# Talk:Curse of the Colonel

This article has been sprinkled quite liberally with "citation needed" tags.  However, as mentioned in the references, the majority of the information in the article comes from the Osaka Info Guide, and English-language tourist guide to Osaka that is given out in the American Embassy, Tourist Information centers, English-language book stores, and pretty much everywhere else. It had an extensive article on Dotonbori, which included the information on the Curse of the Colonel.
Is there some reason why this reference isn't good enough? If not, why, and what further citations are needed? Thanks! MightyAtom 23:54, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

OK, added the requested citations.MightyAtom 04:39, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

The infoboxes for people associated with the curse are unnecessary.  You might possibly include pictures but the whole box really only goes on the biography page for the individual.  Eluchil404 05:29, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! I went ahead and took them out. MightyAtom 06:00, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

This article will be put on hold (for 7 days) until these minor adjustments can be made :

1. Well written? Fail
2. Factually accurate? Pass
3. Broad in coverage? Fail
4. Neutral point of view? Pass
5. Article stability? Pass
6. Images? Fail

Additional comments :

Can you change the floating value of the pictures as they are messing up the look in my browser, I see weird tabs inserted.
The inline citations should come after punctuation in WP.
There are many weasel words to describe the event in 1985 Japan Championship series that should be removed.
so the curse is presumably intact. can a citation be given for that?
There is not enough context pertaining to the construction of the bridge for one to be situated in that part of the text.
What happened during the other years, did they loose every game, did they fail to be in the championship.
Did this curse have any effect outside of the baseball world (except the rebuilding of the bridge)?
Image:Randy Bass.jpg and Image:Hanshintigerslogo.png should state their fair use rationale.
Lincher 17:30, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks!  I will get to work on that right away!  One question regarding the fair use rationale.  I'm afraid I don't really understand what that means.  I took both of those pictures from existing wikipedia sites, so I figured they were OK.  How do I state the fair use rationale? MightyAtom 08:58, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
Just glean the fair use rationale from the image Image:AlainProst Face.jpg which is a model I use. Lincher 11:32, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

OK, I think I have addressed all of the concerns above! MightyAtom 04:18, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

The reference number and inline citation number don't match, why? Lincher 11:55, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
Probably because I am bad at the technical aspects of wikipedia...:(  I will try and fix it.MightyAtom 12:45, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
Taken care of the problem ... I hope you aren't angry with the format change. Lincher 19:34, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
Ah, that's great! Thanks!  I will try and study up on how to do that on my own. MightyAtom 04:42, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

1. Well written? Pass
2. Factually accurate? Pass
3. Broad in coverage? Pass
4. Neutral point of view? Pass
5. Article stability? Pass
6. Images? Pass
The article now meets the requirements and is of GA status. Lincher 19:34, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Looked through the article and I was just curious as to what the statue was made out of.  Plaster? Plastic? Concrete? Stone? Wood? Perakhantu 18:20, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Its made of plastic.  I will be sure to add that.  They are so common in Japan, I tend to forget that everyone doesn't know exactly what they are! MightyAtom 00:17, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Weirdly, a random chain of web links led me to this article about two weeks after reading Haruki Murakami's "Kafka on the Shore" (in English translation), a book where there's a fairly substantial episode involving some sort of metaphysical entity that chooses to present itself in the form of Colonel Sanders.  While reading, it pretty much washed over me as just another odd detail, but now that I know about the Curse of the Colonel, it has more resonance, especially given other baseball references in the book -- like how the guy the "Colonel" is dealing with is constantly identified with the Chunichi Dragons.  And how the main characters are all drawn from central Japan down through Kansai and then across a big bridge (to Takamatsu).  Anyway, I'm completely incompetent to write about Japanese culture, so don't ask me to do it, but I wonder if it might be an interesting section to add: something about how the Curse has been referred to or used as a plot element or an illustration in art or pop culture.
-- Anonymous non-wiki-participant

   0608 4 Jan 2007 (UTC)

I'm afraid that I have never read that book, so I don't really know how it might be relevant. Also, unless someone else made the connection first, or it is mentioned explicitly, original research can't be done on wikipedia. MightyAtom 03:24, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
First, this article totally fn rocks. I laughed so hard, and the choice of pic is brilliant. Second, OMFG, OP might be on to something there. Obvious a source/reference would be required. LoveUxoxo (talk) 03:55, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
Thanks! I took that picture just for the article!  Glad you like it! MightyAtom (talk) 21:16, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
There's a reference in Sonic Adventure: a realistic statue of a man next to a fast food restaurant that you can pick and toss into the ocean.--Stormwatch (talk) 05:32, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

I am tempted to revert the recent changes made to this article, but I wanted to discuss it first.  The previous version had Good_Article status, meaning that all of the material, including parts that have been removed, had undergone a review and where found to be relevant and of good quality.  Also,  the recent inclusion of a trivia section is something disencouraged by wikipedia policy.  Any thoughts or discussions before I revert? MightyAtom 04:28, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Well, just an example,
the 2002 world cup section has nothing to do with a "curse" just the fact that everyone jumped into the canal.
if it is a page on the supposed curse, how bout combining the cursed results into one section as most other "sports curse" pages do.
Don't know about you, but explaining what constituted the 18-year losing streak, ie how bad was it, is better than just saying they had an 18-year losing streak.
If they are truly cursed, something about their history, were they a succes or not, should be incorporated into their bio (second paragraph).
no mention of 2005 and if that isn't a cursed result I don't know what is.
If not trivia section, fine.  First item wasn't necassary.  But second item about the death should be it's own subparagraph to the 2003 Central Championship, not it's own paragraph meaning it relates directly to the "curse."
as for the info being verified, I'm NO expert on japanese baseball.  But looking at wikipedia's info on the japanese season, it was only in the last year that they began a qualifying tournament for league championshp.  In 2003, Hanshin won it by being the best in the regular season.
Corrections were only made to make the article flow easier and to add additional info.  The revisions weren't perfect but they were clearer than what's up there now.  Just because something gets a "gold star" doesn't mean it's perfect. Any wonder why after almost 2 weeks no one else made corrections to the recent changes being "wrong?"  Nygoodliving 20:09, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
Sorry I'm late, but user is right.  Changes were much clearer.  And 2002 has nothing to do with curse. -- 69.183.85.197 (talk) 20:19, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Please don't take this the wrong way. I never said the changes were wrong, or that they shouldn't be done.  It is just usually a good idea to discuss major changes to an article on the talk page before making them, especially if the article has undergone peer review and been cited as a Good Article, which is more than just getting a "gold star".  Of course it isn't perfect, and new additions and corrections are always welcome!
One argument I would make is about the 2002 World Cup. The leap into the canal and stealing of a statue during the World Cup should be enough to include the information in the article, although perhaps it should referenced differently, outside of the main sections.  I just ordered them chronologically, but there is probably a better way.  What do you think? MightyAtom (talk) 05:50, 17 November 2007 (UTC)