![]() | 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. |
Could someone fix the plagiarism? It's been on there for quite awhile, and it's not even a good copy. The plagiarism is more bothering than the Korea↔Japan agenda afflicting this page -- I'd edit it myself, but I don't want to touch this article with a 10 foot pole. Falsedef 16:30, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
If this article is a candidate for a featured article, then the best thing we can do is find and rewrite all the plagiarized parts. Its going to be a pain, but if the editors are pushing for featured article status, then editing the article again is neccesary. Good friend100 13:45, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Japan&diff=66786785&oldid=66784734
The Yamato Court which was probably a Baekje colony, [1] concentrated in the Asuka region, had the strong influence in West Japan and the southern part of a Korean peninsula. During the 5th and 6th centuries, Chinese writing system, Buddhism, advanced pottery, and ceremonial burial were all introduced by the Korean kingdom of Baekje, to which Japan provided military support.
I don't think this article ever mentions that "Japan was a Baekje colony". Ginnre, it didn't "look like it was tempered" it was vandalized. It is a known fact that after Korea was annexed, some Japanese people rewrote some information on the stele. The authencitity of the stele was challenged by Lee Jin-hui in the 1970s. And the stele was an important part of Korean history, now gone because of that cruelty. Good friend100 01:35, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
> PEAKCHE OF KOREA AND THE ORIGIN OF YAMATO JAPAN-- Tyler 07:10, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
Not everything [Chinese writing, Buddhism, advanced pottery] was introduced by Korea. Chinese monks and commoners also went directly to Japan. There is a reason why a lot of Japanese kanji have 呉音 (go-on) pronunciations. Go-on was based on the Chinese dialect spoken around Nanjing in southeast coastal China (呉越地). There is no way it could have came from Korea. The idea that everything that Japan got from China had to be first filtered by Korea is not substantiated. More like modern Korean propaganda. --
Naus
17:53, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
The following is a list of people who were blocked indefinitely for using sockpuppet accounts, primarily to engage in revert wars involving Japan-related articles:
The above persons have also used abusive language against other Wikipedians and, despite previous warnings, insisted on making statements that are in violation of Wikipedia:Assume good faith, Wikipedia:Civil, and Wikipedia:No personal attacks. They also made numerous racist remarks (often misdirected), while accusing others of being racist.
We assumed good faith believing that these were different people we were talking to. Instead, they turned out to be the same people using coordinated, despicable tactics for political purposes.
Not only were your edits misleading and inaccurate, but also poorly worded and lowered the quality of this article. You did not contribute to Wikipedia. Instead, you damaged it and you hurt other Wikipedians with the insulting remarks you made along the way. Your crude remarks and baseless accusations only made your country look worse. Instead of thanking people for making a good Japan article, you only focused on a few Korea-related references with a vigorous obsession that was tasteless and offensive. You are pitiful.
Nobody will take you seriously any longer. You have no right to be a part of Wikipedia. You should be ashamed of yourselves.
In addition, the following users have been blocked for 3RR violation:
If there are others, please add them to the list so that we may know which persons to ignore.-- Sir Edgar 05:15, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
I'm quite shocked that Appleby was running a massive puppet show. I thought many of his posts were very reasonable in the past. But I don't think Wikipedia should be used in a dishonest way like this. Regardless, I don't think his actions were as disruptive or harmful as the above mentioned, at least not from what I've seen in Japan-related articles.-- Sir Edgar 09:24, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
A user wrote that the motto of Japan is "Peace and Progress". However, the user has no information about it (See Talk:Peace and Progress) and it is really doubtful. I think this should be removed.-- Mochi 06:05, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/HSL
Is not Korean's propaganda stopped?
