Talk:Christian Polak

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
Stub This article has been rated as stub-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Japan, a project to improve all Japan-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other Japan-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the assessment scale.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
Japan To-do:
Articles for deletion This article was nominated for deletion on 31 March 2008. The result of the discussion was no consensus to delete.

Contents

[edit] Sources

I don't think that this passes the standard of "reliable source".[1] It's just a conference schedule, and those usually involve self-written biographies anyway. It might be appropriate as an external link though.

Can we find anything more substantial to affirm this individual's notability and biography? --Elonka 12:40, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Is this translation correct?

I thought the following question would help with the AfD, but whatever we find out with regard to this quote is unlikely to help there at all. If the article is saved, it would be worthwhile looking into this. I've crossed out the parts relating to the AfD. Noroton (talk) 16:37, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

The first paragraph quotes Hiroshi Ueki, stating that Polak is a "recognized historian" -- which would be enormously helpful in asserting the notability of this subject under WP:PROF. But when I use the Google Translation page here for the Japanese words in the footnote ( "日仏交流史の優れた研究者であり、同時に有能なビジネスマンでもあるクリスチャン・ポラック氏"、筆と刀 ), I'm given something significantly different: "France's history of exchanges and excellent researcher at the same time as a competent businessman Christian Polak," the pen and sword". Given the recent RFAr concerning accurate use of sources by the same editor who added this information, and given the difference in translation from Google (which could certainly be wrong), it seems to me we should have some further, independent confirmation that the translation in the article is correct. I've removed the quote and put it here:

and "a recognized historian of Franco-Japanese relations as well as a an accomplished businessman".
FOOTNOTE: Hiroshi Ueki (植木 浩), former Director of Japan's Agency for Cultural Affairs from June 10, 1988 to July 1, 1990, and Director of the Museum of Contemporary Art, Tokyo. Original Japanese: "日仏交流史の優れた研究者であり、同時に有能なビジネスマンでもあるクリスチャン・ポラック氏"、筆と刀、２００５

Noroton (talk) 19:37, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

To clarify a bit, WP:PROF gives as its first criterion for notability: The person is regarded as a significant expert in his or her area by independent sources. The words "recognized historian" are very close to "significant expert", but the Google version, "excellent researcher" is not. I don't know Japanese, and Google may well be wrong, but I don't think we have reason enough at this point to be confident in our translation. Noroton (talk) 19:45, 2 April 2008 (UTC)


Interesting question. To the Japanese text by Hiroshi Ueki is attached an "official" translation in French (Sabre et pinceau, p.4-5), which I used for the English rendering:

  • Text in Japanese: "日仏交流史の優れた研究者であり、同時に有能なビジネスマンでもあるクリスチャン・ポラック氏"
  • French translation: "Christian Polak, un historien reconnu des relations Franco-Japonaises, en même temps qu'un homme d'affaire accompli."

I can send a scan of the two pages for anybody who would like to check. The text was translated by a team of Japanese translaters: Akemi Ishii, Mioko Gohira and Kazuo Mochizuki. The French is then directly translatable in English (which I did), without any significant change in wording:

  • "Christian Polak, a recognized historian of Franco-Japanese relations, as well as a an accomplished businessman"

We could create our own direct translations of the Japanese, but I thought relying on a published translation into a Western language by professionals would be more legitimate. I do agree that a word-for-word translation from the Japanese would give something like "An excellent researcher of the History of Franco-Japanese relations", but I am not sure how idiomatic this is, or how legitimate as a good translation. Best regards. PHG (talk) 18:15, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for that explanation. I don't have any reason to doubt your good faith, by the way. If the article is saved, I hope we can confirm a translation useful for the article. Noroton (talk) 18:49, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Teaching

Can anybody find any independent corroboration that he "teaches at Chuo University and Rissho University" and explain what that actually means. Given his work as a business man, and the information here [2]in I don't believe he is a faculty member. Does he give courses, or just the occasional lecture or what? --Slp1 (talk) 22:38, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Come to think of it, I find it interesting that when the affiliation given for his talks is always his consultancy company, SERIC, and never a university. e.g. [3],[4],[5]Slp1 (talk) 01:49, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] French speaker needed

