Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of National Treasures of Japan (writings: Japanese books)/archive1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Dabomb87 00:19, 21 August 2011 [1].

List of National Treasures of Japan (writings: Japanese books)[edit]

List of National Treasures of Japan (writings: Japanese books) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): bamse (talk) 17:21, 13 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is the last of the set of featured lists of National Treasures of Japan. It covers among others poetry collections, prose works and historical chronicles written in Japan. The list has been modelled on other featured lists of National Treasures of Japan. bamse (talk) 17:21, 13 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Basic comments Check the bibliography section like your previous nomination. There are full dates for some of the book sources, and in some there is just the year. Similar for accessdate. I presume this is because of using the reftag tool? — Legolas (talk2me) 14:36, 20 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed. All publication dates are now year only, and all have accessdates in the same style. bamse (talk) 14:53, 20 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • More basic comments The lead feels a little too long, and goes beyond the scope and inclusion criteria in the list, but the information is good and I think will be engaging to readers. Could I suggest moving the second, large paragraph (After the introduction of writing from Korea...) to a new section below the lead, perhaps either before or after the Statistics section (I'm not sure where it would be more appropriate). I, Jethrobot drop me a line (note: not a bot!) 17:06, 20 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The lead does not feel too long for me. Its length is comparable to other long articles such as Seattle. Furthermore it agrees with the recommendation in the MOS. The second paragraph summarizes the development of Japanese literature and mentions the various genres that are discussed in more detail in later sections of the article. As such it summarizes the article and puts the various genres (or sections) in context; which I consider the purpose of a lead section. For these reasons, I would prefer not to move the second paragraph out of the lead section. bamse (talk) 19:08, 20 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I didn't know MOS made recommendation for lead length, so thanks for showing me that. You are right then, in that the section should remain in the lead. I, Jethrobot drop me a line (note: not a bot!) 15:39, 21 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Eisfbnore • talk 05:53, 20 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Sources comments
  • Be consistent in whether you provide publisher locations for books or not
    • Fixed. Removed location from one reference. bamse (talk) 14:48, 21 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retrieval dates are not needed for convenience links (Google Books for instance) to print-based sources
    • I thought so too, but in this FLC, Afro pointed me to {{Cite book}} which states: "accessdate: ... Should be used when url parameter is used." bamse (talk) 14:48, 21 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ref 199 and 207 are only citing Adolphson and Kamens as authors of the Heian Japan book, whilst the bibliographical entry also cites Matsumoto as author of the book
  • In the bibliography but with no citations: Brokaw & Chow (2005); Eliot & Rose (2009); Miner, Odagiri & Morrell (1988); Sansom & Sansom (1961) and Wedgeworth (1992)
    • Fixed. Removed all of them. They only applied to another list which was at some point split off from this list of Japanese books. bamse (talk) 15:17, 21 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • The ISBNs ought to be hyphenated (I can do that for you)
    • I read ISBN and added hyphens to the first entry in the bibliography (Addiss, Groemer, Rimer). It was hard work. Is there a (semi)-automatic method to do this? bamse (talk) 14:57, 21 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • There is a bit of WP:CITEKILL in this list. Have you considered bundling them?
    • Will have a look at it. bamse (talk) 14:57, 21 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • Thanks a lot for your edits/fixes in the bibliography already. I am slowly working my way through the article in order to reduce CITEKILL. Should be done with it by tomorrow. bamse (talk) 00:14, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        • Done. I reduced CITEKILL by joining related citations or removing some refs which said the same as others. bamse (talk) 01:17, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Otherwise it looks fine, and the research and work you have put into this list (and many others) is impressive Bamse. All the best, Eisfbnore • talk 12:42, 21 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Close paraphrase check

I do not have the time to check each sentence in this list for close paraphrasing, but I'll note the few I find below. A tip to avoid close paraphrasing is to write from muliple sources and move content between sentences.

