Talk:Sanzō Nosaka/GA1

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

Reviewer: MathewTownsend (talk · contribs) 19:27, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi, I will be starting the review shortly. MathewTownsend (talk) 19:27, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

All in all, the article looks good to me. These are my comments so far:


 * The lede needs work. It should summarize the important points in the article so that a reader could just read the lede and get the general idea.
 * 1) You mention riots in the lede but his involvement in riots is barely mentioned in the body of the article.
 * 2) Parts of his career that seem important are not mentioned like the face that he was a founding member of the British Communist Party.
 * 3) Summarize that he was active in Japan, Russia, the U.S., China, that the Japanese national who undoubtedly contributed the most in the war against Japanese militarism, etc.
 * 4) The lede says, "Outside the Party, Nosaka was generally well-liked for his gentle demeanor, good manners, and conservative sense of style, and was described as being "just like a British gentleman". The quote needs a citation as do all quotes. Also it is very close to the source you use, which says "People outside the party often commented upon Nosaka's gentle demeanour, good manners and well-dressed conservative style, 'just like British gentleman'. " See Close paraphrasing
 * Further, this sounds a little POV and perhaps not neutral, and it is not mentioned in the article.


 * There are many red links in the article. Do you think they are all likely to become articles in the future?


 * The article contains a lot of detail.
 * 1) Example: "Nosaka announced his intentions to go abroad to study social theory in the November 1918 issue of Rodo Oyobi Sangyo." Rodo Oyobi Sangyo is mentioned a second time in that paragraph. Is this too much detail?


 * What about his personal life? Biographies generally have a Personal life section to include marriage(s), children etc.


 * There are some minor prose issues.
 * 1) The informality in describing him as "generally well-liked for his gentle demeanor, good manners, and conservative sense of style, and was described as being "just like a British gentleman"." (My mentor said this was too informal for a biography).
 * 2) "Nosaka became very influential" - remove "very"
 * 3) Some redundancy, e.g. in "Nosaka retured to Japan in 1922 and "After returning to Japan" in same paragraph
 * 4) Because of his political agitation" - what agitation?
 * 5) Eighth Route Army - explain why this is mentioned; I don't know enough about the history to know why this is important
 * 6) "Nosaka secretly returned to the Soviet Union" and "After he returned to the Soviet Union" - redundant. Something like "While there, Nosaka served ..." or something like that?
 * 7) Condense some paragraphs in "Japanese political career" so the section is not chopped into so many paragraphs.
 * 8) All direct quotes need a citation.
 * 9) "The Soviets' cool praise of Nosaka" - this may be too informal and not neutral enough.
 * 10) "but, because of his contacts among high-ranking Finnish" - where does Finnish come into the picture?
 * 11) re-education needs to be disambiguated.


 * Feel free to ask me any questions. I haven't figured out how to add the checklist here, but I will add it as soon as I can!

MathewTownsend (talk) 23:30, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

[move checklist to bottom of page]

MathewTownsend (talk) 02:51, 11 December 2011 (UTC)


 * I can rewrite the article according to your suggestions over the next few days. My thoughts on your suggestions are:
 * Issues with lead:
 * 1, 2, and 3: I agree that the lead needs to be rewritten to summarize the major themes of the article more closely. I will do this over the next several days.


 * 4: In the article's second paragraph, everything after "Outside the party" is properly sourced to the Kirkup article. This includes the quote that Nosaka was "just like a British gentleman". My reading of the Kirkup article, which describes Nosaka in this potentially POV manner, is that, because Kirkup's article is an obituary, the description of Nosaka's personal qualities is a reflection of how Nosaka was generally remembered by his colleagues and friends outside of his own political party. I could rework the sentence by not directly quoting from Kirkup's article, but all of this personal information is included because I believe that the information on the way Nosaka was perceived within his lifetime is notable.
 * To me the question is 1) should this be in the lede, especially since it is not mentioned in the article and everything in the lede must come from the article 2) it is a quote and not cited as such and generally the lede should not contain quotes unless there is an unusual reason, 3) perhaps since it comes from memories of his colleagues and friends it comes across as POV. If this were in the body of the article, identified as a quote from his friends, and balanced with "the other side" this type of language could be included in the article.


 * It's impossible to know how many of the redlinks will become articles, but a number of them (especially Bunji Suzuki, the JPEL, Akihata, and Kenzo Yamamoto) are definitely notable enough to have their own articles. I may write several of those articles myself if I can find enough information on them to satisfy the requirements of DYK. I believe that the amount of redlinks on this topic are more a reflection of systematic bias than of the subjects' non-notability. As per your suggestion, I will remove the redlinks for subjects if I do not know that those subjects are notable enough to have their own article.
 * ok, that's good enough for me.


 * The recent condensation of paragraphs has led to some superfluous citations and repetitious prose. I will remove unnecessary citations and rewrite repetitious prose over the next day.
 * Yes, you are in a position to make that work while I wasn't. The idea is to have flowing paragraphs with variation in size, and avoid both large blocks of text, and many stubby paragraphs.