Could someone please read this, which appears to contain a 2-page review of Polak's book in the monthly newsletter of the French Chamber of Commerce and Industry in Japan, and let us know whether it has anything that might be used within the limits of WP:SELFPUB? It seems there may be minable content which meets the 7 rules of self-published sources. John J. Bulten (talk) 19:26, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you John, but this is too small for me to read on my computer. Do you know if there is a larger version? Best regards. PHG (talk) 19:44, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
The first paragraph (page 13,14) mentions a party thrown by the CCIFH to celebrate the release of the book and thanks the people who made the book possible. The next two paragraphs are a summary of the book; the first gives an overview of the Sabre, or military relations and the second talks about the Pinceau or the art that brought the two together. The last paragraph discusses the author's decision to include many photographs and paintings from the era to make the book seem more alive. If there's anything there you'd like to have in more detail, let me know. Shell babelfish 21:13, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Christian C. Polak

We know that there are multiple Christian Polak's and from this [6] that the subject of this article has lived in Japan for 30 years. I therefore think it is highly unlikely that this addition to the article,[7] which refers to a Christian C. Polak who lives in France and works in Algerian Uranium mining (which is not our Polak's area of interest at all) refers to the same man. I have removed it pending some confirmation that they are one and the same.--Slp1 (talk) 21:42, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Phillipe Pons and Le Monde: Needs to be Verified

May I ask the person who added this citation to also provide the month, page number, and other appropriate citation details for the newspaper:

  • Pons, Philippe. "Sabre et pinceau", Le Monde, 2005. "Christian Polak, le meilleur specialiste de l'histoire des relations Franco-Japonaises."

I checked several sources and could not find this citation. It needs to be verified. Thanks, J Readings (talk) 06:27, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

This is a preface written by Philippe Pons, in the first pages of the book Sabre et pinceau, p.6. (2005). I can send you a scan if you wish. Best regards. PHG (talk) 06:44, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
Okay, so it has nothing to do with a citation to Le Monde after all. Thanks for the clarification. To be honest, PHG, another problem here is the way that you cite information. I read that citation as a third-party book review by Philippe Pons in Le Monde. When I wasted 15 minutes of my life trying to look it up (and was unable to find anything), I started to grow irritated, uneasy, and suspicious about every citation you then added. I strongly recommend that we all use the citation templates found at WP:CIT.
One last comment, if this is simply a preface written by someone who knows Christian Polak, then it's misleading. First, there is no mention made at all in Bibliography that Philippe Pons wrote the preface. Instead, we are told the following:
  1. Polak, Christian (2005). Sabre et pinceau: Par d'autre Francais au Japon. 1872-1960, Ueki, Hiroshi (植木 浩), foreword; 筆と刀・日本の中のもうひとつのフランス (1872-1960) (in French, Japanese), Chambre de Commerce et d'Industrie Française du Japon, Hachette Fujingaho.
Second, getting a colleague (or more likely a friend) to write a preface and saying good things about you would be sort of the entire point of the preface. In my view, it's the equivalent of getting someone to write "advance reviews" in the back cover of a book--it's done because the author is afraid that the real reviewers will either ignore the book or not write what the author wants his readers to see.
Third, thanks for the offer to send my the quote. It won't be necessary, I think. I'll verify the quote at the library, but to be honest, it really doesn't matter at this stage. In my opinion, it needs to be removed because it's misleading that this was somehow a third-party source. J Readings (talk) 07:07, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
The quote was re-formatted by other editors in the meantime, but what I did write is:
"Christian Polak, le meilleur specialiste de l'histoire des relations Franco-Japonaises", Philippe Pons, Japan correspondant for Le Monde, in "Sabre et pinceau", 2005 [8]
This, I think, can hardly be clearer or more straightforward. We could return the text to that status if you wish. I agree that a preface is not quite as powerful as an outside quote. I believe it is still however a highly reputable journalist and writer (Philippe Pons) laying out his best opinion about another author, and I am confident someone like Philippe Pons would not write untruths. Best regards. PHG (talk) 07:19, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
Be that as it may, it's still a preface and prefaces are ultimately works of puffery. They are not independent, third-party sources at all. If Pons thought Polak's work was so wonderful, I have to ask why he didn't write a review for Le Monde. In my view, most prefaces are the equivalent of someone putting "testimonials" on a business website. It's always good to get "named" people because it makes the business (like the author) somehow look better. In any case, it should be removed definitely from the lead and put in a lower part of the text (if at all). Currently, it's misleading to open the article with that citation. J Readings (talk) 07:33, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
As long as we are clear about where the quote comes from (as I did above), I personnally think it amply deserves representation, especially given the high profile and credibility of the writer (Philippe Pons). 個人的な意見ですが、よろしくお願いします。Cheers PHG (talk) 08:04, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] More problematic edits

According to this sentence, "Polak's works are referenced in various books and publications dealing with Franco-Japanese relations and in Japanese-language publications."

