Edge Rewrite
everything Source code View original
// HTMLRewriter · presentation

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.

// request.cf · coarse context

A page that knows where it met you.

Only coarse request metadata is shown. This demo does not display or persist visitor IP addresses.

Country
US
Cloudflare location
CMH
Connection
HTTP/2
Language
Not provided

Ray ID: a44f8049aae98821

Jump to content

Talk:Aomori Prefecture

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 9 months ago by MisawaSakura in topic Peer review
Former featured article candidateAomori Prefecture is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination was archived. For older candidates, please check the archive.
Good articleAomori Prefecture has been listed as one of the Geography and places good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
November 13, 2020Good article nomineeNot listed
October 14, 2025Good article nomineeListed
November 2, 2025Featured article candidateNot promoted
Current status: Former featured article candidate, current good article

GA Review

[edit]
Latest comment: 5 years ago16 comments4 people in discussion
This review is transcluded from Talk:Aomori Prefecture/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: SurenGrig07 (talk · contribs) 16:49, 1 October 2020 (UTC)Reply


Concerning the previous article, pending a complete investigation concerning the internal minutiae of the article and the correction. of all minor error, which, upon an immediately cursory glance, do not appear to remain particularly prominent, I believe that the article qualifies for selection as a Good Article; this primarily results from its satisfactory fulfilment of the entirety of the associated criteria necessary for good article status. With regards to the first criterion, the article possesses particularly correct prose, with an absence of grammatical errors or sentences which must remain subject to basic or intermediate copy editing from the large majority of the article; the article possesses a structure which satisfies the guidelines established within the Manual of Style concerning layout. When viewing the adequacy of the article from the perspective of the second criterion, the article contains, when viewed cursorily, an apparent absence of original research or plagiarism; all citations within the article correspond to the guidelines of the Manual of Style and the citation format remains organised within a clear and elucidatory manner. The article remains broad within its coverage, addressing numerous aspects of the culture, history, geography, economy and culture of the Prefecture; for a potential future promotion within status, I would primarily recommend expansion of the Climate, Dialects and Symbols and Names sections. The article remains neutral, perhaps assisted via an apparent lack of controversy concerning the nature of the article; regardless, the criterion remains satisfied. A viewing of the edit history of the article dispels potential fears of an edit war; contributions remain entirely stable and constructive. Lastly, the images within the article provide exceptional support to the content; no apparent copyright violations exist within the article. Thus, I would like to announce my support for the selection of this article as a Good Article; thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SurenGrig07 (talk • contribs) 19:10, 1 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for your review of the article! I'll continue to make further improvements to it. ⑉⑉Mccunicano☕️ 01:20, 2 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

Further review

[edit]

Hi, per this discussion I will be completing a more thorough review with the GA criteria. I'll also bullet my comments. Thanks, Kingsif (talk) 12:52, 5 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

