Wikipedia talk:Japan-related topics notice board/2004

This is an archive of past discussions about Wikipedia:Japan-related topics notice board. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Proposal: COTW

We will put Japan-related stubs or nonexistent articles on /ToDo (your collaboration will be greatly appreciated). How about picking up one of them as our Collaboration of this week? First why not list up stubs on en.wp? Newspaper, cities or historical names ...... and put Template:Japan-stub :) --Aphaea 17:28, 22 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Without opposition, I made Wikipedia:Japanese Collaboration of the Week thanks for WP:AnCOTW. The current COTW has been set as Setouchi, Okayama, a newly foundd city just this week (sorry, without vote; only for the purpose of demonstration). Feel free to join, recommende and vote on WP:JCOTW! --Aphaea 10:52, 2 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I like this idea very much, but the real question is not whether we ought to do this but whether we are really willing to work! I certainly am. Anyone else? -- Taku 17:20, Nov 2, 2004 (UTC)

In my opinion, it is not mundatory but an invitation for collaboration; fun for us and informative for all including others. Anyway there are many stubby or nonexistential articles related to Japan. And I found intensive collaboration works well to improve the article. --Aphaea 17:41, 2 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I nominate Han (Japan) for a future collaboration of the week. About 40 articles link to it, but it's only a few sentences long. I'm going to put suggestions on the article's discussion page. Everybody's welcome to participate! Fg2 07:05, Nov 8, 2004 (UTC)

Images on prefectures

How about browsing each city article on Japanese Wikipedia?　--Aphaea 16:00, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Hello, I just started browsing around the Japan section and plan to add some photos. The public domain requirement kind of irks me, but I have some decent images (especially festivals) that I would not mind donating. Sorry, but they won't be my best shots. I'm also knowledgeable about Shiga Prefecture, so my activity will be centered on that prefecture. I've already written the Tourism article there (will be improved) and photos are coming. Photojpn.org 09:12, 7 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Phil, please note that material does not become "public domain", but rather that the owner of the copyright grants publication on Wikipedia. Most material comes under the GFDL, which has some important differences from public domain. Other than that, welcome!Davejenk1ns 10:55, 7 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Hello Phil, Some of the major festivals don't have photos. For example, Hyakumangoku Matsuri, Jidai Matsuri. Some others don't even have articles: Sanja Matsuri, for example. And some of the big shrines don't have articles. Sumiyoshi, Usa Hachiman, Munakata, ... . Even Matsuri doesn't have a picture. Your photos would be great for illustrating any of these. Fg2 07:57, Nov 8, 2004 (UTC)

Also Ice sculpture --- snow festivalFg2 12:24, Nov 8, 2004 (UTC)

OK, give me some time to pick out some photos. I'll let you know when I upload and insert them. My priority will be Shiga Prefecture and I will adopt it as my baby (at least one photo for every single city and town). So what's the difference between the list of Participants above and the List of Japanese wikipedians? How do you get on the list of Participants above? -Phil Photojpn.org 20:26, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I've got five photos in the Okinawa Prefecture article, and I bet you can outdo me (in quality, for sure!) in Shiga. BTW, there's a nice article on Lake Biwa and another on Hikone Castle. To put your name on the list, click on the [Edit] link to the right of the word "Participants" and jump in anywhere you like. (The last few people have put their names at the bottom of the list, but it's not a rule, as far as I know.) Fg2 07:57, Nov 9, 2004 (UTC)

Soon I'll start adding photos to the prefecture pages. But I want the image to be displayed at the top, above the prefectural symbol. Almost all the prefecture pages with images have the image(s) toward the bottom. So the first thing you see on the prefecture page is the prefectural symbol. Is it that important?? I don't think most people care what the prefectural symbol is. I'd rather see a more representative image of the prefecture. If it's okay to put my image on the top, then I will proceed. But I couldn't figure out how to do it without ruining the layout. I tried to do it for Shiga Prefecture, but it ruins the layout when you widen the browser window (looks fine with a narrower window). Tokyo Prefecture has the top image inside the data box. This would solve the problem, but I looked at that code and it looks outdated. Can anybody suggest a better code or way to do it? Photojpn.org 15:01, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)

