Talk:Joji Obara

message: Concerning the changes I made: That the view is slanted is not mentioned in the sources, i.e. it's own research, so I removed it. The Independent source was completely irrelevant, so I removed that one too (I'm not saying the article is of no interest, but it does not support the statement it followed). Finally, if you are going to say something like "The Japanese judicial system was criticised", you are going to need more than one source criticising them. You need either, a good bunch of sources criticising it, or one source summarising the criticism. I didn't remove this part though, but it does need better sourcing. Mackan 22:04, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Are you suggesting she wasn't killed "deliberately" (which is the definition my Oxford dictionary gives me)? Even if Obara isn't charged with murder (for whatever reason), it doesn't really change the fact that Blackman was murdered. If it was Obara's entry we were talking about, removing the tag "murderers" might have been more appropriate, but I suggest the tag "murder victim" is put back right here.
:That comment was by me btw, forgot to sign. Since you haven't replied I'll put the tag back. Mackan 22:14, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: He wasn't charged with murder because intent to kill had not been proven.  He fully intended to rape his victims, but it was because his pattern of serial rape, the deaths of two women out of 400+ acts was thought of as incidental. There were also no witnesses to attest to the fact that he had forethought of the act.  Besides, its the police,courts, and the M.E.s that decide such things.  Putting that tag in is POV opinion at the worst and own research at best.  Go with what's been reported and ruled on and not your opinion of the crime. Neoyamaneko 01:46, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hold on, I'm irritated that you'd accuse me of POV as well as of OR, I find it quite rude. I only put the tag back after you didn't reply here for 2 days. I don't need a rebukal to go with your explanation, mister. Mackan 09:49, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia is not my life nor does it pay my bills, so if I don't respond after 2 days, it's not the end of anyone's world.  Now....onto other things. You can call what I did an "accusation", while I tend to go with "statement of fact".  The police and prosecution didn't charge or indict Obara with murder because intent to kill hadn't been established.  So, to call her a "murder victim" is an opinion and if you come up with anything that supports that view but doesn't support the direction of the trial and/or the probable outcome is your own research.  And even *if* he was charged and indicted on murder charges, the case hasn't rendered a verdict yet, so you couldn't put the tag in until someone of authority in the court said said "guilty" anyways.  Don't take it personal, because people on wiki critique a lot harder than I and there are thesis advisers in uni that would tear people new orifices for such things.Neoyamaneko 13:44, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hey, I have no problems with you not responding for two days, that's not what I'm complaining about. I don't question the "murder" definition either (since your first answer), but instead of answering my question why the tag should be there, you accused me of OR as well as POV-pushing, which was completely uncalled for. Also, I had my thesis defense a month ago so you don't have to tell me how I should take your criticism. This isn't my thesis and I don't care what "other people on the wiki" do, all I'm asking you is to be civil. Mackan 17:06, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If you take offense at it, and you think I'm being uncivil for calling a spade a spade, that's not my problem.  And, like I said, putting the tag based on the facts of the case is what it is.  As I saw it, I explained it *and* said what putting the tag in looked like.  You looked past the explanation and saw what you believed was a personal attack (constructive criticism is not a personal attack). I took yours in stride, why can't you in kind? I'll just leave it at that since you want to be defensive and combative about a little thing. Neoyamaneko 02:31, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Not a murder victim?

message: I do not think that link is slander. To me, it never meant that Lucie Blackman herself was involved in prostitution, but it's relevant to this article, not only because Joji Obara's other victims were largely prostitutes. Mackan 11:39, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it's at least inappropriate.  There's no evidence that Blackman was a prostitute, and while hostess clubs do have a link with prostitution, they're just as often places where sex with the hostesses is not an option (only conversation).  The Hostess club article is not categorized under "prostitution in Japan," so there's no reason for this article to be either.  Exploding Boy 18:05, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm, I don't know, I do see your point, but I'm not sure I agree. The linked article gives interesting insight into something which is closely related to the subject of this article, whether Blackman was a prostitute or not. I think that especially the Mizuho Fukushima quote is a good reason to include such a link. I never thought of the link's inclusion as a suggestion that she was a prostitute, and I'm not sure most others will either. Mackan 17:56, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree with Exploding Boy - inappropriate and the job she was doing is already linked in the article so it is unnecessary Weggie 19:42, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for your comment, Weggie, but I would appreciate if you also responded to the specific remarks I made. Does not the Mizuho Fukushima quote give a good reason to include such a link? Mackan 19:51, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: OK - but I will have to post more tomorrow as I've run out of time tonight. I think it should be possible to expand the Fukushima paragraph to cover the valid points you have made and also include the link in the main body of the work Weggie 21:03, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Prostitution in Japan 

message: On July 1, Lucie went on a dohan (a paid date) with a customer from Casablanca... No one heard from her again.[1]
This para (and the next, ending She is safe and training in a hut in Chiba) is lifted word for word from the Time article. Just because that article is quoted as the source (of the facts) doesn't mean huge chunks can be lifted without explicit acknowledgement. I suggest it should be reworded. Flapdragon 12:04, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyvio? 

