Talk:Japanese archipelago

[Untitled]

Are the outlying islands of the Japanese state, such as Okinawa and the Ryukus (not to mention the contested Kuriles) considered Home Islands? And if so, is this usage consistent? --MacRusgail 16:28, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

As far as I am aware, the Ryukyus, Kuriles, etc. are not considered Home Islands in the World War II historical sense of the term. That is, the term "Home Islands" is largely used almost exclusively in contexts related to World War II, and in such contexts one can make statements such as "Ground fighting occurred on Okinawa, but never in the Home Islands" or "Had we not dropped the bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, we would have had to invade the Home Islands."

On the other hand, putting the term "Home Islands" aside, I actually came to this Talk Page just now in order to pose the very similar question of whether or not the Ryukyus are included in the "Japanese archipelago". Politically speaking, I suppose they would be, but as a geographic term - just because Japan controls Okinawa doesn't make it any more a Japanese island than the Falklands are part of the British Isles - are the Ryukyus generally considered to be included in the Japanese archipelago? LordAmeth (talk) 03:45, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Stop adding unsourced tags everywhere

Stop adding this unsourced tag everywhere. Specify the sentence, tag the sentence, add the tag from that position. Not all of these sentences are unsourced. 75.70.142.23 (talk) 08:51, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Sakhalin & the Kuril Islands

Though they're politically part of Russia, are either Sakhalin or the Kuril Islands or both considered part of the Japanese archipelago in a geographic sense?108.207.39.63 (talk) 09:42, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Good question - geographical features are not limited by political boundaries. Does anyone have an answer? William Harris • talk • 10:30, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

Requested move 8 October 2020

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Moved (non-admin closure) (t · c) buidhe 04:59, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

---

Japanese Archipelago → Japanese archipelago – Undiscussed and incorrect move. — Goszei (talk) 23:21, 7 October 2020 (UTC)

This is a contested technical request (permalink). Megan☺️ Talk to the monster 07:39, 8 October 2020 (UTC) The enWP standard seems to be to capitalize the class name, see Category:Archipelagoes of the Pacific Ocean. TerraCyprus (talk) 23:34, 7 October 2020 (UTC) @TerraCyprus: I think Japanese archipelago actually happens to be a unique case among our archipelago articles, since it is the only one (?) constructed as [adjective + archipelago] instead of [name + archipelago]. A Google search indicates that "Japanese archipelago" is the common usage, which I think stems from this semantic difference (though there is a mix of styles, maybe this requires a discussion?) — Goszei (talk) 08:04, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

Comment I had a look through our perennial reliable sources — all of the ones that I checked overwhelmingly use "Japanese archipelago":

• Al Jazeera: https://www.google.com/search?q=%22Japanese%20archipelago%22%20site%3Aaljazeera.com
• Associated Press: https://www.google.com/search?q=%22Japanese%20archipelago%22%20site%3Aapnews.com
• BBC: https://www.google.com/search?q=%22Japanese%20archipelago%22%20site%3Abbc.co.uk
• The Guardian: https://www.google.com/search?q=%22Japanese%20archipelago%22%20site%3Atheguardian.com
• The New York Times: https://www.google.com/search?q=%22Japanese%20archipelago%22%20site%3Anytimes.com
• The Washington Post: https://www.google.com/search?q=%22Japanese%20archipelago%22%20site%3Awashingtonpost.com
• Reuters: https://www.google.com/search?q=%22Japanese%20archipelago%22%20site%3Areuters.com

— Goszei (talk) 04:26, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Strong Oppose The Japanese Archipelago is not a unique case. Geographic features are proper names. For proper names, we need to capitalise the first letter of every word, whether the first word is a noun or adjective. Here are some examples: Malay Archipelago (biggest archipelago in the world), Arctic Archipelago, Arabian Peninsula (biggest peninsula in the world), Korean Peninsula, North American Plate, Patagonian Desert, Australian Shield etc. All of these geographic features start with an adjective.

As for the reliable sources, they are considered reliable because they come from reputable media, which means their information is likely to be genuine and correct, but that doesn't mean every word they have written is perfect. Some of the authors or editors from these media are not even native English speakers themselves. If you collect 200 articles from these sources, there could be 50% of them use Japanese archipelago and 50% of them use Japanese Archipelago. 120.16.92.71 (talk) 01:06, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

Changing the article map

I think that the map used at the beginning of the article (the one labeled "Japanese archipelago shown in dark green") should be changed. The article talks about how Sakhalin and the undisputed Kuril Islands are also considered to be a part of the Japanese archipelago, despite being a part of the Russian Federation. However, the map used only shows the Japanese islands under Japanese control, as well as Japan's disputed claim over the southern Kuril Islands. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fernsong (talk • contribs) 23:22, 12 November 2020 (UTC)