First, the formatting question. If you enclose both the image and the table generated by the template in a <div style="float:right;width:300px;"> ... </div> block, the image and table will appear vertically stacked with the text on the left (which I suspect is the formatting you're after, for other suggestions see Wikipedia:Picture_tutorial). Regarding image at the top of the article rather than prefecture symbol, I agree the prefecture symbol may not be the most useful thing to see at the top of the article but I'd much prefer we swap the symbol and locator map than add a photograph (and if we add a photograph, I think it should be included in the table rather than outside the table). The point of the template and table is to have a visually consistent spot (top right) for the basic information about the article. I'd include prefecture symbol and locator map in "basic information". For biographical articles and articles about some geographic features (mountain peaks, waterfalls) I think it's possible for a photograph to be considered "basic information", but I don't see how a single photograph can possibly encompass an entire prefecture (I'm assuming you're not talking about a photograph from space). So for the prefecture articles I think photographs should follow the table. I've deferred converting the table in the Tokyo article to the template partly because the existing layout can't be preserved with the current template (Gunma also hasn't been converted due to the same reason - its table lists the prefectural fish). If you read this and still favor adding photographs, I think we might want to consider trying to convene a vote. -- Rick Block 18:07, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Yep, the div tag does the job. See Shiga Prefecture. In this case, the image cannot be wider than 285px, which is fine with me. The page looks much more interesting and colorful now. I don't favor putting it inside the data box if we can leave it outside like that on top of the data box. If this is okay with people, I will start inserting images in the same way for other prefectures. I really think there should be a nice picture at the top, the first thing that people see on the page. I can do this for the cities and towns, so why not for the prefectures? I don't mind swapping the pref. symbol and map. But if you're going to do this, why not use the map the Japanese page uses? It looks much better (and includes the Northern Territories). Also add the Japanese page's prefecture map too (if it has been redrawn to match the municipal mergers/dissolutions). And on the Japan map, it would be nice to see pointers to the major cities. A lot of work to be sure... Photojpn.org 20:28, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Swapping the symbol and existing map is trivial (only requires editing the template). Taku has previously expressed a preference for the English wikipedia maps (I prefer the ja: ones, but don't care enough to pursue this - although feel free). Per above, I don't think there should be a photograph in the position you've put the one for Shiga. Perhaps before adding more we should try to get a community consensus. -- Rick Block 22:58, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Well, I'm in no rush to add photos so take your time to vote on it. I've already started adding photos for some cities and towns in Shiga. (Eventually all the cities and towns in Shiga will have at least one image.) The image is always at the top of the page (mainly because there's so little text that the image would float on the top anyway). So I don't see why we can't do it for prefectures too. What I was trying to say from the beginning is that, seeing a photo is more interesting than seeing the prefectural symbol which is the first thing the eye looks at on the page. Photojpn.org 23:37, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Request for comments

It's not an affair on en.wp, but on ja. i would like to listen to your cooment on town template. Please see ja:Template:日本の町村 and leave your comment on its talk. My interest is what information is necessary for translators; I hope to have all ja town article provide anyone the minimum enough information in its first paragraph and this table. --Aphaea 05:38, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)

A question

I wonder whether some Japanese Wikipedians could help me out. The article on Adolf Hitler contains the sentence: "However in the East, he and Nazism are seen in a much more neutral context, sometimes even favorably, such as in Japan and India and much of the Islamic world." Is that true as far as Japan is concerned? Many thanks for any help you can give me. jguk 20:05, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)