At first, we had 5 citations that attempted to support the claim. One was removed because it was a google book search listing false positives and misleading information. So that leaves us with 4 citations. 1 citation is to an independent book (Les débuts de l'étude du français au Japon), the other to -- what appears to be -- a journal article entitled Transactions of the Asiatic Society of Japan (the citation information is poorly presented and difficult to verify, so that needs to be corrected quickly). That leaves us with a curious citation from Polak himself (Polak 1977, pp. 60-72.) and another Japanese language google book search which yields 4 hits.

Is this it? Are these the extent of the numerous citations in peer-reviewed works? I'm only asking. More importantly, why are we citing Polak to demonstrate that others cite him? That seems rather counter-intuitive, not to mention self-serving. J Readings (talk) 11:46, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

So... the English language Google Book search [9] gives:
  • Transactions of the Asiatic Society of Japan - Page 180
  • Transactions of the International Conference of Orientalists in Japan - Page 155
  • Photography in Japan 1853-1912, Terry Bennett, Page 143
  • Politique étrangère - Page 381, by Centre d'études de politique étrangère (Paris, France)
  • Les débuts de l'étude du français au Japon - Page 180 by Sadao Tanaka "Selon M. Christian POLAK, MERMET DE CACHON est né à la Fesse, village dépendant des Bou- choux. «Mainichi Shinbun», Journal Mainichi du 16 janvier 1977"
  • 日仏文化交流史の硏究: Nihon no kindaika to Furansujin = L'étude de l ... - Page 375 by 西堀昭
And a Japanese language Google Book search [10] gives:
  • Ekonomisuto - 104 "... 人権強国」にならない日本を鋭く街いたクリスチャン・ポラックの指摘がある。 ... 元外交官で、現在はコンサルティング会社の社長をしているポラックは、経済審議 ..."
  • Chūō kōron 1984 "... クリスチャン・ポラック氏の調査で、この一八六八年の七月中旬から八月末 ..."
  • Shiba Ryōtarō zenshū - 276 ページ Ryōtarō Shiba 著 - 2000 "ビゴ・の事歴については、私は清水勲氏とクリスチャン・ポラック氏による「小伝」白ビゴ・日本素描集ヒ岩波文庫）から多くを ..."
I agree it not so numerous, but not so ridiculous as well, especially given the narrowness of the subject.... and probably the lack of exhaustivity of Google Books in some areas... hence the sentence : "Polak's works are referenced in various books and publications dealing with Franco-Japanese relations and in Japanese-language publications.". Should the sentence be further adapted? I also own a book on the subject "Quand le Japon s'ouvrit au monde" by Keiko Omoto and Francis Macouin ISBN 2070760847 which uses various materials by Christian Polak and credits and thanks him at the end. Cheers. PHG (talk) 12:41, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Allegations against the Japanese Government

Regarding the following sentences: After completing his Doctoral studies, Christian Polak attempted to obtain a Professoral (sic) position at a Japanese University, but the Japanese Government of the time denied such a possibility for a foreigner. Inspite (sic) of various demonstrations and petitions which circulated among influent (sic) people, Polak has to abandon his professoral (sic) ambitions in Japan. This is a rather harsh allegation which needs careful substantiation from a reliable source. What's cited is problematic because (1) it appears to be a letter (we can't simply take Polak's word for it that this happened) and (2) the site itself is somewhat suspect (does the site have a history of fact-checking and editorial oversight before posting these types of allegations?). Again, it would be helpful if we used proper in-line citations when adding material, so we can quickly check if the attributed information is accurate. Also, please quote the original French in the footnote from now on (see, WP:RSUE) so that the reader can assess if the English translation of the French is accurate. Thanks, J Readings (talk) 13:11, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