  • The infobox looks good, there doesn't need to be a comma after the "Districts: 8", but otherwise I see no issues - map and flags all commons
  • Some potential copyvio from one source, if you can provide dates relating to the article and [bedril.heartcry.pw/yoshie-shiratori-cause-of-death.html] that would be useful in determining this, because there are some chunks of non-quoted text that are the same.
  • Variety of good sources - there is a ref error in the current [6] (Explore Towada-Hachimantai National Park), though, and it would be better to use a consistent ref style. There's currently inline citations and a separate list of references.
  • The two refs in the lead don't need to be there, the information is not controversial and should be present (and cited) in the article body
  • The lead is a good length for the article, however it goes into too much detail of geography and doesn't cover any/much history or culture, so it needs to be more balanced
  • The geography section is well-written. Though the Mergers sub-section is empty besides a main article link, given the list nature and the standard per similar articles, this is suitable.
  • History also well-written. The Hirosaki Castle image caption should have a period (it's a full sentence) - and I can see why the population table is aligned with the modern history and not the demographics section (room in the right align area, and that the population counts align with this period).
  • I'm surprised there's not an individual sub-section for WWII? But it reads well enough.
  • In Japanese location articles, does geography usually come before history? In Western city articles I see history come first, I don't know if the MOS is different?
  • The economy section seems suitable, though I would have expected more on tourism - something about it, rather than just statistics.
  • The list of festivals seems like it deserves its own article - it also makes the weight of the culture section seem uneven, more reason to reduce the festival coverage
  • Aomori Prefecture hosted the 2003 Asian Winter Games. is not suitable coverage of this
  • There's no references for the sports teams
  • Is there anything about art that could be included in culture, for example?
  • There's no references for the rail or road transport sub-sections. Worse, these are context-less lists. Not suitable coverage.
  • Being a very sea-facing prefecture, I'm surprised there's no mention of maritime transportation.
  • The E5 Series Shinkansen image caption needs a period.
  • There's a massive image of the Aomori Bay Bridge - and zero mention of it? This transport section definitely fails coverage.
  • Similarly, the Education section is an unreferenced, context-less, list of universities. What about other levels of school? Are there school districts? What's the state of adult literacy? Are any of these universities historic or notable? Have any of them produced prefecture leaders? And those are the questions off the top of my head.
  • Apple blossom image caption needs a period
  • Ironically, I did a GAR of Flagstaff, Arizona (for some coverage examples [though it is a city], go there - and it failed) - and that means I know that the Lowell Observatory is there. Perhaps you could mention that, because the way it's included suggests the Lowell Observatory is in Aomori rather than the U.S.
  • The Dialects section could be longer, both so that the present information can be given more coverage and so be understood by more people (linguistics is technical), and so that more can be included on regional differences. It seems to be rushing through the information at present.
  • Media needs more coverage.
  • Notable people needs refs, perhaps an image or two could be used?
On hold I'll place this on a two-week hold; it would be a shame to revoke the GA status awarded, but I think it needs more than a week's work. I'm amenable to keeping it open for longer. Kingsif (talk) 13:55, 5 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
@Kingsif: Thanks for your helpful comments. I've fixed the infobox issue and I've started working my way down the list of concerns you made about the subject. I looked at what got flagged by the earwig tool, I'm really not sure what I'm looking at when I tried to access the page that the information is supposedly copied from: It just appears as a blank page for me, but from the highlighted info in the earwig tool, it looks like the text of the site is just ripped from several different already-published sources, including this article. ⑉⑉Mccunicano☕️ 01:39, 6 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
The bedrii.heartcry.pw site is also giving me a blank page, and earwig no longer flags it. I'm a bit concerned with what's now the top earwig site, which involves the text of the final paragraph in the Military section. The article phrasing could be further from the source, and the article could give a bit more context (or drop this entirely; is it truly notable?). The first paragraph in the section has what appears to be two near-identical sentences in a row, and this should be fixed. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:06, 11 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
@BlueMoonset: thanks for pointing that out, I just dropped it because after doing some research it seems the event had no lasting repercussions on relations between the local people and the US military. I think I've addressed a lot of the issues mentioned above (I'm currently working on an overhaul of the "dialects" section and I'm trying to figure out how to include some artists under the culture section) Other than that, I'd appreciate further input on the changes that have been made. ❯❯❯ Mccunicano☕️ 09:12, 14 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
In that case, pinging Kingsif to consider the recent changes and provide input. BlueMoonset (talk) 14:32, 14 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
Thanks @Mccunicano:. The updates look good so far, with a good use of references. I'm interested in why On 20 February 2018 a U.S. Air Force F-16 fighter jet caught fire in flight. The pilot dumped two fuel tanks into Lake Ogawara in eastern Aomori Prefecture. has been removed entirely; you're right that it's not very relevant in the military section, but has it had an effect on the area's ecology? Kingsif (talk) 14:51, 14 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
@Kingsif: Thanks for looking over the article. According to this source no fuel was found in the lake a few weeks after the incident. The most recent update on the situation I could find didn't mention any ecological impacts. It did mention that fishermen were compensated by the US military and the Japanese government for loses incurred while the lake was being cleaned for a few weeks. I'm not sure if this all belongs in this article, but I'll definitely add it to Lake Ogawara. ❯❯❯ Mccunicano☕️ 23:00, 14 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

@Kingsif: Hey again, I think I've addressed the concerns you laid out above. I'd appreciate feedback on anything else that can be done to help solidify the article's GA status or if it can be retained based on its current state. ❯❯❯ Mccunicano☕️ 03:51, 16 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

@Mccunicano: Is there really nothing more to be said about, specifically, economy and culture? These sections seem brief and surface-level, especially talking about a whole prefecture. Kingsif (talk) 04:42, 16 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
@Kingsif: sorry for the delay in my response, had a bit of a busy weekend. I've added some more detail about foreign tourism and the forestry sector of the economy. I'm kind of hung up on how to address the culture section beyond what's already there. ❯❯❯ Mccunicano☕️ 02:07, 20 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

