Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of National Treasures of Japan (temples)/archive1

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

The list was promoted by Dabomb87 22:39, 14 April 2010 [1].

List of National Treasures of Japan (temples) edit

List of National Treasures of Japan (temples) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Nominator(s): bamse (talk) 08:13, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Toolbox

After two recently featured shortish lists, this is another list of the series of lists of National Treasures of Japan. It uses the same structure as the already featured castle, shrine, residences, painting and sculpture lists. I tried to incorporate comments from previous FLCs. bamse (talk) 08:13, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Early comments Support
  • Some of the refs need ordering (particularly placing #10 before others, but also I see #29 before #27 in the last paragraph).
  • Extra space between #18 and #10 (which need reordering) after the sentence "natural environment in contrast to symmetrical layouts." Staxringold talkcontribs 15:01, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I reordered all references. There should be a bot for that (or is there already?). Also fixed the extra space. bamse (talk) 17:11, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment Check the toolbox; there are a few dead links. Dabomb87 (talk) 16:44, 3 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    It seems that a few organizations decided to re-organize their websites with the start of the new fiscal year on April 1. Already fixed one link. It'll take some time to find the new location of the other pages since google is still pointing to the old locations. bamse (talk) 20:46, 3 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    All dead links are fixed. bamse (talk) 20:56, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: The only thing I see which might be an issue on lower-resolution screens is the Statistics section with the tall left-aligned table next to the smaller right-aligned table and image. Should these maybe not be next to each, and instead placed above or below the left-aligned table? Other than that, I think everything looks very nice. I'm assuming the entries with a dash for the image are those for which we have no images? ···日本穣? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 10:01, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for the feedback. I increased the size of the map a bit so that the space is filled better on my (small) screen. I now have a long and narrow table on the left, a small table on the top right and the map below it also right-aligned. It is virtually impossible to arrange the two tables and map in such a way that it looks good on all browsers and resolutions. I hope that it looks decent on most settings. Indeed, the entries with a dash don't have an image on wikipedia yet. There are only about 1110 (just added a picture of Kōjō-ji's pagoda) national treasure temple structures out of 152 without image which is quite remarkable. Except for the konjikidō where photography is not allowed, all structures can be photographed and will eventually have an image. bamse (talk) 12:23, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Support based on improvements made. ···日本穣? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 08:57, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 08:27, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • "In fact the number of structures listed is more than 152" no need to say "In fact".
    Removed "In fact". bamse (talk) 21:29, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • battle of Shigisen or Battle of Shigisen?
    Capitalized. bamse (talk) 21:29, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Was the battle when the temples were constructed or were they constructed after the battle?
    Fixed by Truthkeeper88 to read: ... in the wake of the Battle of Shigisen in 587, after which Buddhist temples began to be constructed. bamse (talk) 22:40, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pagoda overlinked.
    Fixed. bamse (talk) 21:29, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "kon-dō" linked on its second use, not first.
    Fixed. bamse (talk) 21:29, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "and wars few" comma after wars.
    Fixed. bamse (talk) 21:29, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "extant... extant..." repetitive.
    Removed first "extant". bamse (talk) 21:29, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Emperor Shōmu, decreed temples " no need for the comma.
    Fixed. bamse (talk) 21:29, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "only extant example of these halls[16][26]" missing some punctuation here.
    Added "." bamse (talk) 21:29, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Excellent examples" excellent in whose opinion?
    Reworded to "Representative examples" which is closer to what the provided source says. bamse (talk) 22:35, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The table's columns (except for Remarks and Images)" - col is called Image.
    Fixed. bamse (talk) 21:49, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "year; The column" not a capital letter after the ;
    Fixed. bamse (talk) 21:49, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "structure"; The column " ditto.
    Fixed. bamse (talk) 21:49, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • " at 50.1 (m?)," why the ?
    I used the wrong template (Template:nihongo instead of Template:convert), that's why. Fixed. bamse (talk) 21:49, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "4.363 m (14.31 ft)," extraordinarily accurate - nearest millimetre?
    That's what the source says. Probably goes back to the conversion from some Japanese units of measurement. I rounded it to 4.4 m. bamse (talk) 21:49, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "copper-tiel roofing" is that tile?
    Fixed. bamse (talk) 21:49, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Decimal place consistency needed - 18 m (59 ft) vs 29.8 m (98 ft) etc... especially with the mm accuracy above.
    That's the accuracy provided by the various sources. Indeed mm accuracy does not make much sense here (and is probably due to conversion from some Japanese units). Now I rounded everything to one decimal if the respective source provided this accuracy. I left "18 m", etc where the source did not provide more accuracy. bamse (talk) 22:11, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "　5×5, single-storied, yosemune style,[ex 8] hongawarabuki roof[ex 2]" seems not left-aligned.
    Fixed. bamse (talk) 21:49, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • No need to link ken more than once in a line.
    Fixed in remarks column of "Chion-in", "Hokke-dō" and "Fudōdō". Hope those were all. bamse (talk) 22:32, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note 2 is a little odd, starting with "and ..." and is unreferenced.
    Made a full sentence out of it (The statues represented the nine stages of nirvana.) and added a reference. bamse (talk) 22:24, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note 39 is indecipherable to me.
    Translated it. bamse (talk) 22:31, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • As is the last bullet of Note 35.
    Translated it. bamse (talk) 22:31, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • What makes "Zuiryū-ji" (a) worth linking, (b) reliable? Same with Kaijūsen-ji, Hōgon-ji, Saimyō-ji, etc, etc..
    These are major Japanese temples which (a) should have a wikipedia article (after all they have national treasures which makes them notable). (b) The official websites of these temples are a (very) reliable source in my opinion. bamse (talk) 21:49, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ref 53 needs to be formatted correctly - why the spaces in the title?
    Fixed. bamse (talk) 21:58, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • What makes "dynax" reliable? It doesn't even load for me.
    Indeed it does not appear to be reliable. Removed it. The table info for this national treasure is sufficiently referenced by ref 5. bamse (talk) 22:17, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • further reading link needs an en-dash.
    Fixed. bamse (talk) 21:55, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Rambling Man (talk) 20:02, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the comments. I started to address some point but will need another day or so for the rest. bamse (talk) 21:29, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As ever you're more than welcome, and please take your time to consider the comments you have yet to address. No rush! The Rambling Man (talk) 21:31, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I think I addressed all of your comments. bamse (talk) 22:31, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Jujutacular T · C 20:20, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Just one thing, what is the default sorting of the table? Jujutacular T · C 18:47, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The default sorting is the same as the order used by the Database of National Cultural Properties which is published by the designating agency. The order is geographic traversing Japan roughly from north-east to south-west. The same order is used in other featured National Treasures of Japan lists. bamse (talk) 19:58, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, that makes sense. Jujutacular T · C 20:20, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support Jujutacular T · C 20:20, 13 April 2010 (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_list_candidates/List_of_National_Treasures_of_Japan_(temples)/archive1&oldid=1046728518"