It is not a letter, it is an article (Monthly Letter of the French Chamber of Commerce) [11].
The site is a government-sponsored site, so its handling of information should be quite proper.
Sure, I will put the French original in.
Best regards PHG (talk) 13:16, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
Can you please properly cite to the actual article, instead of this difficult to read page you link to. First, the font is so small it's impossible to make heads nor tails of what's in the text. I'm surprised that you can read fonts that small. As for the website itself, I'd like to read what the actual article says before commenting further. The way these two sentences read right now, the gist still does not sit well with me. J Readings (talk) 13:23, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
The font size is indeed quite small :) But I guess it's easier if it's your own language. I just added the original French quote in the article. Best regards. PHG (talk) 13:26, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for your solution with "according to one source", and the bracket. This is a nice compromise. Best regards. PHG (talk) 13:49, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Newest searches and weight

My initial concern was (and remains) the emphasis on this article on Polak's work about Japanese-French history, when Polak seems to be a business man first and foremost, who researches and writes on historical subjects mainly in his spare time. Note that his training is in Japanese language and Law, not in history at all. I have this morning done some searches using Newscan.com, which examines Canadian English and French language as well as European French language newspapers. This has uncovered several new references to the man which I can send to anybody who sends me an email. However, please note the topic of these articles (homme d'affaires =business man... other translations available on request!)

  • Les Echos Vendredi, 6 mars 1992, p. 25 Short bio of Polak talking only about his business career.
  • Ces Français du Japon, PONS PHILIPPE, Le Monde des Livres, vendredi, 26 juillet 2002, p. 07. Review of SOIE ET LUMIÈRES, (which, BTW, does say that Polak is "le meilleur spécialiste de cette question")
  • Le dernier samouraï était un capitaine français, samedi, 6 mars 2004, p. G8, Le Soleil. Quotes Polak re the Last Samurai movie and calls him "Christian Polak, 54 ans, homme d'affaires et érudit"
  • UN NOM, UNE MARQUE,Les Echos, lundi, 6 août 2001, p. 39. Quotes Polak on Soichiro Honda, and states that he is "Christian Polak, un homme d'affaires français installé au Japon qui a bien connu M. Honda et qui a publié une biographie en français sur ce grand personnage qui citait Napoléon comme modèle."
  • A Tokyo, la voiture hybride ne branche pas tout le monde, Libération, TEMMAN Michel, ECONOMIE, lundi, 24 octobre 2005, p. 18, 19. Quotes Polak on the hybrid cars as "Christian Polak, consultant automobile à Tokyo"
  • Après Tokyo, l'équipementier français vient de créer un bureau à Nagoya, fief du numéro un automobile japonais. Les Echos INDUSTRIE, lundi, 20 avril 1998, p. 10. Quotes Polak on the opening of an French automobile parts subsidiary in Japan as the manager of the subsidiary.
  • Japon :la crise douce-amère: Groggy, mais prêt à rebondir Jean LECLERC du SABLON. Quotes Polak on the Japanese economy as the president of his company SERIC
  • Au Japon, impossible n'est pas français...., DOYERE JOSEE, Le Monde,Mardi, 1 juin 1993, p. 21. Quotes Polak on the difficulties of setting up French businesses in Japan, as the president of his company, SERIC
  • Exporter au Japon,BARRE Nicolas,Les Echos, vendredi, 26 novembre 1993, p. 8, also quotes Polak on the difficulties of setting up French businesses in Japan, as the president of his company, SERIC
  • Empereur, tout simplement, Leclerc du Sablon Jean, L'Express, jeudi, 6 octobre 1994, p. 64. Quotes Polak as "un homme d'affaires français résidant à Tokyo" on the visit of the Japanese emperor to France
  • Le secrétaire d'Etat au Commerce extérieur a lancé hier une campagne de promotion des échanges économiques franco-japonais. Barroux David, Les Echos, jeudi, 29 mars 2001, p. 4. Quotes Polak on economic matters in Japan
  • Alliance entre Renault et Nissan; Amaoua, Frédérique, Le Devoir, samedi, 3 avril 1999, p. C3. Quotes Polak at the head of SERIC on Japanese business
  • Le losange rame sur l'Archipel. Malgré ses efforts, Renault n'a jamais percé au Japon.TEMMAN Michel, Libération, mardi, 19 janvier 1999, p. 19-20. Quotes Polak on the Renault-Nissan merge as president of his company.
  • Hokkaido sur la route de Bouvier TEMMAN Michel,QUOTIDIEN, samedi, 8 avril 2006, p. 42, 43. References Polak's book in a travel piece
  • Yokohama, ville cosmopolite des « longs nez » PONS PHILIPPE, Le Monde, lundi, 1 juillet 2002, p. 03, quotes Polak's piece in a travel piece
  • Renault: comment parler le Nissan? Le choc des cultures est à prévoir. Témoignages de Français basés au Japon., AMAOUA Frédérique, Libération, vendredi, 26 mars 1999, p. 23. Quotes Polak on Japanese business matters as president of his company.

