Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured article review/Hasekura Tsunenaga/archive1

< Wikipedia:Featured article review
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article review. Please do not modify it. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page or at Wikipedia talk:Featured article review. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was delisted by Casliber via FACBot (talk) 9:45, 31 March 2021 (UTC) [1].

Hasekura Tsunenaga edit

Notified: Per Honor et Gloria, WikiProject Japan, WikiProject Politics, WikiProject Biography Talk page notice

Review section edit

This is a 2006 promotion that has never been reviewed since; the main contributor has not edited since 2011. Issues:

  • the article has several unsourced full paragraphs;
  • the article does not have a consistent citation style, with footnotes used as the main "style", and then random parenthetical citations in the text;
  • the article relies a lot on lenghthy quotes;
  • the prose in the "Hasekura today" subsection is not "FA-level";
  • "Timeline and itenerary" is not needed;
  • The notes and the references need work.

RetiredDuke (talk) 17:47, 20 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've started working on cleaning things up, but this one is going to take a while. Once the refs are cleaned up and consolidated (there are a number of duplicate refs that I haven't fixed yet), then we can see more clearly where issues are with existing refs and where we need to add in more. I'll slowly chip away at it as I can.
Regarding your points:
  • There definitely need to be more sources used, though some may already be in the article and not be used fully yet.
  • I'll be cleaning up the citation style so it's consistent and easy to read.
  • I've moved all the quotes into a notes section so they don't clutter up the actual references. If possible, it may be good to see if any of them are on Wikisource, and link to those instead of including large quotes here.
  • As you said, the "Hasekura today" section reads more like an "In popular culture" section right now. I think things could be converted to a "Legacy" section (or something like that), and the language can be cleaned up and made more encyclopedic.
  • I agree, the timeline and itinerary section can be sorted out into the appropriate sections of the article.
  • Already addressed the notes and references.
Thanks for your patience while I carve out time to work on this. You can see my recent work on Manzanar (diff) and Boshin War (diff) to see what I have done before. Diffs are from before I started to when I finished, though others also contributed during those times, so it's not entirely my doing. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 23:30, 20 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for taking on this article. I don't think we are pressed for time at FAR, as long as the article is being worked on. RetiredDuke (talk) 23:47, 20 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
We are working on an AI to automatically identify statement issues around minor POV problems and missing citations. It has identified some statements that need citations on this article. They are given below:
  • He spent his young adulthood at Kamitate Castle (上楯城)[3] that was constructed in Hasekura Ward, Kawasaki City (ex-Hasekura Village), Miyagi Prefecture, by his grandfather Hasekura Tsunemasa (常正).
  • The embassy was probably, at that time, part of a plan to diversify and increase trade with foreign countries, before the participation of Christians in the Osaka rebellion triggered a radical reaction from the shogunate, with the interdiction of Christianity in the territories it directly controlled, in 1614.
  • The galleon, named Date Maru by the Japanese and later San Juan Bautista by the Spanish, took 45 days work in building, with the participation of technical experts from the Bakufu (the Minister of the Navy Mukai Shōgen, an acquaintance of William Adams with whom he built several ships, dispatched his Chief Carpenter), 800 shipwrights, 700 smiths, and 3,000 carpenters. The daimyō of Sendai, Date Masamune, was put in charge of the project.
If the predictions are relevant, and they could have eased the review burden, we appreciate more feedback here to help evaluate our AI and make it robust. More details can be found on the research page. Sumit (talk) 06:05, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I've cleaned up the refs so they are all using appropriate templates and formatting. Now we can see where we are. @RetiredDuke:, if you will go through the article and add {{cn}} to every place that doesn't have a citation and you think it needs one, that will allow me to know exactly what I need to find. Please ping me here when you've done that. Thanks! ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 23:14, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, my, what a layout, image, MOS:SANDWICH mess. Thank you, again, for taking on a big one, Nihonjoe. Once you are further along, I will volunteer to re-format all the image layout to resolve layout problems. Meanwhile, if you see any that can be deleted ... SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:58, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Went ahead and sorted what I could on the image mess. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:53, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, it's definitely a mess (or it was, anyway). ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 19:03, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hold as work is being actively done, with some discussion on the talk page. Just to give the coords a heads-up. RetiredDuke (talk) 11:57, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I have now tagged the whole article like User:Nihonjoe asked above. However, I respectfully ask them if they are sure they want to do this. This FAR is going to be a major rescue job, and while I greatly admire the work done rescuing Boshin War and Manzanar, those articles were never this bad. Many of the sources in the Hasekura article are primary sources, documents and letters from historical figures contemporary to Hasekura. The article draws conclusions solely from historical documents in several sections of the article. Lengthy quotes from historical documents are used verbatim as part of the narrative, instead of being paraphrased. I've added 80+ cn tags to the article. At some point this will become a completely different article from the current one. It's like a new FAC. RetiredDuke (talk) 16:32, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It may take some time, but I think we can do it. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 17:31, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I will help in what I can, but I truly only realized the scale of the job once I read the article sentence by sentence. There's no rush though. RetiredDuke (talk) 17:48, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

