Wikipedia:Peer review/Act on National Flag and Anthem (Japan)/archive2

Act on National Flag and Anthem (Japan) edit

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
The article was taken to FAC by me in November of last year; the main issues from the FAC was the copyediting and grammar. I would like to see what grammar changes can be done and what other improvements can be made on this article. Thanks, User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 06:54, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Quick note: Can you check the following links:-

Ref 51 (Ministry of Education): this appears to be broken.
In the "Legislation" listing, Police of the Hokkaido Prefecture: I get constant timeouts.

Brianboulton (talk) 00:39, 19 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Doing... Comments from Cryptic C62:

"The debate surrounding the law also revealed a split in the leadership of the opposition Democratic Party of Japan and the party discipline of the ruling Liberal Democratic Party and collation partners." What are "collation partners"?
"The passage of the law was met with mixed feelings." Mixed feelings from whom?
"The rules for use of the symbols were not specified; if they had been included, the bill would not have gained enough support in the Diet to pass." This is a bold speculation, not a statement of fact, and it should be rewritten accordingly. See WP:CRYSTALBALL.
"However, the law allowed the continued use and manufacture of flags with the 1870 proportions." The article has not yet specified what the "1870 proportions" were, so this sentence isn't particularly helpful.
"Kimigayo is one of the world's shortest national anthems, with a length of 11 measures and 32 characters." Citation needed. Also, what does "characters" refer to in this context?
"Approximately nine out of ten respondents favored having the Hinomaru as the national flag, and six out of ten supported Kimigayo as the national anthem. Overall, about 46% were in favor of the bill." These two sentences seem to contradict each other. How is it possible for so many people to support the individual symbols but to oppose the bill? Some clarification is definitely needed here.
"The head of a teachers' federation praised the legislation, believing it would help them inculcate people with a proper sense of respect for a country's symbols" It's not clear if this refers to a Japanese teachers' federation and a sense of respect for Japan's symbols, or to some non-Japanese teachers' federation and a sense of respect for national symbols in general.

I won't be watching this page, but feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you need clarification. --Cryptic C62 · Talk 17:26, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Finetooth comments: This is quite interesting and generally well-written. The sound file is excellent and so is your diagram of the flag dimensions. I think the article is likely to achieve FA with just a bit more tinkering. Here are my suggestions:

Shouldn't the flag's name be in regular type instead of italics; i.e., Nisshōki or Hinomaru? This would be parallel to "Union Jack" or "Union Flag" for the U.K. flag or, possibly, "Old Glory", a nickname for the U.S. flag.

Shouldn't the anthem's title be in quotation marks rather than italics; i.e., "Kimigayo"?

Linking World War II more than once in the entire article is probably not necessary.

Lead

I'd include the abbreviations of the Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ) and Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) in the lead on first use.

Background of the legislation

At the time of his suggestion, the Japan Teachers Union was opposed to using the anthem because it "[smacked] of emperor worship" and was connected to pre-war militarism. - An inline citation should follow immediately after the end punctuation of the quoted material; i.e., right after the quotation marks after "worship".

"Failing to win their support, Toshihiro saw no other option but to take his own life." - It is not clear why he would consider this his only option. Why would suicide be his only option and not the only option of those who end up on the losing side of the debate when the Act passes in 1999? What was special about Toshihiro?

Party positions

"The President of the Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ), Naoto Kan, stated that the DPJ must support the bill because the party had already recognized... " - Verb tense. Substitute "had to" for "must"?

"On July 16, the DPJ decided to issue their amendment... " - DPJ is singular, but "their" is plural. Change "their" to "its"?

Public opinion

" ...one respondent suggested the song Sakura Sakura instead." - "Sakura Sakura" should appear in quotation marks rather than italics.

Yomiuri Shimbun should not be linked twice in this section.

"Overall, about 46 percent were in favor of the bill." - I agree with Cryptic C62 that this number looks wrong. Is the number a typo? Should it be 76 percent, maybe?

Reactions

"As one of the two prefectures affected by nuclear weapons during World War II, the education of Hiroshima has been biased with regards to information regarding the symbols and the Emperor due to pressure from native groups and teacher's unions." - This claim is strong enough that it needs its own inline citation to a source. Also, it would be good to say clearly how it is biased; i.e., against symbols connected to the war.

"The passage of the law was seen as an "annoyance," running counter to educational practices in the prefecture and unlikely be able to resolve issues inside Hiroshima." - Would it be helpful to add a word or two to clarify what is meant by "issues"? Perhaps "war-related issues"?

If South Korea and the People's Republic of China are linked, why not the Philippines and Singapore?

Political ramifications

"The DPJ had allowed their elected members to cast their votes... " - DPJ is singular, but "their" is plural.

"the LDP focused on their own agendas... " - Same problem here, singular and plural.

References

The abbreviation for a single page is p. and for multiple pages it is pp. Citations 33, 34, 35, 44, 45, 48, 52, 57, 58, 24, 25, 26, and 30 all use the wrong abbreviation and should be fixed. I might have missed some others. You should check them all for this particular error.

The book data in the "Bibliography" section should include place of publication. If you don't have this information in your notes, you can usually find it via WorldCat.

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider commenting on any other article at WP:PR. I don't usually watch the PR archives or make follow-up comments. If my suggestions are unclear, please ping me on my talk page. Finetooth (talk) 20:17, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]