As a result of all of this survey, I remain concerned about WP:UNDUE issues in this article.--Slp1 (talk) 13:16, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Whoa, this is nice. I did not know he had so much coverage as a businessman. As for his academic training, Polak did support his thesis on the Diplomatic relations between France and Japan from 1912-1925, which would make him an expert on the history of Franco-Japanese relations indeed. I think he graduated from the Diplomacy section at Hitotsubashi Law, but I also saw somewhere that his Doctorate was in Economic History, and I have no certitudes about that. Cheers. PHG (talk) 13:31, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi J.Reading. I noticed you found an article in Le Monde des Livres with a review of "Soie et Lumiere" (Your text above: Ces Français du Japon, PONS PHILIPPE, Le Monde des Livres, vendredi, 26 juillet 2002, p. 07. Review of SOIE ET LUMIÈRES, (which, BTW, does say that Polak is "le meilleur spécialiste de cette question")). Would you have some interesting excerpts of the review? Le Monde des Livres is quite prestigious.... Best regards PHG (talk) 14:01, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi PHP, where did I write this? I'm drawing a blank. I was about to write to ask you the same question. J Readings (talk) 14:06, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
Ahhh, never mind. I think you mean Slp1. She's using a separate search engine (I only use Factiva, LexisNexis, and Google News). I should look into these other search engines, though. Thanks, J Readings (talk) 14:08, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
Ooops, sorry, that was indeed Slp1. Cheers. PHG (talk) 14:23, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Latest edits

PHG, with all due respect, you shouldn't really be adding references to the article that you have not actually seen yourself. You seem to have just copied and pasted the talkpage edits here I made into the article.[12] Even though I know I am trustworthy, and I am pleased that you believe that I am, you shouldn't really trust my word about these things. Editors need to see the article themselves before they use them. That is why I offered to send copies to people.--Slp1 (talk) 14:46, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Well Slp1, I do assume good faith. Since you formally posted the references to this Talk Page, I consider they are guaranteed by yourself. Please remove from my edits material you might feel uncomfortable with. I would be glad to see the articles though. Could you send them to me? Best regards. PHG (talk) 14:50, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for all this material, by the way! PHG (talk) 14:53, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
It doesn't work that way, PHG. It is the editor that adds them to the article that has to "guarantee" them. It is not up to me to "guarantee" your edits, nor to remove things that you have added based on my research. It is your responsibility to verify your edits, not mine. If you want the articles, you need to send me a n email via my talkpage, so I know your address.--Slp1 (talk) 14:57, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
Well, if you're OK with it, you could revert my edits, and reinstate them as your own :) I'm sending you a mail anyway :) PHG (talk) 15:06, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
Hmmm, your page says "No e-mail address". Could you add one? Cheers. PHG (talk) 15:08, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
Regarding the edits, I would strongly advise that you revert any edits that you cannot actually verify at the moment due to the fact that you have not got the original articles. You need to accept responsibility for your edits, not pass it to me. If you can't verify the edits, don't make them, and it is always important to clean up any mistakes you have made to show that you understand the error.
Mm email. Sorry, it used to be hooked up. Not sure how it got unchecked. Anyway, try again now. Slp1 (talk) 15:46, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
Thanks Slp1. I was apparently able to send you a mail. Is there a rule saying that it is prohibited to use the references provided by other users? If it exists, I'd love to see it. Best regards PHG (talk) 19:15, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
Of course it isn't prohibited to use the references provided by another user, as long as you then seek out the full text of the references and verify them yourself. You cannot simply copy citations from intermediate sources (me, in this case) and use them in an article. See WP:SAYWHEREYOUGOTIT and this question/answer on the Reliable Sources Noticeboard where I (rhetorically) asked a similar question.[13] --Slp1 (talk) 19:38, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
It seems J.Reading removed the text anyway. Cheers. PHG (talk) 19:26, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
I deleted it because it was obviously original synthesis and, after thinking about it, I realized that I didn't need to wait to remove it. J Readings (talk) 08:02, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Original Research?

Am I alone in thinking that this sentence is rather off-putting because it's actually original research with primary citations used to try to make the point?

