Talk:Bowing in Japan/GA1

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Farang Rak Tham (talk · contribs) 23:48, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction and limitations

Before starting this review, I'd like to state that I have little knowledge about Japan. But i do know quite some things about Buddhist culture and history, including the modernization part. I brought Buddhist devotion to GA, which includes bowing and prostration, and am currently working on Filial piety and Filial piety in Buddhism, for what it's worth. I found your article fascinating, which is why I started to review it.

Overview

1. Prose:

No copyright violations.
The article reads very well—it is eloquently written. Below I will do a detailed review.
~~Would it more historically chronological if we put the section on "Zarei" before that of business etiquette?~~ You might also want to consider renaming it to "traditional etiquette", "pre-modern customs" or something that fits better with the other headings.

2. ~~MOS: the commons template needs to be in the last section of the body of the text.~~

3. References layout:

Fixed

No dead links, ~~but I can't find the books with Amazon numbers B07FDT5BJQ and B06X43SRQ2~~

~~Sources can more easily be identified if you add isbn or oclc numbers to the books, and issn numbers or dois for the scholarly journals.~~

Can you provide me with an url or issn for the campana journal?--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 10:59, 17 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

4. Reliable sources:

Doing...

Though I cannot read Japanese, there appear to be some sources that look like lifestyle blogs. Do you have better sources to replace those? In particular, I am not sure to what extent ~~japanese-tea-ceremony.net/~~, Live Japan, Japan Visitor, hac.cside.com and ~~Tofugu~~ are professional or have editorial oversight.
Is the Oki Memorial website government or commercial? If the latter, it may not be allowed as a Wikipedia link.

5. Original research: None found.

6. Broadness: Will check later.

7. Focus: It isn't quite clear why an entire subsection is dedicated to Kendo. Would it be possble to make this broader, say, to cover martial arts in general?

8. Neutral: Yes.

9. Stable: article is stable.

10-11. Pics: Well-licensed, ~~but the picture with the incense seems less relevant to the topic~~.

Fixed

Hi, sorry for the wait, I'm still working through the references because the information I found in new citations is not exactly the same so I'm rewriting certain sections.

Regarding point 1, zarei and ritsurei are just 2 variations of bowing gestures in Japan, neither is necessarily more traditional than the other. I put standing bows first because I thought it was more relevant in modern society. Zarei on the other hand is mostly practised in niche categories nowadays.

Okay.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 05:12, 28 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I understand what you meant by point 7. I was trying to use Kendo as a representation of all the Japanese martial arts because it's arguably got one of the strongest ties with samurais. The etiquette in each type of martial arts can be different sometimes, I thought it was a bit redundant to include details on all of them... Luedward1521 (talk) 22:38, 25th June, 2019 (UTC)

Can you write a sentence or two about the role of bowing in martial arts in general? What subjects do secondary sources cover?--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 05:12, 28 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Detailed review per section

I will continue with a detailed review per section. Feel free to insert replies or inquiries. To keep communication to the point, you might want to use templates like Done, Doing..., Not done, Removed, Added, and Fixed. Please do not cross out my comments, as I will not yours but only my own. I will do the review of the lead mostly at the end.

History

~~In the Kamakura period please specify years~~. Fixed
Ise School (伊勢流 Ise-Ryū) and Ogasawara School (小笠原流 Ogasawara-Ryū) Is there some way we can wikilink the three schools as well? Or at least, the provinces they originate from.
- Only one of the samurais clans (Ogasawara) has an entry on English Wikipedia, but the other 2 do have Japanese Wikipedia pages. Should I link to them instead? Luedward1521 (talk) 22:39, 25th June 2019 (UTC)

Yes, that would be a good idea. You can use the {{ill}} template.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 05:12, 28 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Eshaku

This subsection appears to be unsourced. If you have used the same sources as in the Saikeirei subsection, please refer to these sources in each subsection so that the sourcing is unambiguous.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 05:24, 28 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keirei

See comment above.

being less overkill being less extensive?--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 05:24, 28 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Zarei

or seiza, position on traditional Japanese style tatami floors You mean, practiced on traditional Japanese style tatami floors?

Kendo

The kendo saying "Begins with etiquette and ends with etiquette" Better translate as begin with or beginning with.

When to bow

The titles of this and the next subsection read too much like a manual and need to be rephrased. See also WP:NOTMANUAL.
will be decided beforehand You mean, will be determined beforehand?
in respect to its profound spirituality Not quite an encyclopedic tone. Perhaps: "in respect to its profound spiritual role".

How to bow

either of these two variations Do you mean gyō, and sō?
Details of the etiquette may vary depending on which school of tea ceremony one subscribes to, so it is always a good idea to check the manners of the host and the guest of honor for guidelines of proper decorum. Too much like a manual. Rephrase for encyclopedic tone.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 06:44, 28 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Broadness check

June 2019

There may be many negatives in here, but I am sure you can quickly make corrections. Your have many good sources in your article, but some sources need to be replaced. I'll continue the review as soon as I hear from you again. Keep it up, and it won't take long, because your writing is good and contains little errors.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 23:48, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

July 2019

Luedward1521, are you still pursuing this? Many days have past now. When are your exams finished?--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 12:27, 2 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator has not responded in time for this review. Emailing him failed due to an incorrect email address he provided, according to Wikipedia. Failing.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 08:07, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Good Article review progress box

Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()

3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()

Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.