own userpage, he has been blocked three times violating 3rr.

Apart from these violations of Wikipedia policies, Cool Cat has been disrupting Wikipedia by aggressively promoting a some odd ideas. These include insisting on using a very unusual colorsheme when 'mediating' in articles such as Greco-Turkish relations and Javier Solana see:, this often despite other editors clearly rejecting his idea.

More evidence is available here: User:Davenbelle/Evidence re User:Coolcat moved: Requests for arbitration/Coolcat, Davenbelle and Stereotek/Evidence/Davenbelle's Evidence re Coolcat.

Statement by Davenbelle
I request that the ArbCom accept this case because I feel that User:Cool Cat's edits need a review. I don't feel that those who have opposed him have done much wrong. Please see the current RfC Cc has opened against Stereotek and myself and our previous attempt to get User:Cool Cat before ArbCom. I would support the proposal by Tony of a mentorship for User:Cool Cat if previously uninvolved admins will agree to assume the role; if this option is acted upon I would be more than happy to give Cc and most of the articles we've interacted on a wide berth.

I have little time or bandwidth to gather much new evidence; I would hope that someone will present diffs of User:Cool Cat's conduct on Talk:Armenian Genocide from late March — very telling.

On the subject of assuming good faith I would like to say that I did so until User:Cool Cat showed ample evidence of bad faith.

I will be off line for the rest of the week as I have a bus to catch to Padangbai (again!); the white sand beach there has no electricity.

— Davenbelle July 5, 2005 02:37 (UTC)

Arbitrators' opinions on hearing this matter (5/0/0/0)

 * Accept. Fred Bauder July 4, 2005 17:27 (UTC)
 * Accept. ➥the Epopt 23:10, 9 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Accept. sannse (talk) 16:29, 22 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Accept. James F. (talk) 18:37, 22 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Accept. Neutralitytalk 07:09, July 23, 2005 (UTC)

Temporary injunction (sort of)
This may be the wrong place to mention this, but I blocked for one week - at his own request - following IRC discussion at #wikipedia. I consider his stepping up to say that he's too angry to edit, a sign of maturity, even if strictly speaking vacations shouldn't be enforced by account suspensions. (Please move this comment if it's out of place.) Uncle Ed 20:57, September 1, 2005 (UTC)

Furthermore, after a public discussion on the #wikipedia IRC channel, Cool Cat has agreed to let me block his account at any time and for any reason, as part of an informal and temporory mentoring agreement. I shall try to advise him on good conduct, and he shall try to follow my advice. All for the greater good of Wikipedia. Uncle Ed 14:43, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

=Final decision (none yet) =

Mediation
1) Wikipedia mediators are "are part of the Mediation Committee, and are experienced and trusted Wikipedians."
 * Passed 7-0

Informal mediation
1.1) Informal mediation is welcomed as a part of the normal editing process regardless of whether a user is an official Mediator.
 * Passed 6-0

Competence
2) Some tasks necessary for the functioning of Wikipedia require skill and, in the case of mediation, the trust of the community.

 * Passed 7-0

Clarification of issues
3) When there are a number of problems, it may serve to attempt to resolve the most pressing, then observe the situation.
 * Passed 7-0

Stalking
4) It is not acceptable to stalk another editor who is editing in good faith. (Note that everyone is expected to assume good faith in the absence of definite evidence to the contrary.) Once an editor has given reason to suspect bad faith, monitoring is appropriate, but constantly nit-picking is always a violation of required courtesy.
 * Passed 5-0

Monitoring of problem users
4.1) There are hundreds of administrators available to monitor problem users.
 * Passed 5-2

Mediation attempts by Coolcat
1) has unsuccessfully attempted to mediate a number of contested articles Javier Solana, Greco-Turkish relations, and Nanking Massacre. Please look at the talk pages of these articles for examples of the results of Coolcat's efforts.
 * Passed 7-0

Coolcat's status as a mediator
1.1) is not a Mediator. His nomination as a Mediator had no support Wikipedia_talk:Mediation_Committee. Self-nomination ; opposition by  ; opposition by   citing attempts to mediate disputes where he had a strong POV. Coolcat responds to opposition . El C reinforces his point . Having gained no support after several months nomination removed by
 * Passed 7-0

Restructuring pages
1.2) has engaged in the practice of "restructuring" talk pages . This results in the talk pages being confused as comments have been moved out of the context in which they were made.
 * Passed 7-0

POV editing by Coolcat
2) has a history of POV editing which has attracted the attention of other users. He may have moderated his behavior but continues to engage in it in some instances see these edits.
 * Passed 6-0

Efforts by Davenbelle and Stereotek to monitor Coolcat
3.1), , and monitored  with the view to bringing problems he caused to the attention of the community. However, this has tipped over into effectively "wikistalking" or "hounding" Cool Cat, and so disrupting Wikipedia and discouraging his positive contributions.
 * Passed 6-0

Coolcat prohibited from mediating
1) Due to lack of community support, is prohibited from holding himself out as a mediator or attempting to serve as a mediator of any dispute, see Requests for arbitration/Coolcat, Davenbelle and Stereotek/Workshop, Requests for arbitration/Coolcat, Davenbelle and Stereotek/Workshop, Requests for arbitration/Coolcat, Davenbelle and Stereotek/Workshop, and Requests for arbitration/Coolcat, Davenbelle and Stereotek/Workshop. This ban shall continue in effect until such time as he is officially appointed to the Mediation Committee.

 * Passed 4-3. Remedy lifted, per below.

Motion to lift Coolcat, Davenbelle, Steretek Case Remedy 1.
1) Remedy 1 in the Coolcat, Davenbelle, Steretek Case is no longer in force.

 * ''Passed 6 to 0 (with 1 abstention), per this request for amendment (voting tallies).

,, and
2), , and are counseled to let other editors and administrators take the lead in monitoring . If subsequent proceedings which involve Cool Cat show that he has been hounded by them, substantial penalties may be imposed.
 * Passed 6-0

Coolcat prohibited from restructuring
4) is prohibited from moving the comments of others around on the talk page of any article or any user talk page other than his own. Additionally he is not permitted to archive any talk page other than his own. Cool Cat may make no edit to a talk page which is not at the end of a section unless he begins a new section at the bottom of the page. This restriction shall last for one year.
 * Passed 7-0

Coolcat Mentorship
5) is, for one year, placed under a mentorship as follows: If Coolcat should disruptively edit articles relating to Turkey or the Kurds (or on mostly-unrelated articles with sections dealing with Turkey or the Kurds, such as the Armenian Holocaust on Holocaust), an admin may block him for a short time, up to three days.

Coolcat will have users: Mark Ryan, Tony Sidaway, and MacGyverMagic. as his mentors. The mentors will have the power to block Coolcat or prohibit him from editing certain articles. In addition, the mentors may overrule or modify administrator-imposed blocks on Coolcat stemming from this decision at their prerogative (and thus act as an avenue of appeal).
 * Passed 7-0

 * I have imposed a 48 hour block on Cool Cat for violating the above ruling; according to several users at a recent AN/I posting, his edits relating to Kurd categories have been disruptive. -lethe talk [ +] 13:56, 8 May 2006 (UTC)


text:
Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/Coolcat, Davenbelle and Stereotek

Please note that Coolcat has begun using the account. This may affect certain links, in most cases substituting Cool Cat for Coolcat will cause the link to go to the proper place.