The business activites of Christian Polak are mentionned quite extensively in the economic press, as a specialist of Franco-Japanese economic matters,[14] as a businessman in Japan,[15][16] as the President of Seric,[17][18][19][20][21][22][23] and as an automobile consultant and manager.[24][25]

Unless a reliable third-party source actually states something, we shouldn't try to be synthesizing material to advance an argument. J Readings (talk) 15:33, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Actually now I read the sentence more closely (and stop fixating on the above issue) it isn't even accurate. No one says that he is a specialist in Franco-Japanese economic matters for example. The source cited a 2001 Les Echos article says that he is "Christian Polak, le président de la société de conseil Seric" and nothing else. My brief synopsis of the article (Quotes Polak on economic matters in Japan)has been taken for something it shouldn't have been.
PHG, a friendly word. I urge you to stop and slow down: the current rush to edit is reducing, rather than increasing confidence that you can edit verifiably and accurately. How about proposing edits on the talkpage first? --Slp1 (talk) 16:00, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
Sure, I'll work on a more exact wording as soon as I get your articles. Best regards PHG (talk) 19:32, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
You say 'Sure' but then go ahead and edit the article anyway without proposing edits on the talkpage first. What is going on here? Slp1 (talk) 01:26, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
Sorry for the misunderstanding. My "sure" was not refering to that proposal but to the reworking of the sentence: as I said "Sure, I'll work on a more exact wording as soon as I get your articles", which I did. I've abandonned making a general synthesis of these articles as you might see, and just used two or three of them for refernce. Best regards. PHG (talk) 06:10, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
All I can say is that it is too bad you weren't saying 'sure' to the proposal. It could save a lot of time and energy around here.--Slp1 (talk) 13:32, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Attribution: the More Reliable Alternative

This is another problem that's independent of notability for the AfD. The sentence itself reads:

Polak's works are referenced in various books and publications dealing with Franco-Japanese relations and in Japanese-language publications.[20][21][22][23][24][25]

It's not necessary (or useful actually) for the reader to get six citations without any meat behind this rather cryptic sentence. Assuming this article survives the AfD (and I still have my doubts that it will, let alone should) and enough well-respected third parties focus on Polak and use his work, it would be useful to know if they have any interpretations of his work? Do they comment directly on what he published? Was he influential in the academic community? Anything, really....(provided that it's not original research). Right now, it still sounds desperate in places. FWIW, J Readings (talk) 15:53, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Per WP:ETIQUETTE, if no one can think of a good reason for keeping the above sentence I will delete it from the article. It reads like it was actually written for the AfD rather than the general reader of the article. If something specific is worth noting (provided that it's not original research), please attribute it to that author. Obviously, that would be useful information. As it's written right now, it's not. I look at the "various books and publications" connected to the sentence and wonder 2 things: (1) if he's such an "expert" why aren't there many, many more citations? and (2) why should the reader care in the first place about the small sum that are offered? It's actually quite counter-productive. There's probably a more diplomatic and elegant way to write the complaint, but that's my main concern with the sentence. J Readings (talk) 16:18, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Bibliography problem

We have multiple problems in the bibliography, I am sorry to say.