Hi all,
user:220.212.100.227 made a major rewrite of Japan. I thought I should mention this and that I reverted because it was already a FA. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 17:09, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
I don't know who wants to stick with the old version of the article, but should article must evolve and continue to evolve. Suddenly people waking up and reverting like 3 months worth of work should not happen. For three months there were consensus and evolution of the article, so there shouldn't be any huge reason to revert back. 168.253.17.46 23:54, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
Anonymous accounts "working together" how do you know that, where is your fact and evidence to pull an assumption like that. You don't have evidence, so I wouldn't suggest you bring your ideas in larger degree and try to make it a big impact on the article as a whole. UK, Germany articles are all nationalist, heroic, greatest, white great articles. accept it and move on. 168.253.17.46 01:15, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
Just to say, it would be a lot better if you would get a username. Its easier to identify a user and its more formal. Good friend100 03:17, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
Sounds more like your problem. You seem nervous and insecure about the revert to the original version. I know eventually the better original version will prevail and I am willing to take my time to make sure of that.-- Sir Edgar 05:03, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
I suggest you make a wikipedia account. Its more polite to the other editors, instead of barging in without a name or something. Good friend100 03:52, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
I did some searching on the web, and I can nowhere find any confirmation that Japan is officially called the "State of Japan". Could someone please look into this?
Please do not do a large-scale edit without obtaining consensus.
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Japan&diff=next&oldid=67192147
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Japan&diff=67540030&oldid=67537924
The article on Edger has worsened further. A lot of information is deleted, and Korea is added.
Don't assume what other people do. It just makes you look bad. Sir Edgar is trying to help the article. If you believe the "Koreans" are at fault think again. Other the past several weeks, editors have repeatedly deleted all the information about Korean influence on Japan. That is considered vandalism.
"Exxagerate Korean history". Ummm, no, its not exxageration. The fact that some Japanese ancestors are Korean and Korea greatly influenced Japan cannot be denied. Good friend100 23:09, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
Who deleted that section, that was major vandalism and someone should've caught that. No sections should be deleted at all without consensus and from spur of the moment. 168.253.12.197 04:12, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
You are deleting sections that were added to make this article more comprehensive, you are removing these sections. This is absurd. What is your problem? 168.253.14.129
Based on the opinions we received during the article's candidacy for featured status, we have the following tasks:
Fg2 05:55, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
More To-do things:
You guys really need to fix the Yayoi section. If you go in to the Yayoi article, it talks about the Origin as being 300 BC from (2 main thoeries) Korea/China. We are talking about 300 BC. Not 108 BC. But the Japan article here keeps deleting references on 300 BC Korean migration and only state China as the source in 108 BC, while using Korea as a bridge for the Chinese to go to Japan. But if you go in the the Yayoi article it theorizes about Korea as the source for Yayoi culture and also theorizes a Chinese migration as well. Endroit, I know you have always stated that Korea and China via Korean peninsula was the correct term when people were using Korean peninsula only or Korea and possibly China as the source for Yayoi. Please stand up and comment about the new version like you did for China, now that the situation is reversed. Endroit if you had problems with the earlier versions you must have problems with this new version which is one of the worst summarizations we have had so far. Endroit since you have commented so much in the past Yayoi discussions, I hope you make a similar suggestion here. Where did you go when we need you, did you go on vacation, I hope you come back from your leave of absense and stand up for the article to make it a better article like you did before. -- Tyler 09:24, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
I would like to officially protest edits that happened more than 6 times by User:Sir Edgar, which is this one [2]. Please sign your name saying protest and no protest below.
He is deleting sections, and his only claim is that this was "featured article" now he is saying it should be reverted back not caring how much edit expansion was added to this article. He is deleting expanded section. We are getting vandalized more because of this previous "featured article" status article. Sir Edgar don't ever think of reverting back, don't even try, it will be reverted back as long as you keep doing it. Don't even try. If you don't like it, then copyedit it, don't be lazy and selfish and keep reverting people's work. 168.253.21.234 05:49, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
I would like this article to be protected from Vandalism from Sir Edgar's edits. Please lock it down as long as we don't get vandalized and threatened with reverts from Sir Edgar. Admins please lock it down, until we get sufficient editors to counter Sir Edgar's selfish one sided edits and returning this article to simple form. Please lock it down! 168.253.21.234 05:53, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
The japan article is now 74 kb long... WAY too long. WoodElf 12:13, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
I've added {{sync}} tags to all the big sections. Please start synchronizing with their respective "main articles", and move text and images in accordance with Wikipedia:Summary style. In particular, the following sections seem NOT to be an object of revert-wars, so why don't everyone start there?: Demographics ( Demographics of Japan), Government and politics ( Politics of Japan), Economy ( Economy of Japan).-- Endroit 16:48, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
I want to ask a quick question. WHY is the now 70kb too long? I've checked the pages for major countries in the world and they're 70kb+. Why does Japan have to be cut down? I don't mind things being compacted, provided information is deleted for the sake of it. John Smith's 16:04, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
Great job everyone, but the article is still 68 KB long (note to self:have to work harder ...) WoodElf 15:20, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
Can I just make a quick note. In terms of reducing the size of the article, can we please focus on reducing the history section before cutting out much other information. We need to get that reduced and compacted a lot, so let's not worry too much about saving space elsewhere. John Smith's 21:42, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
Anime was added. -- 61.209.162.75 18:20, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
Due to the incessant edit warring concerning the topic of "Korea" in this article, we request semi-protection of this page. Revision to this page by IP Address users will be restricted. IP Address users are requested to obtain an account at Wikipedia ASAP, if they want to resolve this matter through proper channels. Also, be sure to read WP:Sock, as some people were violating that policy. IP Address users who are currently blocked for this reason, please resolve your blocked status with an admin.-- Endroit 14:09, 12 August 2006(UTC)
I support semi-protection.
