Wikipedia:Featured article review/Boshin War/archive1

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 kept by Nikkimaria via FACBot (talk) 9:02, 12 September 2020 (UTC) [1].

Boshin War

Notified: Per Honor et Gloria, Monocrat, Enkyo2, Victuallers, Ernstkohl, Curly Turkey, WP Japan, WP MILHIST

Review section

This article has a long-standing lack of citations for significant portions. -- Beland (talk) 19:50, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Month-old talk page notification got no bites: [2] SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:34, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delist under Wikipedia: V for lack of citations. It would take a lot of work to fix this, and the original nominator from back in 2006 has long since retired. ErinRC (talk) 21:56, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ErinRC, please have a close look at the instructions at WP:FAR regarding the purpose of the first phase of FAR; "Keep or Delist are not declared in the FAR phase". SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:44, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@SandyGeorgia: I'm seeing a contradiction in the FAR guidelines here. It does indeed say what you cite it as saying, but immediately below it also makes the apparently contradictory statement that The featured article removal coordinators [...] determine either that there is consensus to close during this second stage, or that there is insufficient consensus to do so and so therefore the nomination should be moved to the third stage. I am not sure if there is a substantial difference, from the point of view of finding consensus in community discussions, between saying "I think this would take an inordinate amount of work to bring up to FA standard, and the only reason it is currently listed is because it was originally nominated back in the bad old days when we had no standards" and saying "Delist I think this would take an inordinate amount of work to bring up to FA standard, and the only reason it is currently listed is because it was originally nominated back in the bad old days when we had no standards". Is it possible the guideline you are quoting was written to apply to reviews of more recent FAs, where the notable gap between the standards of 2006 and the standards of 2020 is not also in play? Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 03:08, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The spirit of the thing is that, during FAR, we specify the problems and hope someone will address them. A ~~Your~~ "delist" in the FAR phase won't get the article delisted. Keep can happen without moving to FARC, but Delist cannot happen until/unless the article moves to FARC. In other words, unless the article is improved, ~~you have~~ one has to come back during the FARC phase to enter a Delist. No need to ping me, I have the FAR watchlisted. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:27, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

To be clear, I was asking a hypothetical about an apparent contradiction in the instructions; I'm not the same editor who already cast a "delist" !vote. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 03:31, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see a contradiction, but perhaps that could be taken up at WT:FAR rather than here. FAR is for listing things to be improved: one can say, "I don't think this article can be improved during a FAR", and then come back during FARC to !vote "Delist", if the article moves to FARC. (If you want, you can move this whole thing, my responses included, to WT:FAR.) Regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:55, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Move to FARC, no significant improvement, no one has engaged. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:51, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

FARC section

Issues raised in the review section mostly relate to sourcing. Nikkimaria (talk) 18:05, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delist. Tagged for citations for over a year. One statement tagged as dubious since January. DrKay (talk) 09:26, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- @DrKay: I removed the dubious tag as whoever placed it didn't bother to explain why they tagged it, and it's not immediately obvious from the tagging. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 00:43, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - I think it may be in the talk archive at Talk:Boshin War/Archive 1#Weaponry? DrKay (talk) 09:59, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - Thank you for the improvements so far. There are 4 parts of the article that I don't understand:
  1. Why is the Japanese date of February 8 equivalent to March 1 in the Western calendar and are the dates in the article Japanese or Western?
  2. What does it mean to "invest" a Castle?
  3. Was Goryōkaku defended by 800 remaining men or besieged by 800 men?
  4. If Enomoto was determined to fight to the end, why did he send his code books to his opponent?
  - Trivial points that I've left because I don't like the alternatives personally: Parkes' should be Parkes's according to MOS:POSS; "summer of 1866" should be avoided according to MOS:SEASON. The quote marks within the quote marks of " 'as his equal in point of blood'." are probably unnecessary. I recommend: "as his equal in point of blood". DrKay (talk) 16:35, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    - @DrKay: Answering in order:
      1. Likely due to Japan using the Lunar calendar at that time (I believe that was during the transition, or close to it). I don't know regarding the dates in the article as I didn't write it initially.
      2. Based on context within the article, I'm going to assume it is this meaning from Merriam-Webster: "[Middle French investir, from Old Italian investire, from Latin, to surround] : to surround with troops or ships so as to prevent escape or entry".
      3. I'm not sure as I didn't write that paragraph and I do not have access to that source.
      4. This is speculation based on bits of culture I've encountered over the years. I tried finding a source supporting the reasoning, but I wasn't able to. Basically, by sending the valuables to his enemy before defeat, he was placing a responsibility on his enemy to return those items to his family. If he had waited until being defeated, he could not have requested that due to no longer being on equal footing (as far as honor goes).
    - Trivial points:
      1. Fixed "Parkes'" to "Parkes's", even though it looks wrong to me.
      2. Re: "summer of 1866", I don't have access to that source, so I am uncomfortable making this change.
      3. Fixed the quotes issue.
    - Thanks! ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 08:03, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      - I'm not entirely happy, because I still suspect there is some confusion in the article between Western and Japanese dates, and I'm not convinced 'Naval Codes' is the best translation for whatever it was that Enomoto sent Kuroda. However, given the improvements and the lack of any definite fault, I am striking my delist comment. DrKay (talk) 14:23, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hold off on making a decision. The MilHist project was not notified of this discussion, and they are very active and have many experts who can help. I have notified them now, and made a list of sourcing issues needing addressing. Please see Talk:Boshin War#Paragraphs needing references for more details. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 00:43, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Nihonjoe: holding is good, but please note that your statement above is incorrect. Here is the MILHIST notification on 29 Feb, and here is another discussion I initiated much earlier, on 29 Jan, where MILHIST declined to continue listing FARs prominently as they once did. I strongly recommend you add Wikipedia:Featured article review/notices given somewhere prominent as we work through older, neglected FAs. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:52, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@SandyGeorgia: Well, I missed those. I don't have time to review every notice given for every FAR. This just happened to come across my radar. I still think time should be given to allow every paragraph to be referenced. The descriptions above of the article's "long-standing lack of citations for significant portions" is inaccurate at best. There are only eight paragraphs that don't have citations, and most of those that do have multiple citations used. That's really not all that many to fix. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 00:56, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Time is always given at FAR is progress is being made; please keep this page posted every few days as improvements proceed. (Here is the archival of the notification on 8 March, so perhaps the archival time at WT:MILHIST needs to be longer.) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:00, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@SandyGeorgia: Please don't make ridiculous claims about me without foundation. Nothing in my request on the MilHist talk page or on Talk:Boshin War was in any way incorrect. I already acknowledged my error here, so following me around and making false claims regarding the veracity of my requests is simply harassment. We're all in this together, and I'm working to fix the issues raised here. Thanks. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 01:34, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Have a nice day. (PS, I have this page watchlisted, as all FAR pages-- please stop pinging me.) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:55, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I did it out of courtesy. I have 18k pages on my watchlist, so sometimes pages I'm watching get lost in the shuffle. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 01:59, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Update, no edits since Nihonjoe's posts. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:36, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm waiting for a book to arrive. Have a little patience, please. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 18:00, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - Actually, three books now. They should be here within the next couple weeks or so (given all the COVID-19 stuff, I don't have any way to know for sure). I've added a few refs in the meantime. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 01:46, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Holding, pending Nihonjoe receipt of books and update. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:56, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nihonjoe is still waiting for books, and will need an extended delay. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:51, 10 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Nihonjoe: any update? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:56, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't received all of the books yet. No idea why, though. They haven't yet shipped. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 02:27, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've addressed all of the items marked with "citation needed". Any others need work? ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 19:30, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome, Nihonjoe; I will look this weekend when I have time. Perhaps DrKay will revisit as well. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:42, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Are you still planning to look over things, SandyGeorgia, or have all the concerns been addressed? ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 18:09, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@SandyGeorgia: Pinging due to no response for over two weeks. Have all the concerns been addressed? Is there anything else that needs to be done in order to retain the FA designation for the article? Thanks for your time! ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 03:03, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies for the long delay, Nihonjoe; I have added a few cn tags. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:23, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've added citations for all of those. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 20:36, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Source review