  • de Beaucé, Thierry, Christian Polak, and Tōru Araki (1980). Japonichūdo: Nihon no shinsō kōzō (Île absolue) Multiple sources say that Île absolue was written in 1979 in French by Thierry de Beaucé alone. [14] According to this bibliography, Japonichudo is claimed as the Japanese translation of Ile absolue and came out in 1980.[15] with Polak and Tōru Araki added as 'authors'. How can this be? Were Polak and Araki actually involved in the translation? This may be moot, however, because of the following.
  • de Poncet, Didier, and Christian Polak (1980). Japonitude: the deep structures of Japan, as seen by the French, ジャポニチュード フランスの知性が見た《日本の深層構造》 (in Japanese), Saimaru. This book has Polak listed as the co-author, though according to this automatic translation [16]Polak was the translator. I also can find no record of the existence of a Didier de Poncet and the Japanese site has Thierry de BOSSE listed as the author (presumably a transliteration of Thierry de Beaucé). Judging by the title, it seems much that in fact likely that Japonichūdo: Nihon no shinsō kōzō and Japonitude: the deep structures of Japan are actually one and the same, though I await clarification from a Japanese speaker of this, including how Polak is listed in Japanese on the Japanese website: as translator or author.
  • Honda, Sōichirō, Thierry de Beaucé, and Christian Polak (1979). Honda par Honda (in French). Actually, Honda par Honda (in French) was published by a sole author, Sōichirō Honda in 1979 according to this world cat listing.[17]. The Portuguese translation,published in 1982, has Polak listed a "co-author" [18], along with de Beauce and Flavio Rondello Zanchi. Once again, I suspect we are dealing with translation here, not authorship.
Update/correction. A helpful listing from a US library re the French book states gives "in collaboration with" listings to de Beauce and Polak (avec la collaboration de Thierry de Beaucé et de Christian Polak), which I guess explains the discrepancies in the sources. I can't make the University link direct, but here is another one with the same information.[19]In any case, he clearly wasn't a full co-author.
  • Okada, Shinichi, and Christian Polak (1988). End of the Bakufu and Restoration in Hakodate, 函館の幕末・維新　フランス士官ブリュネのスケッチ 100 枚 (in Japanese), Chuo Kouronsha. ISBN 4120016994. The World cat and google books listings at the ISBN names other authors, and Polak not at all [20] [21]. I note that this book is cited here,[22] with Polak as main author, which appears to be totally incorrect. Here is the Japanese Amazon listing for the book in case it can help. [23] update: This automatic translation does list Polak as a co-author, along with several others not mentioned in the current bibliography.[24]
  • Polak, Christian. The French story of Yokohama: French Diplomacy and Yokohama, 横浜フランス物語・フランスの外交と横浜. This book with no date or ISBN number, appears to be published by an e-book publisher.[25] I can find no other sign of its existence under any name, French, English or Japanese.

Slp1 (talk) 15:51, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much for this careful checking of bibliography items. I would like to wait a few days to make sure we have a clear picture, and then perhaps somebody will take this matter to deletion review on the basis that the participants in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Christian Polak did not have all the facts, and therefore the decision must be reconsidered in light of new evidence. I am not going to file for deletion review myself, because if there is a real problem another editor will surely take that step. Jehochman Talk 17:04, 7 April 2008 (UTC)


More info

Thank you Slp1 for the great research!

  • I was wondering what "Japonichūdo" could be in Japanese (Japoni中度??), but it turns out it is the Western phonetic transliteration of the Japanese rendering (ジャポニチュード ) of a French word (Japonitude) meaning "Japanese-ness"! Quite weird, and I think that the Western translitation was made by a Japanese who had no idea of the French. So the proper rendering should probably be:
de Beaucé, Thierry, Christian Polak, and Tōru Araki (1980). Japonichūdo: Nihon no shinsō kōzō ジャポニチュード フランスの知性が見た《日本の深層構造》 (in Japanese) Japonitude: the deep structures of Japan, as seen by the French, .(Île absolue) Saimaru.

I'll try to see what more I can find on this.

  • No problem with:
Okada, Shinichi, and Christian Polak (1988). End of the Bakufu and Restoration in Hakodate, 函館の幕末・維新　フランス士官ブリュネのスケッチ 100 枚 (in Japanese), Chuo Kouronsha. ISBN 4120016994.
I have the book with me, and Polak is indeed of the authors. I can send you a scan if you wish. There are three other authors besides Okada and Polak: Konno Tetsuya, Tanaka Akira, Amibuchi Kenjo.
  • Polak, Christian. The French story of Yokohama: French Diplomacy and Yokohama, 横浜フランス物語・フランスの外交と横浜 is referenced on two sites: [26]. They say it is a collaborative work (共著), and that the publisher is the "Industrial Technology center" (probably of Kanagawa [27]) (産業技術センター刊).