I also want to just say that if Wikipedians support edits like the following, I will just have to quit Wikipedia. I don't see the point in staying somewhere that can tolerate bad grammar, poor writing, nationalistic twisting of phrases, and the mention of inane and useless facts.
Your inability or unwillingness to comprehend is not my responsibility.-- Sir Edgar 02:05, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
Please provide evidence to support your belief.-- Sir Edgar 02:05, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
You cannot rely on a single source, the Nihon Shogi, for all your information. The Nihon Shogi has been proven to have many deliberate exaggerations and falsifications.-- Sir Edgar 02:05, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
Nihon Shokiに書かれているエピソードを認めないなら、百済から仏教が千字文が送られたエピソードも嘘になってしまいますよ。Edger君は面白いBaisを見せてくれますね。
eremonial burial
For the above, please refer to the substantial discussion that took place already (see archives).-- Sir Edgar 02:05, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
This just shows your bias.-- Sir Edgar 02:05, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
It is not clear whether they were hostages or visitors. The point is these things were transmitted from Korea to Japan.-- Sir Edgar 02:05, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
Your comment is offensive.-- Sir Edgar 02:05, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
User:211.3.123.212|211.3.123.212]] 17:53, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
-- Sir Edgar 23:53, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
Semi-protection is a good idea, I think.
Sir Edgar, saying things like "I also want to just say that if Wikipedians support edits like the following, I will just have to quit Wikipedia." is not the way to go about making friends/allies on wiki. As someone who has more of an academic historical background than most people here, I find it very frustrating being here sometimes. Indeed most academics avoid this place like the plague because they find it a bit of a joke. So if you want to stay here, that is your choice. It is all of our choices. John Smith's 10:33, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
Japan, however has had a long history with Korea. In ancient times, much of Japan's culture was influenced by the Korean's own culture. There were also several wars between the two countries, as stated in Japan's national history. Korea should be mentioned at the very least once, but not to a point where there is an 'edit war'. It might also help if the Korea page also had some information about it's relationship with Japan. -- Eiyuu Kou 19:23, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
Some requests:
WoodElf 17:34, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
It's absolutely horrific. I'm not going to list each incident, but this article has gone to shit. Just look for yourselves. How can you tolerate this?
1. 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 (i.e. Yayoi-jin) from outside of Japan.
2. Buddhism were introduced by Baekje, to which Japan provided military support.
3. By 1910, Japan amalgamated Korea, Taiwan, and the southern half of Sakhalin.
4. After the atomic bombings, Imperial Japan signalled its willingness to surrender on the condition that the Emperor be allowed to continue as the symbolic head of state.
5. Japan maintains close economic and military ties and remains friends with its key ally and partner, the United States, and therefore the US-Japan security alliance serves as the cornerstone of its foreign policy.
