Talk:Genkō Bōrui

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Japan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Japan-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project, participate in relevant discussions, and see lists of open tasks. Current time in Japan: 22:33, December 21, 2024 (JST, Reiwa 6) (Refresh)JapanWikipedia:WikiProject JapanTemplate:WikiProject JapanJapan-related

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is supported by the joint Japanese military history task force.

WikiProject Japan to do list:

Peer review: None
A-class review: None

Featured content candidates –

Articles: None
Pictures: None
Lists: None

Good article nominations: Vinland Saga (TV series), Godzilla Minus One
Add requested images to articles that need them.
Pages for Deletion: Participate in Japan-related deletion discussions.
Improve and expand Japan-related stubs.
Create some requested articles.
Help translate an article from the Japanese Wikipedia into English.
Assess unassessed articles

Architecture

	Architecture portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Architecture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArchitectureWikipedia:WikiProject ArchitectureTemplate:WikiProject ArchitectureArchitecture
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Military history: Fortifications / Asian / Japanese

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion not met

Associated task forces:
/
	Fortifications task force
	Asian military history task force
	Japanese military history task force

Historic sites Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Historic sites, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of historic sites on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Historic sitesWikipedia:WikiProject Historic sitesTemplate:WikiProject Historic sitesHistoric sites
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WP:Japan Assessment Commentary

The article was Stub-class, as it has serious deficiencies. The wording is unclear at several points, at least three of which are now marked. While not needing to go into great detail, there should be a section on the actual battles fought at the wall. In addition, the article says that "most" of the stone were taken to be used at Fukuoka Castle, and at other times there were excavations. Are there any remnants of the wall now? If so, where? What were the results of the excavations? Boneyard90 (talk) 08:21, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The results of the excavations of Genko Borui are shown in the table. About the Fukuoka Castle, it is from the reference. The battle near the Genko Borui was really nonexistent since there was Kamikaze and in 2011, underwater remains of the battle were discovered in Matsuura, Nagasaki. I am writing based on references and I am looking for convincing newer references of historians. --Ichiro Kikuchi (talk) 22:33, 12 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've upgraded the assessment to Start-class, but it's almost a C-class. This is a very interesting article. Boneyard90 (talk) 23:58, 12 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Copy Edit

It appears as though someone has already come through and done some pretty significant copy editing and improved this page. It reads pretty cohesively and I think it might be time to consider removing the issue. DaltonCastle (talk) 09:06, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, it's in pretty good shape. Removing the tag. Any editor can remove a tag if they see that the problem has been resolved. Richigi (talk) 03:41, 17 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]