 * Confirmation that all parties are aware of the request

 * Request posted by Tony Sidaway|Talk 4 July 2005 17:36 (UTC)
 * Coolcat notified 17:28, 4 July 2005
 * Stereotek notified 17:30, 4 July 2005
 * Davenbelle notified 17:31, 4 July 2005

See also editor comments below.

Stereotek has told me that he's leaving Wikipedia over this. There are no edits from this user since July 4th.

 * If it matter in any way to this RFA, I've actually been making a few edits as an anon since July 4th, but not many though. The project doesn't interest me much anymore and I won't follow this RFA very closely, properly not at all. -- Stereotek.

If not, then explain why that would be fruitless
 * Confirmation that other steps in dispute resolution have been tried

See Requests for comment/Davenbelle and Stereotek where Coolcat gives extensive evidence of his attempts to resolve this using all other means available to him in the dispute resolution process.

Stereotek et al are supposed to let an admin watch over Cool_Cat?
I may have understood that wrong, as I've even closed that window, but did it mean that an admin will be appointed to watch over Cool_Cat? If so, I'd be willing to do just that as I've read a few of the pages concerning his case and I know the editor. Also, FWIW, I'll soon be the newest mediator to the medcom. R e  dwolf24  (talk) 01:32, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

 * I would hope this is the case. Even if ArbCom does not explicitly appoint someone, you are free to monitor his edits. I would encourage you to follow your conscience — you'll get no objection from me. — Davenbelle 03:01, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

 * I am open to monitoring. I oppose monitoring by Fadix, Davenbelle, and Stereotek. As quite often they go beyond enforcing wikipedia policies. --Cool Cat Talk 03:49, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

The decision says that:
 * "there are hundreds of administrators available to monitor problem users" (Principles 4.1 Monitoring of problem users)
 * and "Davenbelle, Stereotek, and Fadix are counseled to let other editors and administrators take the lead in monitoring Cool Cat." (Remedies 2 Davenbelle, Stereotek, and Fadix)

To clarify: the three people named are advised not to monitor Cool Cat themselves, and in particular they should avoid behavior that could be interpreted as further evidence of [stricken by Davenbelle 07:09, 7 October 2005 (UTC)], modified again by Tony Sidaway Talk 07:33, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
 * '"wikistalking" or "hounding" Cool Cat, and so disrupting Wikipedia and discouraging his positive contributions.' (Findings of fact 3.1 Efforts by Davenbelle and Stereotek to monitor Coolcat),

with a particularly dire warning that
 * "if subsequent proceedings which involve Cool Cat show that he has been hounded by them, substantial penalties may be imposed." (Remedies 2 again).

No one administrator is to be appointed, all administrators are charged with and empowered to restrain any disruptive editing by Cool Cat in certain articles, and empowered to enforce this restraint by a block of up to three days. (Enforcement 5, Coolcat mentorship). --Tony Sidaway Talk 04:57, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Tony, I have stricken out part of your above comment because it is an inaccurate summary. I do not mean offense by this — I only intend it to highlight what I feel is inaccurate.

 * We have been counseled to let others take the lead in monitoring User:Cool Cat, not to refrain from monitoring him at all.

 * I do hope that others  will take the lead in monitoring User:Cool Cat and I hope to minimize my involvement with him in the future. I appreciate your call on all admins to restrain disruptive editing by User:Cool Cat and would urge that they pay particular attention to Armenian Genocide and Kurdistan Workers Party.
 * — Davenbelle 07:09, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

Well I'm just one of the mentors, not an arbitrator, so I can't make an interpretation of what was written. My own opinion, however, is that you, Fadix and Stereotek would do well to avoid the kind of monitoring that you have been engaged in in the past. The mentors are charged with acting as an avenue of appeal for Cool Cat himself, and part of that duty could involve further proceedings at arbitration. Think of us as guardians. --Tony Sidaway Talk 07:33, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

 * I did say that I hope to minimize my involvement with him in the future. I have also said that I do not intend to edit articles related to Turkey, Kurds, and the Armenian Genocide.

 * I'm surprised to find Mentorship a red link; is there a definition somewhere else? The decision does not mention a function of guardianship (which also has an element of responsibility to it). I am not surprised that you are bringing that view to your role as mentor and this is part of why I objected to you as a mentor. A mentor should teach and correct as necessary. If you are charged with guarding anything, it would be Wikipedia, not User:Cool Cat.

 * My concern here is that no one will, in fact, take the lead in monitoring his editing. This concern was expressed by Jayjg and Raul654 . Do you see it as part of the mentors' responsibilities to take the lead in reining-in POV-Editing and any other objectionable editing by User:Cool Cat? — Davenbelle 09:28, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

 * On guardianship, not only do the mentors have powers and discretion to block and prohibit, they also have the power to review and amend or anull any other block made under the terms of the decision. They are to act "as an avenue of appeal."  A mentor is a "wise and trusted counselor or teacher."  Most of the mentorship happens person-to-person, nobody will see it.  It's a matter of giving good advice, and I'm afraid that does involve considering the interests of Cool Cat as well as Wikipedia.

 * On monitoring, this is a normal administrative function carried out routinely by administrators. It's the reason why we have talk pages, RfCs, an administrators' noticeboard, and so on.  If complaints filter back about an editor's behavior, administrators tend to get involved. --Tony Sidaway Talk  04:13, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

User:Cool Cat decision

 * This was copied from User talk:Raul654

By my count the prohibition on User:Cool Cat editing articles articles related or referring to Turks, Kurds, or Armenians for three months, plus Probation for one year passed with four in favor: Jayjg, ➥the Epopt, Theresa Knott, Neutrality. If I misunderstand something, please let me know. — Davenbelle 02:34, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Oh, plus the caution to not interfere with his mentorship. — Davenbelle 02:51, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Yes, I anticipated that little happenstance. The arbitration rules make no allowances for such a contingency (where two mutually exclusive rulings pass). So, (figuring that that is what would happen) I emailed the arbitration committee mailing list 4 days ago asking if everyone was OK with the mentorship passing instead of the the 3.0 and 3.1 (because the mentorship seemed to have the most support, all of it unqualified). Since one objected to closing it as such, that's how I closed it. →Raul654 02:38, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

 * As far as the caution (2.1), it was an alternative to 2.0 -- 2.0 had 6 supports, 2.1 had 5 supports; thus, I closed it out with 2.0 and not 2.1. →Raul654 02:44, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Hmmm... Well, off-the-cuff, I'd say that passed is passed and I don't see how the two decisions are mutually exclusive; indeed the mentorship text refers to "administrator-imposed blocks" and the mentors as an "an avenue of appeal" — presumably for action based on the other decision.

