Talk:Debito Arudou

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Embedded Racism mentioned in newspaper review[edit]

Dear Editors, My book Embedded Racism has been mentioned in a published review. Please add it to this BLP. http://www.japantimes.co.jp/opinion/2015/12/19/commentary/recommended-reading-holidays-beyond/

Thank you very much. Dr. ARUDOU, Debito (Talk) 19:16, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Curly Turkey for putting the book up. Could I ask an additional favor: Please shift the sentence about the book from its current paragraph to the last paragraph, if not its own paragraph? That way the publications remain chronological. Would suggest this:
In 2011, Arudou self-published his first novella entitled In Appropriate: a novel of culture, kidnapping, and revenge in modern Japan. The novella tells the story of an transnational marriage, culture shock, and child abduction..[46]
Arudou has published twice in Fodor's Japan Travel Guide, in 2012[48] (Hokkaido Chapter) and 2014 (Hokkaido and Tohoku Chapters).[49] He has also published academic papers in The Asia-Pacific Journal: Japan Focus[50] and other peer-reviewed journals in the interdisciplinary field of Asia-Pacific Studies, and has contributed chapters to academic books published by Akashi Shoten (Tokyo)[51] and Springer.[52]
In 2015 he published Embedded Racism: Japan's Visible Minorities and Racial Discrimination through the Lexington Books imprint of Rowman & Littlefield.[53]
Thanks. Dr. ARUDOU, Debito (Talk) 20:14, 20 December 2015 (UTC)
I guess it doesn't really matter, but I think that reads kind of weirdly: a book in 2011, followed by parts of a travel guide in 2012 and 2014, the some journals and chapters of books in whenever, then another book in 2015 ... I mean, if it were in list form, you'd keep the books together, wouldn't you? Curly Turkey 🍁 ¡gobble! 21:19, 20 December 2015 (UTC)

Edit suggestion for section on Early life and education.[edit]

Dear Editors,

Thank you for considering my edit suggestions for this BLP thus far. Another one I would like you to consider is, under the section "Early Life and Education", is this bit:

"Arudou joined a small Japanese trading company in Sapporo, where he contends that he was the object of racial harassment.[2]"

Nowhere in the link(s) provided does the word "racial" appear. Workplace harassment is possible given the links, but rendering it as "racial" is a violation of WP:SYNTHESIS. Would suggest amending "racial" to "workplace", perhaps.

PS: What are the guidelines on BLPs citing blog entries and the Wayback Machine in this case? Thank you. Dr. ARUDOU, Debito (Talk) 22:57, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

  • The Wayback Machine's fine and many of us use it frequently. Blogs are a different matter, though, and generally fail to be considered Reliable sources. What if we just dropped "racial" so it reads "object of harassment"? Curly Turkey 🍁 ¡gobble! 23:19, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
Personally, I'm fine with that suggested edit. But if blogs are not considered reliable, I would suggest deleting that sentence or the contents in that section sourced by that blog entry. Dr. ARUDOU, Debito (Talk) 23:36, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
Well, before doing so, can we get some more voices on this? Curly Turkey 🍁 ¡gobble! 01:12, 31 January 2016 (UTC)
I think it should be removed. As mentioned, the text is severe WP:SYNTH because the original does not mention "harassment" anywhere I can see, and certainly does not claim racial harassment. An argument could be made that it is minor synthesis which would be fine in an article published under an author's name on some other website, but it is standard at Wikipedia to reject such interpretations in a case like this. An approach that would generally be acceptable here would to stick to the facts—this happened, that happened—but there is no source sufficiently reliable to do that, so removal is good. Johnuniq (talk) 05:18, 31 January 2016 (UTC)
As I understood it, writings by the subject could be considered reliable sources for biographical entries; making blogs allowable in this case? Browny Cow (talk) 01:10, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
Never in cases that involve any level of interpretation. Besides, as Johnuniq says, the blog doesn't actually make that interpretation. Curly Turkey 🍁 ¡gobble! 10:34, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
Sorry, I didn't mean to suggest that. The suggested edit or even deleting the sentence (it's not a particularly key point) is right. I just meant to just to answer Dr. Arudou's question about removing the whole sentence because the source was not reliable. There's a few factual assertions that come from that blog in this article, which should be ok. But in general I think this whole article is better these days in terms of not leaning too heavily on the Debito.org blog for sourcing.Browny Cow (talk) 15:21, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

A month has passed. Do we have a consensus on the section being removed as a violation of WP:SYNTHESIS? Thanks. Dr. ARUDOU, Debito (Talk) 02:14, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Two months have passed. Do we have a consensus on the section being removed as a violation of WP:SYNTHESIS? Thanks. Dr. ARUDOU, Debito (Talk) 18:11, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

Recent edits by GrandTheftVotto. Previously topic banned from this site, please resume ban and revert all edits.[edit]

Hello Wikipedia Editors. Please note recent edits from user GrandTheftVotto to this BLP. He has been topic banned from editing this page before. Source: [[1]] Please resume his ban and revert all of his edits. Thank you. Dr. ARUDOU, Debito (Talk) 22:41, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

  • According to the message Mr. Stradivarius left, the ban was indefinite. Was it lifted somewhere? Curly Turkey 🍁 ¡gobble! 23:09, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
    • No, and if in doubt you can check on the log page to see if it's still active. I've reverted the edits and blocked GrandTheftVotto for a week. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 01:15, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
      • Just a quick question on mechanics: How do topic bans work? I see there is a way to ban a user from editing everywhere for a certain time period or indefinitely, but how does Wikipedia ban people from editing certain topics? I ask because clearly GrandTheftVotto was able to evade the ban. Do we still have to maintain vigilance against people already banned? Thanks. Dr. ARUDOU, Debito (Talk) 21:28, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
        • There is no technical method at present to enforce topic bans. If a user violates a topic ban they are usually blocked from editing all articles for a short period of time, and after repeat violations the length of blocking increases, becoming indefinite in extreme cases. There is some more detail at the banning policy. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 05:04, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Debito Arudou. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:59, 10 November 2016 (UTC)