6. With its geographical neighbors, it has several territorial disputes (islands). For example it has territorial disputes with Russia over the Kuril Islands, with South Korea over Takeshima (Korean name "Dokdo"), with the People's Republic of China (PRC) and the Republic of China (Taiwan) over the Senkaku Islands (Diaoyutai Islands), and with the People's Republic of China over the status of Okinotori. These disputes are in part about the control of marine and natural resources, such as possible reserves of crude oil and natural gas. These disputes are just territorial (islands) and doesn't amount to any serious crisis in all of the countries involved.
7. Japan is an economic world power with free-market economy with GDP (nominal) of little over $4.6 trillion as of 2005.
8. Historically, Chinese culture has been the most influential, starting with the development of the Yayoi culture from around 300 BC and culminating with the introduction of rice farming, ceremonial burial, pottery, painting, writing, poetry, etiquette, the Chinese writing system, and Mahayana Buddhism by the 7th century AD.
So some choice of words and grammar isn't perfect. Why don't you fix it instead of overreacting in such an immature manner? Since this article is on a non-English-speaking country, you can bet that non-English speakers were involved in its creation. Some of your points are very valid, but it's a shame you had to spoil them by acting like a child.
62.56.101.167
13:49, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
Endroit, your correction is definitely better. Very readable and elegant English phrasing. Thank you. -- Anonymous user who just happened by here (native English speaker if that matters)
I think its pretty rude to have your own coversation in Japanese while everybody else just sits there and can't read anything.
Sir Edgar, I'm ready to quit Wikipedia because its time consuming and energy sapping when nobody compromises. Good friend100 03:13, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
The country template says Japan is 377 835 sq.km, but the lead mentions 377873. which is it ???
WoodElf 16:10, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
The article Japan is too long, and we're trying to shorten it. Recent additions included valuable material, but there's not enough room for them in the article on Japan. Accordingly, we encourage editors to add material to the main articles that each section links to, such as History of Japan, or to articles they in turn link to, such as Victory over Japan Day or Surrender of Japan. Each topic has some appropriate article and Wikipedia welcomes additions to them, as well as improvements to this and all articles. Fg2 10:30, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
Japanese cuisine is an integral part of its culture and Japanese cuisine is also famous worldwide. Should it not have section under culture?
WoodElf 10:00, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
"Japanese cuisine is unique and famous worldwide. It is enjoyed by many around the world and appreciated for its aesthetic quality."
Japanese cuisine is not only cutting raw fish but heavily based on gratitude to nature. The techniques are developed to bring out taste of nature as possible with expression of gratitude to nature and the producers. itadakimasu, gochisosama deshita, and mottainai are very important essence of Japanese food culture and what I am trying to incorporate here. (one of reasons I do not like US kids movies is because kids always waste foods by throwing each other at the last moments..)
Although green tea is sharing very important part, I think it is not solely recognized worldwide as Japanese cuisine.
I also changed the photo because the hotel breakfast matches better with the description and the previous one was so simplest which is difficult even in Japan. The problem of the new one is that it looks so gorgeous for common home-made breakfast while many hotels serve in this style.-- Jjok 00:46, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
Please improve Israel-Japan relations. Thanks, Republitarian 01:55, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
The section on music of japan is rather iffy and could be improved. Any responses? WoodElf 09:04, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
Be sure the material isn't copywrited. Usually 'better' music has an owner or two. -- Eiyuu Kou 19:25, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
This article has the potential to become a FA. To do:
WoodElf 09:10, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
One of our primary objectives is to eliminate any content-based revert-warring in the Japan article. To that effect, we need to raise the standards of verifiability wherever a content-based revert-war occurs in this article. I propose that if any controversial material cannot be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, and if that material is not of top importance to the Japan article, it should be deemed as "not meeting the criteria for inclusion."
"Controversial material" includes statements such as "x came from Korea", which has resulted in persistent revert-wars in this article. In reality, the origin is not always certain (beyond a reasonable doubt), as some things are argued to have come directly from China, some directly from Korea, and some are argued to have originated in Japan. Historical matters in the 6th century and before, are particularly prone to this problem, because verifying and enforcing WP:V is difficult. For this reason, some of such controversial material in this article were already moved to their respective "main articles", mostly into History of Japan. This is not only a stopgap measure to avert a revert-war, but also means 2 things:
Part 1 of this proposal deals with which specific topics to exclude from the Japan article.
Other parts of this proposal shall deal with the wording on "controversial materials" still remaining after this exclusion.