 * I strongly feel that the prohibition on Turks, Kurds, or Armenians articles and the Probation needs to be imposed and that it has passed. — Davenbelle 02:51, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

 * The mentorship and probation are inherently mutually exclusive (and I say that as the architect of both). The mentorship was presented as an alternative, it passed with far more support than the probation, and (just to cover my bases) I emailed the arbcom and no one objected. So while you are entitled to feel strongly about it, it has not, in fact, passed. →Raul654 02:55, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Furthermore, the exact wording is "In addition, the mentors may overrule or modify administrator-imposed blocks on Coolcat stemming from this decision at their prerogative". The administrator imposed blocks are a reference to an earlier part of that same remedy - "If Coolcat should disruptively edit articles relating to Turkey or the Kurds (or on mostly-unrelated articles with sections dealing with Turkey or the Kurds, such as the Armenian Holocaust on Holocaust), an admin may block him for a short time, up to three days." →Raul654 02:57, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

 * I somehow misunderstand, I thought the mentors were for Coolcat general participation in Wikipedia, since this was proposed after Fred proposition of a year ban(from every articles) was found to be too strong, while the proposition of three months(for things related to Turkey) was accepted and not found too strong, in fact, if I remember, Jay proposed that after he has abstained from another proposition and Fred asked him to present an alternative. The conclusion here is not my problem, but rather, I believe things are unclear. Also, was the mentorship not proposed for Coolcat general participation? If not, so why has it been proposed as somehow an alternative to Fred general ban proposition? What I understand is that the situation in which we are, Mentors will only have a say on his participations regarding matters that concern Turkey, directly or indirectly, while Fred told me to bring my problem with Coolcat hitlist to his mentors, when according to the final decision, they do not have a say here, which seems to not be what was planned and discussed previously. Fadix 03:27, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

 * The problem with coolcat's editing basically boils down to the fact that his editing on Turkey/Kurdish related articles was bad, but his editing outside those areas was generally good (mostly good but admittedly not perfect). So here's the solution passed in a nutshell:
 * Any admin may block coolcat for up to three days if he disruptively edits a turkey or kurdish related articles
 * The mentors may overrule blocks arising from part 1
 * The mentors can prohibit coolcat from editing any article they believe he is causing problems on. →Raul654 03:41, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Thanks, that clarify things. Fadix 03:51, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
 * To which I'd add another point: The mentors also have discretion to block Cool Cat. --Tony Sidaway Talk 04:12, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

Davenbelle should bear in mind that, together, the sysops and the mentors have far more extensive prohibition powers than those contemplated under the probation and ban. The Committee found that Cool Cat has a long history of POV editing, particularly in relation to the articles about which Davenbelle is concerned, and the mentors are bound to take that finding of fact very seriously. Under the mentorship, administrators are permitted more discretion in blocking, using their own judgement as to when Cool Cat's edits are disruptive; the mentors may mitigate instances where they think that such judgement has erred. In the proposed probation, the administrators would have had to show reasonable cause for a complete ban from editing an article. If they can show this, then under the mentorship they can petition the mentors to perform such a ban, which in my opinion should not be refused without equally good reason.

Of course the purpose of this case is to ensure that Cool Cat is able to rehabilitate himself and continue to perform the useful work he has done, without causing further problems for other editors. It means striking a balance. Disruptive editing won't be tolerated, but Cool Cat should otherwise be permitted the space he needs to continue to develop ways of working with the Wikipedia community, for which he has already drawn much praise. I know that Davenbelle, Stereotek and Fadix will take their own responsibilities under the committee's decision seriously, as I intend to take mine. --Tony Sidaway Talk 03:51, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Tony, for me the cases will be really over, after that Coolcat hitlist gets deleted. For some, this may not be a big deal, for me it is. Since you are one of his mentors, can you do something about this? Fadix 03:56, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

 * I, too, still want that page gone (and yes, I realize that delete just means hide from non-admin view). Fadix, please note that User:Cool Cat will be free to edit Armenian Genocide so long as he plays nicely. — Davenbelle 04:12, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

 * I'm sure you realise that the mentors cannot overrule WP:MD. I have voted delete in that debate.--Tony Sidaway Talk  04:32, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

Mark (Raul), and Tony, thanks for the clarifications. It is my hope that all parties can disengage to a large degree and work together civilly where mutual interests bring them together. For now, I think we need to let the dust settle a bit and see how things go. I like the suggested mentorship page idea and feel that the parties and the mentors should make a few agreements there. I look forward to suggestions. — Davenbelle 04:12, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

 * I believe that this discussion should be moved to Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/Coolcat, Davenbelle and Stereotek; Mark, if you would, please... — Davenbelle 04:12, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

I db'ed my semi-evidence/notes to self page. Should the need arise for a second rfar it is easy enough to undelete it, for now however I do not feel the need for it. --Cool Cat Talk 19:06, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Thanks Coolcat, it is greatly appreciated. Fadix 01:50, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

 * My thanks, too. This was the appropriate ending of this issue. — Davenbelle 06:39, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

 * I db'ed it strictly because the rfar concluded. --Cool Cat Talk 05:05, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

Remidies
Coolcat prohibited from mediating

1) Due to lack of community support, Cool Cat (talk • contribs) is prohibited from holding himself out as a mediator or attempting to serve as a mediator of any dispute, ... This ban shall continue in effect until such time as he is officially appointed to the Mediation Committee.

Passed 4-3

 * I do not see how this works, I cannot be a member of Mediation Committee unless I demonstrate I can mediate. --Cool Cat Talk 03:51, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

Coolcat prohibited from restructuring

4) Cool Cat (talk • contribs) is prohibited from moving the comments of others around on the talk page of any article or any user talk page other than his own. Additionally he is not permitted to archive any talk page other than his own. Cool Cat may make no edit to a talk page which is not at the end of a section unless he begins a new section at the bottom of the page. This restriction shall last for one year.

Passed 7-0

 * What exaclty does this mean? I dont have a history of "restructuring". I just moved embedded convos into my post on that instance (I also forgot about this). I cannot abide by the "Cool Cat may make no edit to a talk page which is not at the end of a section unless he begins a new section at the bottom of the page" as that would mean I cannot respond people in votes for example. I also dont see the purpose it serves. --Cool Cat Talk 03:51, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

 * I'll discuss these issues on the mentorship page. --Tony Sidaway Talk 04:16, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

Request for appeal: /Coolcat, Davenbelle and Stereotek

 * Copied from Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration for archiving purposes. Daniel (talk) 14:49, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

List of any users involved or directly affected, and confirmation that all are aware of the request:
 * (Formerly Coolcat) (initiator)
 * aka
 * aka
 * aka
 * aka
 * 1 year ban per Requests for arbitration/Armenia-Azerbaijan (ban reset on 25 February 2008)
 * aka
 * aka
 * aka
 * aka
 * aka
 * Indef blocked per rfar discussion and recently per comment
 * aka
 * Inactive since 14 February 2008
 * aka
 * Inactive since 14 February 2008
 * Inactive since 14 February 2008

Appeal by White Cat
Too long... *click* -- Cat chi? 00:00, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Statement by Moreschi
I really don't recommend altering this. White Cat is still the same old Armenian-bashing, anti-Kurd POV-pusher he was back at the time of the arbitration case. At the very least mediators should pretend to some faint semblance of neutrality. White Cat doesn't come close to cutting the mustard. Moreschi (talk) 12:45, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

