Talk:U.S.–Japan Status of Forces Agreement

Japanese title

Untitled

I don't think we need the Japanese transliteration of the extremely long title, but I will preserve it here on the talk page in case anyone strongly disagrees. - Wickning1 19:45, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Agreement under Article VI of the Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security between Japan and the United States of America, Regarding Facilities and Areas and the Status of United States Armed Forces in Japan (日本国とアメリカ合衆国との間の相互協力及び安全保障条約第六条に基づく施設及び区域並びに日本国における合衆国軍隊の地位に関する協定, nihonkoku to amerikagashukoku tono aida no sougokyoryoku oyobi anzenhoshojoyakudairokujo ni motozuku shisetsu oyobi kuiki narabini nihonkoku ni okeru gashukokuguntai no chiini kansuru kyotei)

1. That's the official English name of the agreement, not "Japanese transliteration." 2. Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, not a dictionary. You don't create an article for a "short name." --222.3.77.88 02:24, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

• I was talking about the Japanese transliteration (all the japanese characters, and then all the romanji). No prejudice against having the full title in the article, though it is distracting and seems redundant - the way I wrote it it was perfectly clear that it came from Article VI of the treaty. Now you're basically saying the same thing twice in a row. - Wickning1 05:24, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
• As for using the short name for the title, that was the consensus result of the AfD referred to at the top of this page, not my personal decision (though I recommended it). - Wickning1 05:24, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Rename

Shouldn't this be the United States - Japan Status of Forces Agreement? AndrewRT(Talk) 21:43, 30 November 2008 (UTC)