Talk:Saitō Hajime (Rurouni Kenshin)

Image copyright problem with Image:Saito Hajime Stance.JPG

The image Image:Saito Hajime Stance.JPG is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --01:48, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Saitō Hajime (Rurouni Kenshin)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: ChrisGualtieri (talk · contribs) 15:06, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Review

I'm going to start with the checklist and explain afterwards.

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.	Prose is clear, but could be better.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	Has weasel words which need to be fixed, otherwise fine.
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.	Almost all official, Anime News Network is acceptable for commentary.
	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).	Some issues, mostly minor which need to be fixed.
	2c. it contains no original research.	Some comments contain weasel words and are unattributed.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	No major issues.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	It seems like a battle between the historical figure and the creator for a good chunk of this article. This has to be addressed.
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	Due to the previous comments it assists in attacking the creator, not neutral. Weasel words and skewed bias in favor of the character.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	No edit wars.
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.	Acceptable.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	Not the best pictures, but relevant.
	7. Overall assessment.	This has some work, specifics follow. It is close to passing.

I have major concerns with the article battling the creator and the historical figure for the majority of the article. "Saitō Hajime (1844–1915) was an actual historic figure of the Meiji era who was the captain of the third squad of the Shinsengumi." This should be preceded or fixed with something like "Nobuhiro Watsuki based Saitō Hajime..."

Secondly, "In the development of Rurouni Kenshin Watsuki planned for Saitō to be a "dirty" hero who maintains his "Swift Death to Evil" policy and does not become "a nice guy" and "palsy-walsy" with Kenshin's group. Hajime has no specific model for his design." No citation and argumentative and frankly insulting with 'palsy-walsy'.

Next, "Watsuki received negative feedback from Shinsengumi fans who believed that Saitō had a more handsome face than the "villain-ish" face Watsuki used. In his defense Watsuki said that no photographs of Saitō exist; Watsuki added that while portraits exist, "if you think that's handsome, well, your mileage may vary, okay?" Watsuki recalled that one of the complaints criticized Saitō's selling of "Ishida powdered medicine" from the Hijikata family. Watsuki said that was "just me, fooling around" and that while he would take criticism for some aspects, "when people start complaining about stuff like that...come on now." [7] Watsuki stated that he received negative feedback letters regarding Saitō and received some positive feedback letters "in response."[8]" This is unacceptable. The article actually engages in the dispute. Watsuki's comments should be minimal and not used in such a way.

More so, "He later changed his name to Fujita Gorō (藤田 五郎?) (which the real life Saitō used) and started working for the Meiji Government as a spy agent.[6][15] Saitō is also married to a woman named Tokio (時尾?), who does not appear in the story." The ties to the historical figure are allowed in one brief section, preferably not in detail. Do not pick apart the character and bring the historical figure into the picture. It ruins the flow.

The sections for Personality and Abilities have weasel words and unsourced claims which seem to be WP:OR and WP:SYNTH. "A ruthless fighter, Saitō has no compassion or mercy for his enemies. He lives by the Shinsengumi code "Swift Death to Evil" (悪即斬 Aku Soku Zan?, also translated loosely as "Evil Unto Evil", where evil is killing[17]), though he never shows much regard for human life, at some points even letting on that he likes to kill. He is rather arrogant, morbid and cynical. Nevertheless, none of these character flaws prevent him from being a superb investigator and fighter. He believes in peace and order, even in the society created by the Imperialists, his former enemies. Anyone he considers to be corrupt or despotic, he targets for elimination.[18]" Give examples do not state it as a matter of fact without a source.

Abilities section has some problems with the weasel words as well, "Besides his overwhelming ability with a sword, Saitō is extremely well versed in hand-to-hand combat. His fighting style mostly resembles boxing as he possesses amazing footwork, defense, tremendous speed and immense physical strength. This is evident when he effortlessly pummels Sagara Sanosuke in a fistfight.[21] Saitō is also an able observer and extremely analytical in battle, much like Hiko Seijūrō, and can exploit his opponent's weaknesses quite easily, such as Kenshin's reliance on his quick judgment, to which he replies by kicking him to the back rather than with the sword despite having taken his sword up.[22]" This needs to be addressed.

Appearance in Rurouni Kenshin is a bit lack luster, but possible. His role could use some touch ups and some personality. It just seems like it is missing some emotion and detail. Rather then play on the other characters strengths make Saito be the main focus.

Reception is the last major area of concern. The issue of the items, amazon ones, being linked without reason are a bit much for me. List one or two, but a direct link to purchase them comes across as advertising.