It is not true. I live in Tokyo, and have studied Japan's Foreign Policy and History for some 16 years now. Granted, Hitler is not seen as the Devil Himself in Japan, but that is more because there was no direct effect on Japan (i.e. no Jewish Community or Holocaust Survivors group to remind society of his evil). Japanese would rather forget about the war and that portion of history-- they have moved on. If any memories remain, they center on Japan's atrocities in China, and/or the bombs in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Davejenk1ns 03:20, 7 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Precisely it is not true "no direct effect on Japan"; I would like to say quite small effect. Most of Japanese didn't notice or mind Hitler's racism actually, and the reason is has no substantial effect on the diplomatic relation between two states in those days. But it doesn't mean there was no effect. For example, there were actually Jewish communities in Japan (in Tokyo and Kobe) nad they received the effect, even if it was smaller than in Europe. On the other hand, it was entirely a community of foreigners in very limited area and most of Japanese had no relation to those communities. So it has been difficult for most Japanese to recognize the effect of German policies in those days. --Aphaea 02:32, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Japanese name order in the Wikipedia

There is currently a reworked vote going on about Japanese name order for the Wikipedia at Wikipedia:Manual of Style for Japan-related articles/Naming order. Since they are trying to establish a consistent policy for the Wikipedia, I suggest everyone participate. gK 01:52, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Japanese Naming Order

A sugggestion: Over at Wikipedia:Manual of Style for Japan-related articles/Naming order there is a vote on possible changes for what I thought was already a pretty good Wikipedia standard -- "use the form of a person's name that is most widely known and used by English speakers". Unfortunately there have been a few Eurocentric individuals who have suggested that every name be in Given Name-Surname order. I would like to see a few more votes for some common sense on this subpage. gK 07:35, 3 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Ahem. I can't speak for the others, but I'm not Euro-centric. Our readers are Euro-centric, however, and it's them I am catering to (or trying to). Noel (talk) 01:23, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Some people have recommended that default for Japanese names to be used in the English-language Wikipedia should be the GN-SN order, even when that person has never been known or referred to in that order. Although it is a highly loaded phrase, the only adequate description for an attitude like that, in my opinion, is Cultural imperialism, and I can see why some of our Japanese, Korean, and Chinese user/editors have been upset with such an opinion.

The registered user/editors for the Wikipedia are probably a fairly good representation of the regular "reader" population for the Wikipedia. If you look at the information that they have put on their user pages, you will see that there are fair percentage of them are not native-English speakers, nor do they live in countries where English is the dominant language. Although many of the initial policies for the Wikipedia were developed with the assumption that the main audience for the English-language Wikipedia would be native English speakers, I think that assumption deserves to be challenged since the Wikipedia is truely becoming a World Encyclopedia.

Recommending that the default for all Japanese names is GN-SN so that some native English-language speakers don't get confused is also making the assumption that knowing a person's last name is very important, when the real issue is "how do we make sure we have identified the correct person". For example, pre-Meiji Era individuals are almost exclusively known in their SN-GN order, so that is what people are going to type in the search field when they do a search on the Wikipedia. Even modern individuals, if they are not famous (or at least not famous outside of Japan) will most likely be known in their Japanese name order. As I research this issue, I am starting to thing that the Encyclopedia Britannica policy, where the article name for all Japanese persons is in the Japanese name order, may actually be the best policy for the Wikipedia as well. [[User:GK|gK ¿?]] 04:26, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Hello GK, I agree that having a standard helps people be sure they have gotten the right person. My proposed standard is SN-GN for people born before 1868; GN-SN for those born in or after 1868. It's a clear standard, and easy to implement. I wrote a draft of a page that would explain it if it should become policy. Take a look at (article removed). I'm interested in hearing the reactions of Wikipedians. Fg2 06:40, Nov 11, 2004 (UTC)

