Talk:Mamoru Shinozaki/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: AustralianRupert (talk · contribs) 03:43, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

I shall review this article against the GA criteria over the next couple of days. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 03:43, 21 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Technical review
 * This section uses the Featured article tools. Please note compliance with this section is not a GA requirement, but I use it in my GA reviews to help improve the article further. As such, non compliance with this section will not lead to the article not being listed as a GA.


 * Disambiguations: no dab links (no action required).
 * Linkrot: external links check out (no action required).
 * Alt text: the images lack alt text so you might consider adding it (suggestion only - not a GA criteria).
 * Copyright violations: The Earwig Tool reveals no issues (no action required).


 * Criteria
 * It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * Structure:
 * subsections: suggest deleting the "History" heading, and replacing it with an "Early life" level two section header. The other sections - "Conviction", "Overseas Chinese", "Endau" and "Bahau" would then be converted to level two headers also;
 * I have implemented this. AustralianRupert (talk) 00:39, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Prose: some of the writing seems a little awkward or long winded and could be tightened. I have made a couple of minor changes, but there is more work required. I will list a few examples of what I think needs fixing, but overall I think that the article needs a run through by a copy editor. For instance:
 * This sentence is very long and probably should be broken up: "While in Singapore as the press attache to Japan's consul-general, he took Colonel T. Tanikawa, the planning chief of Japan's Imperial Army Headquarters in Tokyo, and Major Kunitake who was on Tsuji Masanobu's Malaya Campaign planning staff, on a spying mission";
 * This sentence is also quite long and should be broken up: "He was tried and sentenced despite protesting his innocence (claiming that he was not fully aware of the actual agenda of the Japanese officers he accompanied earlier) to three years' hard labour and a fine of $1,000"."
 * "These actions also made him highly unpopular with some in the Japanese military that in June 1942..." This is quite an awkward sentence and probably needs rewording.
 * "under Kempeitai arrest during the Sook Ching". Is there a word missing after "the Soon Ching"?
 * This is not a complete sentence: "But most probably an opportunity by the Japanese authorities to disperse the Chinese and prevent a core of subversives from forming, should the British try to re-take Singapore".
 * "After the Japanese surrender, Shinozaki was captured but did not remain long in the internment camp in Jurong". This would be tighter as: "After the Japanese surrender, Shinozaki was captured and briefly sent to an internment camp in Jurong."
 * This is a run-on sentence: "In 1973, he was interviewed by Lim Yoon Lin of the Institute of South-East Asian Studies for its oral history programme, his transcript called "My wartime experiences in Singapore" continues to give an invaluable insight into the Japanese occupation of Singapore".
 * this seems too conversational: "On the plus side, in Bahau one had the freedom to talk and move without fear of the Kempeitai"
 * "resistance groups put behind enemy lines". Who do you mean when you say "enemy" here. Is it Japanese, or British?
 * this seems too conversational and should be reworded: "To keep the MPAJA off the backs of the Endau settlers";
 * this seems too conversational: "even risked his neck".


 * Formatting: there are some inconsistencies in style that could be tightened:
 * Note 14 seems inconsistent in style with the others. Additionally, are there page numbers that can be added to aid in verification?
 * the format of Notes 15 and 16 seems inconsistent with the others. I suggest converting them to short citations like the Shinozaki refs and then adding the long citations to the Bibliography;
 * in the Bibliography, Foong is listed, but there are no Notes to the work (i.e. citations). Some citations should probably be added to the text where appropriate.


 * It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * citations: a number of sentences appear to be uncited. The following sentences/paragraphs need citation:
 * "But his biggest single act of mercy..."
 * "The Eurasians and Chinese were the obvious targets in any anti-Japanese..."
 * "The association set up its headquarters at the old Chinese Chamber of Commerce building in Hill Street"
 * "But most probably an opportunity by the Japanese authorities to disperse..."
 * "There were coffee shops and a few restaurants..."
 * "There was no hospital in Bahau then"
 * ""In early 1990s, Shinozaki died of an illness in Tokyo"
 * "Today's cynics might still demur and claim perhaps there was"
 * "But victims and their families brutalised"
 * As the subject might be seen to be controversial, I would suggest limiting the use of the subject's own book in sourcing. If it has to be used, I'd suggest verifying the information and adding a second source for each point.