  • Article: "…the Engishiki, the greatest legal compendium of the ritsuryō age.[198][199] It was compiled from 905 to 927 by Tadahira and others under command of Emperor Daigo." Source: "The Engishiki was compiled between 905 and 927 under the command of Emperor Daigo." [2]

To be honest, that was actually the only one I was able to find, and it does seem easy to get rid of. Well done! Eisfbnore • talk 18:36, 21 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This issue has been addressed by Truthkeeper88 in this edit. bamse (talk) 00:14, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure if attribution of facts (opinion could be good) is the best thing to do here. The line David Lu's book is not an opinion or an analysis, merely a statement of fact. The better thing to do here would in my opinion be to move information from his sentence into others, i.e. convey the meaning but using our own words. Also, Lu does present an assessment of the Engishiki in his book which could be worth including. Perhaps "Compiled between 905 and 927 by Tadahira, the Engishiki is the most respected legal compendium of the ritsuryō age and an important resource for the study of the Heian period court system. Emperor Daigo commanded its compilation; the Engishiki is according to David Lu an "invaluable" resource and "one of the greatest compilations of laws and precedents". Or: "Compiled between 905 and 927 under the command of Emperor Daigo, the Engishiki is according to David Lu "one of the greatest compilations of laws and precedents" and "invaluable in the study of the court system in the Heian period". Or: "An important resource for the study of the Heian period court system is the Engishiki, combiled by Tadahira between 905 and 927. It is the most respected legal compendium of the ritsuryō age and, according to David Lu, "invaluable in the study of the court system in the Heian period". Hope this helps, --Eisfbnore • talk 11:55, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. It did help indeed. I went with your first suggestion. bamse (talk) 14:22, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done for now. Please see my comments above and let me know if anything else needs to be fixed. bamse (talk) 01:17, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, looks good. I tried to introduce WP:CITEBUNDLE in this list, but it didn't look nice and I reverted it. --Eisfbnore • talk 11:55, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support - outstanding work, and amazingly accesible to a layman like me. Eisfbnore • talk 05:53, 20 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Redlinks?

