![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. 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. |
The article says that beginning in the 12th century martial arts consisting of judo, karate, etc were practiced. I contend this fact because Judo was founded sometime around 1882 ( http://www.judoinfo.com/jhist4.htm) and karate was formalized a few years after. "The first public demonstration of karate in Japan was in 1917 by Gichin Funakoshi, at the Butoku-den in Kyoto (Hassell 1984)." ( http://www.karateinternational.net/karatehistory.php) Mustamike 03:11, 7 July 2006 (UTC)mustamike
I don't want to get into another edit war but I don't think blanking of a lot of information that had citations is okay. If you have an issue with the information, it should be discussed first I think. Tortfeasor 02:58, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
The section which keeps getting blanked out are the ones that mention Korea. In the intro everyone agreed that the Yayoi were from Korea and may be China. But people keep deleteing Korea from the summary section at the bottom of the article. In addition, people keep modifying the Baekje section or deleteing it. I think the current paragraph is neutral and should be left as is about Baekje. We don't need to bring in theories about a tributory relationship (Almost all historians have thrown this idea out about Baekje and Minima) and we don't need to bring in the current theory about Yamato being a colony or expeditionary force from Baekje cause trying to get an agreement on the wording of this paragraph would be difficult. I think leaving the sentence as the relationship between Baekje and Yamato was close but the exact nature is unresolved is neutral and will have to do.
Anyways, if anyone else would like to suggest a rational solution to the continual blanking of relevant and cited information, I would appreciate it. Thanks. Tortfeasor 17:59, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
Oh come on now. This "Baekje is not a Korean kingdom" logic is a play on semantics. Just look at the Baekje article, everything indicates that it is a "Korean kingdom". --- Hong Qi Gong 18:05, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
"people keep deleteing Korea from the summary section at the bottom of the article. In addition, people keep modifying the Baekje section or deleteing it."
Its obvious. Some users cannot admit to the fact that Japanese culture came from Asia, namely China and Baekje. This is probably the third time I saw a user start a discussion about how some users are deleting information about Baekje.
Baekje is a Korean kingdom! During the Three Kingdoms period. Make sure you know what happened in Korean history before writing things down on talk pages. Read History of Korea. Good friend100 18:41, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
I did not write anything in the Japan article. Most of the content is something I have not studied before. I am not trying to endorse Baekje. The point is, that the Baekje information is being deleted frequently! Good friend100 20:21, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
The only part I wrote in was the change from "Seven Year War" to " Imjin War". I don't write false information to articles that I don't even know and I take your comment about "socks" offensive, buddy.
Baekej literally taught Japan. They introduced Chinese calligraphy and Chinese culture. Japan before that was at a much lower cultural level than China or Korea. Baekje's influence has been an important part of Japanese history.
How is the Baekje information not as important as Chinese information? Korea itself was the gateway to Chinese culture from Japan and brought Chinese culture to Japan, especially Buddhism.
I believe the users against Baekje information are either denieing a larger Baekje influence in the article, or are wholly believing Korea was only a "gateway" to China. Good friend100 20:59, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
It seems you don't fully understand what "endorse" means. Endorsing something is To give approval of or support to as written in a dictionary. I may have written "I don't endorse" but that is because endorse may also mean "advertise", for example you endorse a type of cereal on TV.
Of course I would support that Baekje influenced Japan! Of course you would endorse that Tokyo is the capital of Japan. Or you would of course endorse that Mount Everest is currently the tallest mountain on Earth.
Baekje influenced Japan and the subject of this discussion is about how there are several users that decide to erase Baekje off of this article. Good friend100 22:53, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
On the section on Baekje, the paragraph states Buddism, pottery, burial style etc..., these technologies were passed around 538, 300, 250 AD. Yamato helps Baekje in 663 AD and lose the war together. How can these technologies be a gift or tribute for help with military when the technology was passed on prior to military support and they lose the war? Here's a gift, Thanks for helping us lose the war??? Which you won't help us for 100s of years after the gifts are given??? We have to at least make the paragraph chronologically sensical. If you mention the transfer of technology as a gift or tribute you are forced to mention the current belief of Baekje being the origin of Yamato From Paekche to Origin of Yamato. There is no other way to explain 100s of years in difference. Otherwise we can not mention tribute or colony of Baekje and write the nature of the relationship is not resolved yet. Tyler111
The mass introduction of Chinese writing system is not a gift or tribute either, it was because they lost the war and people of Baekje fled to Japan.
Hideyoshi launched Seven-Year War.
I changed the above statement to "Hideyoshi launched the Imjin War" because of the grammatical error and the name of the article as changed as well, is that ok? Good friend100 02:52, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
as per cfd
Why did you just delete all the information about Korea and China on the article???
Just because there is an edit war doesn't mean that is an excuse to delete all information about Korea and China. Please revert the changes. Also, the deleted information are all true.
??? Good friend100 12:58, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
Name of Dokuto will be an edit battle if there are a lot of Japanese nationalists. If you hope for the friendship of Japan and South Korea, the article on Japan must be stopped and the South Korean must stop the hijacking.
First before I go on I am going to ask everyone this. Why are all these people attacking Korea and not leaving their own name. Is because you are too shameful to even show your own name to the public? If you believe the Koreans are nationalists, POVs, hijackers, vandalizers etc etc... then why don't you come out boldly, instead of skimpering around in the back?
Is it because you know we're right, or are you not strong enough to attack Korea, or specifically me? Its just rididulous with that excuse just to delete "exxagerated" content that "Korean hijackers" wrote.