 * It's true that the article doesn't have a "personal life" section: all relevant information that could be included in this section is dispersed throughout the article. Nosaka lived to be 101 years old, lived for long periods in Japan, Britain, the USSR, China, and the US, and worked for periods as a writer, editor, trade unionist, propagandist/brainwasher, government bureaucrat, politician, and spy. Because the article is arranged chronologically, and because the details of Nosaka's personal life must have changed in radical ways throughout his lifetime, I don't believe that taking information out of the article and placing it, out of context, in a special "personal life" section would be constructive.
 * Maybe a "person life" section could contain the quotes from his friends and such which seem out of place in an article that is basically historical. That is why the quote in the lede sticks out so.


 * Issues with prose:
 * 1:Kirkup's article, (from which the quote from the lead is sourced) includes the quote that Nosaka was remembered as being "just like a British gentleman". This obituary was carried by a major British newspaper, so I find the assertion that the quote is "too informal to be in a biography" to be confusing.
 * See above. It is a quote and not cited. It is POV. It shouldn't be in the lede, especially since it is not a major point taken from the body of the article. And it doesn't seem to be part of any larger point. Again, if you had a "personal section", perhaps it could be worked in there.


 * 2:I agree with altering the phrase "very influential".
 * ok
 * 3:I believe that many of the issues with repetitious prose cited are generally due to the page's recent condensation of paragraphs, and I will rewrite the article to address these issues.
 * ok


 * 4:The "political agitation" referred to in the article refers to the work Nosaka was doing as a trade unionist: organizing labour in ways that were considered disruptive and/or illegal by the Japanese government. I didn't believe when writing this article that this activity was notable enough to include in the article, but I could expand on his activities in a sentence or two if you do not believe that this is self-evident.
 * What I mean is that it isn't explained in the article where it is mentioned. It just needs some context.


 * 5:I mostly became interested in researching and rewriting Nosaka's article while doing research for another article that I (re-)wrote, on Yan Xishan, and my background in Chinese history might have biased my writing by making me assume that some terms included in the article were self-evident. The Eighth Route Army was one of the main Chinese Communist armies active in northern China around the time of WWII: in China it is very famous. Most of the Japanese soldiers that Nosaka worked with in Yan'an would have been captured by the Eighth Route Army. I should probably also rephrase many uses of the term "CCP", since many of these references refer more to the Army than to the Party.
 * I found it a fascinating article, even though I knew nothing about Nosaka. Your suggestions above are good ones.


 * 6:I will address general issues of prose redundancy, as per above.
 * ok
 * 7:I believe that the article's paragraphs are thematically distinct from one another, but will condense a few paragraphs for effect.
 * ok
 * 8:The only portion of the article which is not directly attributed to a source is the first paragraph of the lead. If a sentence in this article does not have a citation, it is because the next citation in that paragraph also covers the information used in that sentence. I do not use sentence-by-sentence citations in these circumstances because I want to avoid superfluous citations, and these are not required by Wikipedia. If you believe that there is any unsourced information in this article (besides the first paragraph of the lead, which I will probably rewrite anyway), please let me know, and I will point out which citation this information is attributed to.
 * All quotes must be directly cited. (See GA requirements above)
 * 9:I can rewrite this sentence.
 * ok
 * 10:I have never read anything about Nosaka's associations with Communists from Finland other than that what it says in the Kirkup article: that he had high-ranking contacts among them in 1921-1922, and that these contacts were influential enough to prevent Nosaka from being purged at that time. The reference to Nosaka's Finnish contacts inside the USSR are included in the article because I believe that they are notable enough be mentioned here.
 * ok - maybe just a little context to explain.
 * 11:I am not the person who wikilinked "re-education", but "re-education" should be disambiguated to "mind control" in this article. "Re-education" is often used euphemistically for "brainwashing" in articles about Maoist China, including in the source to which the reference is cited (the article by Gillin and Etter).
 * ok
 * Other:
 * All information is included in this article because I believe that information is notable. If you do not believe that some information is notable, please let me know, and we can discuss removing it.
 * ok
 * WP:MOS recommends that the word "the" be lower-case if it is used in the middle of a sentence, even if the word "the" is used as the beginning of a title or name. This includes our use of the Communist Manifesto. I will change this in my rewrite of the article.
 * In this case, you must use the correct name of the document which includes "The". We can get a second opinion for this, but I'm quite sure. From the MOS:''
 * Incorrect - (title):   - J. R. R. Tolkien wrote the Lord of the Rings.
 * Correct  - (title):    - J. R. R. Tolkien wrote The Lord of the Rings.
 * I believe "the" should be capitalized mid-sentence in this case, as it is part of the proper noun. Arsenikk (talk)  11:12, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I discussed the article's issues with close paraphrasing with another editor when I submitted the article for DYK. We believed then that any issues with close paraphrasing were resolved at that time. If you believe that the current article has issues with close paraphrasing, please review the article's DYK nomination first. If you have a suggestion on how a particular sentence should be rewritten, please suggest this version.
 * DYK has chronic problems with plagiarism and close paraphrasing. I wouldn't use them as an authority. But we can ask somewhere else. My mentor suggested that you simply use it as a direct quote and cite it as such.
 * I would recommend that for such a subjective description, a quote is better. A description of a person will always be subjective, and in an encyclopedia, it is important to emphasize when being subjective, which is often best done with quotes. This would also avoid any questions of close paraphrasing, even though I would tend to say that close paraphrasing is for multiple sentences, as a single sentence generally cannot said to be copyrighted. Arsenikk (talk)  11:12, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I have a paper due Monday (I am only writing this out of procrastination), but I will rewrite the article after I am done. Please let me know what you think of the article after I rewrite the article to address the issues that you have cited. If you believe that my responses to your suggestions are unsatisfactory or unclear, please let me know, and we can discuss these suggestions further.Ferox Seneca (talk) 04:34, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
 * No worries on the time issue. I've responded above to your answers. My mentor will be evaluating this also. And we can always ask for a second opinion. I'm quite sure the article will be GA with changes, especially in the lede.