I know its a lot of work to do, but I'll be here to help out. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 15:36, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Saitō Hajime (Rurouni Kenshin)/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: DragonZero (talk · contribs) 03:46, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. Has an appropriate reference section:

   B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

Issues from first GA

These are issues that have still not been addressed.

• Article is still engaged in commentary war between the author and reviewers. I would like to add that criticism of the character should be in reception section.
• Weasel words in most sections

Issues

I will add onto issues that were found from the first GA.

• "Watsuki altered the character to a higher degree than the other historic figures" Source? If you're sourcing paragraphs with a single source, put one in the beginning and the end.
• "Watsuki considers Saitō as the "curse" of the villains in the series as he always defeats the enemies who believe they are the strongest" Reword.
• Gatotsu is entirely fictional, next sentence says its based on the historic figure's style. Reword.
• "Watsuki again redesigned Saitō's appearance to show how he would appear at that time" At what time?
• The redesigned section begins to describe the character's physical appearance. This looks like original research and was physically described by an editor. Physical descriptions can be added to alt image instead.
• "indicating Saitō's left-handedness" Did the author explicitly state this, that the design was to stress that behavior?
• This reads more like an epic documentary instead of a neutral encyclopedia. Ex "overwhelming ability". Remain neutral
• "His fighting style mostly resembles boxing as he possesses amazing footwork, defense, tremendous speed and immense physical strength. This is evident when he effortlessly pummels Sagara Sanosuke in a fistfight" After seeing this and checking the source myself, I conclude this was an observation made by the editor and is original research.
• "When Kenshin arrives at the dojo, he notices Saitō and becomes angry, revealing Saitō's true identity as the former third squad captain of the Shinsengumi" You mean recognizes?
• "They duel, and as Saitō gains the upper hand, Kenshin reverts to Hitokiri Battōsai" Less in-universe. Etc..."They fought and then stop fighting". Reword it to be much better than that.
• Improve concision for appearances section.
• Concision again. Why do the readers need to know that he utters a challenge during a falling ship due to an explosion caused by a bomb? Moving onto other media
• "He also receives assistance from Himura Kenshin to stop the rebellion." Clarify. Currently it sounds like the two just stopped a mob.
• Middle two paragraphs in reception are out of place
• "Some concepts of the Rurouni Kenshin version of Saitō Hajime were used in is the fighting game series The Last Blade in the character of Keiichiro Washizuka, a unit leader of the Shinsengumi, a police-like group during the Bakumatsu era. The character also had a similar sliding thrust technique to the Gatotsu." Original research unless the author stated he lent those designs to that game. Currently written as if the two characters were compared by an editor.
• "a rivalry with Himura Kenshin, an assassin of the pro-Imperialist Ishin Shishi, who was known as the "Hitokiri Battōsai"" Article is not about Kenshin, cut the Hitokiri Battosai part.
• "They duel, and as Saitō gains the upper hand, Kenshin is forced to fight lethally. The two continue their fight and just as they are about to kill each other, Ōkubo Toshimichi appears and stops the duel, revealing that Saitō was only testing Kenshin's abilities to see if he was skilled enough to face Shishio Makoto." Concision. Kenshin forced to fight lethally confuses the general reader. Don't need to explain that.
• "Saitō reveals his true allegiances to Shibumi before killing him and Arundo." Clarity, can be confusing.
• "the Purgatory, which is blown up by bombs carried by Sanosuke." Why does the reader need to know that the ship blows up?
• "During the fight on Mount Hiei, Saitō kills the second most powerful opponent in the Ten Swords (東京タワー Juppongatana?), Uonuma Usui, but is wounded in the legs in the process." The main thing here is he killed someone, his wound is not important unless he's permanently crippled by this. Focus only on the character's plot.
• "He ambushes Shishio, almost but failing to kill him as Shishio had been wearing a hachigane (iron headband). Afterwards, Shishio easily deflected all of Saitō's attacks and defeated him." Concision.
• "After Shishio is defeated by Kenshin, Saitō is thought to be dead after the explosions on the battlefield. He is later revealed to have survived." Concision. Can be completely removed if the character was revealed to be alive MUCH LATER in the story.
• "defeating Yatsume Mumyōi and breaking his arm and teeth." Does the general reader need to know this?
• "and defeats him even after he exploits the Gatotsu's weak spot as Aoshi, Sanosuke, and Yahiko take care of the rest." Concision
• "At the end of the series, Saitō is transferred to work in another location after rejecting the continuation of his duel with Kenshin, claiming that he will not enjoy settling the score with an assassin that does not kill anymore." Concision
• "Five years later, it is revealed that Saitō has traveled to Hokkaido for a government mission." Do you mean he's living there now? If not, this doesn't sound very significant. At best it can be worded as something like "Five years after the end of... it is revealed Saitō continues to work for the government"
• Jump stars are not Rurouni Kenshin games. Battle Koma will confuse readers
• Is that kazenban image really a cover art, that's what its rationale says. It looks like a page to me, since the picture is at such an odd angle plus the fact the characters redesign is sourced in the article as page 2
• Stance image adds no context. Should be removed.
• "Later, during the fight on Mount Hiei, Saitō kills the second most powerful opponent in the Ten Swords (東京タワー Juppongatana?), Uonuma Usui. He ambushes Shishio, almost, but failing to kill him as Shishio had been wearing a hachigane (iron headband)." Don't need kanji and romaji since the ten swords already have the kanji on its section in the character page. General reader does not need to know "second most powerful". The details on how battles are won and the struggles the characters went through should be only in the manga or episode summaries. You can practically combine the two to say that Saito was there during that arc and killed those two. Is there a better wording then "During the fight on Mount Hiei"? You should also provide a reason on why he's there. Sorry if this part was removed while I was stressing concision, I'm reading this article from a non-expert (haven't heard of the series) point of view.
• " He also fights against the first of the four Sū-shin guards of Woo Heishin, Enishi's second-in-command, and defeats him even after the Gatotsu's weak spot is exploited." Concision, don't need to know about his struggle. With this, you should be able to combine the two paragraphs.
• "He stated that while he received negative feedback letters regarding Saitō, he also received some positive feedback letters "in response." This doesn't have any depths, it is already assumed only positive feed back and negative feedback would exist side by side. With the removal of this, you can probably combine this reception with the first paragraph which seems to be Japan's reception of the character.

