User:Yuya.As/sandbox

Article evaluation

Article I chose

"Liancourt Rocks"

Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?

Yes, everything in the article is relevant to its topic, and nothing distracted me.

Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? 

It is neutral. Both Japanese and Korean names of the islets are redirected to this article, which implies it respect both of them. Also, when someone initiated discussion about changing the title of the article, contributors agreed to keep the neutral name. Even in Japanese version, editors were against a modification solely based on the claim made by the Japanese government.

Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article?

Some of the links are broken, especially ones to the Korean government websites.

Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference? Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted?

The section about the territorial conflict between Japan and South Korea does not use proper citations.

The article uses a lot of Korean sources and some non-Asian ones but few Japanese ones. Most non-Asian sources look neutral. The sources published by the Japanese government are biased because they makes the claim that Takeshima (Japanese name for Liancourt Rocks) is under Japanese sovereignty, but the editors do not use them in the section that has controversy. I cannot judge articles written in Korean.

Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added?

Information about climate and ecology is out of date because it comes from sources made more than ten years ago. The section about the history can be added because the Japanese version has more useful sources and information. There is another article about the territorial conflict between Japan and Korea, and it covers history of the rocks.

Check out the Talk page of the article. What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?

As I mentioned in the third answer, the contributors talked about the name of the article. A Korean person claimed that the article should be named Dokdo (Korean name for Liancourt Rocks) because Korea has stronger evidence. However, others evaluated the evidence provided by that person and concluded it was biased. Finally, they reached an agreement to use Liancourt Rocks as the title of the article.

How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?

• WikiProject Islands articles
• B-Class WikiProject East Asia articles
• Mid-importance WikiProject East Asia articles
• WikiProject East Asia pages
• WikiProject Japan articles
• WikiProject Korea history working group
• WikiProject Korea South Korean geography working group
• WikiProject Korea articles

How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class (if we have)? What is your overall impression of the article?

While students may express mere opinions based on their feelings, Wikipedia tries to be objective by using only facts confirmed by reliable sources; most of the statements are supported by outside sources. I felt Wikipedia is also different from research papers I have written in college because it does not intend to make any claims though I have been taught research papers must be argumentative. I think those characteristics makes Wikipedia a fact-based website.

Choose your topic / Find your sources

Article I chose

Koreans in Japan

How to contribute?

• Adding citations
• Expanding some sections such as "Newcomers" and "Registration of residents."
• Translating sections that English version does not have but Japanese version has.

List of relevant, reliable sources

• 木村 幹 [Kan Kimura]. 総力戦体制期の朝鮮半島に関する一考察 -- 人的動員を中心にして [Analysis of Korean Peninsula during the total war era in World War II -- focusing on conscription]. 日韓歴史共同研究報告書. 第3分科篇 下巻 [Vol 2 of Report of Japan–South Korea Joint History Research Project - Modern History]. Tokyo: THE JAPAN-KOREA CULTURAL FOUNDATION, 2005.
• The Ohara Institute for Social Research, Hosei University, ed. The Labour Year Book of Japan special ed. Tokyo: Toyo Keizai, 1964.
• Shipper, Apichai W. "Nationalisms of and Against Zainichi Koreans in Japan." Asian Politics & Policy 2, no 1 (2010). doi: 10.1111/j.1943-0787.2009.01167.x
• Suzuki, Kazuo. "KOREANS IN JAPAN (ZAINICHI KOREANS)" ExEAS Teaching Materials and Resources. Columbia University. http://www.columbia.edu/cu/weai/exeas/resources/koreans-in-japan.html
• Tamura, Toshiyuki. "The Status and Role of Ethnic Koreans in the Japanese Economy." Institute for International Economics. https://piie.com/publications/chapters_preview/365/5iie3586.pdf