Talk:Sinking of Japan

Simply bad
This page has been marked with the "reads like a review" (and a very bad one at that) tag since November of last year. Why hasn't it been fixed?

I just watched the last half of the movie on WOWWOW and came here looking for an article on the original novel, to see how the movie differed from the original story (which I read years ago in English. Japan sinks completely and the book ends with a scene depicting survivors on a foreign ship IIRC). Instead of encyclopedia-quality pages on the original novel and movie adaptations, I find this crap.

This page should be renamed "Japan Sinks (film)" and divided into two sections, one for the 1973 film and one for the remake *OR* one page made for each film (probably not worth doing at this point).

I'll wait a few days and if no one voices any objections, I'll start making changes in line with the above myself.

Also, factual error: in the 2006 movie, Onodera (the Tsuyoshi Kusanagi character...using the actors names in the synopsis is NOT acceptable) does NOT leave for the UK as planned. He volunteers to take a submersible down and arm the bombs set along the undersea fault. Whoever wrote that he escaped to the UK either didn't really watch the movie or fell asleep at the end.

This is NOT acceptable. --RJCraig 13:48, 6 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Please do. I found the same treatment done on the Prophecies of Nostradamus page. Perhaps we could get the guys at | Toho Kingdom to help out here.Eaglestorm 08:53, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Reformatted
+infobox +picture +film data

I reformatted the article to all the suggestions in the talk page. As well, re-edited the synopsis to take out the invalid information and added to the plot which were from the suggestions in the talk page. I also took out the actor names in the synopsis and instead put in the character names.

But in all truth, I've never seen this movie, either the remake or original, nor have I read the book. I simply reformat articles to match wikipedia standards. If there are any corrects to make, PLEASE MAKE THEM. Don't complain and do nothing. Be bold about editing. Jonmwang 18:54, 20 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for undertaking this. Sorry, but I got busy with other matters and haven't had a chance to get back to WP since. --RJCraig 14:42, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Rethough earlier comments
After thinking about it some more, I'm not sure that dividing the content among three articles is currently warranted.

I therefore propose that for the time being we combine information on the novel and two film adaptations on this single page. If in the future the amount of details warrants doing so, we can divide into separate pages.

Sound OK? --RJCraig 14:48, 26 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I'll try to fill out the section on the novel based on the ja:WP article over the next few days. Once the synopsis of the novel itself is up, it won't be necessary to repeat all the detail in those for the movies, only indicate points on which the screenplay differs from the original. --RJCraig 15:01, 26 May 2007 (UTC)


 * It's a bit messy, but you're right that it'd be redundant to repeat the content in 3 different pages. I'm really not sure how to proceed with this because in the case of manga/movies/anime such as Great Teacher Onizuka, there is an infobox made especially for this type of situation.  Except this time we're dealing with movies and a book.  In a lot of cases, books, movies and remakes are seperated as shown in The Constant Gardener or Pride and Prejudice.  I ran into a very similar problem with 1 Litre of Tears, which I ended up separating the articles which were previously combined.Jonmwang 15:50, 30 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I ended up separating the pages, making a disambig page for the three articles. I understand where you were coming from, because you are right.  It is redundant repeating information in the pages.  But the biggest problem with the infobox is that you basically can't have more than one in an article, a problem wiki needs to fix in its templates.  If you find that this is too much of a problem, just revert the pages.  But personally I feel that it's more organized this way even though you might repeat information. Jonmwang 12:24, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Japan sinks.jpg
Image:Japan sinks.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 04:05, 7 November 2007 (UTC)