Status query

[edit]

Mccunicano, Kingsif, where does this review stand? Nothing has been posted here for over three weeks, and it's been over two weeks since Mccunicano made any significant edits to the article, though they have been quite active elsewhere on Wikipedia since then. Can we get this wrapped up soon? Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 21:27, 12 November 2020 (UTC)Reply

@Mccunicano: I'm going to procedural fail this based on coverage. Sometimes it can take a while to get a good level of coverage that is consistent to the topic throughout the article, and since you haven't been updating us (or the article), it would probably be easier to work on it then re-nominate rather than be under the expectations of reviewers. I'll happily review again at that point. Besides that, it's good - the culture and tourism sections just need detail. Kingsif (talk) 07:08, 13 November 2020 (UTC)Reply

Get to GA/FA?

[edit]
Latest comment: 1 year ago79 comments4 people in discussion

Hi Mccunicano. Would you be interested in getting this article to GA and possibly FA? I'm not good at prose but I can do other things, like make the dates have a consistent format. BTW, that photo I added is up for featured picture on Commons. MisawaSakura (talk) 00:01, 29 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

All images have a free license, public domain or creative commons. MisawaSakura (talk) 03:31, 1 September 2025 (UTC)Reply
Starting to make date formatting consistent. This and the FA Japan are tagged for American English and the Japan article uses the format September 1, 2025, so will do the same here. MisawaSakura (talk) 12:43, 1 September 2025 (UTC)Reply
I've gone through and fixed many date formats, and all the broken/dead reference weblinks (replaced or updated them). I will keep working on date formats. MisawaSakura (talk) 19:48, 1 September 2025 (UTC)Reply
I think I've caught all date format problems. Now I'm working on a few other reference items. Then I'll start working in the suggested refs above on the talk page. MisawaSakura (talk) 21:22, 1 September 2025 (UTC)Reply
Book refs fixed. MisawaSakura (talk) 23:55, 1 September 2025 (UTC)Reply
Done incorporating those refs. MisawaSakura (talk) 14:18, 2 September 2025 (UTC)Reply
Added government section. MisawaSakura (talk) 16:27, 2 September 2025 (UTC)Reply
Made intro more of a summary. MisawaSakura (talk) 20:43, 2 September 2025 (UTC)Reply
Earwig Copyvio Tool returned "Violation unlikely 5.7% similarity" MisawaSakura (talk) 01:57, 3 September 2025 (UTC)Reply
Just discovered Itako. I'll make it a subsection and post back here when I'm done with it. MisawaSakura (talk) 23:14, 3 September 2025 (UTC)Reply
@Mccunicano: I'm done with itako for now. Maybe it should be added to the intro. You may want to read the new ref by "Tadashi, Shinohara". I can get back to helping late tomorrow. Itako would make a great DYK too.MisawaSakura (talk) 00:24, 4 September 2025 (UTC)Reply

I've been invited to leave some comments here. If you're aiming for FA status - the biggest jump between GA and FA and what a lot of newcomers to FA struggle with the most is the differences between WP:GACR #2b and #3a vs WP:FACR #1b and #1c. GA requires only broadness - covering every major topic to some extent. FA requires comprehensivness - a much more thorough level of coverage and also a requirement to place "the subject in context". The GA criteria refer to only "reliable source" but the FA criteria require the stricter standard of "high-quality reliable sources". As an example of what the difference can look like - Battle of Big Black River Bridge passed GA looking like this in 2020 and passed FA in 2024 looking like this. Some thoughts are below:

  • " Free, Early Japanese Railways 1853–1914: Engineering Triumphs That Transformed Meiji-era Japan, Tuttle Publishing, 2008" - for any book or article of greater than say 15-20 pages in length, you will be expected to provide accurate page numbers for where the information can be found. In certain situations with ebooks or similar, exact page numbers may not be available but some degree of placement within the book (some sort of internal numbering in the ebook or at least chapters) is going to be expected
  • " "Aomori Ferries". Ferry To New Zealand. Retrieved December 20, 2024." - citing a commercial ferry's website for historical linguistic information is not going to be accepted at a FAC
  • I would expect that at FAC it would be requested some information regarding religious demographics be included if available
  • Really, you're going to want somebody who has prior FA experience and who is familiar with the Japanese language and Japanese sources to look over this before any potential FA run. You will probably be challenged on the usage of various tourism websites and websites not written by obvious subject-matter experts which are currently being used in the article.

