User talk:Bart9311/sandbox

Reid, this is a good start. If you are up for it, you will find information in a multi-volume collection of documents called Nihon fujin mondai shiryo shusei. You can find it in the stack in Bizzell. I am thinking that Vol. 2: Seiji, is probably where you would find information on Sekirankai. I would be happy to look at this with you. If you can sign up for at time to meet me in Bizzell during the hours I set up, we can do that. We'll talk more in detail at that time. Elyssafaison (talk) 04:10, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

Peer Review
Hey, Reid!

So, this article looks really good already. I couldn't think of much to fix, except maybe change the "that" to "who" when referencing a person, like at the end of the article when you are talking about Yamakawa Kikue. Also, changing May 15ht to 15th. Maybe describe the Red River Foundation seminar a bit, like one sentence explaining what they did there? Also, you have Mayday in one place, so just separate that out to May Day like in the other places. Maybe see if you can add a picture of Yamakawa Kikue or the other members, maybe a group photo? Really, that's all I can find to comment on. I really like that you added subheadings to the history section, adding organization and information where needed. Your sources look good, too, and the whole article seems very proportional, filled-out, and encyclopedic. Good job!

Rebecca

RAM2018 (talk) 22:30, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I wanted to echo this - this is very good. My only notes concern formatting and a little bit of tone. The members section may be better formatted like it is in the live version of the article, since it may read a little easier. The tone is mostly about the ideology section, as it slightly reads like a personal interpretation of the group. This can be resolved by attributing claims to specific people, such as "According to...", "in their work, so-and-so states...", "the charter for the organization says...", and things along those lines. It's not a major issue, so if there are other things that you want to fix first this can easily wait. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 19:20, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

Hey Reid!

I like how everything is much cleaner. One thing that stuck out was that the "dissolution" subtopic was expanded, but there wasn't a citation on the changes. The breakdown in the "Other Activity" also doesn't seem to have any inline citations. Otherwise, the whole thing looks much crisper than the original article, and it's easier to find specific information. Jacob.jones615 (talk) 04:54, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Thank you all for your comments and suggestions!

I love the idea about finding a photo; I'm not sure how feasible it would be, but I'll see if I can find some images of some of the more important members of the group. The tone is something I need to be far better about being conscious of. I'm a literature person by trade, so I'm used to primarily working with an interpretive lens. I'll go back and be more rigorous about attributing the claims to individuals and work on keeping my editorializing out of the equation. I preferred the member format as it was in the main page, but I couldn't figure out how to move it back to that when I copied over to my sandbox. When I go to actually edit the page, I'll leave that section untouched. I know exactly where I pulled a lot of the dissolution information from, so I'll be sure to go back and tighten that up with a handful of citations. As for the other activity, I gathered a lot of that from the Japanese Wiki page, so I wasn't exactly sure how to cite that correctly. I think that I'll remedy it by simply copying the sources that the Japanese Wiki page had listed for those sections. I'm glad that the majority of my changes were positively received; I especially wasn't sure if the organizations of my subheadings were done in a logical way, so that puts a lot of my worries to rest. I was also concerned that I didn't add enough new information, so these comments were a helpful barometer of how much research I had left to do. It sounds like now I mostly just have to start doing cleanup and tightening. Of course, I'll be keeping my braing turning for new information to add. I feel like I can expand on the ideology page more--I mean, people have written entire books about these thoughts.

I appreciate the help, and I'll get right on those changes! Bart9311 (talk) 04:55, 26 February 2018 (UTC)bart9311

Instructor Response to your Peer Review Response
Here are few additional suggestions to add what you already have addressed from your peer evaluations. First, I would recommend using the kanji for the group's name, as in the Japanese language article for the group. I believe it was formally known at the time by the naming using three kanji, rather than kana for the "ran". Also, in looking at the Japanese version, it seems they have 17 key members listed while you have only fifteen (although you say in your Founding section that there were 17 active members). One of the ones you have missing is Ito Noe, who you mention in your lead as a key adviser. It would also be really great if you could include the familial relationships that are noted in the Japanese version, and link to the names of their parents/spouses/etc.

In your Founding section, third sentence, the more common wording is "socialist women's association" rather than "women's socialist association." You should also provide a citation for the quotation from the platform. You took out the line in the currently existing article about Article 5 of the Peace Preservation Law, but I think that is actually important context. It does, however, need a citation, which you can easily find in the essays found in the book Recreating Japanese Women (on reserve; check the index for Peace Police Law and Peace Preservation Law).

In the Other Activity section, you seem to have removed some of the detail about the first event that is found in the current article. All of the things you list here need citation. Also, here and at the end of the previous section, check your use of tenses. You should stick to past tense throughout.

In "Conflicts" section, you might clarify that NWA leader Ichikawa Fusae's resignation is from the organization (if that is correct). In this section, too, you would do well to look at the book Recreating Japanese Women. Look up sekirankai/Red Wave Society and NWA in the index.

In "Dissolution", I see here is where you have the info on Peace Police Law. Still, I think the book RJW would be better to cite than McClain's textbook. You have some oddly worded sentences (sometimes awkward syntax) in this section, too.

"Ideology": capitalize Marxist. Ideological TENETS (not "tenants", which has a completely different meaning)

Looks great! I think if you work on these things, and the other suggestions you have had from peers and Shalor, you will have a great article. Elyssafaison (talk) 03:29, 1 March 2018 (UTC)