I don't believe the "exxagerated" material had information such as "Korea went to Japan and found barbarians" or "Koreans taught the Japanese everything" or "Japan should thank Korea for helping them" or "Japan is actually Korea".
All the content that were deleted are true and they are not exxagerated. The edit should be reverted. Good friend100 19:11, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
Finally... -- Kamosuke 09:37, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
Why are the multiple citations being deleted and any mention of Korea being deleted. Although the terms China or mainland may be used like the term Rome you need to acknowledge the nation the brought the culture especially if it is 100s of years later. Also, when you have so much evidence it would be silly to word things vaguely and gloss over 3 or more centuries as if nothing was happening in Japan in those centuries and popping up all of a sudden in the mid 7th to 8th century. When we speak of America which is heavily Roman influenced, England is always mentioned as the source of various culture and technology. Even though the Romans or sometimes the French or German may have introduced things to England, if England was the source or reason for America practicing a certain culture/tradition or technology England is mentioned even if the origin is Roman or European. Especially if they have the name of the King or scholar that brought the technology to America. We need to find a compromise, if some users do not want any mention of Korea, please bring in multiple references to counter the multiple references above and in archive sections. It is almost impossible to talk of ancient Japan without mentioning Korea, please don't let your emotions work against logic and evidence. Tyler111
Friendly reminder of referenced citations by other people again:
1. Many people from Korea emigrated to Japan. Those people brought rice cultivation and metal work to Japan during the Late Jomon Period. Jomon people started to learn and practice those new things. The cultural effect from Korea was reflected in the shape of earthenware vessels, tools, technology and society in Yayoi period. http://www.mnsu.edu/emuseum/prehistory/japan/yayoi/yayoi.html
2. According to one estimate, Yayoi Japan received several million immigrants from Korea, utterly overwhelming the genetic contribution of Jomon people (thought to have numbered around 75,000 just before the Yayoi transition). If so, modern Japanese are descendants of Korean immigrants who developed a modified culture of their own over the last 2,000 years. http://www.asianresearch.org/articles/2350.html
3. The Yayoi period brought also the introduction of iron and other modern ideas from Korea into Japan. http://www.japan-guide.com/e/e2131.html
4. Unlike Jomon pottery, Yayoi pottery was very similar to contemporary South Korean pottery in shape. Many other elements of the new Yayoi culture were unmistakably Korean and previously foreign to Japan, including bronze objects, weaving, glass beads, and styles of tools and houses. http://www.faculty.fairfield.edu/faculty/hodgson/Courses/so191/PacificRimReadings/JapaneseRoots.html
5. In this sense, a very great part of Japan's origins, both culturally and ethnically, can be traced back to Korea. http://www.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/ getarticle.pl5?nn20020312b6.htm
6) Cambridge History of Japan:
7) The rank system adopted by Japan in 603 CE, although based on the Chinese Wei, was most directly influenced by "Koguryeo (Goguryeo) and Paekche(Baekje)." [3].
8) Korean immigrant: Kuratsukuri no Obitotori who cast a bronze Buddha at Asuka-dera [4].
9) The "conclusion that Yamato's relations with the Korean kingdoms had become more active in the last half of the fourth century":
10) There is "little doubt that the Japanese court was determined" to "make extensive use of Korean experts for an accelerated and wide-ranging program of modernization." [6].
11) Disovering the Arts of Japan: "Early Japanese temple compounds were based on Korean Paekche temples of the sixth and seventh centuries." [8].
12) Korea: A Religious History states that monks sent to Japan include Hyep'yon (Keiben in Japan), Hyeja (Keiji in Japan) was the tutor of Prince Shotoku. [9].
13) Gateway to Japan: The famous artist, Tori Busshi, "was of Korean descent." [10].
14) A History of Writing in Japan: The Nihon Shoki states that King of Paekche sent Atiki, who taught about horse culture. Also, it menions a Wani of Paekche who tutored the crown prince. [11].
15) The New York Times: Japanese National Treasure No. 1, a famous contemplative Maitreya, was "almost certainly carved in Korea and sent to Japan. [12].
Compare:
"Government-industry cooperation, a strong work ethic, mastery of high technology, and a comparatively small defense allocation (1% of GDP) helped Japan advance with extraordinary rapidity to the rank of second most technologically powerful economy in the world after the US and the third-largest economy in the world after the US and China, measured on a purchasing power parity (PPP) basis." - CIA Factbook
"Government-industry cooperation, a strong work ethic, mastery of high technology, and a comparatively small defense allocation have helped Japan advance with extraordinary speed to become one of the largest economies in the world." - wiki article
Please choose more original wording. 70.187.164.216 03:17, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
1. Introduction The introduction is vague and does not deliver valuable information to the reader. The details it does have are almost irrelevant. Nobody cares if Japan is at "over 377,873 square miles... the 62nd largest country by area". Being a G4 member is not significant. It's just a group of countries trying to get seats as permanent members of the UN Secruity Council.
Instead, the introduction should highlight key points of Japan: 660BC founding, early Chinese/Korean influence, the Heian period, the Tokugawa shogunate, the Meiji Restoration, WWII, and re-emergence as an economic power.
2. Korea references Any references to Korea have these strange additional comments that make the sentences convoluted and difficult to comprehend. The edits seem to have political motivations behind them, somehow trying to dilute Korean influence and even denigrate Korea.
Example A) "The start of the Yayoi period around 300 BC marked the influx of new practices such as rice farming, shamanism and iron and bronze-making brought by migrants from Korea and probably China."