Sadly, I don't have any real familiarity with Japan, the Japanese language, or Japanese sourcing to help in much more detail but I hope the above is helpful. Hog Farm Talk 01:29, 4 September 2025 (UTC)Reply

      • @Mccunicano: I've worked the specific refs Hog Farm mentioned and also replaced some additional weaker refs with better ones. I also wrote a three part Religion section; and could you look it over and please incorporate it into the intro somehow? Thanks! and Hog Farm Thanks again for the help! Feel free to look over recent changes if you like. I probably won't be online tomorrow. MisawaSakura (talk) 15:16, 5 September 2025 (UTC)Reply

SC review comments

[edit]

I'm hugely busy offline at the moment, so I'll have to do this in pieces. The first batch follows.

Firstly it should be noted that I know next to nothing about Japan, so I cannot judge whether this is a complete or thorough examination of the region nor whether the article reflects the sources. I'm reviewing this solely from a prose and coherence point of view and can only advise on this aspect.

General
  • This seems to be written in AmEng, but there are some BrEng spellings dotted around (totalling, travellers, sulphuric, metres)
  • There are also some spelling errors "serveware" isn't a word (I don't think, but I'd be happy to be provide wrong), typhooon, scuplture, polilticians.
fixed both MisawaSakura (talk) 13:45, 15 September 2025 (UTC)Reply
Lead
  • You mention in each of the three lead's paragraphs that Aomori is at 'northern edge of Honshu'
  • "a virtuosic style of playing shamisen": I think you need a couple of words explaining what shamisen is, otherwise it reads like someone is playing sports! "... a virtuosic style of playing the shamisen musical instrument" or similar will suffice.
Fixed both. MisawaSakura (talk) 13:48, 15 September 2025 (UTC)Reply
History
  • 'blue forest, although it could possibly be translated as "green forest"': best to put 'blue forest' in invested commas to match how you refer to green forest
  • I think you need to explain (very briefly) what the Jōmon/Yayoi/Heian/etc periods are at the start of each section. FAs need to be largely standalone articles where readers don't click away to find out something. I see the FA-rated article on Japan avoids the problem entirely by using generic terms, which is an alternative, but if you want to keep the current terms, some explanation is needed

Done to the end of Jōmon period: more to follow. - SchroCat (talk) 06:35, 15 September 2025 (UTC)Reply

Done with these, did all history period intros too. I really, truly appreciate you taking the time to do this. MisawaSakura (talk) 15:25, 15 September 2025 (UTC)Reply
Done to the start of the Edo period. Sorry it's a bit slow – RL is somewhat hectic at the moment. - SchroCat (talk)
  • "However, the Tsugaru clan": Delete 'However' – it's rarely needed at the start of a sentence
  • "However, the Tsugaru soon switched course, and briefly became a member of the Ōuetsu Reppan Dōmei.[34] However, for reasons": Both these 'however's can go too
  • "the Cheseborough wrecked off the": 1. Shouldn't have 'the' in front of the ship's name (there's something in the MOS, I seem to remember); 2. This should either be "was wrecked" or "sank off" (depending on circumstances)
  • "Shariki, many" -> "Shariki; many"
  • "During the Occupation of Japan": lower case 'o'
  • "Aomori Airport began offering regular": a regular
  • Some of these later paragraphs lose coherence and are just lists of unconnected events – you'll need to try and smooth the prose on these a bit to get it through FAC

Done to the end of the History section. - SchroCat (talk) 06:41, 20 September 2025 (UTC)Reply

Done to the start of Culture. More to follow – SchroCat (talk) 07:12, 22 September 2025 (UTC)Reply

Culture onwards

[edit]

Back to Geography for a second...

Done MisawaSakura (talk) 13:00, 25 September 2025 (UTC)Reply

Done to the start of Government. - SchroCat (talk) 07:33, 25 September 2025 (UTC)Reply

  • is a governor with the seat of -> comma after governor
  • "4-year" -> "four-year"
  • "are elected in staggered every 3-year elections for six year terms": the grammar goes a bit awry here and needs sorting (in addition: "3" needs to be "three" and "six year" needs to be "six-year")
  • "Due to this negativity speakers": comma after "negativity"
  • "a person is regardless": comma after "is"
  • "On the other hand": too idiomatic
  • "to dialects fo Aomori": spelling
  • "newspaper market in the prefecture": -> "in the region" would avoid another use of 'prefecture'.

