Talk:Yakusugi: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Traveler100 (talk | contribs) removed reqphoto, added image from commons |
Tag: |
||
| (6 intermediate revisions by 5 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=Start| |
|||
{{WPJ}} |
|||
{{WikiProject Japan|importance=mid|flora=y}} |
|||
{{WikiProject Forestry|importance=low}} |
|||
{{WikiProject Plants|importance=low}} |
|||
}} |
|||
== WP: Japan Assessment Commentary == |
|||
This article appears to have serious problems. Aside from its lack of references, the Lead states: <p>"The term "Yakusugi" refers to trees that are more than 1,000 years old." -- a statement that misses the pretty obvious connection to [[Yakushima]], as evidenced not only by the ''yaku-'' phoneme, but the use of the same kanji. On this point, I was tempted to mark it as Stub-class, since there is no way to know how much more of the article has misleading information. [[User:Boneyard90|Boneyard90]] ([[User talk:Boneyard90|talk]]) 18:02, 29 January 2012 (UTC) |
|||
:I retranslated the lede off of the Japanese article. The original does qualify the Yakusugi as the trees from Yakushima, and it must have been a unwitting omission in the process of translation.</br> |
|||
:I'm not sure about how sound the definition is either. The Ja article at least now gives one source, a bulletin from an "administrative corporation" that endorses the 1,000+ Yakusugi, younger kosugi definition, but it's not footnoted. My cursory search didn't turn up further sources, within a short time turn around, and that will have to do for now.--[[User:Kiyoweap|Kiyoweap]] ([[User talk:Kiyoweap|talk]]) 12:28, 28 March 2015 (UTC) |
|||
Latest revision as of 06:27, 22 February 2024
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.jpg)
WP: Japan Assessment Commentary
[edit]This article appears to have serious problems. Aside from its lack of references, the Lead states:
"The term "Yakusugi" refers to trees that are more than 1,000 years old." -- a statement that misses the pretty obvious connection to Yakushima, as evidenced not only by the yaku- phoneme, but the use of the same kanji. On this point, I was tempted to mark it as Stub-class, since there is no way to know how much more of the article has misleading information. Boneyard90 (talk) 18:02, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
- I retranslated the lede off of the Japanese article. The original does qualify the Yakusugi as the trees from Yakushima, and it must have been a unwitting omission in the process of translation.
- I'm not sure about how sound the definition is either. The Ja article at least now gives one source, a bulletin from an "administrative corporation" that endorses the 1,000+ Yakusugi, younger kosugi definition, but it's not footnoted. My cursory search didn't turn up further sources, within a short time turn around, and that will have to do for now.--Kiyoweap (talk) 12:28, 28 March 2015 (UTC)