Here is my problem with the proposed Meiji divide. My knowledge about Japanese names is mostly for Japanese haiku and tanka poets. Every one of those poets, including the post-Meiji and even the living ones, are known almost exclusively by their SN-GN order, except for a very few, such as Ban'ya Natsuishi, who are very active in international haiku organizations and also publish in English. Even someone like the tanka poet Tawara Machi, who is well-known in Japan, is practically unknown outside of Japan, and then is mostly known by her SN-GN order. That is the reason that I am now leaning towards the solution that the article name should always be SN-GN. Redirects are easy to create. Some indication (still to be decided) of a person's last name within the article is easy to create. But always using the SN-GN order is the most clear and unambiguous standard that the Wikipedia can use. [[User:GK|gK ¿?]] 07:04, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Frankly, I don't see why this is such a debate. Japanese use SN-GN in all documents, official, business, personal-- everything. The only time Japanese use GN-SN is when they are trying to go out of their way for westerners, and trying to fit into western constraints. Because Japanese given names are not readily distinguishable for westerners (i.e. John, Thom, Bob), then they conformed to the GN-SN so unknowning westerners knew which was GN and which was SN. However, this is no longer the case, in my experience. Most people who deal with Japanese (or Koreans or Chinese) now have a basic understanding that name order is SN-GN. I don't think there should even be a Meji divide. I vote strongly for SN-GN in all cases. The redirects can be put in place where needed. If anything, we can perhaps have a {{Asian Name Order}} that can be included on all these redirects that gives a short explanation.Davejenk1ns 11:06, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)

It may be true that most people who deal with JP/KR/CN know the name order but that leaves out the other 99% of the readers. The English wiki should follow English conventions. The Japanese wiki should follow Japanese conventions. (IMO, that is). Note that the vote is not only about the title, it is also about names within the text so your redirect solution won't work there. Personally I think it would make sense to make all names (not just JP) SN, GN for the URL and title like you would find in most encyclopedias and name listings. Mdchachi|Talk 15:08, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)

What do you mean by "English conventions"? Do you mean English naming order (GN-SN)? Or do you mean the most common way of representing Japanese names in books, academic publications, newspapers, etc. when written in the English language? Those are two very different things. For example, consider Fujiwara Teika, the compiler of the important Japanese poetry anthology Hyakunin Isshu. That SN-GN order is clearly the most likely way that you will find his name in any publication. If you search Google for the reverse ("Teika Fujiwara"), you will find that almost all of those listing have a comma between the two names (that is "Teika, Fujiwara" or "GN, SN", which the opposite of what you are recommending) and that version of the name is in addition to more common "Fujiwara Teika".

re: "most encyclopedias": Give me an example. The Encyclopedia Britannica, which is usually considered the most authoritative encyclopedia in the English language, uses the SN-GN order exclusively for their titles, including people like Kurosawa Akira (Akira Kurosawa) who are well-known in the English-speaking world by their GN-SN order. [[User:GK|gK ¿?]] 04:22, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I meant the most common way the English-speaking world organizes human names in lists. They do it in SN, GN (with the comma) order. For everything from book catalogs to encyclopedias. Your Fujiwara example is an example of what happens when an error is perpetuated. Some editor along the way didn't know what he was doing. You're not claiming that they knowingly intended to refer to him as GN, SN are you? Mdchachi|Talk 21:54, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Again I ask, what encyclopedias? I've already mentioned Encyclopedia Britannica. I just checked at Encarta, and except for those modern Japanese that are well-known in the West such as Akira Kurosawa, the names are in the Japanese name order including the post Meiji divide Japanese poets Tawara Machi, Ishikawa Takuboku, Yosano Akiko, Miyazawa Kenji, Masaoka Shiki, Hagiwara Sakutaro. Encarta is inconsistent, however, since they have Mifune Toshirō (SN-GN) instead of Toshiro Mifune. These are modern Japanese authors that I found in Western name order: Ryu Murakami, Haruki Murakami, Banana Yoshimoto. Encarta is very inconsistent since Tawara Machi (SN-GN) and Banana Yoshimoto (GN-SN) are contemporaries. [[User:GK|gK ¿?]] 13:27, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)