Read this from "Japan's Delayed Transition Into Early Civilization" by Edward Kaplan:
"The evidence seems conclusive that at least the beginnings of the shift to the Yayoi archaeological stage was effected by Mongoloidal ethnic type people from the Korean peninsula. (Some Japanese prefer to believe these migrants came from the lower Yangzi, but this contradicts the linguistic evidence for a Korean connection.)"
"Korea is a much more likely point of origin for the Yayoi than China. It is not likely that they came from as far south as the mouth of the Yangzi at the bottom of subzone C1, as some recent Japanese scholars have proposed. Even scholars, if they are Japanese, do not fancy having Korean ancestors. (Remember, Korea was a Japanese colony from 1909 to 1945, and imported Korean labors still do the kinds of dirty jobs in Japan that we reserve for migrant laborers from Latin America.)"
http://www.ac.wwu.edu/~kaplan/eas201/201-13.pdf
If French statesmen were to introduce the concept of democracy to Britain, then it is stated so. There is no need to mention that democracy originated in Greece or that it came to France from Rome. We're grasping at straws here to find this non-Korea connection by way of rice DNA and some random Chinese artifacts (all brought to Japan via Korea anyhow).
Example B) "During the 5th and 6th centuries, the sophisticated Chinese writing system, Buddhism, advanced pottery, and ceremonial burial were all introduced as tributes from the neighboring kingdom of Baekje in exchange for military support from Japan which they were dependent on."
The "tribute" claim by Japanese scholars is in dispute and largely dismissed by both Korean and Western scholars. The point of the sentence is to describe when important advances were introduced to Japan and how. Instead, it seems to focus on trying to make an entirely different statement.
3. Pictures This article is cluttered with pictures. Also, there is constant change in the pictures included. Having a stable article is important and there is no need for some of these pictures (Meiji era Emperor Jimmu, two pictures of the imperial family, parliament floor that is barely visible, stock exchange symbols, etc.)
4. Repetitive statements and general need for copy editing On the emperor: "He performs ceremonial duties and holds no real power; not even emergency reserve powers. Power is mainly held by the Prime Minister, and other elected members of the Diet. Sovereignty is vested in the Japanese people by the constitution." Power is mentioned three times in two sentences. Okay, we know the emperor has no real power and power is with politicians who are elected by the people. I don't know why this was edited like this.-- Sir Edgar 01:42, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
There are many Japan side editors that have used nasty words worse than this. I will not point them out but don't just reprimand the Korea side. Your statement makes it seem like the Korea side is all at fault. Good friend100 02:16, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
Hermeneus, I think you are confusing efforts to provide accurate information in articles with efforts to politicize. By the way, it's quite laughable that you call me a "PR campaign manager of Korea" and put a link to VANK when I've only visited their site once in my entire life and I've worked five times more on Japan-related articles than Korea-related ones. Really, I'm quite upset that after putting in so much content and work into editing Japan that all the focus is on Korea-related references. What is up with this obsession with deleting all references to Korea, except for colonization of it? Baffling.-- Sir Edgar 05:13, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
It should seem even more funny to you Sir Edgar that I myself am beginning to wonder if Hermeneus has made an accusation that warrants investigation. ~~collective Conscious An yong ni gaseo Chingu.
The Japanese nationalism on Wikipedia, specifically anti-Korean bias on countless articles, has really gotten out of hand, with the concerted revert wars, destruction of months of hard work by many editors, vote-stuffing, personal attacks, and on and on. It is really driving away many well-intentioned editors and weakening the credibility and quality, as well as damaging the image of Japan. It will take months or years of patient work to undo the childish tantrums.
Dollarfifty 05:32, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
Kamosuke and IP 130.127.67.137 (aka "Collective Conscious"), you are in violation of Wikipedia:Assume good faith, Wikipedia:No personal attacks, and Wikipedia:Harassment. I have warned you previously. Focus on the article and avoid personal references. You may apologize to me now for your rude and inappropriate behavior or I have no choice but to report you both, especially IP 130.127.67.137 for wikistalking and making threats.-- Sir Edgar 23:44, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/elsewhere/journalist/story/0,7792,625427,00.html
"I, on my part, feel a certain kinship with Korea, given the fact that it is recorded in the Chronicles of Japan that the mother of Emperor Kammu was of the line of King Muryong of Paekche," he [Emperor Akihito] told reporters.
Unfortunately, many of Korea's greatest monuments were burned down by the Japanese. National treasures were looted and destroyed. This can give the impression of cultural superiority.
"Historians believe Japan carried away the bulk of its Korean cultural assets during two aggressions: the 16th-century invasion of the Korean peninsula and its 20th-century occupation."
"But the size of the haul is astounding. Eighty percent of all Korean Buddhist paintings are believed to be in Japan. And, says Seoul art historian Kwon Cheeyun, "35,000 Korean art objects and 30,000 rare books have been confirmed to be there, too." That's only the tip of the iceberg: much more is believed to be hidden away in private collections."
"More than 1,000 bronze, gold and celadon pieces owned by the late businessman Takenosuke Ogura now make up the core of the Tokyo National Museum's Korean section. Another precious item is a two-meter-tall stone tablet, originally built in northern Korea to commemorate the country's repelling of the 16th-century Japanese invasion."
Taeguk Warrior 00:49, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:History_of_Japan#Korean_influences Taeguk Warrior 20:40, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
Korean often deletes an important event of the history of Japan. They has value that is higher than Begja by these events though they insist, "It is worthless" on this event.
What can be higher in value than learning how to write?
militarism of Japan.