 * Please try to remain civil on this page Moreschi. --bainer (talk) 10:13, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh, please. You chaps are seriously contemplating letting White Cat - White Cat - go back to mediating. And you're freaking out because I called him a POV-pusher, an entirely accurate description, as Folantin has nicely proved. Talk about screwball sense of priorities. Moreschi (talk) 13:29, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Actually, White Cat has just made my point for me. He still thinks that the Turkish Government is a reliable source for matters relating to the Armenian Genocide and Armenian-Turkish conflict stemming from the genocide, despite countless attempts to explain to him why this is not the case. It's the old, classic fallacy of equating NPOV with middle ground. HE JUST DOES NOT GET IT. Mediators need clue as well. Moreschi (talk) 10:13, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Statement by Rlevse
I suggest not changing the ruling. — Rlevse  •  Talk  • 12:51, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Comment from AGK
I'd like to note that the remedy self-terminates when White Cat (née Cool Cat) is appointed to the Mediation Committee—not the Mediation Cabal. There's a few mentions of the MedCab in various statements and comments (I pick up on Sam's view, below, as an example). After all, one cannot be "appointed" to the Mediation Cabal, by its very nature. Just a comment, for technical accuracy purposes. AGK § 15:06, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

 * Thanks for the correction. Sam Blacketer (talk) 00:17, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Statement by Folantin
No thanks. White Cat's contributions to the 2005 Nanking massacre talk page are an object lesson in how NOT to mediate a contentious article. In White Cat's own words: "I tried mediating both topics and I knew nothing about them. I still don't know much as I do not care". That's the reason why it failed, not the interference of some stalker. White Cat thought that committing the fallacy of middle ground ("it's always six of one and half a dozen of the other") at enormous length was somehow equivalent to NPOV. As Bathrobe put it when, well into the mediation, White Cat asked who Koizumi was: "It is a bit rich that Cool Cat is trying to moderate this article when he doesn't even know who the current [Japanese] Prime Minister is. How can you decide what the facts are when you don't even know the basic ones"? His attempted "mediation" of the Armenian genocide article was even worse, given the obvious pro-Turkish bias of his general editing history.

An example of White Cat's "moderation" : "You are obligated to recognise my authority and the authority of all moderators and they recognise yours, you are welcome to ignore me but any more Personal Attacks from you will not be tollerated. Such attacks will result in your destruction, I do not WANT your destruction. I am warning you so that you dont get destroyed. This is neither a threat nor an attack - just a freindly warning. I am a moderator and so are you. Everyone on wikipedia is a moderator. Not everyone is an Admin. I know mods who turn down admin requests as it is a lot of hard work so dont underestimate/dismiss us mods". --Folantin (talk) 16:07, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Your point being what? I've collaborated with Moreschi on several occasions trying to maintain NPOV on Armenian-Azeri-Turkish-Iranian pages. In fact, I only noticed this appeal when I was looking for clarification on the Armenia-Azerbaijan Arb regarding Iranian articles. You seem to have taken up semi-permanent residence on RFAR and ANI, so it's hardly surprising people keep stumbling across you. None of this has any bearing on the arguments I presented. --Folantin (talk) 16:43, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Reply to White Cat
 * Must be a new definition of reliable source if we're allowed to use a Turkish tourist board website trying to attract punters by presenting a history of Armenian-Turkish relations so skewed that it doesn't mention the Seljuk invasions (erm, so how exactly did the Turks get to Armenia in the first place?), the Hamidian massacres or even the Armenian genocide. Mind you, it took forever to get you to stop linking blatant hate sites like TallArmenianTale. But that's beside the point. "This is why I will not even attempt to mediate". Good. So we're all agreed now. --Folantin (talk) 17:03, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Statement by Black Kite
I would just point out that a meditor's main attribute is an ability to assume good faith, yet White Cat writes above "In the form of Jack Merridew, Davenbelle is still around..." despite nothing of the sort having been proved.  Black Kite  20:05, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Statement by Seddon69
I have had no real on-wiki interaction with this editor and have only known this editor through IRC though with only a small amount of time has been spent in direct conversation with him but i feel that perhaps in the spirit of this encyclopedia's OWN policy we all start assuming a little good faith. This was passed 2 years ago and time has moved on. It may be an idea to allow him an opportunity to mediate one case under supervision through MedCabal by co-mediation. Now i don't expect him to solve this case as the Cabal has far from a 100% success rate but i think what does deserve to happen is that we see how he acts. Seddon69 (talk) 20:57, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Statement by Xavexgoem
I second Seddon69. I was in IRC at the time, and this seems like a common sense approach. Note that I was not canvassed; I just wandered into the conversation and was bored enough to go through the diffs in the '05 arbcom case. Conduct may have been poor at that time, but I agree with Seddon69 that this was 2 years ago and People Change. I think that allowing mediation through WP:MEDCAB would be best to allow some degree of oversight; and I recommend to White Cat that he avoid mediating issues ethnic, religious, or political (esp. in regards to SW Asia), but that would be up to him.

I don't believe I've seen him around medcab's talk page, so I don't know what the coordinators (User:PhilKnight & User:Vassyana) and other old timers would think of this. At any rate, I think it's acceptable to drop the sanction but bring transgressions to enforcement per the '05 case. A trial run, if you will. Xavexgoem (talk) 21:32, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Statement by WJBscribe
While I could understand White Cat being banned from mediating disputes on topics with which he is involved, is a total ban needed? Were there to be a dispute about correctly identifying certain types of flora, for example - would the project be harmed by White Cat being able to offer to assist in resolving the dispute? I would point out that users who have strong POVs that make them unsuitable to mediating in certain areas have been acknowledged to be very effective at resolving disputes in other unconnected areas. It does seem that this sanction could be made a little narrower in scope. WjBscribe 17:25, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Comment by Nick

 * Not a clerk, but I'm going to note this here, just to let Arbcom know that per this diff Jack Merridew has self identified as a sockpuppet of blocked/banned user Davenbelle. Don't know what impact, if any, this is going to have on this request. Nick (talk) 01:28, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Arbitrator views and discussion

 * The remedy unusually has a built-in provision for its own termination: if White Cat can win the confidence of the community and be appointed to the Mediation cabal, the remedy is discharged. While noting that he prefers not to go down this route, I regard it as the best way of determining if he is a suitable user to act as mediator. Sam Blacketer (talk) 12:59, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Some of the remedies and especially the long-forgotten enforcement provision contained in the Davenbelle decision are weird. It also is not completely clear to me that remedy 1 (rather than 1.1) is the one that should have been deemed to have passed. That being said, it is apparent that when this case was decided a couple of years ago, the arbitrators were pretty much unanimously convinced that White Cat's talents lie in areas unrelated to mediating disputes and that his past attempts at mediation had worsened rather than helped solve problems. I would like to ask White Cat to briefly explain what has changed since the time of that decision such that he now wants to help mediate things again. I would also ask White Cat if he would agree that any attempts at informal mediation (because the chances that he will be appointed to the Mediation Committee are non-existent) would related to areas unrelated to the topics on which he has engaged in editorial disputes recently, such as Turkish/Kurdish and episodes-and-characters-related matters. Newyorkbrad (talk) 15:16, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

 * Yes, choosing 1 to pass does seem odd. I too think the underlying opinion was clear. There were two common factors (subject-matter in which White Cat has an interest, and the involvement of certain editors) which probably contributed to the failure of those attempts at mediation, but the third common factor remains White Cat's involvement. The issue for you, White Cat, is to demonstrate which of these factors is really the problem; that is, should we continue to prevent you from acting as mediator altogether, or would the better remedy be to restrict you merely from mediating disputes to do with those certain editors or certain subject-matter? It would be good if you could point to some incidences of successful mediation that you had been involved in before this remedy was passed. --bainer (talk) 00:17, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

 * Wholly opposed to removing these restrictions. I do not feel that the encyclopedia project will be helped thereby.  The restrictions were imposed because of real problems. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 00:36, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Request to amend Coolcat, Davenbelle and Stereotek
List of any users involved or directly affected, and confirmation that all are aware of the request:
 * White Cat

Review of White Cat's sanction related to mediation
White Cat has requested the Arbitration Committee review and lift Remedy 1 in the Coolcat, Davenbell, Steretek Case.

