Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Act on National Flag and Anthem (Japan)/archive2
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
The article was not promoted by SandyGeorgia 01:29, 15 August 2011 [1].
Act on National Flag and Anthem (Japan) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Featured article candidates/Act on National Flag and Anthem (Japan)/archive1
- Featured article candidates/Act on National Flag and Anthem (Japan)/archive2
| Toolbox |
|---|
- Nominator(s): User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 05:49, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
At an FAC last year, the main issue with the article seems to be prose. After a peer review, along with this article being submitted to the Guild of Copy Editors, I feel the prose is a lot better than it was a year before. Some new information was added to the article, mostly about legal ramifications since the passage of this law and what legal challenges it had. Enjoy. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 05:49, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Media Review Yay, I can justify using the word "media" instead of "image" this time. Everything is good from a copyright perspective. I'll do some touch up on the captions and the file description pages, but this is good to go. Sven Manguard Wha? 06:12, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Source review - spotchecks not done. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:37, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- FN 7: page(s)? Generally speaking, multi-page documents need page numbers
- Don't mix different types of citation templates, as this creates formatting inconsistencies
- Use a consistent formatting for multiple authors/editors
- Be consistent in whether or not you include locations for book publishers
- Use a consistent formatting for notes and bibliography entries
- Be consistent in how you format newspaper citations, and whether or not you include publishers
- Use a consistent date format
- FN 30: hyphen should be dash
- Don't repeat cited sources in External links. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:37, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- I am working on the citations right now. I added the page numbers for FN 7, but the template seems to use p., even though it is multiple pages (which I been told have to use pp.). Trying to use http://toolserver.org/~magnus/makeref.php for the formatting, but having 500 errors with it. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 18:45, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. The prose still seems substandard:
"After Japan's defeat in World War II, there were suggestions to legislate the Hinomaru and Kimgayo as the official symbols of Japan. However, a law to make both symbols official in 1974 failed to gain a majority in the Diet, due to the symbols' connection with the militaristic history of Japan. It was suggested that both symbols be made official in 1999, after a school principal in Hiroshima committed suicide over a dispute regarding the symbols."—overuse of the word "symbols"; "in 1999" is in the wrong place"collation partners"—coalition partners, surely?"Other nations felt"—nations have feelings?"in wake of this law"—in the wake- "have been challenged in the court systems due to the constitutionality of forcing teachers and students to honor both the flag and anthem against their wishes"—convoluted and wordy sentence; "against their wishes" is unnecessary, but even without that the sentence does not read well.
- This sentence still doesn't make much sense.
In the first paragraph of "Text of the Act", it is said twice that rules about use of the flags weren't included. "Respect of" sounds odd."The 1870 proportions had a ratio of seven to ten units (7:10), with the red disc off-center by one-hundredth of the flag's length toward the side of the hoist, which were set in the Prime Minister's Proclamation No. 57"—rather too much space between "which" and its antecedent"Japanese law did not designate a national flag from 1885 to 1999, although the Hinomaru was legally the national flag from 1870 to 1885."—odd chronology. Why was the law changed in 1885?
I haven't read further. This article needs a good copyedit. Ucucha 22:29, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- I am going to have the Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Requests take a look at this article; any order passed before 1885 was declared null and void due to a change of government systems in Japan. This is mentioned in the citations at the bottom. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 22:48, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Some of the above comments haven't been fixed yet. Some other comments:
- Act on National Flag and Anthem is a red link. Why is the disambiguator in the title?
- "The debate surrounding the law also revealed a split in the leadership of the opposition Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ) and the party discipline of the ruling Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) and coalition partners."—the part about party discipline doesn't make sense. Did it reveal that party discipline was weak in the LDP?
Incidentally, the copyedit introduced some further errors into the prose (e.g., "Nineties"). Ucucha (talk) 12:44, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- For the "have been challenged in the court systems due to the constitutionality" I changed it to where it says "Regulations and government orders issued in the wake of this law, especially those issued by the Tokyo Board of Education, have been challenged in court due to conflicts with the Japanese constitution." so it removed a lot of text.
- As for the disambiguator in the title, there are similar laws about the national symbols, such as Law_on_the_National_Arms,_Flag,_and_Anthem_(Mexico). I was suggested to add Japan in the title.
- The DPJ was shown as split and fractured, unlike the LDP. I changed "party discipline" to just "unity." User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 17:24, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.