Koreans, Explain the reason to delete this event. -- HaradaSanosuke 18:13, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
Overall, some people need to change their attitude toward Koreans. Good friend100 00:57, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
Is it true that in Japan it is still widely believed that
倭国 established
任那日本府 somewhere in
Baekje? That was the main evidence for Japanese to deny any significant influence from
Baekje, I think. However, as you know, 任那日本府 was a representative example of the manipulated history of Japanese imperialism before WWII. It is ridiculous to say that the culture of Baekje was inferior to that in Japan at that time.
Ginnre 18:15, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
In the main article the Yayoi are referenced to be from Korea and maybe China. This agreement was difficultly reached last month because of the overwhelming evidence about Korea and DNA theory adding to the Korea evidence and including South China as well. Then in the bottom summary section people keep deleteing any mention of Korea. Instead it states China as the influence such as Yayoi culture etc. This needs to be corrected. Either the information above about the Yayoi needs new references pointing to mainly China as the Yayoi or the summary at the bottom of the article needs to mention "China and Korea". Please do not let your emotions work against logic and evidence. Tyler11
It is also not about China, America, England or Germany but can't exclude them if they are a part of your past, You can't just say this is about Japan and exclude ALL these countries.
But Japan based their root on Chinese buddhism cause Korea was based on Chinese buddhism. The people from Korea brought it to Japan initially and you can't just bypass that cause you have the names of the men who brought it and the king who commissioned it. You can't compare Japanese buddhism to Chinese buddhism without mentioning Korean buddhism cause then you can see the transition in practices and the differences which appear from Japanese to Chinese make since when you study the Korean practices. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.17.96.104 ( talk • contribs) .
Is that a joke or something? Your links are names of Chinese people. Are you saying that Korean and Chinese names are the same? Also what do you mean by write the Korean's name? Good friend100 03:45, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
Thats like asking somebody who invented fire. Or asking who brought Buddhism to Korea. Buddhism went to Japan by means of Korean Buddhist monks, traders, missionaries, etc. There is no specific person. >Gegesongs, Harada Sanosuke Good friend100 20:59, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
Please join discussions at Talk:Imjin Wars. I think the correct title of that article needs to be Hideyoshi's Invasion of Korea. This is based on my Google Books count, which represent citations of scholarly materials....
Invasion of Korea comes out on top, while Hideyoshi's Invasion of Korea is 2nd place. However, because Invasion of Korea is used in the context of "Hideyoshi" anyways, Hideyoshi's Invasion of Korea is a more appropriate name.
Also invasion of Korea outnumbers Imjin War(s) by a factor of 9 to 1. Hideyoshi's Invasion(s) of Korea outnumbers Imjin War(s) by a factor of 3 to 1. Also, Imjin War(s) is usually never used in the Japanese context, as most instances have the word "Korea" prominently in the book title, topic, chapter title, etc., proving that it is used mostly in the Korean context, and not in the general context.
Finally, all mention of "Hideyoshi's Invasion of Korea" in this (and all Japan-related articles) should use "Hideyoshi's Invasion of Korea" rather than "Imjin War".-- Endroit 17:05, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
I live in Japan. However, I have not heard the fight of the Imugen river. Wikipedia of Japan is named "Bunroku-Keicho-NO-Eki" ja:文禄・慶長の役. -- HaradaSanosuke 17:33, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
As the original request said, please join the discusstion at Talk:Imjin Wars. Discussion here at Talk:Japan is likely not to be read or taken into account when a decision is made about Imjin Wars. Fg2 00:47, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
Dear reverters, please be careful and do not cancel contributions that are not of your concern. -- LittleTree 01:02, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
What were written in the subsection 'Heisei era' of 'Modern era' were about post-war period of Showa era. Nothing to do with Heisei era. So I made a subsubsection in the previous subsection 'Meiji, Taisho and Showa eras' to put the sentences in. Then, there is nothing in 'Heisei era'. Looking back in the history, some descriptions about Heisei era were removed by the edit of '06:06, 14 July 2006' [16]. At that time, the subsection was named 'Modern Japan'. Then the subsection was renamed to 'Heisei period' at 04:05, 21 July 2006 [17]. So I temporarily restored what were removed before. Any comment?-- LittleTree 02:16, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
I have completely rewritten this section, which was written in SHAMEFULLY HORRIBLE ENGLISH. As I have stated elsewhere, these additions are very hard to read, and are confusing information, often strongly biased as well. It was not the case here, though. However, some sentences were thrown completely randomly... and without references, it goes without saying. I have taken out Higuchi Ichiyō of the list of "representative" Japanese writers. And changed "typical" to "representative", if there is such a thing. "Typical" is a terrible adjective. Essentialist, and completely ignorant of the diversity of modern Japanese literature. I have replaced her by Tanizaki, arguably a more central writer in the literaty canon. Shogo Kawada 23:52, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
Editors speaking English as a second language should either post their information on the talk page for others to edit and then insert into the article. Good friend100 00:04, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
Accoding to Encyclopædia Britannica [18]
Please make it to an easy sentence.
It wasn't a result of imports. The Baekje court retreated to Japan after being conquered and passed Korean and Chinese culture to Japan. Good friend100 13:55, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
"At over 377,873 square kilometers". I find this clause confusing. If we have information on the country's size down to the exact kilometer, why use the word "over"? MarkBuckles 23:00, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
It seems to me that this means the country is not exactly 377,873 square kilometers but something like 377,873.6 square kilometers. SIGURD42 20:50, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
Hope u all appreciate the new template i created for the "misc. topics" section. WoodElf 10:37, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
This article is 66kb long, which is more than double the recommended size... someone, anyone, a wikiwizard, PLEASE help reduce the size of the history and economy sections.