This is a minor point, but I noticed there were some redlinks in the bibilography (e.g. Ishikawa Prefectural Museum of Art, Seikadō Bunko Art Museum, Yōmei Bunko, Nabeshima Hōkōkai). I don't think it's necessarily bad to have red links, but are all these articles likely be to created in the future? I, Jethrobot drop me a line (note: not a bot!) 00:23, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, as locations/owners of National Treasures of Japan, these are relevant entities that will likely get an article in the future. In fact I am planning to have articles on all temples/shrines/museums that house or own National Treasures. Recently I wrote: Shōjō-ji, Hatakeyama Memorial Museum of Fine Art, Anraku-ji (Ueda), and Omura Shrine. There are other wikipedia users (e.g. User:663highland, User:Tenmei) creating such articles as well, so I am quite optimistic that this goal will be achieved in the not too distant future. bamse (talk) 00:31, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Giants2008 (27 and counting) 23:34, 24 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comments –
  • Heian period doesn't need to be linked twice in the lead.
  • Still see two links, one in the second paragraph and one in the third. One is piped and shows up as Heian, if that helps. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 19:33, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Usage: Add "by" to "sortable pressing the arrows symbols."?
  • Done. Changed to "sortable by pressing the arrows symbols."bamse (talk) 10:07, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • In a few of the notes here, remove the capitalization of the first words after semi-colons.
  • Japanese literature: "The Tale of Genji is a work written in the early 11th century by noblewoman, (Murasaki Shikibu)." Remove the comma at the end and make a change to "by a noblewoman", I'd say. Also, who calls it "the single most impressive achievement of Heian civilization"? Sounds like a pretty strong declaration, especially when preceded by "Indeed".
    It's important the Murasaki Shikibu was a noblewoman - otherwise she wouldn't have been educated, so I'd be opposed to seeing it removed, fwiw. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 02:05, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'd also prefer to keep the "nobelwoman". In addition to what Truthkeeper88 wrote, the word points out that Murasaki Shikibu is a woman which would be hard to guess from the name and which is relevant since the preceding sentence discusses male/female differences in Japanese literature. As for who uses such a strong declaration, that's Helen Craig McCullough. Re-checked the source, and the exact quote is: "...single most impressive accomplishment of Heian civilization, Murasaki Shikibu's The Tale of Genji" (not "achievement"). Do you think that this should be attributed to Helen Craig McCullough or do you think that it should be removed, because it is a too strong statement? bamse (talk) 14:38, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "were originally Buddhist influenced, and meant to be educational." Needs "were" before "meant".
  • Waka: "In the late 9th century, Waka...". Why is Waka capitalized?
    Because of bad eyes. Fixed. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 02:35, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove comma after "renga" toward the end of the section?
  • Monogatari, Japanese-Chinese poetry, setsuwa: "and, for its calligraphy". Remove comma here.
    Fixed. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 02:35, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Add "a" to "has been designated as National Treasure" toward the end of the section.
  • History books and historical tales: "and four, Bungo (730s), Harima (circa 715), Hizen (730s) as fragments." That's three according to my count, unless one of them is meant to count twice.
  • I had forgotton the Hitachi fudoki. Added. bamse (talk) 10:30, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Again, who says the Nihon Shoki is the most interesting thing in this category? That's a pretty big leap to be making without some form of attribution.
  • Varley states: "All were written in Chinese and, with the exception of the Nihon Shoki, were notably dull, consisting as they did of a dry recitation of the facts and events of court government." Anyway, I removed that phrase, since it is not really relevant here and because one could argue whether it is really the most interesting of the histories. bamse (talk) 14:53, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The Kojiki, long been neglected by scholars until the 18th century". Remove "been", or add "which had" after the comma.
  • Others: Another "has been designated as National Treasure" that needs an "a".
  • Note 2: Flip the order of "blank two".
  • Note 16: Should the first comma be a semi-colon?
Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 10:59, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • Four dab links are showing: kanshi, fascicles, kanshi and Toji.
    • Fixed kanshi and Toji. There seems to be some disagreement where the concept of Fascicle (book) is to be explained. At some point it was a redirect to book which is what is meant here. However it does not seem to be explained in that article. At the moment Fascicle (book) points to the dab page Fascicle which explains the term at the bottom (A discrete section of a book issued or published separately). Not sure what to do about it.
  • "(in the form of Chinese books) to Japan around 400 AD" put the parenthetical clause after "400 AD", don't split the sentence as you currently do.
    • Moved parenthesis to after "400 AD".
  • That sentence needs a little work - it has "writing", "writing" and "wrote" all in one hit.
    • I've tweaked but now it has Chinese books, Chinese writing and Chinese scribes. Does it need another go? Truthkeeper88 (talk) 16:17, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • Thanks. If necessary, "Korean and Chinese" could be replaces by "mainland" (which is a common term used in references to refer to these two countries with which Japan had most exchange at the time). To make it understandable for non-expert, how about adding a footnote explaining what "mainland" means here? bamse (talk) 20:52, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Can you link "Classical Japan" to a specific section of the History of Japan rather than the whole article? (Like you have for Feudal Japan...)
  • Last lead paragraph, can you pipelink those awkward list titles, e.g. just link "Chinese book National Treasures" instead of saying "Chinese book National Treasures of the List of National Treasures of Japan (writings: Chinese books)"
  • "4000 pieces" -> "4,000 pieces".
  • You say tanka and then the second time you say tanka you explain what it is, perhaps you could put the explanation the first time.
  • "31 syllable" hyphante.
  • "century.[nb 4][42][20]" can you order references numerically please? Check others.
  • What's an en-dash in "author" represent considering you have "various" and "unknown".
    • Fixed. No more en-dashes in that column. bamse (talk) 11:17, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • How does Format sort? Alphabetically I guess, but it's not particularly helpful when you start some entries with numbers. 16 bound books sorts before One bound book, for example.
    • Sorting is explained in the usage section. I think that sorting by the amount of items is not that useful, so I made it to sort by the type of objects: "scroll/book/other". bamse (talk) 10:59, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "more than 1000 anecdotes" -> "1,000".
  • ""Inside Notes"" why is Notes capitalised?
    • As the title of the work, I capitalised it. Is that not correct?
  • "There are 18 National Treasures that do not ..." specifically of the Japanese book type right?
    • Specified as "There are 18 Japanese book National Treasures..." bamse (talk) 11:08, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "1572-1662" en-dash required.

The Rambling Man (talk) 08:35, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for taking the time to read the article and for your comments. All have been addressed. As far as I can see for three issues ("writing/writing/wrote", dab of fascicle, capitalization of "Inside Notes") your feedback is required. bamse (talk) 20:56, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support As my comments have been addressed and concerns were fairly rebutted, I am more than happy to support the FL nomination. I, Jethrobot drop me a line (note: not a bot!) 23:55, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support This is one hell of a work. I had looked into it for quite some time, but did not find anything thwarting its promotion for me. — Legolas (talk2me) 14:57, 19 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]


The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates/List_of_National_Treasures_of_Japan_(writings:_Japanese_books)/archive1&oldid=1141921370"