 * It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * Major aspects:
 * is it possible to find a more accurate date of death? Currently it is a bit vague. Have you searched for obituaries in newspapers?
 * "Shinozaki was born in Japan in February 1908". Where in Japan was he born? Do any of the sources say?
 * are there any details of his family? For instance, did he get married and have any children?
 * "...a fine of $1,000". Did a British court actually fine him $1,000? Surely it would have been pounds sterling? Or is this an amount equivalent to $1,000?
 * in the lead this claim is made: "A book he wrote after the war called Syonan—My Story, continues to give an invaluable insight into the Japanese occupation of Singapore today." It does not appear in the body of the article, though.
 * in the lead this claim is made: "He was later credited as the "Japanese Schindler"..." It does not appear in the body of the article, though, and no context about Schindler is provided.
 * the section about Critics and supporters doesn't really provide much information on what his critics say. What is there amounts to only a sentence. Is there more that could be said here? Obviously it depends upon whether or not reliable sources exist.


 * Focus:
 * the article goes into considerable detail about daily life in Endau and Bahau, but some of this seems off topic. The article should be written about the subject's involvement in the the settlements, providing only enough context to enable a reader to understand his involvement.
 * this seems off topic: "In 1946, Chin Peng, the Secretary-General of the MCP had been decorated by the British for his anti-Japanese activities. By then he was leading the MCP and by 1948 would be engaged in a guerilla war with the British that came to be called the Malayan Emergency."


 * It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * a (fair representation): b (all significant views):
 * some of the wording seems non-neutral and probably should be rephrased. I will list a few examples, but as per the section on prose, the whole article should be worked through to remove similar instances:
 * "secret and dangerous deal with the terrorists". The word "terrorists" is negative here, I suggest rewording it to a more neutral term.
 * "post war witch hunts". Calling something a witch hunt characterises it in a certain fashion and creates a perception of a point of view. It should probably be rephrased to something neutral such as "inquiry" or something similar;
 * "Today's cynics might still demur and claim perhaps...". This is editorialising.
 * "the British roped him in to help". The term "roped him in" has negative connotations and should be rephrased.


 * It is stable.
 * No edit wars etc.:
 * No issues detected with this.


 * It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.
 * a (tagged and captioned): b (Is illustrated with appropriate images):  c (non-free images have fair use rationales):  d public domain pictures appropriately demonstrate why they are public domain:
 * "File:Shinozaki Mamoru.jpg", if possible, can the date of when the image was taken be added to the image description page?
 * "File:Sook Ching Centre site.JPG": probably needs a licence that indicates that Singapore has freedom of panorama. Per this page on Wikicommons FoP-Singapore (on Commons) is probably the correct licence;
 * "File:Bahau.JPG": probably needs a licence that indicates that Malaysia has freedom of panorama. Per this page on Wikicommons, FoP-Malaysia (on Commons) is probably the correct template to use;


 * Overall:
 * a Pass/Fail:
 * In its current state, I am of the opinion that this article does not meet the GA criteria. Nevertheless, I believe that with a bit of work, it could be brought up to scratch. As such, I will place the article on "hold" for seven days to allow editors time to deal with the issues I have raised.
 * When you have dealt with an issue, please feel free to notate your actions in the relevent section of the review. I will come back to the article on 28 Dec 12 and review the changes and reassess it against the criteria.
 * If any editors have concerns about my review, or wish clarification of my points above, please add a comment to the discussion section below. Cheers, AustralianRupert (talk) 06:13, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I have failed this GAN as no significant work has been done since posting this review. If editors wish to re-nominate, please feel free once you have attempted to address these concerns. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 00:39, 28 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Discussion/clarification
 * Please add any questions or comments about the review in this section. AustralianRupert (talk) 06:13, 21 December 2012 (UTC)