Talk:Michael Brown Okinawa assault incident
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] GA review
In the current shape I can see, no major problems are spotted that strictly denies the article from. However, there are a few fixes that I feel can be completed in a short while. So I'm putting this on-hold.
Have a look at the checklist.
- It is reasonably well written.
- a (prose):
b (MoS): 
- a (prose):
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (references):
b (citations to reliable sources):
c (OR): 
- a (references):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- It is stable.
- It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.
- a (tagged and captioned):
b lack of images (does not in itself exclude GA):
c (non-free images have fair use rationales): 
- a (tagged and captioned):
- Overall:
--Deryck C.review my hometown! 07:44, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
Now comes the explanation of my rating. It's my pleasure to read an article with the six GA MOS guidelines complied. As far as I feel competent to comment, the prose style of the article is okay. I'm able to understand the entire passage with little difficulties. However, being a non-native speaker of English, I feel unqualified to review the complex grammar used in this article. To summarize, this article deserves a far pass to criterion 1.
The article is generally well-referenced. However, it might look quite skeptical to footnote all but only the end of each paragraph. Moreover, multiply used footnote contents should be combined with the <ref name="something" /> syntax. This one needs a fix before I can let the article pass. Plus, if possible, the style used in the "websites" section should be used for the footnotes, and contents in the websites section incorporated into the footnotes wherever content is duplicated. This article deserves a bare pass to criterion 2, but I'd like to see the minor fixes done so that it could turn into a far pass.
- Combining all of the footnotes in a single citation at the end of each paragraph is acceptable. I've done it in two articles that I've successfully nominated for Featured Article: Actions along the Matanikau and B-52 aircraft crash at Fairchild Air Force Base. Having all the citations at the end of each paragraph helps the text look smoother. I did, however, combine two of the footnotes as you suggested since they were duplicates. What do you mean by "contents in the websites section incorporated into the footnotes wherever content is duplicated?" CLA 23:32, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
Now comes to criterion set 3. The article is indeed comprehensive. However, there lies a major problem - what does the Virginia arrest of Brown have to do with the Okinawa assault? That is clearly off-topic.
- I removed that section. CLA 23:32, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
I gave a neutral to 4b. This is because this article seems to focus only on views with significant media coverage. Does that mean all aspects and views? Being a complete outsider to the topic, I feel unqualified to rate. (this also applies to criterion 2, but given all the referencing and footnoting I think it's okay)
- I wish that I could read Japanese so that I could reference the Japanese-language press. Unfortunately, I don't. But, I did use some Kyodo News sources which is a Japanese news agency that produces English language reports. The Chalmers Johnson reference gives a view from an outside academic observer. Therefore, I feel the article is presenting the story from different sides fairly well. CLA 23:32, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
Criterion 5 is the farthest pass on the list, perhaps I should give it full mark. This article must be superbly stable as I simply can't find a revert summary on the history, nor any comments on the talk page. (big laugh here please)
For the images in this article, I understand the fair use rationale you people gave, but I'm not sure whether they're going to pass when put into the harsh FAC folks' hands. Moreover, this article is really in a little, though insignificant, lack of pictures. However, for the GA criteria, this is a sure pass.
Overall, this article deserves a marginal pass, but I'm leaving the space blank for the quick fixes I mentioned above (especially the off-topic section) to be fixed. Then I'll let the article go.
This is the first GA review done by me, and I hope you give me some review on my reviewing techniques. Thanks. Happy editing! --Deryck C.review my hometown! 08:01, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
- I addressed your comments above. Thank you for the in-depth review and constructive feedback. CLA 23:32, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Question regarding image
Why is there a photo of the "View of Naha, Okinawa from the bridge of a United States Navy cargo ship." in this article? It seems incongruous and irrelevant to the topic. I hesitate in making any edit in case there is some relevancy that escapes me. Cheers 64.172.226.100 (talk) 22:56, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
- I needed a picture of Naha, Okinawa and that was the only public domain image I could find. Since the article concerns, in part, the relationship between the US military and Okinawa, I thought it was interesting also to show a picture of Naha as seen from the deck of a US military ship. Cla68 (talk) 00:30, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] USMC Disciplinary Action?
I think this article needs to mention if any disciplinary action was taken against Maj Brown. I find it hard to believe that an incident such as this only incurred a transfer to another base. For completeness of the article this does need to be addressed. Mikemill 06:24, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
- After Michael Brown returned to the U.S., he requested to retire but it was put on hold while the USMC decided if they were going to take any disciplinary action against him or not. During this time, Brown was arrested in 2005 and charged with assault and kidnapping a young girl in West Virginia. He was jailed while awaiting trial. I haven't been able to find any sources that say what has happened with him since then. Cla68 09:22, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