Cheers PHG (talk) 17:47, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Okay, aaaargh
  • Japonichūdo: Nihon no shinsō kōzō ジャポニチュード フランスの知性が見た《日本の深層構造》 (in Japanese) Japonitude: the deep structures of Japan, as seen by the French, .(Île absolue) Saimaru. It is clear from multiple, multiple sources that Ile absolue was written by de Beauce alone. [28][29][30]. This academic review of the book [31] listing de Beauce as the sole author, mentions that Polak contributed "une note d'histoire" at the end. This is in keeping with the World cat listing at the University of Michigan (who are NOT the publishers BTW, but happen to have the book in their library, the only one in worldcat range that does, apparently) which lists Polak and Tōru Araki as contributors. [32] Given the evidence, I think that we should stick very close to the sources and put these two as contributors only.
  • I believe you that you have the 'End of the Bakufu and Restoration in Hakodate' book and that Polak is one of the authors. But why on earth don't you put put the full, correct citations into this and other articles? How can Polak et al. be correct on the Jules Brunet page, when he isn't even the first author? [33] It is completely inappropriate to make it looked like he co-authored a book [34] when it seems he is actually the third listed author of five, according to this machine translation.[35]
  • Polak, Christian. The French story of Yokohama: French Diplomacy and Yokohama. If, with your Japanese and all, you knew that this was a collaborative work, which implies other authors, and that is published by the uninspiring "Industrial Technology center" then why did you not say so in your citation, may I ask? Instead you list Polak as the only author. How come?
While I am at it, Polak wasn't the first author on this one either [36], see [37] though that has been more or less fixed, at some point, I am not sure by who, and I can't be bothered to look.

--Slp1 (talk) 19:03, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Ah, I guess I went too fast: you will notice I neither put in the publisher nor the "collaborative work" mention. Your second point: I was not so sure how to read 田中彰 (Akira Tanaka), 紺野哲也 (Konno Tetsuya) and 網淵謙錠　(Amibuchi Kenjo), which is why I often left it at "Christian Polak and al.": Japanese names are a difficult science to master (I had to ask a native)!
More stuff: Your Kurischan Porakku: Kurischan Porakku is simply the Japanese phonetic transliteration of "Chritian Polak". I'll correct it myself if you want. Cheers. PHG (talk) 19:32, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
Your Ashetto is the famous French publishing house Hachette. Are you putting false information on Wikipedia? (just joking :) PHG (talk) 19:36, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
Swatari is actually "Sawatari". Cheers PHG (talk) 19:42, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
Paul Jacoulet cannot be one of the authors of the 2003 book on Paul Jacoulet: he died in 1960.

I didn't add either of these things you mention. --Slp1 (talk) 19:40, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
No problem. I'm not going to look after who inserted this :) Best regards. PHG (talk) 19:42, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for your additions to Polak's publications. This is great. Best regards PHG (talk) 19:45, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
"I guess I went too fast". Mon cher PHG, given the scrutiny your edits are under, "going too fast" is either extremely foolish or disingenuous to the nth degree. The article was subject to an AFD for lack of notability, and you add incomplete and duplicate references of his publications, all of which serve to maximize Polak's importance at the expense of accuracy and verifiability. You use Polak extensively as a reference in other articles and in this article minimize (and actually initially totally exclude) the fact that Polak has for more than 25 years been a career businessman, because "Je ne pensais pas vraiment que son activité entrepreneuriale mérite mention dans une encyclopédie, mais pourquoi pas" (translation: I really didn't think his business activities warranted a mention in an encyclopedia, but why not?) [38] You want to write a encyclopedia biography and his profession is not relevant??? Hello??? Slp1 (talk) 22:27, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
And, as has occurred to me as I prepared supper, "I guess I went too fast" is not a terribly satisfying response to somebody who has just spent about 6 hours of her life checking up on a flippin' bibliography, and finding numerous errors. Luckily, the supper tasted good, however. Slp1 (talk) 23:02, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi Slp1. I am glad you liked your supper, and I am happy that this article went through AfD through all our efforts. Thank you finding the duplicate reference (I couldn't find it myself), and thank you for the numerous additions and adjustments you did. Thank you for adding information on his business life as well, because I indeed did not think that was quite notable compared to his life as a book writer (which, for people like me who are interested in the subject of France-Japan relations has indeed been extremely notable). Best regards. PHG (talk) 17:27, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Just want to mention something about how libraries catalog books. They do not analyze the role of the various people. They copy whatever is on the title page of the book at face value, translating as necessary. DGG (talk) 20:46, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] source evaluation

Ref. 17, of which much is made for the notability--it's the quote in a box at the end of the article-- seems to be from the introduction to him as a speaker at an after-dinner talk. (p.9 of the reference cited). I don't think that counts for much.

On the other hand, the book review in Le Monde seems the sort of thing which is taken to demonstrate importance. DGG (talk) 20:56, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Part of what is useful about the AfD process is that sometimes additional references are found. It would help greatly if additional editors would go through this article. There might be a reasonable article here (or not), but it is hard to tell with the current mixture of verifiable and unverified statements. Jehochman Talk 21:12, 8 April 2008 (UTC)