That's my lot. As I said on my talk page, I would advise going through PR or GAN before taking this to FAC. The above is my opinion on the prose, and others may have different or better suggestions to make. Others will also focus on all the areas I have not looked at, or they may have a better idea on what to include in an article on a region of Japan (highly likely: as I said at the start, I know very little about Japan as a whole, let alone one of its regions). It's always best to get as many pairs of eyes as possible on an article before it gets to FAC rather than have people opposing because of something that should have been managed earlier in the process. I hope this all helps – and please ping me when you eventually take this to FAC. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 08:03, 26 September 2025 (UTC)Reply

  • In line with SchroCat's comments, I think it would be best to renominate this for GAN once more before moving on. Given the similarity of the articles that are in that category, I have a feeling that it would not take anywhere near a year for this article to be reviewed. I know that quid pro quo (QPQ) isn't a requirement to having an article reviewed, but reviewers are likely more willing to help editors out who have shown they are willing to help with the GA review backlog. ❯❯❯ Mccunicano☕️ 04:12, 27 September 2025 (UTC)Reply
Also, sorry if I'm a bit slow to reply or act on requests. I'm always happy to help when time permits, but at least for the next couple of weeks I'll be very tied up with academic work as the current term ends and the next one starts. ❯❯❯ Mccunicano☕️ 04:26, 27 September 2025 (UTC)Reply
Mccunicano No worries on the reaction time. We all have real life to deal with. I've reviewed 5 articles as QPQ for Hackiko and Aomori Prefecture, so I'm at a 2.5 to 1 ratio. I will nom Aomori at GAN momentarily. MisawaSakura (talk) 11:10, 27 September 2025 (UTC)Reply

GA review

[edit]
Latest comment: 11 months ago19 comments3 people in discussion
Passed. —Ganesha811 (talk) 23:03, 14 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

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

This review is transcluded from Talk:Aomori Prefecture/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: MisawaSakura (talk · contribs) 11:19, 27 September 2025 (UTC); Co-nominator: Mccunicano (talk · contribs)Reply

Reviewer: Ganesha811 (talk · contribs) 01:14, 5 October 2025 (UTC)Reply


Hello! I'll be reviewing this article using the template below. If you have any questions, ask them here. It may take me a few days to complete my initial runthrough, but don't hesitate to respond to issues as I mention them below. —Ganesha811 (talk) 01:14, 5 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

  • Images
replaced Shikō Munakata.jpg with gov photo of the mountain climber
Inako 2006-10-09.jpg in the upload notes to this the uploader clearly says he took the photo so I did what I think are acceptable tweaks. MisawaSakura (talk) 16:44, 7 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
Ganesha811, cherry blossom and maple viewing...I've replaced it with the Hirosaki Castle photo and put a Sannai site photo where the Hirosaki photo was. MisawaSakura (talk) 16:54, 7 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
All looking good - feel free to make replies directly in the template or cross out issues as you address them. —Ganesha811 (talk) 19:20, 7 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
I've done as you asked and will do for future ones, but you should be the one changing the icon images as items become satisfactory. MisawaSakura (talk) 19:27, 7 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
Sorry it’s been a bit slow, I’ll be finishing my first run through this weekend! —Ganesha811 (talk) 22:33, 10 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
Ganesha811 I've gone through the latest comments you made. I left a few questions asking what you want to do, so let me know about them. MisawaSakura (talk) 18:23, 11 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

This article now meets the GA standard. Congrats to both nominators and all others who worked on this article. —Ganesha811 (talk) 23:02, 14 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