Statement by Ryan Postlethwaite
I would suggest that this motion isn't as straight forward as some seem to think it is. White Cat was originally banned from mediating disputes because he was mediating them where he had a clear point of view and often made the situation worse. Lifting a ban on mediation would allow White Cat to request to join the mediation committee and probably free reign to mediate any dispute he feels like for the mediation cabal. I suspect that a request to join the mediation committee would be unsuccessful, but I also suspect that participants of mediation cabal mediations would not be aware of the full facts and therefore accept him as the mediator. There's little stopping him from getting involved in the highly contentious disputes where his involvement could potentially be highly problematic. To put it bluntly, whilst White Cat does some extremely beneficial work on wikimedia projects, I believe he doesn't have the right demeanor to mediate any dispute here. I've seen him jump into too many disputes head first without looking at the overall picture or understanding what it's about. I'd thereofre suggest that the ban on White Cat mediating should stay in place indefinitely - there's plenty of other things he can do here.  Ryan Postlethwaite See the mess I've created or let's have banter 20:17, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Statement by White Cat
To clarify the concerns of Ryan Postlethwaite and anyone else. I am uninterested in mediating at this point. When I tried to mediate in 2005, I was merely trying to help (no good deed goes unpunished). I was not trying to destroy wikipedia. I understand I was no good at mediating back then and I am unsure if I am any good at mediating right now. So I myself feel I am less than ready to mediate and wouldn't expect anyone else to feel otherwise. I hope people can agree with thus far.

Mediating is an art not everyone can do. Many users on Wikipedia should never mediate a dispute but this does not mean they should be banned from doing so. There are many users out there who should never touch Mediawiki:Common.css but that should not mean over 80% of the current admins should be sanctioned by arbcom from doing so.

Despite all that I am very tired of explaining the circumstances behind the ban even on issues when the ban itself does not apply. The circumstances behind it is quite complex and it gets more complicated over time. If anyone asks...
 * I would need to start explaining the entire dispute between me and Davenbelle (aka Moby Dick aka Jack Merridew) and that four year old harassment case. After all Davenbelle played a key role.
 * I would need to explain all remedies in the rfar case on 2005. (linked case)
 * I would need to explain all remedies in the rfar case on 2006. (Moby Dick case)
 * I would need to explain issues surrounding User:Diyarbakir in 2007 and the relevant checkuser case.
 * I would need to explain several issues surrounding User:Jack Merridew in 2008
 * The complexity of that case may get even more complicated over time.
 * I would need to explain other remedies concerning me on the 2005 case. (linked case)
 * I would need to do my best in explaining why this remedy will not ever expire (how it only expires if and only if I get an official MedCom seat and how that will not happened to a user who has an outstanding arbcom sanction on Mediation).

...and so on...

The arbcom ban was and still is a bit flawed too. It does not even clarify what kind of an action would be taken in the event of me mediating. I guess what I am trying to say is the arbcom remedy has a lot of room where I can game around. To date I have made no attempt to game around the remedy. Basically the remedy itself was never used. I am told it was in fact ancient history no one cared about until I brought it up.

So please give me a break.

-- Cat chi? 07:28, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Statement by Mediation Cabal Coordinators
Following discussion between the three coordinators of the Mediation Cabal we have come up with a simple plan if User:White_Cat wants to take a case at MEDCAB. For the first mediation he takes it will need to be co-mediated with an experienced mediator. In this instance "experienced mediator" will be someone chosen by the coordinators.

It cannot be categorically stated at this time who that will be, as it will depend on availability of mediators to mediate. Subsequent mediations at WP:MEDCAB will be watched as is done by the coordinators for new mediators. This is to ensure those who come to the Mediation Cabal for dispute resolution get the best possible mediation provided by volunteers.

Although MEDCAB is the normal venue for informal mediation, we have no jurisdiction to maintain informal mediation outside the cabal, eg. Third opinion. We will do what we can to assist. Any additional needs from us for mediation conducted outside MEDCAB, will need to be stated and discussed with us.

Signed by Mediation Cabal coordinators

Seddσn talk Editor Review Xavexgoem (talk) Huzzah! PhilKnight (talk) Huzzah! indeed

Clerk notes

 * Six supports now. FloNight♥♥♥ 21:31, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Arbitrator views and discussion

 * After discussion with White Cat and reviewing the past circumstances that lead to the sanction, I support lifting the sanction that restricts mediating. Based on my conversion with White Cat, he does not intend to immediately start involving himself with mediating disputes, but would like to be able to participate in discussions without the burden of explaining the reason for an active ArbCom sanction. Given the long length of time from the date of the sanction (Case Closed on 5 October 2005), I think it is a reasonable request and make the following motion to lift the sanction. —Preceding unsigned comment added by FloNight (talk • contribs) 17:06, November 15, 2008
 * Comment:Ryan, you misunderstand the current sanction. The ruling did not prevent him from requesting to join MedCom, it merely restricted informal mediation, so there is no change in status with the Mediation Committee. In general, I'm not comfortable leaving an indefinite ArbCom sanction hanging over the head of an user when lifting the sanction will cause no harm. I've discussed his interest in doing mediation, and he tells me that it is not something that he plans to do at this time. FloNight♥♥♥ 20:53, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you Seddσn, and Xavexgoem. It sounds like a good plan. Your prompt attention to this matter is very much appreciated. ;-) FloNight♥♥♥ 15:01, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I have asked the Mediation Committee to submit their view on this, and will be guided by what they feel. FT2 (Talk 04:11, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Note that nothing in that ruling prevents White Cat joining MedCom (in fact the sanction automatically ends if MedCom accept him); it does however prevent him mediating informally or as part of Medcab. I do not have a problem with open ended sanctions, provided they are subject to periodic review to see if the consensus is they are still needed. FT2 (Talk 04:18, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Motion to lift Coolcat, Davenbelle, Steretek Case Remedy 1.
1) Remedy 1 in the Coolcat, Davenbelle, Steretek Case is no longer in force.

 * There are 11 active Arbitrators, so a majority is 6.