User:Nihonjoe, progress seems stalled. Are you still on this one? Update? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:55, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Progress hasn't stalled. It's the holidays, and I have a lot of other things going on. I'm still working on it as I can. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 17:14, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Some of the references would be easier to find for people in Spain, Italy, Mexico, or Vatican City. I've pinged the following projects to see if they can help find some of those sources: WP:SPAIN, WP:ITALY, WP:MEXICO, and WP:CATHOLICISM. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 00:26, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nihonjoe, you may find the Resource Exchange/Resource Request helpful if you're having trouble finding sources. Aza24 (talk) 02:56, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Aza24: Thanks. That was going to be my next stop. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 17:19, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Could we get an update on status here? Nikkimaria (talk) 14:48, 30 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Nikkimaria: I have some stuff next week that I'm preparing for, so I haven't had time to do anything since my last edit. After next week, I should have a little more time to do that. Anyone else is welcome to help, too. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 00:03, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Move to FARC, four months in, there are still 68 citation needed tags, and progress has been stalled for over a month. Moving to FARC does not preclude that further improvements will be made, but will keep FAR on track. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:16, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

FARC section edit

Issues raised in the review section mostly concern sourcing. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:28, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delist Improvements have stalled and there are major unaddressed concerns, including the citation needed tags. Z1720 (talk) 17:13, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delist. Dead external links from September 2017, page number citations needed from November and December 2020, unsourced passages need footnotes from November and December 2020, clarification needed from November and December 2020. Thanks for the improvements, but the article is still far from meeting featured article criteria. DrKay (talk) 10:34, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delist. Considerable improvements by Nihonjoe, effort recognized, but much remains to be done in this difficult full-rewrite-needed FAR. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 13:42, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delist - solid effort, but it's been stalled out for some time, and is still a long ways from the criteria. Hog Farm Talk 15:07, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delist as I don't have the time or the resources to fix all the current issues in a timely manner. Thanks to Zupotachyon for all their efforts, too. The talk page of the article has a very good list of things to work on, however, so anyone who can do so is welcome to work on those issues. If they are all addressed, it's very likely this article could be a FA again. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 16:37, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delist Thanks for the ping Nihonjoe. As it currently stands, it's next to impossible to tell where sourced analysis ends and OR begins. As stated by others: lots of unsourced claims, claims based on primary sources alone, etc... I tried going through the [citation needed] tags, but after a few days it became apparent that simply adding references is not enough. I could cite several claims back-to-back, but it wasn't always clear whether those claims were meaningful or significant. For example, one could reasonably ask whether anything in the 'Background' section provides sufficient or relevant context to Hasekura's journeys. Even if each sentence's claims were cited, the combination of sentences as a paragraph may easily imply a conclusion unsupported by any expert text -- and I haven't figured out if this is the case or not. It's an open question whether the section reflects academic consensus, is pure OR, or something in-between -- and this applies to the entire page. I've done what I can but I've hit my limit, unfortunately... Zupotachyon (talk) 05:42, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@WP:FAR coordinators: it's snowing here, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 13:05, 31 March 2021 (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_article_review/Hasekura_Tsunenaga/archive1&oldid=1015353737"