Rate Attribute Review Comment
1. Well-written:
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.
  • As is my usual practice, I've made minor prose tweaks myself to save time. Let me know if there are any you object to.
    • I'm fine with your tweaks, you seem a better writer than me and I'm all for saving time.
  • which were three meters higher than the present day shoreline - this isn't very clear. Does it mean the ocean was 3m higher, so the shoreline was farther "inland"?
    • not clear in source either so I've cut the three meter part
  • The conflict was put down what exactly does this mean? Does it mean the conflict ended?
    • changed to ended
  • people have encountered difficulties imposed by the rapid modernization of a region with harsh winters and little previous urban development. this sentence is a bit vague and doesn't appear to be supported by the subsequent source after the next sentence.
    • This probably got lost in all the editing that's gone on...researching
      • Ganesha811 This was added by my co-nom, Mccunicano on Sep 24th. While the statement is certainly true, it's separated from the book ref in the above train paragraph. I've merged this bit with the train para, tweaked a bit, added a harvbn book ref to the pre=existing book ref, and added three journal articles that discuss how important this train was to Aomori's development, for people and economics. Also pinged Mccuniano as he may have more insight. MisawaSakura (talk) 16:04, 14 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
  • Overall, prose is occasionally inelegant, but meets GA standard that I can see. Some grammar tweaks were made. Pass.
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, list incorporation, and table accessibility.
  • See comment on 'Notable people' subsection below.
  • Issue addressed, pass.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
  • Pass, no issues.
2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).
  • What is the Kodawari Times and what indicates that it's a reliable source?
    • A Japanese media company that promotes artisanship. Seems reliabele to me. Pls advise what you want to do here.
  • "Hiraizumi, Pure Land's World" looks a little unusual. It's difficult to tell exactly what the "Committee" that put it together is, other than that it appears to be about tourism promotion. Is this reliable?
    • Cut this one as we have two other sources
  • #27, Minamoto, is a painting, which is not an adequate source for historic facts.
    • replaced with a book ref
  • #29, the Gonohe Town Promotion Plan, seems like an unlikely source for reliable historic detail. Is there a better source we can use here?
    • cut, as both spots have two other sources
  • #30, "Hariyama" about Nabu-shi, does not seem like a reliable source, but a personal web page. Please modify and replace.
    • replaced with book refs
  • #37 from Rekishi Dokuhon is incorrectly formatted with the language note first, please modify
    • Done
  • What exactly is #47, Koyasu Nobushige? Is it a genealogy? Could you share more details about this source?
    • The text of this page was changed from when it was added by whomever back whenever. I've replaced it with a book. Good catch!
  • For #54, Akaishi Village snow mudflow, what is the original source? Yahoo Japan is a rehoster, but where did the info originally come from?
    • I can't find any first source nor any other than yahoo, I've cut this sentence as it's minor and isn't even mentioned in the village's article
  • For #56, Aomori Air Raid, what is Asahi Net? This doesn't appear to be a reliable source on first spec.
    • cut the ref and the stats it mentioned
  • For #60, Mission Number 298, what sort of website is this? What suggests that it's reliable?
    • Can't tell as the root web site is dead. Replaced with two solid refs.
  • Is Military Bases.com (#62) a reliable source?
    • I think so but if you prefer, I can replace it with this, the official misawa air base site. Let me know
      • I went added this in addition to the existing one

Definitely some sourcing issues, but seem very resolvable. Pausing there and will continue soon.