message: Japanese media sources clearly state that he was given indefinite sentence (Muki choeki). Though I do accept that almost all media in English translated this as life sentence, this is categorically wrong in technical term because there are some common law countries which use indefinite sentence apart from life sentence. Moreover, without this correct translation, one cannot properly translate the debate in Japan regarding the introduction of life sentence. Here is a reference in English legal system about indefinite sentence. Encyclopedia Britannica also has a separate entry for indeterminate sentence. Though many media source use "life sentence" in place of indeterminate sentence for easy reading, wikipedia as an online "encyclopedia" should use more accurate term.  I also altered article about life sentence in Japan. Vapour
:It's actually referred to in English as an "indeterminate sentence", and it is used in the judicial system of South Africa as well. Neoyamaneko 03:09, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Indefinite Sentence

message: For those who may be interested, there is a long-standing debate as to whether the article about the suspect should open with an explit mention of   his ethnic minority status. Looking for as many comments as possible, long or short - please take a peek at Talk:Joji Obara#Rfc Ethnic origin mentions and help us resolve this dispute. Phonemonkey 23:16, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Request for comment on Joji Obara

message: It's not clear what title would be the best choice to move this article. Murder of Lucie Blackman was the most popular choice, but it might not be the best one due to doubts about her actual cause of death. I for one was going to move it to "Murder of..." but thought better of it, doubting the merit of "murder" as a neutral word to describe any incident. Perhaps Disappearance of Lucie Blackman would be better. Ironically though, the status quo would probably be least controversial, so I'm not touching it. Have fun. — CharlotteWebb 02:58, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Title 

message: Personally, I think this is a good solution. Wikipedia retains information on her murder, which the AfD indicated has been of some importance in the media and in international relations; but by redirecting to another article we avoid the over-detailed description of the circumstances surrounding her disappearance and murder. Wikipedia isn't supposed to be tabloid news.
Another option would be to strip this article down to bare details, and rename it, as most of the AfD "voters" thought should be done. --Akhilleus (talk) 15:01, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Also, the consensus in the AFD wasn't to keep, but to change the topic to the murder or the case, which is why the merge/redirect works.-Wafulz 15:38, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Redirect to [[Joji Obara]]

message: The Wiki page says Tony Blair met with PM Koizumi to raise the case. Time magazine says Blair met with Yoshiro Mori to raise the case. Which is correct? Time magazine says Blair met with Yoshiro Mori to raise the case. Which is correct?
http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,108848,00.html  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.47.66.229 (talk) 04:09, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Mori or Koizumi?

message: You should not do the contradicted edit about the Korean people naturalized in Japan. 
You must change their nationalities at the same time. If you have neutral sense of values
:Does anyone mind if I change the title of this section? It's needlessly combative. Just Heditor review 20:53, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have not made "the contradicted edit"(?) or anything like it. I haven't edited the other articles, and I don't know about those people, whether or not there is any specific reason to state they are Korean Japanese. "Ethnicity should generally not be emphasized in the opening unless it is relevant to the subject's notability". All I'm saying is that it's NOT relevant to this subject's notability. If you want to make similar claims in other articles, feel free to do so. But it doesn't have anything to do with this specific article. Also, why can't you agree to ask for a third opinion? Please answer. Mackan 14:39, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps "korean ancestry" might be the best phrase there, emphasizing their current nationality status, or "Korean-Japanese" with a hyphen, similiar to "Italian-American", which is fairly common. Is this a reasonable compromise? If some more information on the subjects could be shared, that'd help considerably. Just Heditor review 20:51, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes. The Korean naturalized in Japan is called Korean-Japanese. "Those who succeed about the naturalized Korean are Korean-Japanese. However, the criminal of the naturalized Korean is Japanese." I cannot agree to this Mackan's insistence. --Necmate 13:40, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