Support:
 * FloNight♥♥♥ 17:06, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Sam Blacketer (talk) 18:36, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Support. I'd like to clarify why I am supporting this. Mediation is a totally optional process, in all forms. By supporting the removal of this sanction, it is still possible for users who are unhappy with White Cat mediating their disputes to refuse to let him mediate their dispute, and seek another mediator, so it's not like we're forcing him on users who do not want him. It seems somewhat silly, at this stage, to refuse to let White Cat mediate if a group of users are happy with him doing so for their dispute. --Deskana (talk) 19:06, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Kirill (prof) 20:54, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Per Deskana. --bainer (talk) 11:36, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
 * All of us find our niches at different roles within the project, and I don't think that mediating is the highest and best use of White Cat's particular skill-set, but I can understand his desire to get this years-old restriction off the books. Newyorkbrad (talk) 03:45, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:
 * Pending response from the Mediation Committee. If the Mediation Committee had sufficient doubts as to not recommend this, then I would wish to think twice and discuss further, before saying otherwise. FT2 (Talk 04:18, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text:
Michiru Ōshima

Michiru Oshima (大島 ミチル) is a Japanese composer and arranger. She works on music in wide range of areas, such as anime, films, television series, video games and concerts. She has written scores for over 100 movies, over 200 television titles, video games, various types of events, concerts, theaters, among others. Ōshima is one of the most prolific living composers for film, anime and video game. She has released over 300 CDs including film soundtracks and artist CDs. Her works include composition for Godzilla vs. Megaguirus, Godzilla Against Mechagodzilla, and Godzilla: Tokyo S.O.S. movies and scores for numerous anime television series, including Fullmetal Alchemist, Fullmetal Alchemist the Movie: Conqueror of Shamballa, Nabari no Ou, Queen Emeraldas, Xam'd: Lost Memories, Arc the Lad, and Weathering Continent. In addition to the soundtracks on Kaiju films and anime music, she has composed music for several video games such as Genghis Khan II: Clan of the Gray Wolf for Super NES, Ico for PlayStation 2, Legend of Legaia for PlayStation and its PlayStation 2 sequel Legaia 2: Duel Saga, Arc the Lad III, Deemo, Midnight Play by the company Tivola based on the art illustrations of Květa Pacovská,  and an orchestral arrangement of a Zelda medley for the Wii and GameCube game The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess. She was also the composer for a Japanese stage musical adaptation of the classic Hollywood film Roman Holiday. Her latest work includes the composition of several music tracks for the highly acclaimed Chinese espionage thriller film The Message and a 2017 Chinese mystery thriller film The Devotion of Suspect X (film).

She is a member of both the Japan Academy Film Prize Association and the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences.

Biography
Graduated from Kunitachi College of Music, Department of Music Composition, Ōshima began her activities as a composer and arranger while in college, and has been involved in composing music for movies, commercials, TV programs, anime, ambient music and tunes for classical musicians. She released the first Symphony entitled “Orasho” when she was still in college. Through her masterful manipulation of both orchestras and synthesizers, she has attracted attention from various sectors for creating grandiose, dramatic sounds and beautiful melodies.

Ōshima was the youngest person to be awarded the 1st prize at International Electone Festival / International Electone Concours in 1977 when she was 16 years old. Her other awards include the 52nd(1998) and 67th(2013) Mainichi Film Contest Award for Best Music, the 21st(1998), 24th(2001), 26th(2003), 27th(2004), 29th(2006), 30th(2007) and 38th(2016) Japan Academy Prize (film award) for Music, and the 31st Japan Academy Prize for Best Score, Tokyo Anime Award for Best Music in 2006, Best Composer Award at Jackson Hole Film Festival 2007(in U.S.). Moreover, Ōshima has composed a large number of music for music festivals in France and Luxembourg, stages in Belgium or concerts in Japan and U.S.A. She also recorded and conducted with orchestras and musicians from all over the world such as U.S., Australia, France, Russia, Belgium, England, Czech, Austria, Poland, Italy, Hungary and Bulgaria, including a concert "KAIJU CRESCENDO: AN EVENING OF JAPANESE MONSTER MUSIC" at the G-FEST XXVI (2020) in Chicago. Ōshima was one of the 27 composers for the album ‘In 27 Pieces: the Hilary Hahn Encores’ performed by violinist Hilary Hahn which was awarded a 2015 Grammy Award in the Best Chamber Music category (she composed “Memories”). She has been engaged in many governmental projects as well, such as music director at “40th Year of ASEAN-Japan” in 2013, in which she supervised and managed musicians in ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations) countries, organized concerts in ASEAN countries and composed music for the ASEAN Summit.

Awards and nominations

 * Awards
 * 2005: Yubari International Fantastic Film Festival Award for Composer Orchestrator
 * 2006: Tokyo Anime Award for Best Music for Conqueror of Shamballa
 * 2008: Japanese Academy Award for Music of the Year for Bizan

 * Nominations
 * 1998: Japanese Academy Award for Outstanding Achievement in Music for Paradise Lost
 * 2001: Japanese Academy Award for Outstanding Achievement in Music for Nagasaki Burabura Bushi
 * 2003: Japanese Academy Award for Outstanding Achievement in Music for The Sun Also Rises and Copycat Criminal
 * 2004: Japanese Academy Award for Outstanding Achievement in Music for Like Asura
 * 2006: Japanese Academy Award for Outstanding Achievement in Music for Year One in the North
 * 2007: Japanese Academy Award for Outstanding Achievement in Music for Memories of Tomorrow
 * 2016: Japanese Academy Award for Outstanding Achievement in Music for 125 Years Memory
 * 2016: Japanese Academy Award for Outstanding Achievement in Music for 125 Years Memory

Film soundtracks (selective)

 * 1995: Winds of God (Yôko Narahashi)
 * 1998: Puraido: Unmei no Toki (Shunya Itō)
 * 1998: Ohaka ga nai! (Takahito Hara)
 * 2000: Godzilla vs. Megaguirus (Masaaki Tezuka)
 * 2002: Hi wa mata noboru (Kiyoshi Sasabe)
 * 2002: Mohou-han (Yoshimitsu Morita)
 * 2002: Godzilla Against Mechagodzilla (Masaaki Tezuka)
 * 2003: Godzilla: Tokyo S.O.S. (Masaaki Tezuka)
 * 2005: Princess Raccoon (Seijun Suzuki)
 * 2006: Memories of Tomorrow (Yukihiko Tsutsumi)
 * 2007: Tsubaki Sanjûrô (Yoshimitsu Morita)
 * 2009: The Message
 * 2010: Ghost: Mouichido Dakishimetai (Tarô Ohtani)
 * 2015: 125 Years Memory (Mitsutoshi Tanaka)
 * 2017: The Devotion of Suspect X (film)
 * 2020: Japan's Independence (Shunya Itō)
 * 2022: SABAKAN

Show soundtracks (selective)

 * 2004: Guns of the world VOL. 3

Anime soundtracks (selective)