Please make sure that the books cited are sorted alphabetically
Be consistent in whether you use cite templates for books
For easier verification, give inline page indications for journal articles with long page ranges. In particular Ravina 2010.
What is the rationale behind embedding long quotations in the footnotes?

I may return to have a look at the prose. Eisfbnore ^(会話) 05:17, 18 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Also, the corresponding Portuguese article pt:Guerra Boshin is an FA, but was formerly demoted, before being promoted again last year. Most of the discussion was about spelling and Aportuguesamento, yet some parts of that review might be of interest. Their article is also quite well-shaped and handsome, I have to say. FWIW Eisfbnore ^(会話) 06:09, 18 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Eisfbnore: Answering in order:

They are in alphabetical order by author surname (which is standard).
All of them use one of the citation templates.
I don't have access to the Ravina article. Are there any others that need this?
To provide context, I assume.

Thanks! ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 18:09, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Okay to Keep, @DrKay: SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:41, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Nihonjoe: I've added a couple more cn tags. I also note that the formatting of citations and references is quite inconsistent - some cleanup needed there before this can be kept. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:57, 4 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Nikkimaria: Unless you want to do some of it, you're going to have to wait a bit. I have some real life things that are taking up my time right now. I've already done a ton, and it would be great if others found some sources for the two citations needed and helped fix the refs formatting. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 03:46, 5 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Nikkimaria: I've cleaned up the refs and tagged a few that need page numbers or clarification. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 01:06, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm working on clearing up the citations that need page numbers. I'm not sure what to do about the ones that vaguely reference a museum exhibit (it's tagged for clarification). I'm fine with museum exhibits being cited, but there needs to be a date at least, and perhaps an archived link to their website or to a pamphlet or book from the exhibit. I'm waiting on a couple more books to arrive in order to fix the Keene reference and improve refs (perhaps even replace the museum refs). ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 23:19, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've updated the Keene reference that was missing page numbers, as well as the Evans and Peattie ref missing page numbers. Waiting on a a request for page numbers from someone who has access to the Polack book. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 23:18, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I now have copies of the Polak reference, but it's in Japanese and French, so it will take me a few days to review them and find the pieces of information that need the page numbers. Outside of that, are there any other things that need to be fixed in this article? ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 22:07, 9 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I replaced one Polak reference with a couple others. There is still one of the Polak references that I can't find in the pages sent to me. I'm trying to find any other source that says that. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 17:23, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Outside of the "Ryozen Museum of History exhibit", all of the refs have been fixed and updated now. I can probably find refs to replace the five places this museum exhibit is used. We'll see. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 17:48, 11 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Closing note: This removal candidate has been kept, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please leave the {{featured article review}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Nikkimaria (talk) 19:02, 12 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.