Talk:Japan Medical Association

Author's note on sources

In writing this article I have drawn content main,y from the following sources:

Official websites in English and Japanese Scholarly journals in English and Japanese Newspaper articles in English and Japanese. and some content (mainly the history section) from the Japanese Wikipedia article (the translation is my own)

The JMA is a huge organisation commanding a multi billion dollar budget and administrating large scale national and international public health projects. It is probably the most influential stakeholder in international public health in the based in the Asian region. Many of these programs are noteworthy but too numerous to document, especially for just one author.

To move forward it will be important to have the article published in the Wikipedia main space. Other editors will be needed to collaborate in improving the quality and scope of the article. Dr.khatmando (talk) 03:01, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Public programming

The Japanese Wikipedia article has a section on public broadcasting and programming. Most of the programs have ceased. I have added those they are still being broadcast, and only those with connections to the JMA that can be verified. Dr.khatmando (talk) 06:29, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Clinical malpractice issues

I have included a brief reference to the JMA's role in regards to clinical malpractice. This is a relatively new area for Japan as malpractice cases were almost no existent until an abrupt rise in the 2010s. I'm not sure if this matter is worth expanding until a decent review of the literature is made, perhaps by someone more familiar with Japanese legal culture. Dr.khatmando (talk) 03:14, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Reviewing against the Wikiproject: Organisation criteria

References and inline citations are from reliable scholarly sources. Secondary resources are cited to support primary sources. Meets GA quality on this criteria

The article reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies. Probably GA level, but need to check against other articles (or reliable sources) of known GA quality

The article has a defined structure consistent with other organisations of this type. Including notable public events, criticisms, and controversies would be an improvement. Meets B grade level

The article is written well, neutral, and has been proofread by experienced editors. GA level

The article contains supporting materials where appropriate, including suitable images, and infoboxes. Contains no original research complies with MOS. Meet GA level

.Dr.khatmando (talk) 06:20, 9 May 2017 (UTC)