text: I think that's a suggestion worth discussing, but I do have some objections. Obara lived his entire life in Japan, so it seems somewhat like you are treating him as a second class citizen when you point out that he is "naturalized". That's the difference, of course, between him and for example Hearn. Mackan 07:56, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Also, in the case of Hearn as well as Heco, their ethnicity is definately important to their notability. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mackan (talk • contribs) 07:57, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm the one who brought WP:MOSBIO#Opening paragraph as a justification for removing "Korean" but I now think I misunderstood the guideline. When I read it, I misread it as "generally not be mentioned". However, the actual text is "generally not be emphasized" and I don't think mentioning he is a Korean Japanese is emphasizing his ethnicity; it's a simple fact, stated in a manner commonly used in various biographic articles. --Kusunose 09:02, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: He isn't a "Korean Japanese". Mentioning it is emphasizing it. Mackan 09:34, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

text: (To clarify:) He is only a Japanese national, he has not retained his Korean nationality. He has never lived in Korea (as far as I can gather). His connections to the Korean peninsula seems to be one of ethnicity alone. Mackan 09:53, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Obligation of [[User:Mackan|Mackan]]

message: They were all naturalized in Japan. 
* Masayoshi Son
* Akira Maeda 
* Tachihara Masaaki
--Necmate 12:51, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have not made "the contradicted edit"(?) or anything like it. I haven't edited the other articles, and I don't know about those people, whether or not there is any specific reason to state they are Korean Japanese. "Ethnicity should generally not be emphasized in the opening unless it is relevant to the subject's notability". All I'm saying is that it's NOT relevant to this subject's notability. If you want to make similar claims in other articles, feel free to do so. But it doesn't have anything to do with this specific article. Also, why can't you agree to ask for a third opinion? Please answer. Mackan 14:39, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps "korean ancestry" might be the best phrase there, emphasizing their current nationality status, or "Korean-Japanese" with a hyphen, similiar to "Italian-American", which is fairly common. Is this a reasonable compromise? If some more information on the subjects could be shared, that'd help considerably. Just Heditor review 20:51, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes. The Korean naturalized in Japan is called Korean-Japanese. "Those who succeed about the naturalized Korean are Korean-Japanese. However, the criminal of the naturalized Korean is Japanese." I cannot agree to this Mackan's insistence. --Necmate 13:40, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

text: I think that's a suggestion worth discussing, but I do have some objections. Obara lived his entire life in Japan, so it seems somewhat like you are treating him as a second class citizen when you point out that he is "naturalized". That's the difference, of course, between him and for example Hearn. Mackan 07:56, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Also, in the case of Hearn as well as Heco, their ethnicity is definately important to their notability. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mackan (talk • contribs) 07:57, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm the one who brought WP:MOSBIO#Opening paragraph as a justification for removing "Korean" but I now think I misunderstood the guideline. When I read it, I misread it as "generally not be mentioned". However, the actual text is "generally not be emphasized" and I don't think mentioning he is a Korean Japanese is emphasizing his ethnicity; it's a simple fact, stated in a manner commonly used in various biographic articles. --Kusunose 09:02, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: He isn't a "Korean Japanese". Mentioning it is emphasizing it. Mackan 09:34, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

text: (To clarify:) He is only a Japanese national, he has not retained his Korean nationality. He has never lived in Korea (as far as I can gather). His connections to the Korean peninsula seems to be one of ethnicity alone. Mackan 09:53, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Korean list with obligation to change at the same time

message: (To clarify:) He is only a Japanese national, he has not retained his Korean nationality. He has never lived in Korea (as far as I can gather). His connections to the Korean peninsula seems to be one of ethnicity alone. Mackan 09:53, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: He is writing wrong information. Obara was naturalized in Japan at 21 years old. Till then, he was South Korean.  (You must submit the source if I am wrong. I have gotten tired of what is called "you are SokcsPapet" by Mackan . ) --Necmate 14:27, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You're mistaken. I didn't say he never was a South Korean national, I said he never lived in South Korea and that he is not a South Korean national now. Mackan 17:27, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: "He is only a Japanese national, he has not retained his Korean nationality." (ちょっと翻訳してみな。２ちゃんで自作自演してるくらいなんだから、日本語ぺらぺらだろ？) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Necmate (talk • contribs) 17:33, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  He naturalised as a Japanese citizen. Therefore, he has not retained his Korean nationality. What's so difficult? Phonemonkey 08:34, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Mistake of Mackan