As an English speaking person living in Japan, I write my Romanji name First Name Last Name. When I right my name in Katakana, I write it Last Name First Name. If we use George W. Bush as an example, if you do a Wikipedia search on Bush George, there is no redirect to his page. You can however find his entry with either George Bush or George W. Bush. Also, his title page is "George W. Bush". English articles should be titled FN LN, and a redirect used for those who might search for an article with LN FN convention. Revmachine21 11:46, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but your example of George Bush is insufficient, if not inapplicable. Of course George BUsh would appear as George Bush, because that is his name order in his home country (USA), his mother toungue, as well as the language of the article (both English). You admit that you use the convention LN GN when you write your name in Japanese, because that is the convention for Japan and Japanese. (I do the same, BTW). I still base my position on the most clean, consistent solution: always post in LN GN for Japanese names. Otherwise we will always be arguing exceptions, strange rules (Meiji divide?), or some other strangeness. Certainly some people will post GN LN, but editors can either 1) edit into LN GN format, 2) create a redirect, 3) correct the link into the existing LN GN article (most cases). We do the same for French, German, and European names (with their accent marks, graves, umlauts, etc.). Would we also force those names into standard 26 letter format for the benefit of the "English"? No. To do so with the Japanese (or Chinese or Korean) is potentially just as culturally offensive.Davejenk1ns 12:01, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)

BTW, I work for a German company in Japan, who as a matter of corporate policy, avoid any special characters in the spelling of their proper names in order to have a uniform, standardized and completely international operation. So when we have a German guy come into town, his meisi are printed up avoiding the funny German characters. This is a commonplace practice in international business and not culturally insenstive. This is just the way English & international business is done. Münster becomes Muenster, Schloß becomes Schloss etc.

Furthermore, you look at the front page of the Japan Times today at the "Koizumi to keep pressing Pyongyang" article first paragraph, I quote "Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi said Saturday...". Note the GN LN format, in a newspaper published in Japan with a Japanese editor-in-chief. Again, in English with GN LN standard.

I also checked other online Japanese publishers like Mainishi and Asashi Shimbum. They use the GN LN order when publishing in English. Enough said.... Revmachine21 13:50, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Of course, the difference here is that wikipedia is an encyclopedia. I saw somehere someone noted Britannica uses SN-GN (LN-GN) formats. If you look at some English publications on Japanese history or cultures like Go, you can find they are using SN-GN. In fact, the other day, I was reading an article about Go in mathematics and it refered to Japanese scholars in SN-GN formats just like for other Chinese and Korean people, even they are contemporary figures. In sum, we have contradicting cases about the convention of Japanese names in English writing. -- Taku 18:52, Nov 22, 2004 (UTC)

I have started a new section Japanese_name#Japanese_names_in_English. It is very mottainai (shameful to waste) that many interesting observations are buried in the talkpages! -- Taku 19:24, Nov 22, 2004 (UTC)

I just checked the Britannica as well as the Yahoo & Encyclopedia.com online encyclopedias. Britannica used the SN FN format in the article but the Yahoo & Encyclopedia.com used SN, FN in article titles and inside the article, they used FN SN as in the case of the Junichiro Koizumi article where they refer to Yoshiro Mori. The article about Yoshiro Mori referred to Keizo Obuchi. Unfortunately, there don't appear to be set rules in all encyclopedias.

Also, I checked my home library for books about Japan and again, they were split, one used SN GN, one GN SN. I stick to my original recommendation of using GN SN for articles. When in Rome, do as the Romans do... Revmachine21 01:46, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)

'When in Rome, do as the Romans do...' Go ni itte ha go ni shitagau. (When in the village, follow the villagers). Actually, that would argue for SN GN, as that is what Japanese do. Davejenk1ns 02:39, 26 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Time for a vote and a decision

Okay. I think it is time for a vote/decision. How do we resolve this? Revmachine has his opinion, Taku, Gk, and I have ours-- we have each made our points, presented evidence (encyclopedias on the one side, newspapers on the other). I think we need to set this out and go with it. Do we vote? (huzzah for LN GN!!!) Davejenk1ns 02:31, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)

LN GN

Davejenk1ns 02:31, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)

