Talk:Kingdom of Kibi

Mark Riddle and Balbals
This rather odd claim of "Turkic Balbals" seem to come from a very poor source. Mark Riddle had no background in Japanese history or anthropology. In fact, he was a Mormon missionary and English instructor who peddles fringe theories like "Israelites and Christians in Old Japan" (the Hata clan is generally thought to be of Chinese origin). In the paper referenced, he uncritically cites Wikipedia as a source, multiple times, even while acknowledging that Wikipedia is written by 'anonymous authors'. Other sources he uses are turkishairlines.com, pictures he found on Facebook, Lonely Planet, etc (which he interprets himself), and an amateur photographer.

This is not the work of a professional. It is what we would dismiss as WP:SYNTHESIS.

It was published in Sino-Platonic Papers, which is overseen by the respected Victor Mair, but not peer reviewed. The site openly declares that it takes "risks", prefers "challenging and creative" theories, and is "not the place for safe, sober, and stodgy presentations". This sounds like a nice way of saying it publishes fringe theories and speculation, which is reflected in their publications -- mostly papers on cultural influences across Eurasia based on speculation (some reasonable, some far-fetched, many not RS). Which is not unusual for a monograph, but should be regarded with extreme caution as a source for Wikipedia.

More importantly, Sino-Platonic also declares that its contributors are often unqualified amateurs ("actively encourages younger, not yet well established, scholars and independent authors to submit manuscripts"). A background check on many of its authors (not all, some are real scholars) confirms that they are either students or just people with no academic expertise on the subject they're writing about. Mark Riddle is one of them. Should his paper be removed? - A Morozov  &#9001;talk&#9002; 03:47, 14 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Follow up comment: I've removed the parts associated with Riddle after 5 months of no discussion. I've also removed the image of "kasai rakan". On Japanese wiki, these are interpreted as 500 arhats from Rakan-ji temple in Hyōgo prefecture. Large numbers of arhat (Buddha's disciples) statues are found at many Buddhist temple grounds, although these ones do admittedly look different. The Japanese wiki article notes that they may be foreigners, but also notes that the date of construction is unknown, only stating that it may have been around the early 17th century -- long after the "Old Japan" theory proposed by Riddle.


 * None of those statements on JP wiki are sourced. And barring a better source than Riddle, it's hard to justify their inclusion here. JP wiki does not include the image on their Kingdom of Kibi page, probably because it would be misleading, but places it on the Rakan-ji (Hyōgo Precture) page, for which there is no English equivalent. I would not object to putting it on that page if someone makes it, provided that it doesn't reference Riddle or make unsourced claims about who or what the statues depict. - A Morozov  &#9001;talk&#9002; 21:43, 13 November 2020 (UTC)