message: The Obara, Joji should be removed.  He hasn't been convicted.  -- Mufka (user) (talk) (contribs) 20:38, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Rapist category

message: Please define Korean Japanese.　--Azukimonaka 03:42, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Cho Seung-hui is obviously completely different from Joji Obara. He was a South Korean national, so of course it should be mentioned in the lead. Mackan 15:47, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  A Japanese person of Korean origin. That much is undisputed. Phonemonkey 14:47, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: According to your insistence, does not Obara meet the requirement of Korean Japanese?--Azukimonaka 15:37, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Of course he does. The dispute isn't about whether or not he is Korean-Japanese. It is about whether or not it warrents a mention in the opening paragraph. If an American criminal is African-American, should his wikipedia article start off by pointing this out in the first sentence?  Phonemonkey 15:49, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Is it? I think that "Korean Japanese" could just as well refer to a person holding both a Korean and a Japanese nationality. While I know that this is an impossibility today as neither country allows dual citizenships, it could still be misunderstood to carry such a meaning, in my opinion. Mackan 14:50, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Masutatsu Oyama is not Zainichi Korean but Korean Japanese according to your insistence. --Azukimonaka 15:37, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have never made any such insistence and I have never made any comment relating to any Japanese national with Korean ancestry except for Joji Obara. Wikipedia guidelines state that the ethnicitiy should not be mentioned in the first paragraph, unless there is a specific reason. I have never heard of Masautatsu Oyama before and whether or not his ethnicity is relevant to his article, I'll leave up to others to decide. Also, you are obviously misunderstanding what I wrote, unless you meant to say that, according to me, he is not "Korean Japanese" but Japanese. As I said, I have no objections to  anybody changing his article in that way, but whether or not his ethnicity is relevant, I've no idea.Mackan 15:40, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Edit battle

message: This isn't going to solve the dispute, but one thing Joji Obara is definitely not is a zainichi korean.  As it says in the article, zainichi koreans are "not ethnic Koreans who have acquired Japanese nationality through naturalization."  Currently this is what the article is linking to.  MightyAtom 01:52, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. Phonemonkey 07:43, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Definitely not [[Zainichi Korean]]

message: Can we get this article unprotected?  Joji Obara has been sentenced to life in prison for multiple rapes, but aquitted of murder.MightyAtom 02:11, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yep, ethnic origin aside, this article needs updating. I agree not to touch the disputed section until we've had a few more comments in the Rfc section below. Phonemonkey 07:43, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. Please unprotect. Sparkzilla 09:23, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Obara was never charged with murder, and therefore cannot be acquitted of that crime. Neoyamaneko (talk) 13:36, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Breaking news!

message: There is still no clear consensus, but as I see it, a majority is against including any mention of ethnicity in the first paragraph, and for replacing whatever it currently says with "Japanese". There is a higher number of people who have been supportive of this, and the few people who opposed it, Sparkzilla, Octoploid and Saintjust have not replied to some very legitimate questions directed towards them, and as such I think their opposition is rendered invalid. They have argued for the inclusion of his ethnictity (for which there already is a clear consensus), but they have not made any specific arguments why it should be included in the first paragraph. If no such arguments are made, I will take the liberty to change "naturalized Japanese citizen" to "Japanese". Mackan 09:06, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: After reviewing this, I see no problem with simple listing him as "Japanese" in the first paragraph. It is more concise, and anyone reading the article will have all the information he needs as to his origin and citizen status. Andyparkerson 21:29, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: 11 days have passed since I posted here and nobody has protested. I'm going to change it now. Mackan 15:29, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not certain removing a dead source and replacing it with a "fact"-tag is the best way to go? Wouldn't it be better keeping the link, stating that it is now dead? I mean, that's something which probably was in print as well, just because it's can't be find online anymore doesn't mean it never existed. Mackan 14:03, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The usual policy-based solution is to leave it and note that it is dead, per Mackan's reasoning.  Conversely, you could try to find a cached version, but you would still need to note it is a dead link. MSJapan 21:19, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, right. -- Mackan talk | c 17:08, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

text:  Vml132f, you say "a majority is not against including any mention of Korean". *Nobody* here even dreamt of suggesting we should exclude any mention of his Korean ethnicity. As for "naturalized Japanese citizen", while it is certainly accurate, I am moderately against it simply because it unnecessarily (and inaccurately) implies that he is an immigrant and is therefore detrimental to the quality of the article. Phonemonkey 22:08, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Consensus