WoodElf 10:50, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. 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. |
The article says that beginning in the 12th century martial arts consisting of judo, karate, etc were practiced. I contend this fact because Judo was founded sometime around 1882 ( http://www.judoinfo.com/jhist4.htm) and karate was formalized a few years after. "The first public demonstration of karate in Japan was in 1917 by Gichin Funakoshi, at the Butoku-den in Kyoto (Hassell 1984)." ( http://www.karateinternational.net/karatehistory.php) Mustamike 03:11, 7 July 2006 (UTC)mustamike
I don't want to get into another edit war but I don't think blanking of a lot of information that had citations is okay. If you have an issue with the information, it should be discussed first I think. Tortfeasor 02:58, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
The section which keeps getting blanked out are the ones that mention Korea. In the intro everyone agreed that the Yayoi were from Korea and may be China. But people keep deleteing Korea from the summary section at the bottom of the article. In addition, people keep modifying the Baekje section or deleteing it. I think the current paragraph is neutral and should be left as is about Baekje. We don't need to bring in theories about a tributory relationship (Almost all historians have thrown this idea out about Baekje and Minima) and we don't need to bring in the current theory about Yamato being a colony or expeditionary force from Baekje cause trying to get an agreement on the wording of this paragraph would be difficult. I think leaving the sentence as the relationship between Baekje and Yamato was close but the exact nature is unresolved is neutral and will have to do.
Anyways, if anyone else would like to suggest a rational solution to the continual blanking of relevant and cited information, I would appreciate it. Thanks. Tortfeasor 17:59, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
Oh come on now. This "Baekje is not a Korean kingdom" logic is a play on semantics. Just look at the Baekje article, everything indicates that it is a "Korean kingdom". --- Hong Qi Gong 18:05, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
"people keep deleteing Korea from the summary section at the bottom of the article. In addition, people keep modifying the Baekje section or deleteing it."
Its obvious. Some users cannot admit to the fact that Japanese culture came from Asia, namely China and Baekje. This is probably the third time I saw a user start a discussion about how some users are deleting information about Baekje.
Baekje is a Korean kingdom! During the Three Kingdoms period. Make sure you know what happened in Korean history before writing things down on talk pages. Read History of Korea. Good friend100 18:41, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
I did not write anything in the Japan article. Most of the content is something I have not studied before. I am not trying to endorse Baekje. The point is, that the Baekje information is being deleted frequently! Good friend100 20:21, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
The only part I wrote in was the change from "Seven Year War" to " Imjin War". I don't write false information to articles that I don't even know and I take your comment about "socks" offensive, buddy.
Baekej literally taught Japan. They introduced Chinese calligraphy and Chinese culture. Japan before that was at a much lower cultural level than China or Korea. Baekje's influence has been an important part of Japanese history.
How is the Baekje information not as important as Chinese information? Korea itself was the gateway to Chinese culture from Japan and brought Chinese culture to Japan, especially Buddhism.
I believe the users against Baekje information are either denieing a larger Baekje influence in the article, or are wholly believing Korea was only a "gateway" to China. Good friend100 20:59, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
It seems you don't fully understand what "endorse" means. Endorsing something is To give approval of or support to as written in a dictionary. I may have written "I don't endorse" but that is because endorse may also mean "advertise", for example you endorse a type of cereal on TV.
Of course I would support that Baekje influenced Japan! Of course you would endorse that Tokyo is the capital of Japan. Or you would of course endorse that Mount Everest is currently the tallest mountain on Earth.
Baekje influenced Japan and the subject of this discussion is about how there are several users that decide to erase Baekje off of this article. Good friend100 22:53, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
On the section on Baekje, the paragraph states Buddism, pottery, burial style etc..., these technologies were passed around 538, 300, 250 AD. Yamato helps Baekje in 663 AD and lose the war together. How can these technologies be a gift or tribute for help with military when the technology was passed on prior to military support and they lose the war? Here's a gift, Thanks for helping us lose the war??? Which you won't help us for 100s of years after the gifts are given??? We have to at least make the paragraph chronologically sensical. If you mention the transfer of technology as a gift or tribute you are forced to mention the current belief of Baekje being the origin of Yamato From Paekche to Origin of Yamato. There is no other way to explain 100s of years in difference. Otherwise we can not mention tribute or colony of Baekje and write the nature of the relationship is not resolved yet. Tyler111
The mass introduction of Chinese writing system is not a gift or tribute either, it was because they lost the war and people of Baekje fled to Japan.
Hideyoshi launched Seven-Year War.
I changed the above statement to "Hideyoshi launched the Imjin War" because of the grammatical error and the name of the article as changed as well, is that ok? Good friend100 02:52, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
as per cfd
Why did you just delete all the information about Korea and China on the article???
Just because there is an edit war doesn't mean that is an excuse to delete all information about Korea and China. Please revert the changes. Also, the deleted information are all true.
??? Good friend100 12:58, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
Name of Dokuto will be an edit battle if there are a lot of Japanese nationalists. If you hope for the friendship of Japan and South Korea, the article on Japan must be stopped and the South Korean must stop the hijacking.
First before I go on I am going to ask everyone this. Why are all these people attacking Korea and not leaving their own name. Is because you are too shameful to even show your own name to the public? If you believe the Koreans are nationalists, POVs, hijackers, vandalizers etc etc... then why don't you come out boldly, instead of skimpering around in the back?
Is it because you know we're right, or are you not strong enough to attack Korea, or specifically me? Its just rididulous with that excuse just to delete "exxagerated" content that "Korean hijackers" wrote.