 * 1986: Saint Elmo – Hikari no Raihousha (Tomoharu Katsumata)
 * 1992: The Weathering Continent (Koichi Mashimo)
 * 1993: Casshan: Robot Hunter (Hiroyuki Fukushima)
 * 1994: Lord of Lords Ryu Knight (Toshifumi Kawase)
 * 1995: Legend of Crystania (Ryutaro Nakamura)
 * 1996: Boys Over Flowers (Shigeyasu Yamauchi)
 * 1996: Gall Force: The Revolution
 * 1998: Fancy Lala (Motosuke Takahashi)
 * 1998: Queen Emeraldas (Yuji Asada)
 * 1999: Arc the Lad (Itsuro Kawasaki)
 * 1999: Magic User's Club (Junichi Sato)
 * 2003: Pretty Guardian Sailor Moon (2003 TV series) (2003 TV Series) (Yasuko Kobayashi)
 * 2003: Fullmetal Alchemist (Seiji Mizushima)
 * 2005: Fullmetal Alchemist: Conqueror of Shamballa (Seiji Mizushima)
 * 2005: Garasu no Usagi (Setsuko Shibuichi)
 * 2006: Le Chevalier d'Éon (Kazuhiro Furuhashi)
 * 2006: Project Blue Earth SOS (Tensai Okamura)
 * 2008: Xam'd: Lost Memories (Masayuki Miyaji)
 * 2008: Nabari no Ou (Kunihisa Sugishima)
 * 2010: The Tatami Galaxy (Masaaki Yuasa)
 * 2010: Sound of the Sky (Mamoru Kanbe)
 * 2011: Tezuka Osamu no Buddha (Kozo Morishita)
 * 2012: Fuse Teppō Musume no Torimonochō (Masayuki Miyaji)
 * 2012: Blast of Tempest (Masahiro Andō)
 * 2013: Little Witch Academia (Yoh Yoshinari)
 * 2013: Aura: Maryūinkōga Saigo no Tatakai (Seiji Kishi)
 * 2013: Patema Inverted (Yasuhiro Yoshiura)
 * 2015: Snow White with the Red Hair (Masahiro Andō)
 * 2015: Rokka no Yūsha (Takeo Takahashi)
 * 2017: Night Is Short, Walk On Girl (Masaaki Yuasa)
 * 2018: Bloom Into You (Makoto Katō)
 * 2019: Ride Your Wave (Masaaki Yuasa)
 * 2020: Hula Fulla Dance (Shinya Watada)
 * 2020: Star Wars: Visions (Studio Trigger)
 * 2022: Tatami Time Machine Blues (Shingo Natsume)
 * 2023: Dog Signal (Kazuhiro Furuhashi)
 * 2024: Bucchigiri?! (Hiroko Utsumi)

Video games soundtracks (selective)

 * 1992: Taikou Risshiden
 * 1992: Undercover Cops (arranges)
 * 1998: Midnight Play (Das Mitternachtsspiel)
 * 1998: Legend of Legaia
 * 2000: Arc the Lad III (arranges)
 * 2002: Ico
 * 2002: Legaia 2: Duel Saga (with Yasunori Mitsuda and Hitoshi Sakimoto)
 * 2002: Suikoden (arranges)
 * 2003: Arc the Lad: Twilight of the Spirits (arranges)
 * 2006: The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess (arranges)
 * 2017: DEEMO (White Rain, Tree of Dreams, Voice of Cell, Little Love, Lonely Pianist)
 * 2019: Shining Nikki

Drama soundtracks (selective)

 * 2001: Sayonara, Ozu Sensei
 * 2002: Gokusen
 * 2002: Satorare
 * 2003: Tenshi mitai
 * 2005: Yume de Aimashou
 * 2006: Oishii Proposal
 * 2006: CA to Oyobi
 * 2006: Regatta
 * 2007: Hotelier
 * 2007: Watashi wa Kai ni Naritai
 * 2008: Yasuko to Kenji
 * 2010: Misaki Number One!!

Selected concerts and projects

 * 1980s: Symphony No.1: Orasho
 * 2005: For the East (with the Ravel Quartet)
 * 2006: London Essay (with Dai Kimura)
 * 2007: Le Premier amour (from the album "Smile" by Japanese violist Emiri Miyamoto)
 * 2007: Amanda (with Kaori Muraji (classical guitar) and the Orchestre des Virtuoses de Paris)
 * 2009: Concerto for saxophone (with Daniel Gremelle (saxophone) and the Tokyo City Philharmonic Orchestra)
 * 2010: Concerto for viola (with Pierre Lenert (viola) and the Kyushu Symphony Orchestra)
 * 2011: Ganbalo Nippon (short film The Orchestra in Hot Air Balloon for Japan )
 * 2011: Vocalise (with the mezzo-soprano Irina De Baghy for Festival Sérénade in Surgères )
 * 2011: Requiem ~ It lies at the bottom of the sea (with Ensemble Lucilin in Luxembourg)
 * 2013: In 27 Pieces: The Hilary Hahn Encores (musical project with the violinist Hilary Hahn)
 * 2013: Viola Sonata (with Pierre Lenert (viola) and Ariane Jacob (piano) for Festival Sérénade in Surgères in France)
 * 2013: Concerto for piano quartet with Orchestra (with Musicians of Opera de Paris and the Kyushu Symphony Orchestra)
 * 2013: The ASEAN-JAPAN "Drums & Voices" Concert Tour (the 40th year of ASEAN-Japan friendship and cooperation project)
 * 2015: Symphony No.2: Since 1945 (with the Kyushu Symphony Orchestra and Hiroko Kokubu (piano))
 * 2017: Symphonic Suite "Sama" (with the Kansai Philharmonic Orchestra)
 * 2017: Suite for Male Voice Choir "Message of the Voice" (with the Glee club of Tokyo Keizai University)
 * 2018: "Augustus": Suite for Orchestra and Chorus (with the Kansai Philharmonic Orchestra and the Osaka Prefectural Yuhigaoka High School Music Department)
 * 2018: Jin & Rin: 2 Rhapsodies for Clarinet, Marimba and Orchestra (with Richard Stoltzman (clarinet), Mika Stoltzman (marimba) and the Kansai Philharmonic Orchestra)
 * 2018: Concerto for Koto and Shakuhachi (with Chiaki Endo (koto), Dozan Fujiwara (shakuhachi) and the Kansai Philharmonic Orchestra)
 * 2018: Musical Sanza and Okuni
 * 2019: Godzilla in Chicago - C.H.C.A.G
 * 2019: Beyond the Point of No Return (with Japan Philharmonic Orchestra)
 * 2020: Koto recital Lacrima (with Chiaki Endo (koto))
 * 2021: Concerto No.2 for Koto and Shakuhachi Seasons12 (with Chiaki Endo (koto), Dozan Fujiwara (shakuhachi) and the Japan Philharmonic Orchestra)
 * 2023: Flux et reflux (with Paris Saint German-en-Lay Orchestra Concert)
 * 2023: For Blue Promise (Siletz Bay Music Festival )

title: Michiru Ōshima


text:
Ferndale, Rhondda Cynon Taf

Ferndale (Glynrhedynog) is a town and community located in the Rhondda Valley in the county borough of Rhondda Cynon Taf, Wales. Neighbouring villages are Blaenllechau, Maerdy and Tylorstown. Ferndale was industrialised in the mid-19th century. The first coal mine shaft was sunk in 1857 and Ferndale was the first community to be intensively industrialised in the Rhondda Valley.

History
In Welsh, Ferndale is known as Glynrhedynog, the name of one of the old farms on which the town is built. In its infancy Glynrhedynog was also known as Trerhondda, after the name of the first large chapel to be built in the town. The naming of settlements after chapels was widespread in Wales at the time, but neither Glynrhedynog nor Trerhondda was used for long. Glynrhedynog is made from the words glyn (valley) and rhedynog (ferny), so coal from the Glynrhedynog pits was marketed as Ferndale coal, a much easier name for English buyers to assimilate.

