your points echo mine very closely hoary the person who wrote the article daisuke kawasaki is not a noted music critic or industry person he owned a small fanzine called beikoku ongaku which is linked in bbb 's source and published it with his wife but it is now defunct if you look at their companies website they are now selling collagen beauty drinks whatever that is i'd just like to point out that while it may seem trivial to argue about people use the wikipedia for information and silly claims like this spin out of control and escalate into utter nonsense journalists researchers etc do use the wikipedia to get a lot of their information quickly the articles are making it sound like an achievement or hallmark in japanese popular music when it is not lists by the british film institute etc are different as they are made via a consensus with the worlds leading critics and industry persons and an explanation is provided as to why each film was chosen etc what is being contested by me is just a random list that is noted by the publisher as being biased and arbitrary which means chosen randomly with no reasoning this is like a tv network saying the views of such and such do not reflect those of the station it's pretty bad when the publisher prints a disclaimer on the cover next to what it's advertising