I don't believe the "exxagerated" material had information such as "Korea went to Japan and found barbarians" or "Koreans taught the Japanese everything" or "Japan should thank Korea for helping them" or "Japan is actually Korea".
All the content that were deleted are true and they are not exxagerated. The edit should be reverted. Good friend100 19:11, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
Finally... -- Kamosuke 09:37, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
Why are the multiple citations being deleted and any mention of Korea being deleted. Although the terms China or mainland may be used like the term Rome you need to acknowledge the nation the brought the culture especially if it is 100s of years later. Also, when you have so much evidence it would be silly to word things vaguely and gloss over 3 or more centuries as if nothing was happening in Japan in those centuries and popping up all of a sudden in the mid 7th to 8th century. When we speak of America which is heavily Roman influenced, England is always mentioned as the source of various culture and technology. Even though the Romans or sometimes the French or German may have introduced things to England, if England was the source or reason for America practicing a certain culture/tradition or technology England is mentioned even if the origin is Roman or European. Especially if they have the name of the King or scholar that brought the technology to America. We need to find a compromise, if some users do not want any mention of Korea, please bring in multiple references to counter the multiple references above and in archive sections. It is almost impossible to talk of ancient Japan without mentioning Korea, please don't let your emotions work against logic and evidence. Tyler111
Friendly reminder of referenced citations by other people again:
1. Many people from Korea emigrated to Japan. Those people brought rice cultivation and metal work to Japan during the Late Jomon Period. Jomon people started to learn and practice those new things. The cultural effect from Korea was reflected in the shape of earthenware vessels, tools, technology and society in Yayoi period. http://www.mnsu.edu/emuseum/prehistory/japan/yayoi/yayoi.html
2. According to one estimate, Yayoi Japan received several million immigrants from Korea, utterly overwhelming the genetic contribution of Jomon people (thought to have numbered around 75,000 just before the Yayoi transition). If so, modern Japanese are descendants of Korean immigrants who developed a modified culture of their own over the last 2,000 years. http://www.asianresearch.org/articles/2350.html
3. The Yayoi period brought also the introduction of iron and other modern ideas from Korea into Japan. http://www.japan-guide.com/e/e2131.html
4. Unlike Jomon pottery, Yayoi pottery was very similar to contemporary South Korean pottery in shape. Many other elements of the new Yayoi culture were unmistakably Korean and previously foreign to Japan, including bronze objects, weaving, glass beads, and styles of tools and houses. http://www.faculty.fairfield.edu/faculty/hodgson/Courses/so191/PacificRimReadings/JapaneseRoots.html
5. In this sense, a very great part of Japan's origins, both culturally and ethnically, can be traced back to Korea. http://www.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/ getarticle.pl5?nn20020312b6.htm
6) Cambridge History of Japan:
7) The rank system adopted by Japan in 603 CE, although based on the Chinese Wei, was most directly influenced by "Koguryeo (Goguryeo) and Paekche(Baekje)." [3].
8) Korean immigrant: Kuratsukuri no Obitotori who cast a bronze Buddha at Asuka-dera [4].
9) The "conclusion that Yamato's relations with the Korean kingdoms had become more active in the last half of the fourth century":
10) There is "little doubt that the Japanese court was determined" to "make extensive use of Korean experts for an accelerated and wide-ranging program of modernization." [6].
11) Disovering the Arts of Japan: "Early Japanese temple compounds were based on Korean Paekche temples of the sixth and seventh centuries." [8].
12) Korea: A Religious History states that monks sent to Japan include Hyep'yon (Keiben in Japan), Hyeja (Keiji in Japan) was the tutor of Prince Shotoku. [9].
13) Gateway to Japan: The famous artist, Tori Busshi, "was of Korean descent." [10].
14) A History of Writing in Japan: The Nihon Shoki states that King of Paekche sent Atiki, who taught about horse culture. Also, it menions a Wani of Paekche who tutored the crown prince. [11].
15) The New York Times: Japanese National Treasure No. 1, a famous contemplative Maitreya, was "almost certainly carved in Korea and sent to Japan. [12].
Compare:
"Government-industry cooperation, a strong work ethic, mastery of high technology, and a comparatively small defense allocation (1% of GDP) helped Japan advance with extraordinary rapidity to the rank of second most technologically powerful economy in the world after the US and the third-largest economy in the world after the US and China, measured on a purchasing power parity (PPP) basis." - CIA Factbook
"Government-industry cooperation, a strong work ethic, mastery of high technology, and a comparatively small defense allocation have helped Japan advance with extraordinary speed to become one of the largest economies in the world." - wiki article
Please choose more original wording. 70.187.164.216 03:17, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
1. Introduction The introduction is vague and does not deliver valuable information to the reader. The details it does have are almost irrelevant. Nobody cares if Japan is at "over 377,873 square miles... the 62nd largest country by area". Being a G4 member is not significant. It's just a group of countries trying to get seats as permanent members of the UN Secruity Council.
Instead, the introduction should highlight key points of Japan: 660BC founding, early Chinese/Korean influence, the Heian period, the Tokugawa shogunate, the Meiji Restoration, WWII, and re-emergence as an economic power.
2. Korea references Any references to Korea have these strange additional comments that make the sentences convoluted and difficult to comprehend. The edits seem to have political motivations behind them, somehow trying to dilute Korean influence and even denigrate Korea.
Example A) "The start of the Yayoi period around 300 BC marked the influx of new practices such as rice farming, shamanism and iron and bronze-making brought by migrants from Korea and probably China."