message: The second reference now redirects to the first reference, which does not have all of the content it needs.  This leaves a good deal of the article unreferenced, as #2 is used 5 times.  Can anyone find new references to replace it?  Vancleef 22:51, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No one having found replacements, I removed that citation, replacing it with citation-needed where no other cites existed. Vancleef 00:24, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not certain removing a dead source and replacing it with a "fact"-tag is the best way to go? Wouldn't it be better keeping the link, stating that it is now dead? I mean, that's something which probably was in print as well, just because it's can't be found online anymore doesn't mean it never existed. Mackan 14:03, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Reference bit-rot

message: I've merged Blackman's article because it wasn't a biography as much as a description of her rape. Since Wikipedia is not news, we should respect basic human dignity here and stick to the trial.-Wafulz 22:36, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merged Blackman's article 

message: My name is Junichiro Hironaka, a licensed Japanese attorney, and I am writing to the administrators on behalf of my client, Mr. Joji Obara. Please be advised that Mr. Obara is the subject of a false, misleading and libelous article appearing on Wikipedia at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joji_Obara. The administrators are hereby requested to remove in its entirety without delay. Kindly note that a similar request was made regarding a substantially identical article on Mr. Obara appearing in Japanese on the Wikipedia Japan site. In response to my request, the administrators reviewed the article and have deleted it in its entirety from the site. Since the English article contains essentially the same false, misleading and libelous information, it should also be deleted in its entirety. Without going into all of the false, misleading and libelous statements in the article, administrators should be aware of the undisputed and verifiable fact that the Tokyo District Court has acquitted Mr. Obara on the charge of murdering Ms. Lucie Blackman. The article makes it appear as if Mr. Obara is guilty of this tragic crime, even though he has been found not guilty. Moreover, the article implies that Mr. Obara has raped as many as 400 women. This is completely false and not supported by any reliable evidence. There are many additional specific statements that are false, misleading and libelous in the English article. For the reasons stated above, the administrators are requested to remove the article in English on Mr. Joji Obara from Wikipedia without delay. I will continue to monitor Wikipedia. The administrators' prompt and affirmative response to this request will be greatly appreciated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.131.61.24 (talk) 14:22, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Mr. Hironaka, it is unlikely that this article will be deleted, because Mr. Obara appears to satisfy Wikipedia's notability guidelines. To address the problems with this article, perhaps the best option is to contact OTRS (see the instructions at Wikipedia:OTRS#Contacting_OTRS), and the volunteers there will attempt to address your concerns. --Akhilleus (talk) 15:37, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

text: If you truly are Mr. Obara's lawyer, you need to contact Mike Godwin, the Wikimedia Foundation's lawyer, at the email address or telephone number listed there. WilyD 20:32, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposed deletion

message: Does anyone know it? F W Nietzsche (talk) 15:24, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Date of birth

message: He is Korean.
His real name is Kim Sung Jong and if he has been nationalized to Japanese, he would not be allowed to have two names. And now he can't get nationalized because criminals cannot get nationalized to Japanese.
Zainichi Koreans (Koreans living Japan) are allowed to have two names (Japanese-like name and their real name). 
So having two names, his nationality is Korea.
Wiki kitkat (talk) 00:12, 9 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  He is Korean with Korean nationality 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Joji Obara. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090217230502/http://home.kyodo.co.jp:80/modules/fstStory/index.php?storyid=414799 to http://home.kyodo.co.jp/modules/fstStory/index.php?storyid=414799
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 19:58, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Joji Obara. 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/20090218114328/http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/nn20070424f1.html to http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/nn20070424f1.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070927092843/http://timesonline.typepad.com/times_tokyo_weblog/2007/04/joji_obara_not_.html to http://timesonline.typepad.com/times_tokyo_weblog/2007/04/joji_obara_not_.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080705182248/http://www.japantoday.com/category/crime/view/obara-pleads-not-guilty-in-appeal-trial-over-killing-of-blackman to http://www.japantoday.com/category/crime/view/obara-pleads-not-guilty-in-appeal-trial-over-killing-of-blackman
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:12, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Obara and the crimes were featured in the true-crime television program "Corrupt Crimes," in an episode subtitled "Drugging Your Dates," which was first broadcast on October 16, 2016, and is presently in repeat syndication.  This program reports that the drug used in addition to chloroform was ROHYPNOL.Starhistory22 (talk) 08:26, 28 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  "CORRUPT CRIMES" episode