MathewTownsend (talk) 14:41, 11 December 2011 (UTC)


 * I completed my comprehensive rewrite of the article, according to the suggestions above. I'm not sure what to add to the paragraph about Nosaka's ties with Communists from Finland in 1922, since what is in the article already summarizes the sum of the sourced content that I can find on that issue. Also, I'm not sure how to change the fact that Yuaikai's magazine is mentioned twice in the same paragraph, since both references refer to different events. If there are any further concerns that you believe deserve attention, please identify these, so that I can alter the article as needed.Ferox Seneca (talk) 02:56, 14 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Adding a few things:

It looks good. I have a few questions:


 * I'm assuming you use American spelling (versus British) as most of it seems so. Is that true?
 * Everything in quotes must be cited. I removed quotes from "illness" as that makes it seem like he wasn't really ill, and from the source it seems like he was.
 * "The short lengths of Nosaka's arrests aroused suspicion among other Japanese communists that Nosaka had given important information to the Japanese secret police, but these suspicions were never acted upon." What is the source for this. I couldn't find it in the Obituary cited. (I found something similar in the Independed here).
 * Encyclopædia Britannica is a tertiary source and therefore not counted as a reliable source for quotes or anything controversial. Looks like its ok as used in this article.
 * Same with Universalium, Academic Dictionaries and Encyclopedias. Can you try to find other sources?

MathewTownsend (talk) 19:56, 14 December 2011 (UTC)


 * I'm Canadian, so my spelling is intuitively Canadian, but I don't have any problem with using American spelling in this article.
 * Hmmm... OK.
 * The two sources that you just linked are the same. The source that you cited states: "There was always something shadowy about his loyalties... he was unique in always obtaining a quick release. Such things aroused suspicions among some of his party members, but the suspicions were never acted upon."
 * I'm aware that citing tertiary sources is sub-academic, but they are used in this article because they contain information that I can't find in my other sources. The tertiary sources that I have used are used to fill in non-controversial background information in the article, and are not used to provide any perspective that challenges a secondary source, so I believe that their use is in accordance with the WP:RS guidelines. I believe that my research has mostly exhausted the information on Nosaka that is freely available on the internet: the next step would be to go to a library to see if I can find a formal biography.Ferox Seneca (talk) 23:38, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
 * ok. MathewTownsend (talk) 23:46, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose quality:
 * B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
 * 1) Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
 * A. References to sources:
 * B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
 * C. No original research:
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. Major aspects:
 * B. Focused:
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * I think you've done a great job. Extremely interesting and not a topic most of us Westerners know about!  MathewTownsend (talk) 23:46, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * I think you've done a great job. Extremely interesting and not a topic most of us Westerners know about!  MathewTownsend (talk) 23:46, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * I think you've done a great job. Extremely interesting and not a topic most of us Westerners know about!  MathewTownsend (talk) 23:46, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I think you've done a great job. Extremely interesting and not a topic most of us Westerners know about!  MathewTownsend (talk) 23:46, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Nosaka's Chinese name in China
According to Page 170 of "A Partnership for Disorder: China, the United States, and Their Policies for the Postwar Disposition of the Japanese Empire, 1941-1945 by Xiaoyuan Liu Cambridge University Press, Jul 25, 2002" It says that In March 1940, Nosaka Sanzo, arrived in Yan'an with Zhou Enlai. From 1940 to 1943, Nosaka's presence in China was a well-kept secret even in the Communist region. Using a Chinese name, Lin Zhe, he directed the work of the Research Office of the Japanese Problem and also wrote editorials concerning Japan for the Jiefang Ribao. Nosaka's work with the Research Office in Yan'an brought Yan'an's intelligence information about Japan up to date.(Greg723 (talk) 22:41, 10 April 2015 (UTC)).
 * I think this information is fine, though much of it may already be in the article. Do you know the Chinese characters that Nosaka used for "Lin Zhe"? The article already states that Nosaka used the name "Okano Susumu" while he was in China. I would be interested to know if that is the Japanese translation of "Lin Zhe".
 * As per WP:~, please sign all of your talk posts with four tildes (~).
 * If you add sourced information in this article, please add a full [mla-style citation].Ferox Seneca (talk) 01:54, 30 July 2014 (UTC)