GN LN

I are having a poll right now :) Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_for_Japan-related_articles/Naming_order. I don't know why people started this debate here not there. -- Taku 02:56, Nov 23, 2004 (UTC)

Taku is correct in pointing out that there is already a poll going on at Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_for_Japan-related_articles/Naming_order, which is where I think that the poll should stay. Before that poll was set up, and even after the poll had been started, there have been debates on the subject of Japanese name order for Wikipedia articles that have also occured here, on the Talk page for the Naming_order subpage, on the Talk page for Wikipedia:Manual of Style (Japan-related articles) article, on various User and User Talk pages, in the Talk pages on a number of Japanese-related subjects, and even under the Request for Deletion on a particular article.

I am glad this debate is going on because it has helped me become clearing on my own opinions on the subject, and actually made me change my mind. This debate has already been going on for awhile, and for something so important, I think that it should continue for awhile longer. Until things are settled, it is probably fine to continue to follow the suggestion at Wikipedia:Manual of Style for Japan-related articles - "use the form of a person's name that is most widely known and used by English speakers". [[User:GK|gK ¿?]] 04:59, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Draft of article on Japanese name order

Latest comment: 19 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I've voted on some of the issues related to name order, and drafted an article that could be useful, depending on how the voting comes out. Everyone's invited to view the draft at (article removed) and to comment on the Discussion page. Fg2 10:59, Nov 9, 2004 (UTC)

Sounds good and simple solution. Makes it clear as to what the problem is, and why this solution was chosen.--ZayZayEM 02:02, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I like the idea of the page, and I agree with the text, except for the idea that we would go with the Meiji divide-- I thought that got the least amounts of votes... no? I'm sorry, but the reasoning behind the Meiji divide is simply unsound, for all the reasons we have argued on the discussion pages. Do I edit that draft page?Davejenk1ns 03:54, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)

There's no ideal solution

In my humble opinion, I think that all Japanese names SHOULD follow the English naming conventions, with redirects from the Japanese order, and little boxes to the side explaining (with kanji) the person's surname, given name, and in which order it most often appears. Inconsistency isn't great, and either way is going to create some inconsistencies with what is most often read. At least if we keep it consistent, with a little frame explaining what is most common, with redirects, everyone will get to the information, and get a nice little explanation of Japanese naming conventions, and what the most common usage is.

In cases where the most common usage is in doubt, Googlewar is your friend... Akira Kurosawa: 672,000. Kurosawa Akira: 192,000. That way people can be informed as to the most easily recognizable use, as well as which name is which. It'd be a good compromise that would stick to the official wikipedia policies, as well as providing the information on Japanese naming that really is integral to understanding Japanese names.

--Joshua Maciel 00:46, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

Japanese Stubs & Categories

I just discovered Template:Stubs. Would it be useful to create a template:Japanese-stub and also a Category:Japanese stub to help keep track of, and better organize, those Japanese articles that need work? See also: Wikipedia:Stub categories

Actually these stubs have been created, but the names were slightly different from what I was looking for. There is Template:Japan-stub and Category:Japan-related stubs.

Also: I found that there are already some Japanese related articles in Category:Historical_stubs, including Prince Hisaaki. There are also Japanese biographies listed at Category:People stubs, such as Abe Nobuyuki. There are a few Japanese articles in Category:Geography stubs, including Osa, Okayama. I found a single Japanese related article under Category:Literature stubs: Takizawa Bakin. gK 23:53, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Would we like to gather these separated stubs under Category:Japan-related stubs with {{Japan-stubs}}?--Aphaea 02:17, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Let's leave the other stubs, but also add the {{Japan-stubs}}. It's probably not the "wiki-way" to have two stubs, but maybe it will attract a few people who are not primarily interested in Japanese topics to edit a few of the articles. gK 03:24, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Japanese categories

Latest comment: 19 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I was just at Category:Japanese language, and it looks like there are entries there that should have been in Category:Japanese terms instead (e.g. Moshi moshi), but someone with a good knowledge of Japanese should be the one to do the recatogorization.gK 05:55, 7 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Okay-- I took a swipe at clening this up. Many of them are specific terms to Geisha or kimono (someone was busy...)Davejenk1ns 07:57, 7 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Thanks!