    • Ganesha811 I will work through any issues you find. I've worked the first refs pass, leaving you a few questions. Let me know about them.
      • Now that you've given me a much better idea of what to look for in refs, I've gone through ALL the remaining refs doing things like updating them, deleting weak ones, replacing weak ones, etc. I'm sure you'll still have questions but it should be much smoother from now on. Thanks for the excellent reviewing. MisawaSakura (talk) 02:01, 9 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
  • Cite #61 doesn't support the information it's used to cite, namely that Camp Haugen is now called JGSDF Camp Hachinohe. It contains the new name, but not the old, so doesn't verify that they are one and the same.
    • I cut this ref and sentence. The sources that tie them together are weak, though the stmt does seem true.
  • In general, please check that newspapers/magazines are cited correctly, so that they are italicized in the citation. This is currently inconsistent, with issues say at #70 (Korea JoonAng Daily) and #71 (The Korea Times), #80 (The Asahi Shimbun), etc
  • #83, to the Encyclopedia Britannica, is a tertiary source, which is less preferred to a secondary source. Can we find a good secondary source for this basic fact rather than having to cite another encyclopedia? Maybe #85 (Takaaki) contains this information.
    • not found in Takaaki (it's online) but did find in another acceptable source
  • What suggests that #95, CityPopulation.de is a reliable source?
    • It says it pulled info from Statistics Bureau of Japan, so I changed the source to that one
  • #115, to the Daily Iowan, is a bit odd. Is there no better source than a faraway newspaper from 1938? And it says "p. 19" but the PDF doesn't seem to have a page 19, looks to be page 16.
    • good catch! I didn't add this (nor many others), but there are two other refs that support this so I left it in if that's okay. I fixed the page number
  • #119 seems an odd source for this fact and if #120 is sufficient for the sentence, can be removed.
    • It's the only one I find that actually says "66%", the others say things like "lots", "much", "large portions", etc. I can remove and tweak wording if you want. Let me know.
  • What suggests Demographia (#121) is a reliable source?
    • recycled Statistics Bureau of Japan ref, it's got prefectural data too
  • #128, the citation to the Statistical page should be expanded to note the specific table or chart the fact is coming from, as the link is to a generic landing page.
    • I found a newer set of info on the site and changed the blurb and ref. It's a downloadable excel spreadsheet. I put that in the ref but don't know if I did it correctly so please advise if I did it incorrectly
      • Looks fine.
  • Where it is used, "Amazing Aomori: The Official Aomori Travel Guide" should probably be italicized.
    • done.
  • What is the Federation of American Scientists (#150) and what suggests it's a reliable source on the JMSDF?
    • Scientists are good but are they reliable on Japan military is a good point. as the other sources are even worse, I've cut the blurb and ref
  • #153, I'm not sure that Google Arts & Culture can be considered a reliable source.
    • Cut
  • #162 to the V&A should be expanded to have the full name of the museum.
    • done
  • Is Nippon.com a reliable source?
    • It's the Nippon Communications Foundation, a nonprofit non government site, on their about page: "We share Japan with the world. With our website , available in seven key global languages including Japanese, we offer a nonprofit, nongovernmental perspective on all things Japanese to a global readership. Our team of translators and editors includes native speakers of all our languages with decades in and deep knowledge of today’s Japan, dedicated to sharing it clearly with the world.....The Nippon Communications Foundation strives to promote understanding of Japan through web-based publishing and other activities to convey information on Japanese politics, economy, society, and culture to a diverse global readership.At the same time, in our capacity as a nongovernmental organization, we develop and implement a range of other projects aimed at contributing to better international understanding and fostering global human resources in numerous fields." Let me know if this passes muster
  • #207, from Cultural heritage online, should probably have the Japanese name and then an English translation, rather than a super-long English transliteration of the words.
    • done
  • What suggests that Tofugo Kanji Language Learning is a reliable source?
    • It's an instructional language site
  • I think #212, "The Journal of Race Development" from 1912 may not be a reliable source - seems like it may be pretty outdated. —Ganesha811 (talk) 20:22, 11 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
    • Agreed, Cut, still has two other refs. It was #266 when I cut it.
2c. it contains no original research.
  • Minor issues addressed in prose and source review. Pass.
2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.
  • Earwig only pulls up the Kodawari source as a possible issue, with a number of shared phrases, but almost all are so generic that I don't think it's an issue (Sea of Japan to the West....largest producer of apples....the town of Sotogahama etc.
  • Hold for manual spot check of at least 10 sources.
  • Spot-checked 10 random sources, no issues I can see.
3. Broad in its coverage:
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
  • Based on a survey of the sources and some other tertiary sources, seems quite comprehensive and good enough for GA. Pass.
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
  • I don't think there's any way to effectively curate a "Notable people from Aomori Prefecture" list. It could be much longer - or much shorter! There are a bunch of notable people from Aomori mentioned in the text who aren't listed, and inclusion criteria aren't clear. The simplest solution is to just get rid of the section altogether.
    • This section was already there when I started working on the article. I thought nothing of it since I see so many articles with a notable people section. So, I just checked most of the FAs in the country and regions section and none of the them had a notable people section. So I've removed this list.
      • Issue addressed, pass.
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
  • A few minor tweaks in prose review to tone down promotional / boosterish language. No major issues. Pass.
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
  • No issues on talk, after recent peer review by SchroCat, was in stable shape before this review began. Pass.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.
  • File:Inako 2006-10-09.jpg is poorly described on commons. It is likely "own work" but needs fixes to the metadata source/author.
in the upload notes to this the uploader clearly says he took the photo so I did what I think are acceptable tweaks
  • File:Shikō Munakata.jpg - the source is dead 404, and the publication date is unclear. I recommend finding an alternative image.
replaced Shikō Munakata.jpg with gov photo of the mountain climber
  • Issues addressed, pass.
6b. media are relevant to the topic, have suitable captions, and have alt text.
  • The "cherry blossom and maple viewing" image's relevance isn't immediately clear, as the caption doesn't state it's in an Aomori museum. Does the scene depict Aomori? It's also very small. I recommend finding a replacement if possible.
cherry blossom and maple viewing...I've replaced it with the Hirosaki Castle photo and put a Sannai site photo where the Hirosaki photo was.
  • No major issues, generally well illustrated with appropriate captions.
  • Pass, any minor tweaks to captions can be handled in prose review.
7. Overall assessment.
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Did you know nomination

