Wikipedia:Peer review/Fiona Graham/archive2

Fiona Graham
I've listed this article for peer review as I've spent some time cleaning up the contents, referencing, accuracy and layout of this article.
 * Previous peer review

It had issues with disruptive edits, addition of copyvio material likely from sockpuppet and/or COI editors, and was pretty messily structured and written. This being the first BLP article I've edited, I hope I've improved upon these things. I did have a look at the last rating it receieved against B-class criteria, and the two that weren't met - coverage and accuracy, structure - I think would be met now.

I hope that I've improved it, but I'd welcome any comments on going further.

Many thanks, --Ineffablebookkeeper (talk) 13:35, 30 November 2019 (UTC)


 * Hello, I am going to be doing your peer review for today. Here are some things I have concerns about:
 * The early life section is pretty short.
 * The external links section should probably be split off into a further reading section unless that is an intentional choice.
 * I'm going to send over to you on WP:Discord some extra sources that I have access to, and you should consider incorporating them into this work.
 * If the goal is get this article to eventually GA-class, then it's nearly there! :D

Cheers! &#8211; MJL &thinsp;‐Talk‐☖ 17:55, 30 November 2019 (UTC)


 * Start of the coverage of anthropology; my version:


 * Graham has published three volumes of anthropology.


 * Inside the Japanese Company (2003) and A Japanese Company in Crisis (2005) are about the large insurance company (given the fictional name "C&#8209;Life") that she joined upon graduation, and which she later observed, first as a researcher and later as a documentary film maker. [...]


 * Current version:


 * Graham has published three volumes of anthropology; in Inside the Japanese Company (2003) and A Japanese Company in Crisis (2005), the fictionalised account of Graham's time spent working in a large insurance company post-graduation, [...]


 * I read Elger's review before writing that material. Imaginably I made a mistake. I don't currently have access to the review. Does Elger really say that this book (marketed as academic) provides a "fictionalised account"? I'm also puzzled by the change from precise "upon graduation" to vague "post-graduation", not to mention the disappearance of any mention of FG's return to the company no longer as one of its employees but instead as a researcher and later as a documentary film maker.


 * And this is all about less than one paragraph. I don't much want to read more of this article. -- Hoary (talk) 11:48, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

, you asked for comments. Almost a month ago, I gave you some (see immediately above). They were rather tentatively phrased, but since then I've looked again at the three sources I cited in this earlier version of the article, and I don't see any sign in any of the three that FG's account is fictionalized. Where did you find this? (It's a pretty serious charge to level against any book that's marketed as academic, as these books were.) Have you read either book? I haven't, but McCann says that they're about "C‑Life", the fictional name of a large insurance company that went bust in October 2000. Large Japanese companies don't often go bust, large Japanese insurance companies rarely go bust. Chiyoda Seimei Hoken was a large insurance company that went bust in October 2000. Did you remove this because it seemed like editorializing, because it didn't interest you, or for some other reason?

As I compare the section of the article about FG as anthropologist in the versions before and after you did your rewrite, I greatly prefer the earlier one. But I'm open minded: please tell me what I misunderstand or fail to notice. (I'd be interested in 's comments too.) -- Hoary (talk) 07:48, 17 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Hi - from what I can recall, I was either drawing from previous edits of the article, or made the assumption that the books were a fictionalised account. I hadn't realised that they were marketed as academic literature - I was just trying to clean up the article, and made a mistake based on books I hadn't read and my attempts to put the text into some kind of legible article. Please forgive me. --Ineffablebookkeeper (talk) 13:54, 17 March 2020 (UTC)