The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Paul Nobuo Tatsuguchi[edit]

Review extended until 01:19, 16 May 2008 (UTC) to garner further comments. --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 14:36, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination: I hope that this article about an American-trained, Christian medical officer with the Imperial Japanese Army who was killed during the Battle of Attu is ready for A-class review. Because I don't work on biographies very often, I also requested a peer review, which has now been archived. Any comments or feedback are greatly appreciated. Cla68 (talk) 01:19, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Question: In the ((blockquote)) in the "Final attack and death" section, are the parenthetical remarks from the sources themselves, or insertions by an editor? — Bellhalla (talk) 04:54, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

All are from the sources except the statement, "Some versions of the diary's translation do not contain this line". I'll remove that line because it shouldn't be there without it's own citation. Cla68 (talk) 06:35, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support A very interesting and unusual article indeed. Tatsuguchi's story, for some reason, reminded me of Letters from Iwo Jima. I'd give the copy a massage before running for FA but otherwise it's fine. Well done, --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 14:33, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support I agree with Roger that the text might need a bit of a copyedit before FAC, but I really can't see any major problems. It meets the MOS as far as I can see, well illustrated, well sourced, looks very good. Well done. Woody (talk) 14:43, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks guys. I understand that this is an unusual article for military history but I appreciate you giving it a fair review. There aren't very many military history articles with this kind of angle, which is one of the reasons why I was so interested in writing it. The comparison with "Letters from Iwo Jima" is an apt one, because the attitude and motivation of the Allies' Pacific War adversary was so different that it may be disconcerting to try to understand it. It has been so for me in spite of my seven years total of living in Japan. To try to bring to life the story of a soldier stuck between the two sides and having to choose which side to be loyal to is fascinating. Cla68 (talk) 14:48, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unusual but certainly very valid. I've long been interested in the sociology of warfare, the impact of cataclysmic events on people's lives. Good choice of subject, --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 15:13, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The sociological differences between Japan and Western countries make it even more interesting. Our dedication to the individual pursuit of liberty and self-determination versus the collective loyalty to a common goal that supercedes any individual reservation or personal belief that existed in Japan at that time to me is one of the most fascinating and unexplored aspects of the Pacific War. Perhaps one more reason why this subject grabbed me like it did. Cla68 (talk) 15:18, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support Interesting article ready for A-class in my opinion. As Roger said, it would need some further copyediting before FAR. --Eurocopter (talk) 16:12, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.