The Ferndale pits drew workers and their families to the area, and by the 1880s Ferndale was well established as a thriving town. With the phasing in of bilingual road signs from the late 1980s onwards, the name Glynrhedynog gradually reappeared and is now the officially designated Welsh language name for Ferndale. The village adopted the English language during the Industrial Revolution, but the Welsh language is now on the increase in Ferndale. A Welsh language school is situated near the park and is named after the park's lake, Llyn-y-Forwyn (the Maiden's Lake).

Industry
The pioneer of coal mining at Ferndale was David Davis of Blaengwawr, Aberdare who already had an extensive colliery business in the neighbouring Aberdare Valley. His wealth enabled him to engage in costly but unsuccessful singings in the Rhondda Fach in the 1860s until he finally struck a good seam at Ferndale.

Ferndale Colliery disasters
Two large coal mining disasters occurred in Ferndale during the 19th century. The first took place on 8 November 1867, when an underground explosion killed 178 miners at the Ferndale Colliery owned by David Davis and Sons Ltd. The second disaster happened on 10 June 1869 when a further explosion resulted in the death of 53 miners.

Governance
A Ferndale electoral ward was coterminous with the borders of the Ferndale community and elected two county councillors to Rhondda Cynon Taf County Borough Council. Since 1995, representation was mainly by the Labour Party, but the ward also had a Plaid Cymru councillor from 1999 to 2004 and an Independent councillor from 2012 to 2017. At the May 2017 election, Labour and Plaid Cymru won a councillor each.

Following a 2018 review of electoral arrangements by the Local Democracy and Boundary Commission for Wales, it was proposed to merge Ferndale with neighbouring Maerdy into the Ferndale and Maerdy ward. The proposals took effect from the 2022 council elections, which saw Susan Morgans and Jayne Smith elected for Labour.

Modern Ferndale
Ferndale has developed over recent years. Some new features have been added such as an 3G football field, car park and an all-weather cricket training enclosure. The Sky TV comedy series Stella is largely filmed on location in Ferndale.

Transport
Between 1849 and 1856, the Taff Vale Railway opened the Maerdy Branch from Porth, including a station at Ferndale. Passenger services were withdrawn in 1964, but coal trains continued until August 1986 when the line closed completely. Coal from Mardy Colliery was then raised through Tower Colliery. The track was lifted in 1996. Since 2005, the southern section of the line from Porth to Pontygwaith has been used for the A4223 Porth and Lower Rhondda Fach Relief Road (Porth Bypass). The upper section, including the section passing Ferndale, has become a branch of the Taff Trail cycleway.

Religion
There are several chapels and churches in or near Ferndale:
 * St Dunstan's Church (Church in Wales)
 * Bethel Baptist Church (Baptist)
 * Rhondda Fach Methodist Church (also called Ferndale Methodist Church, Methodist)
 * Capel Penuel (Calvinistic Methodist)
 * Trerhondda Welsh Independent Chapel (Welsh Independents)

Sport
Ferndale is home to rugby union club Ferndale RFC, whose first XV team play in the Welsh Rugby Union leagues.

Adjacent to Llyn y Forwyn is an AstroTurf football field that, during the summer, annually becomes the ground of sports days for many of the local junior schools. Darran Park has a tennis court and a bowling green.

Ferndale Bowls Club have a strong standing in the Welsh bowls community, with several players from the club representing Wales at International level in the past. J.S. Hill represented Wales in the 1930's with several others, including Gareth Hughes, Lee Morgans & Martin Jones, having represented Wales numerous times in more recent years at both Junior and Senior team level. The club were runners up in the Curruthers Shield in both 1947 and 2010. The club is always well represented in the Welsh National Championships each year, with several players having won Welsh titles.

In December 2006, the Ferndale Skate Park was opened with indoor ramps and other equipment available to BMX riders, rollerbladers and skateboarders. The skate park began with the aim of improving the prospects of school leavers in the area, providing a 'safe haven' from the influences of drugs and alcohol, and encouraging sports and healthy living. It has since received National Lottery continuation funding as well as a Rhondda Trust grant to secure the future for an additional 3-year period. It closed in 2014.

Notable people

 * Sir Stanley Baker (1928–1976), actor
 * David "Alan" Evans (1949–1999), darts player
 * Roderick Jones (1910–1992), baritone
 * Meirion James Trow (born 1949), author
 * D. J. Williams (1885–1970), Welsh nationalist writer, worked as a teenager in local mines and lodged at 32 Dyffryn Street circa 1905
 * Sir Wyn Lewis Williams (born 1951), High Court judge

title: Ferndale, Rhondda Cynon Taf


text: User talk:200.93.199.34

title: User talk:200.93.199.34


text:
Driff Field

Xavier Driffield (1948 - 2023), also known as Driff Field, drif field, driffield, dryfeld or simply Drif, was a figure in the British bookdealing world during the 1980s and 1990s and published several editions of the acerbic Driff's Guide to secondhand and antiquarian bookshops in Britain.

History
Driffield started as a booksearcher, obtaining titles to order for private customers, and in 1984 began producing a self-published guide to All The Secondhand and Antiquarian Bookshops in Britain (also titled In Quest of the Perfect Book : The Antiquarian Bookshop Catalogue & Directory). Hugely successful for its wit and wide coverage of the field, the guide was nonetheless idiosyncratic and often sarcastic, with entries such as: "the b[oo]ks are slowly transforming themselves back into rags"; "judging by body temp, shop seems to have expired in 1930"; "I could smell a bargain, pity was I had a cold that day"; "owner has been unwell recently with bad back (possibly caused by turning on the customers once too often)".

His Guide introduced a number of widely-quoted acronyms, including "ETGOW (easy to get on with), "NSOC (not strong on condition)", "FARTS (follows around recommending the stock)" and "WYLAH (watches you like a hawk)". Among the entries in the Guides's Terminology chapter was "book fairy" describing people who sell books at book fairs.

Driffield also launched a periodical called Driffs: The Antiquarian & Second Hand Book Fortnightly, although the magazine was rarely published as frequently as that and folded after 22 issues.

The Guide went through at least five editions, dated 1984, 1987, 1991, 1992, and 1995. In the third he seemed to refer to a spell of mental illness after the publication of the second, though Francis Wheen thought this an intentionally misleading reference.

Sexual assault acquittal
Although photos existed of Driffield (he fancied he resembled Raymond Carver), for a long time little was known about him or his current whereabouts, or even if he was still alive, until 2014, when he was the defendant in a trial at Snaresbrook Crown Court, accused of indecent assault, indecency with a child and rape. In November 2014 Driffield was found not guilty on all the charges.

He stood trial under the name Xavier Driffield, although previously some sources had cited his name (seemingly erroneously) as "B.C.M. Driffield", others as "Colin Driffield" and yet others as "David Richard Ian Frederick Field". He claimed to have been brought up in Newbury, England. In 1991, Francis Wheen considered that he "seems to be in his forties".

In popular culture
Drif appears as a character in Iain Sinclair's novel White Chappell, Scarlet Tracings. He appeared in the 1992 documentary The Cardinal And The Corpse, made by Chris Petit for Channel 4 and also featuring Alan Moore and Iain Sinclair.

title: Driff Field