If the terms are too obscure, maybe we should think about a VfD for each one of them with a recommendation that the information first be merged into the appropriate larger category (geisha, kimono, etc.), plus a possible copy to the Wiktionary. The best thing would be to gather up a list, nominate them all at the same time, and make sure that all the Japanese Wikipedians are on board for voting for deletion so they don't get outnumbered by the inclusionists [1]. gK 09:01, 7 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Authors and Writers

There are two categories that seem closely related,

Should we merge these, or should we insert text to help authors of articles choose which one to place an article in?

If we want to match what has been done with other language/nationality categories, they should are all be under Category:Japanese writers. Under that should be the subcategories Category:Japanese poets and Category:Japanese novelists. There could also be a Category:Japanese dramatists and playwrights to cover Noh, Kabuki, etc. Then all those List of Japanese authors can be hidden in a new Category:Lists of Japanese authors. To do all of that, however, would be lots of work. It would be much easier to just merge everything into Category:Japanese authors. [Also: Unless someone can think of someone to add to it, the Category:Japanese historians should probably be deleted since it is currently empty.] gK 12:07, 7 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I am for to merge them. --Aphaea 02:21, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Yes, I agree we should merge them, but under which category? The easier choice (authors) or the way most of the other Wikipedia categories are structured (writers), which will require much more editing? gK 03:24, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I prefer the latter; unity helps us greatly to collaborate each others IMO. But I don't want to make a dicision too rushly. If necessary, we will have a vote. Or we would wait to make a general concensus. --Aphaea 06:28, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I'm nominating Japanese authors for deletion. Oliver Chettle 08:30, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

more under Category:Japanese people

I was just looking at this category and it is a real mess. For example:

Category:Japanese sportspeople --> Category:Japanese people

Category:Japanese athletes --> Category:Japanese people by occupation --> Category:Japanese people

Both Category:Japanese sportspeople and Category:Japanese athletes have a bunch of subcategories, so it will be a real mess untangling them. For example, the both have Category:Japanese baseball players, but only the first one has Category:Olympic swimmers of Japan (which only has one person in it).

Somewhere in the Wikipedia, or maybe it was Media-Wiki I saw a tool that allowed one to show a tree of linkages for a particular category, but now I can't find it. It would really help straiten things out. ;-) [[User:GK|gK ¿?]] 11:42, 26 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Category:Japan-related stubs?

I was going through some of the Category:Japan-related stubs to see what there was, and if there was anything that I could un-stub (I did de-stubbed Tsubouchi Shoyo - see [2]). One of the japan-stubs is for Hiro Yamagata. The Wikipedia article doesn't say much, and the English page on his official website shows a person with a certain amount of arrogance and self-importance, but has nothing that shows he might be worthy of a Wikipedia article. Is this just a vanity entry, or is he someone that can have something more written on him?

Also: I couldn't find anything on Fukuda Eiko in English that wasn't connected to the Wikipedia.

Finally: Does the Iwakura Tomomi article have enough in it to remove the stub template (although it would be nice to add a picture of the 500 Yen Japanese currency that carries his portrait)? Another candidate for removing the stub template: Kakinomoto no Hitomaro

Cleanup: I added the cleanup template to the Kabuki article. The article needs some better organization and more info. It doesn't even mention the famous Kabuki dramatist Chikamatsu Monzaemon (whose article is another japan-stub). [[User:GK|gK ¿?]] 11:24, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Thank you for your comment. As for Hiro Yamagata he is popular but imo not a great artist. Perhaps he is worthy to have a stub but I can't expand it by myself ... I haven't heard Fukuda Eiko, later I will try to get info after I engage more important themes

Thank yhou for your comment on Iwakura Tomimi. I feel happy it doesn't seem to be a stub. As for Kakinomoto no Hitomaro, I would like to replace stub templte to expand. We can refer his works more closely, I think.