Read this from "Japan's Delayed Transition Into Early Civilization" by Edward Kaplan:
"The evidence seems conclusive that at least the beginnings of the shift to the Yayoi archaeological stage was effected by Mongoloidal ethnic type people from the Korean peninsula. (Some Japanese prefer to believe these migrants came from the lower Yangzi, but this contradicts the linguistic evidence for a Korean connection.)"
"Korea is a much more likely point of origin for the Yayoi than China. It is not likely that they came from as far south as the mouth of the Yangzi at the bottom of subzone C1, as some recent Japanese scholars have proposed. Even scholars, if they are Japanese, do not fancy having Korean ancestors. (Remember, Korea was a Japanese colony from 1909 to 1945, and imported Korean labors still do the kinds of dirty jobs in Japan that we reserve for migrant laborers from Latin America.)"
http://www.ac.wwu.edu/~kaplan/eas201/201-13.pdf
If French statesmen were to introduce the concept of democracy to Britain, then it is stated so. There is no need to mention that democracy originated in Greece or that it came to France from Rome. We're grasping at straws here to find this non-Korea connection by way of rice DNA and some random Chinese artifacts (all brought to Japan via Korea anyhow).
Example B) "During the 5th and 6th centuries, the sophisticated Chinese writing system, Buddhism, advanced pottery, and ceremonial burial were all introduced as tributes from the neighboring kingdom of Baekje in exchange for military support from Japan which they were dependent on."
The "tribute" claim by Japanese scholars is in dispute and largely dismissed by both Korean and Western scholars. The point of the sentence is to describe when important advances were introduced to Japan and how. Instead, it seems to focus on trying to make an entirely different statement.
3. Pictures This article is cluttered with pictures. Also, there is constant change in the pictures included. Having a stable article is important and there is no need for some of these pictures (Meiji era Emperor Jimmu, two pictures of the imperial family, parliament floor that is barely visible, stock exchange symbols, etc.)
4. Repetitive statements and general need for copy editing On the emperor: "He performs ceremonial duties and holds no real power; not even emergency reserve powers. Power is mainly held by the Prime Minister, and other elected members of the Diet. Sovereignty is vested in the Japanese people by the constitution." Power is mentioned three times in two sentences. Okay, we know the emperor has no real power and power is with politicians who are elected by the people. I don't know why this was edited like this.-- Sir Edgar 01:42, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
There are many Japan side editors that have used nasty words worse than this. I will not point them out but don't just reprimand the Korea side. Your statement makes it seem like the Korea side is all at fault. Good friend100 02:16, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
Hermeneus, I think you are confusing efforts to provide accurate information in articles with efforts to politicize. By the way, it's quite laughable that you call me a "PR campaign manager of Korea" and put a link to VANK when I've only visited their site once in my entire life and I've worked five times more on Japan-related articles than Korea-related ones. Really, I'm quite upset that after putting in so much content and work into editing Japan that all the focus is on Korea-related references. What is up with this obsession with deleting all references to Korea, except for colonization of it? Baffling.-- Sir Edgar 05:13, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
It should seem even more funny to you Sir Edgar that I myself am beginning to wonder if Hermeneus has made an accusation that warrants investigation. ~~collective Conscious An yong ni gaseo Chingu.
The Japanese nationalism on Wikipedia, specifically anti-Korean bias on countless articles, has really gotten out of hand, with the concerted revert wars, destruction of months of hard work by many editors, vote-stuffing, personal attacks, and on and on. It is really driving away many well-intentioned editors and weakening the credibility and quality, as well as damaging the image of Japan. It will take months or years of patient work to undo the childish tantrums.
Dollarfifty 05:32, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
Kamosuke and IP 130.127.67.137 (aka "Collective Conscious"), you are in violation of Wikipedia:Assume good faith, Wikipedia:No personal attacks, and Wikipedia:Harassment. I have warned you previously. Focus on the article and avoid personal references. You may apologize to me now for your rude and inappropriate behavior or I have no choice but to report you both, especially IP 130.127.67.137 for wikistalking and making threats.-- Sir Edgar 23:44, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/elsewhere/journalist/story/0,7792,625427,00.html
"I, on my part, feel a certain kinship with Korea, given the fact that it is recorded in the Chronicles of Japan that the mother of Emperor Kammu was of the line of King Muryong of Paekche," he [Emperor Akihito] told reporters.
Unfortunately, many of Korea's greatest monuments were burned down by the Japanese. National treasures were looted and destroyed. This can give the impression of cultural superiority.
"Historians believe Japan carried away the bulk of its Korean cultural assets during two aggressions: the 16th-century invasion of the Korean peninsula and its 20th-century occupation."
"But the size of the haul is astounding. Eighty percent of all Korean Buddhist paintings are believed to be in Japan. And, says Seoul art historian Kwon Cheeyun, "35,000 Korean art objects and 30,000 rare books have been confirmed to be there, too." That's only the tip of the iceberg: much more is believed to be hidden away in private collections."
"More than 1,000 bronze, gold and celadon pieces owned by the late businessman Takenosuke Ogura now make up the core of the Tokyo National Museum's Korean section. Another precious item is a two-meter-tall stone tablet, originally built in northern Korea to commemorate the country's repelling of the 16th-century Japanese invasion."
Taeguk Warrior 00:49, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:History_of_Japan#Korean_influences Taeguk Warrior 20:40, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
Korean often deletes an important event of the history of Japan. They has value that is higher than Begja by these events though they insist, "It is worthless" on this event.
What can be higher in value than learning how to write?
militarism of Japan.
