Talk:Hiroyoshi Nishizawa

Unverifiable Source

An obscure foreign research book, untranslated and available only in Japanese, is not adequate source material to reverse the story (published worldwide) reported on the english Wikipedia site. Additionally, the additions used exceedingly poor grammar and punctuation. ScrapIronIV (talk) 14:28, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

Citations to non English sources are allowed on Wikipedia. But It is probably difficult because this study compare many official records and his testimony. So I will translate from The Japanese language Wikipedia into The English language Wikipedia. It is simpler than my sentences. But you can access it easily. And you can find a problem in my translation specifically.--Sicmn (talk) 09:29, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

"Samurai!"

I translated from The Japanese language Wikipedia into The English language Wikipedia by a way of Wikipedia. But ScrapIronIV removed it. Why?

"The claim that Sakai performed three tight loops in close formation over the allied air base with Hiroyoshi Nishizawa and Toshio Ōta. Sakai also claimed that the date is May 27 or June 25, 1942. But the records of these days or the others do not have the possibility of this flight."

At first I translated from the original source.

But ScrapIronIV removed different views of "Samurai!" in spite of the source. His claim is "An obscure foreign research book, untranslated and available only in Japanese, is not adequate source material to reverse the story (published worldwide) reported on the english Wikipedia site." It is only your point of view. Non English sources are allowed on Wikipedia. The article"Hans-Joachim Marseille" or others also are edited by foreign research books, untranslated and available only in German. If you want to forbid it, you must change the Wikipedia policy.

"Samurai!" was judged a preposterous story in Japan that is used as the background for it. So "Samurai!" is not published in Japan. And recently English sources (For example, "Eagles of the Southern Sky") also deny "Samurai!". This point of view must be treated as coequal with the point of view of "Samurai!".

But I translated from The Japanese language Wikipedia because I considered that ScrapIronIV can not read the source. If you claim my translation is bad, you should present an alternative translation. You must not promote the point of view of "Samurai!".--Sicmn (talk) 08:08, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

See the discussion on Talk:Saburo Sakai

Phrase things in such a way that they are not slanted or POV, and the information can be included. What you are not permitted to do is say a source is "preposterous" and then call the subject of an article a liar.

The claim for "shared" victories is ridiculously high, in large part because entire units were given victories after 1941. This does not distinguish Nishizawa from any other pilots in the unit.

Also, proof read your entries. Such simple grammatical errors are easily avoided.

ScrapIronIV (talk) 13:15, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

The source also question the number and explan that definition of "shared" is unclear, but it is the official record. On Wikipedia, The verifiable source is more important than the judgement by a User. You should write the claim by the verifiable source.

Read Accessibility in Wikipedia:Verifiability. "Do not reject sources just because they are hard or costly to access. If you have trouble accessing a source, others may be able to do so on your behalf."--Sicmn (talk) 12:17, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Nobody questions whether they are permitted; however, when they make exceptional claims they must be exceptional sources. See WP:UNDUE to clarify. The trouble I was pointing out is the source you provided makes claims which contradict existing sources; we use foreign language sources when english language sources are unavailable. We don't use them to rewrite properly sourced histories. Unfortunately, this does cause problems on occasion, particularly when people from different cultures meet on a global project. We go by specific rules on the english Wikipedia for sources, and I am certain that there are similar rules on japanese Wikipedia. So, until the sources you have get published here, they can not be used to rewrite our history. If you don't understand this, then there is little more I can say to you. We do want your input, we do want your sources, and are absolutely willing to incorporate them. Hopefully, you will begin to understand and start working cooperatively with us here. ScrapIronIV (talk) 13:52, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

On Wikipedia, Verifiable sources may have technical or personal restrictions. Non-English sources may also restrict your access. But the difficulties of verifying a source do not impact its reliability. And users must not reject sources just because they are hard or costly to access. See Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Cost, Wikipedia:Verifiability, Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/FAQ. Non-English is not a valid excuse for judging whether it is the Verifiable source or not. And Sakai's recollections and investigation of official records is clearly different quality. It is impossible to substitute the non-English sources by English sources. I will carefully consider the format.--Sicmn (talk) 09:42, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Hiroyoshi Nishizawa. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070930201206/http://www.historynet.com/air_sea/aces/3037341.html?page=3&c=y to http://www.historynet.com/air_sea/aces/3037341.html?page=3&c=y
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061018141355/http://acesofww2.com/japan/Aces/Hiroyoshi_Nishizawa.htm to http://www.acesofww2.com/japan/Aces/Hiroyoshi_Nishizawa.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:52, 4 November 2017 (UTC)