Talk:Dealing with Disaster in Japan

Junko Otani's kanji
I need a source that states the kanji of Junko Otani. From this list of papers (Archive) I may be able to tell her kanji

This may be her: http://www.dma.jim.osaka-u.ac.jp/view?l=ja&u=5418 - http://www.webcitation.org/6S4fjcdLP -- 大谷　順子

WhisperToMe (talk) 20:11, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

http://www.dma.jim.osaka-u.ac.jp/view?l=ja&u=5418&i=j4&sm=name&sl=ja&sp=2&c=ronbn&dm=0&p=1 - http://www.webcitation.org/6S4fv8E5L = Yes, her Japanese name is 大谷　順子 WhisperToMe (talk) 20:18, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

Dealing with Disaster in Japan criticisms and commentary of the final report
I want to know if it is reasonable to include the criticisms and commentary of the final accident report that were made in Dealing with Disaster in Japan.
 * The section "Problems with the Final Report" begins on p. 73.

The author is a lecturer in Japanese studies. Were his comments made with the guidance of air accident investigators, and what is the science like in regards to the comments? I understand standards are more stringent for inclusion of material in relation to the hard sciences compared to the soft sciences (especially medicine but I imagine this is also true for air accident investigation).

This is one reason why I want to find commentary on Dealing with Disaster in Japan by air accident investigators and/or people who study the field. I myself am not a part of this field, so I would rely on the expertise of others in order to judge whether Hood's commentary on the accident report is worthwhile to include. WhisperToMe (talk) 18:05, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Since apparently the commentary was never commented upon by scientists/accident investigators, Dealing with Disaster in Japan should not be cited in regards to any technical or legal aspects of JAL123, including any apportioning of blame for the disaster. You guys may cite it for anything regarding the cultural aspects of JAL123 as well as simple demographics. WhisperToMe (talk) 04:31, 18 March 2018 (UTC)
 * BTW p. 234 does talk about differences between the English and Japanese versions of the report - Note the English report already states that in the event of a difference between the English and Japanese reports, the Japanese version prevails, and that the English version is only there as a reference for English speakers.
 * From page 2/332 of the PDF file: "(This is a translation of "Aircraft Accident Investigation Report on Japan Air Lines JA8119, Boeing 747 SR─100" prepared for reference only with intent to be helpful to those who may wish to read the report in translation. Therefore, it goes without saying that the original text in Japanese governs in case there is any discrepancy from the original, in usage of words, substantial content, or context in any part of this English version.)"
 * WhisperToMe (talk) 14:32, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

Neither of the two reviews indicate problems with sourcing or content, but since neither address technical or accident investigation aspects, that means one cannot say you can use the reviews to prove the book is reliable in the science fields/accident investigation fields. WhisperToMe (talk) 21:43, 21 August 2019 (UTC)