Koreans, Explain the reason to delete this event. -- HaradaSanosuke 18:13, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
Overall, some people need to change their attitude toward Koreans. Good friend100 00:57, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
Is it true that in Japan it is still widely believed that
倭国 established
任那日本府 somewhere in
Baekje? That was the main evidence for Japanese to deny any significant influence from
Baekje, I think. However, as you know, 任那日本府 was a representative example of the manipulated history of Japanese imperialism before WWII. It is ridiculous to say that the culture of Baekje was inferior to that in Japan at that time.
Ginnre 18:15, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
In the main article the Yayoi are referenced to be from Korea and maybe China. This agreement was difficultly reached last month because of the overwhelming evidence about Korea and DNA theory adding to the Korea evidence and including South China as well. Then in the bottom summary section people keep deleteing any mention of Korea. Instead it states China as the influence such as Yayoi culture etc. This needs to be corrected. Either the information above about the Yayoi needs new references pointing to mainly China as the Yayoi or the summary at the bottom of the article needs to mention "China and Korea". Please do not let your emotions work against logic and evidence. Tyler11
It is also not about China, America, England or Germany but can't exclude them if they are a part of your past, You can't just say this is about Japan and exclude ALL these countries.
But Japan based their root on Chinese buddhism cause Korea was based on Chinese buddhism. The people from Korea brought it to Japan initially and you can't just bypass that cause you have the names of the men who brought it and the king who commissioned it. You can't compare Japanese buddhism to Chinese buddhism without mentioning Korean buddhism cause then you can see the transition in practices and the differences which appear from Japanese to Chinese make since when you study the Korean practices. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.17.96.104 ( talk • contribs) .
Is that a joke or something? Your links are names of Chinese people. Are you saying that Korean and Chinese names are the same? Also what do you mean by write the Korean's name? Good friend100 03:45, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
Thats like asking somebody who invented fire. Or asking who brought Buddhism to Korea. Buddhism went to Japan by means of Korean Buddhist monks, traders, missionaries, etc. There is no specific person. >Gegesongs, Harada Sanosuke Good friend100 20:59, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
Please join discussions at Talk:Imjin Wars. I think the correct title of that article needs to be Hideyoshi's Invasion of Korea. This is based on my Google Books count, which represent citations of scholarly materials....
Invasion of Korea comes out on top, while Hideyoshi's Invasion of Korea is 2nd place. However, because Invasion of Korea is used in the context of "Hideyoshi" anyways, Hideyoshi's Invasion of Korea is a more appropriate name.
Also invasion of Korea outnumbers Imjin War(s) by a factor of 9 to 1. Hideyoshi's Invasion(s) of Korea outnumbers Imjin War(s) by a factor of 3 to 1. Also, Imjin War(s) is usually never used in the Japanese context, as most instances have the word "Korea" prominently in the book title, topic, chapter title, etc., proving that it is used mostly in the Korean context, and not in the general context.
Finally, all mention of "Hideyoshi's Invasion of Korea" in this (and all Japan-related articles) should use "Hideyoshi's Invasion of Korea" rather than "Imjin War".-- Endroit 17:05, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
I live in Japan. However, I have not heard the fight of the Imugen river. Wikipedia of Japan is named "Bunroku-Keicho-NO-Eki" ja:文禄・慶長の役. -- HaradaSanosuke 17:33, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
As the original request said, please join the discusstion at Talk:Imjin Wars. Discussion here at Talk:Japan is likely not to be read or taken into account when a decision is made about Imjin Wars. Fg2 00:47, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
Dear reverters, please be careful and do not cancel contributions that are not of your concern. -- LittleTree 01:02, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
What were written in the subsection 'Heisei era' of 'Modern era' were about post-war period of Showa era. Nothing to do with Heisei era. So I made a subsubsection in the previous subsection 'Meiji, Taisho and Showa eras' to put the sentences in. Then, there is nothing in 'Heisei era'. Looking back in the history, some descriptions about Heisei era were removed by the edit of '06:06, 14 July 2006' [16]. At that time, the subsection was named 'Modern Japan'. Then the subsection was renamed to 'Heisei period' at 04:05, 21 July 2006 [17]. So I temporarily restored what were removed before. Any comment?-- LittleTree 02:16, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
I have completely rewritten this section, which was written in SHAMEFULLY HORRIBLE ENGLISH. As I have stated elsewhere, these additions are very hard to read, and are confusing information, often strongly biased as well. It was not the case here, though. However, some sentences were thrown completely randomly... and without references, it goes without saying. I have taken out Higuchi Ichiyō of the list of "representative" Japanese writers. And changed "typical" to "representative", if there is such a thing. "Typical" is a terrible adjective. Essentialist, and completely ignorant of the diversity of modern Japanese literature. I have replaced her by Tanizaki, arguably a more central writer in the literaty canon. Shogo Kawada 23:52, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
Editors speaking English as a second language should either post their information on the talk page for others to edit and then insert into the article. Good friend100 00:04, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
Accoding to Encyclopædia Britannica [18]
Please make it to an easy sentence.
It wasn't a result of imports. The Baekje court retreated to Japan after being conquered and passed Korean and Chinese culture to Japan. Good friend100 13:55, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
"At over 377,873 square kilometers". I find this clause confusing. If we have information on the country's size down to the exact kilometer, why use the word "over"? MarkBuckles 23:00, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
It seems to me that this means the country is not exactly 377,873 square kilometers but something like 377,873.6 square kilometers. SIGURD42 20:50, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
Hope u all appreciate the new template i created for the "misc. topics" section. WoodElf 10:37, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
This article is 66kb long, which is more than double the recommended size... someone, anyone, a wikiwizard, PLEASE help reduce the size of the history and economy sections.
WoodElf 10:50, 31 July 2006 (UTC)