[edit]
Latest comment: 10 months ago20 comments5 people in discussion
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. You can locate your hook here. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: withdrawn by nominator, closed by MisawaSakura (talk) 21:57, 27 November 2025 (UTC)Reply

(
)
Aerial view of Aomori Prefecture
Aerial view of Aomori Prefecture
    • Reviewed:
Improved to Good Article status by MisawaSakura (talk) and Mccunicano (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

MisawaSakura (talk) 23:51, 14 October 2025 (UTC).Reply

Not a review, but the current hook is unsuitable as it does not meet WP:DYKMAJOR: it is more about Kirisuto no Haka rather than Aomori Prefecture itself. In addition, that specific angle was already rejected back when Kirisuto no Haka was itself nominated for DYK earlier this year. A new hook is needed here. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 09:09, 25 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
ALT1 sounds good, but it would need a precise timeframe, as it is a fact that is not definite and could change in the future. For example, "In, X, Aomori Prefecture..." Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 15:38, 25 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
ALT1's ref doesn't mention a specific year, but see top of ref for ALT1a. MisawaSakura (talk) 16:10, 25 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

How about: Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 13:00, 29 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

This is silly: the point of DYK is to motivate/reward editors and offer readers interesting/significant hooks/articles; am striking the withdrawal and reviewing (though I did suggest the hook; not sure recourse to IAR is necessary); the hook is obviously about Aomori Prefecture, drawing attention both to its shape — in the way a museum label helps viewers look more closely at the item in question — thereby anchoring it in the mind for future recognition, and its septentrionality, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 05:03, 6 November 2025 (UTC)Reply
General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
QPQ: None required.

Overall: nearly good to go, just one clarification needed: in paragraph 2 of the demographics section we seem to have birth rates of 1.21 and 1.24, the latter being higher than the former, or are the measures different? Thank you, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 05:03, 6 November 2025 (UTC) Good to go, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 13:16, 6 November 2025 (UTC)Reply

As here & , I think we can proceed regardless of the withdrawal, though perhaps without a credit; thanks, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 13:16, 6 November 2025 (UTC)Reply
The article is far from timing out, and there appears to be interest in allowing the nomination to run regardless since it has no issues otherwise. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 22:47, 16 November 2025 (UTC)Reply
This is a significant article about a significant topic. We could do worse than showcase it, thank you, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 00:35, 17 November 2025 (UTC)Reply
I disagree; as far as I know, we've never disrespected a nominator's request to withdraw a nomination. Consensus should be established to run before this hook is promoted, and I currently count two in favor and three against. theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 03:48, 22 November 2025 (UTC)Reply
Normally, I would be fine with the nomination being closed as a withdrawal, but given that the withdrawals took place as a result of miscommunication that could have easily been resolved, perhaps there is still a way forward for the nominations, or at least for the withdrawals to be lifted. As for your concern, I'm not sure if this counts, but in the past we have run nominations by editors who said they would not participate further in a nomination, but stopped short of withdrawing. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 08:39, 22 November 2025 (UTC)Reply

References

  1. ↑ Lidz, Franz (January 2013). "The Little-Known Legend of Jesus in Japan". Smithsonian Magazine. Retrieved September 4, 2025.
  2. ↑ "Tohoku Aomori Take the road less traveled to Aomori". Japan National Tourism Organization. Retrieved September 13, 2025.
  3. ↑ "The Story of the Best Apples in Japan". Amazing Aomori: The Official Aomori Travel Guide. Retrieved September 13, 2025.
  4. ↑ Takiguchi, Takahiro (July 30, 2025). "Stunning Shimokita: Unworldly beauty, attractions in Japan's northernmost peninsula". Stars and Stripes Japan. Retrieved October 25, 2025.

Peer review

[edit]
Latest comment: 9 months ago2 comments1 person in discussion

Aomori Prefecture

[edit]
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

I've listed this article for peer review because it failed at its first FAC run. I've worked thorough the issues here: User:MisawaSakura/Sandbox2. Before trying another FAC run, I'm listing it here at PR to get more eyes on the article. Any input appreciated.

Thanks, MisawaSakura (talk) 12:46, 3 December 2025 (UTC)Reply

Closing due to no participation received. MisawaSakura (talk) 14:31, 12 December 2025 (UTC)Reply
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Aomori_Prefecture&oldid=1327085218"