Chikamatsu Monzaemon could be a good candidate for JCOTW? But now it would be better for us to change this collaboration from COTW to the collaboration of this forenights(sorry I missed the right word ... meaning two weeks. --Aphaea 15:07, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)

re: Chikamatsu Monzaemon: The best strategy might be to start with a fixup of the Kabuki article and add in some of the important actors, playrights, plays, etc. that the article is missing. Then start attacking any related topics that are stubs or red-linked, such as Chikamatsu Monzaemon. (BYW: It was interesting to find out that Tsubouchi Shoyo who I just de-stubbed has a Kabuki connection. I knew about his novel writing and criticism through comments made by Shiki, but I didn't know about the rest of his story.)

I've also been turning any Japan-related {stubs} that I accidentally run into into {japan-stubs}, but if anyone want's some real mindless work to do for awhile (instead of thinking hard about rewrites and fixups for Japan-related articles), they can go through Category:Stub and Category:Substubs looking for articles to convert. ;-) [[User:GK|gK ¿?]] 17:13, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I moved some substubs into Japan-stubs' pool. And tried to add some edits. I think there are more substubs untagged. As for geographical stubs I will make a proposal. --Aphaea 07:52, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

As far as I can tell the author Hiro Yamagata listed is more accurately a translator. He has a lot of translation credits if you look up his name at amazon.co.jp (assuming it's the same person). I think Aphaea is referring to the artist who is probably more famous than the "author". See http://www.ilec.or.jp/jp/store/yamagata.html and www.schwarzenegger.com

There's a bio of Fukuda Eiko here if anybody feels like translating it.

Mdchachi|Talk 22:20, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Thank you for your clarification. BTW if we translate materials out of wikipedia, it would be a copyright violation? Translation is a derivative work ... --Aphaea 03:07, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I think a literal (chokuyaku) translation would violate copyright but if you summarize or rephrase the information then there should be no problem. Mdchachi|Talk 19:39, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Japan-related Feature Articles

Just out of curiosity, I tried to go through the list of past feature articles, and find any existing Feature Articles that had some relation to Japan. The bold titles were featured on the main page. Some else should probably also take a look at the list because it is l-o-n-g and I may have missed something (I almost missed the Go article. Also, I didn't look though the archives to see if there were any Japan-related articles that didn't make it. (see also Category:Wikipedia featured articles). [[User:GK|gK ¿?]] 13:30, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Japanese toilet Japan general election, 2003

Kimi Ga Yo

Could some of the Japanese members take a look at the Kimi Ga Yo article. To me, it looks rather POV. If the article does a fairly good job of representing the arguments being used in Japan, then it looks like the pro-Kimi Ga Yo camp are misrepresenting the facts (see my remarks at Talk:Kimi Ga Yo). [[User:GK|gK ¿?]] 10:39, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Japanese name from an image

Hi. I found the characters of a Yu-Gi-Oh! character named "Murashibe" here http://www.janime.net/images/series1_11/02/45.jpg - I want the characters so I can post them on the English Yu-GI-Oh! articles. Can someone please post the characters in text here so I can copy and paste them?

I posted the same prompt back at "Chatsubo" on the JA wikipedia. WhisperToMe 22:38, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)

More on various Japan-related Categories

User:JesseW has created some tools for looking at how verious categories are organized. When I asked for his help, he created a couple of pages to show the organization of everything under Category:Japan. There are at User talk:JesseW/Children of Category Japan list and Image:Japan_category_graph.png (warning:a very large file). [[User:GK|gK ¿?]] 14:24, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Graphic for japan-stub?

There is discussion going on at Template talk:Japan-stub on what would be an appropriate graphic to add to the japan-stub. If someone knows of a good drawing (or photo maybe) that would look good shrunk down to approx. 40 pixels square that is in the public domain or could be used under the GFDL license, please join the discussion. [[User:GK|gK ¿?]] 08:12, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)