- The following discussion is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: promoted by Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:19, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
Sanzo Nosaka
edit( Back to T:TDYK • Article history )
- ... that Sanzo Nosaka trained Japanese POWs to fight for Mao Zedong?
5x expanded by Ferox Seneca (talk). Self nom at 09:56, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
- Hook: Need a bit of background knowledge to get the irony of this, but it is interesting enough without it. I'd remove Japanese as the POWs were not of Japanese descent (probably), which makes this somewhat ambiguous.
- Article: Date and length fine. Referencing seems fine. Spotchecks show some issues with paraphrasing.
- Summary:
Please fix the paraphrasing and give feedback on the hook wording. Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:14, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
- Comment: The POWs WERE of Japanese descent: they were ethnic Japanese soldiers who were captured by the PLA, and who were indoctrinated to fight for the Chinese Communists after their capture. Many stayed in China after the end of WWII, and fought against the KMT. This is what makes the hook especially interesting.
- Most of the phraises which have been flagged above as being problematic are short, general phraises in the middle of sentences, including phraises like: "Yoyogi Hospital in Tokyo"; "was suspected of being", "was one of the"; and "in the Soviet Union". I'm not sure to what degree the use of phraises like this might potentially be plagiarism: certainly not all of them need to be in quotation marks. Is there a technical rule about how many words a sentence can have in common with its source before quotation marks are needed or advised? Can you tell me which phraises you believe are potentially problematic (i.e. "every phraise with at least x words in common"), so that I can rewrite them as needed?Ferox Seneca (talk) 01:29, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
- Interesting thing about the POWs; okay, hook's fine.
- Regarding the paraphrasing, generally 4 or 5 words that are the same in a sentence is a tip. From this report, the first entry should probably be rewritten as it is quite easy to say the same thing in different words; the others are mostly harmless. For this one, the first should probably be quoted and most of the rest should be rewritten (the sentence structure is quite similar, even if the words aren't the exact same) Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:31, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
- I rewrote the first phrase in the first link and all phrases in the second link with seven or more words in common with their source. Please check to see if this is sufficient.Ferox Seneca (talk) 10:05, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
- Just an example: Source: "emperor hirohito should be replaced by crown prince akihito". Article: "emperor hirohito should be replaced with crown prince akihito". A single word difference isn't enough. Perhaps something like "Sanzo believed that Crown Prince Nosaka Akihito should replace Emperor Hirohito if Soviet forces were able to occupy Japan", which conveys the same information but with different wording and sentence structure. Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:50, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
- I rewrote the sentence cited above and all sentences from the second link with six or more words in common with their source.Ferox Seneca (talk) 00:33, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
- Just an example: Source: "emperor hirohito should be replaced by crown prince akihito". Article: "emperor hirohito should be replaced with crown prince akihito". A single word difference isn't enough. Perhaps something like "Sanzo believed that Crown Prince Nosaka Akihito should replace Emperor Hirohito if Soviet forces were able to occupy Japan", which conveys the same information but with different wording and sentence structure. Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:50, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
- I rewrote the first phrase in the first link and all phrases in the second link with seven or more words in common with their source. Please check to see if this is sufficient.Ferox Seneca (talk) 10:05, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
Looks fine. Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:45, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
