Scan for Requests for Peer Review

WikiProject Japan (Talk)

Founded: 18 March 2006
(18 years, 2 months and 3 days ago)
Articles: 91,828 (180 featured)



{{WikiProject Japan}}   {{Japan current era date}}   {{Japanese}}   {{nihongo}}   {{Nihongo2}}   {{Nihongo3}}   {{Nihongo foot}}   {{Needhiragana}}   {{Needkanji}}

Project parentage
V·T·E·Q115724607 on Wikidata

Peer reviews for Wikipedia:WikiProject Japan

Editors with article requests involving significant policy and/or POV concerns or edit wars should use Wikipedia:Third opinion, Wikipedia:Requests for comment, and/or Noticeboards (Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard for living persons and Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents for others.) before a peer review.

All reviews are conducted by fellow editors—usually members of the WikiProject.

Adding a new peer review edit

WikiProject peer reviews
A Wikipedia Peer Review can be a useful way to improve articles associated with this WikiProject.

You can keep track of new reviews by watching this page; do that by clicking here. If your project has article alerts enabled, reviews will display on that list too.

To list your review below:

  1. Create the peer review following instructions here.
  2. Add [[Wikipedia:Peer review/Name of nominated article/archiveN]] - May 2024 at the top of the list of requests below (where N is the archive number).

When the review is finished:

  1. Follow the general instructions for peer reviews here.
  2. Move [[Wikipedia:Peer review/Name of nominated article/archiveN]] - MONTH - YEAR from the list of active reviews to the list of old reviews.

To change how your project's peer reviews are managed, see here.

Requests edit

Kako River (Japan) edit

I've listed this article for peer review because I wanted to see how this article held up against other Japanese river articles, like Shinano River for example. I'm trying to get this to GA.

Thanks, Tosatur (talk) 19:17, 3 March 2024 (UTC) - March 2024[reply]

Japanese New Zealanders edit

I've listed this article for peer review because I have been editing this page recently and adding a lot of information, and would like to check whether it is in alignment with Wikipedia's guidelines.

Thanks, ADWC312 (talk) 03:37, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@ADWC312 the article looks great! I think you should put it through WP:GA. It was well written, well illustrated, well sourced, and interesting to read. Thanks for your contribution. Tom (LT) (talk) 03:31, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@ADWC312: Looks pretty good to me too! I also found it interesting to check out. There are a few cases, like "Historians note that the higher proportion of women can be attributed to a larger number of Japanese women in mixed relationships with New Zealand citizens than Japanese men.", where I'm not sure whether the citation for the following sentence is meant to cover the first sentence as well. I'd suggest explicitly citing all those sentences where there could be any doubt, to help readers and future editors looking for a reference. :) Dreamyshade (talk) 02:47, 21 June 2022 (UTC) - January 2022[reply]

Japan Crude Cocktail edit

I've listed this article for peer review because I have recently added a lot of new information to the page so would like to check it is alignment with Wikipedia's guidelines.

Thanks, Popdmas43 (talk) 22:04, 15 November 2020 (UTC) {{doing}} Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 20:37, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@David Fuchs am doing my fortnightly PR census. Ping to see how you're going on this review. --Tom (LT) (talk) 07:25, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Tom (LT): Thanks for the reminder. Lost the draft and then just plain forgot about it. I'll work on this over the weekend. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 15:06, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'll note User:Popdmas43 hasn't edited since November, but if they return/anyone else is interested, thoughts:

  • The article features a lot of content in the lead that either doesn't need to be cited there, or else needs to be included in the body as well (WP:LEADCITE.)
  • In terms of what's useful or appropriate for a general-purpose encyclopedia, but the month-by-month breakdown of prices for 2020 seems unnecessary.
  • There's apparently unsourced passages throughout. If something is sourced in a following paragraph, it should still have a citation at the end of the previous one to make clear it's not unsourced. Sample of unattributed information includes:
    • They are responsible for providing central information on the petroleum industry for the public, as well as advocating, researching and enhancing communication among the public and oil companies.
    • The PAJ publish a range of oil statistics monthly on their website, including the JCC.
    • The JCC pricing index is based on the average price of customs-cleared crude oil imports into Japan. The Ministry of Finance sector within the Japanese government publishes the data used to calculate the JCC each month.
    • It wasn’t until 2015 when some of Japan’s nuclear plants were restarted, that JCC prices to return to a lower price. etc.
  • Not sure what this sentence fragment is trying to say, so unable to fix: However, most East Asian nations continue to use the JCC to price LNG. cheaper alternative.
  • I would change the graphics and charts for pricing into sidebars instead of their own section so the text flow isn't interrupted.
  • Images should generally not have forced sizing so as to respect user preferences (see WP:MOSIMAGE.)
  • Overall the sources used look decently reliable for the topic; the only one I would definitely recommend replacing is the one (there are going to be much better sources for that information.)

--Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 23:42, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Old requests edit