Minor issues

• Use Nihongo3 when representing romaji ahead of English
• Add spaces between "|" in the references for easier access.
• Remove the ref codes in the amazon links.
• Article structure is outdated for Wikipedia:WikiProject Anime and manga. Currently, character articles are arranged to have only one level 2 header for in-universe information. See Kira Yamato, one of the most recent GA characters. You can also refer to Sasuke Uchiha.
• "Mibu no Okami" (壬生の狼?, lit. "Wolf of Mibu")". The series has been licensed in English. Does the English use the romaji or the English translation? Same with Aku Soku Zan" (悪即斬?, Swift Death to Evil). Only represent romaji first if there was never an official English translation or the series used the romaji term in English. Ex in Bleach, "Zanpakutō" would use Nihongo3 since the romaji term is used instead of Soul slayer in the English dub.

DragonZero (Talk · Contribs) 03:46, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Improvements

I've roughly revamped the article after reading your review. I know it's not fixed yet but could you check and see if I've made any improvements?--Wrath X (talk) 06:37, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

I want to note that the article can pass if you skip the minor issues, which are only side improvements. Try to remove unnecessary words and improve for concision. Ex "very fierce rivalry", the reader has no idea what this is, you can just say develops a rivalry. There are many examples of that in the plot. For concision an example is this "The only one at the dojo is Sagara Sanosuke, who quickly realizes Saitō is an imposter due to the sword calluses on his hand. Saitō then attacks Sanosuke, seriously injuring him and leaving him as a calling card, along with clues to alert Himura Kenshin of his presence." has unnecessary detail. It could be summed up as "He defeats Sagara Sanosuke as a warning towards Kenshin" DragonZero (Talk · Contribs) 22:44, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Just wondering if you could point out any signs of major original research in the article. --Wrath X (talk) 06:56, 02 April 2013 (UTC)

I've added one to the current list. DragonZero (Talk · Contribs) 17:24, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Just wondering why the Gatotsu image is irrelevant. I see several "good" anime character articles which have an image depicting an important attack. --Wrath X (talk) 08:47, 04 April 2013 (UTC)

It's because the technique is not so artistically different from a normal stab and does not give further depth to the character. In Sasuke Uchiha's article, his abilities picture shows what chidori, which can be easily recognized. A Gatotsu image would look like a normal stab. You want to reduce as much non-free images as possible. Also note that old GA and FA may not meet current standards; though GAs really pass by the reviewer's discretion. DragonZero (Talk · Contribs) 03:28, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Saitō Hajime (Rurouni Kenshin). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150220010405/http://www.mania.com/rurouni-kenshin-vol-07_article_81868.html to http://www.mania.com/rurouni-kenshin-vol-07_article_81868.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090912035121/http://www.mania.com/rurouni-kenshin-vol-14_article_81972.html to http://www.mania.com/rurouni-kenshin-vol-14_article_81972.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121025095710/http://www.mania.com/rurouni-kenshin-vol-07-shadow-wolf_article_73906.html to http://www.mania.com/rurouni-kenshin-vol-07-shadow-wolf_article_73906.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:21, 5 May 2017 (UTC)