From Sir Edgar's list of 8 problems (see "Wording in this article." above), two problems still remain:
1. 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 (i.e. Yayoi-jin) from outside of Japan. From where "outside of Japan"? 2. Buddhism were introduced by Baekje, to which Japan provided military support. Disputed fact and not important to sentence. The word "were" used improperly.
Parts 2 & 3 of this proposal deals with these 2 specific points respectively.-- Endroit 20:10, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
Any text describing the ORIGIN of the following will be banned from the Japan article, and moved to their respective "main article" according to the manner prescribed in Wikipedia:Summary style: burial mounds ( kofun), burial rituals, Shintoism, shamanism, kanji, gagaku, buddhist chant, "Yayoi pottery" (see Japanese pottery, Korean pottery).
Any banned material may be reconsidered to be included in the Japan article again, if one of the following 2 criteria are met:
Please comment on the above, and discuss any ideas, changes, criticisms, or suggestions you may have.-- Endroit 20:10, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
We need to discuss, modify, and reach consensus on the following text, in the "Jomon and Yayoi eras" section:
Sources for this text:
Please comment on the above, and discuss any ideas, changes, criticisms, or suggestions you may have.-- Endroit 20:10, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
If the references state Korea and Korean penisula more than East Asia, East Asian Continent or Mainland Asia, shouldn't we follow the references. -- Tyler 06:46, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
I like the "continental East Asia" myself--it's short and to the point. Does anyone truly believe this phrase will lead to confusion? I really doubt it--instead, it seems people want to squeeze in the name of whatever their favorite present day country is, when such a reference is really unnecessary--just making things longer. Komdori 15:21, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
I agree with Komdori. I like the "Eastern Asia" or "Continental East Asia" because, "Continental East Asia" is obviously including a region of the Korean peninsula. I seem to some people wants to using a word of "KOREA". Why does someone insists persistently on the using "Korea"? I guess that it give rise to an unnecessary edit war about interpretation of "Korea".-- Watermint 10:44, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
I am trying to find out which wording is acceptable to which user. Multiple choice is allowed here. Please modify youself in the list (realign yourself), and specify which choices are acceptable. Pease also comment in the above section, on your reasoning for the choice(s), if you haven't already.-- Endroit 22:10, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
Please explain the difference between a Ancient Korea culture and a Ancient Chinese culture. If the difference between an ancient South Korea culture and a Chinese culture cannot be understood, this vote is not academic. -- 211.3.112.206 12:11, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
There's already been a long and drawn out discussion about terminologies over at the Yayoi article itself. Those that believe "China" did not exist is sorely mistaken, as that English word itself is a reference to the Qin dynasty. It came from the Sanskrit word cina. If editors are still in doubt, all you need to do is click on History of China and note that the article does not begin at 1911 or 1949, but that it begins at the 16th century BC. The suggestion to eliminate references to "China" and "Korea" here would also necessitate we elimate references to the word "Japan" and change it to "Wa" at articles such as the Yayoi article. --- Hong Qi Gong 17:32, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
It is difficult to discuss the rice farming and iron manufacturing as an equal. According to the current studies, the gene of Japanese rice is directly imported from china.-- Questionfromjapan 15:08, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
We need to discuss, modify, and reach consensus on the following text, in the "Classical era" section:
Sources for this text:
{{
cite book}}
: |editor=
has generic name (
help)Please comment on the above, and discuss any ideas, changes, criticisms, or suggestions you may have.-- Endroit 20:10, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
Just more things to ponder. The sentence above has stripped away almost everything such as pottery, burial practices, intro of Chinese writing system, shamanism, rank system, etc cause it is considered un-important, difficult to word, and various other reasons. I believe the sentence was more about these cultural ideas, when and how it came to Japan and the impact it had on Japan. As we know Buddhism seems to have had an impact on Japan. Apparently the military assistance is disputed at the time around 530-580 AD (if it actually happened, when, were the troops actually sent or was it just talk of it, how many etc) what kind of impact this troop info had on Japan appears to be not important. How significant was the military alliance part to the sentence if you don't mention that in 670 AD they lost the war and their was a migration of Baekje scholars to Yamato. Without the part about Baekje migration being mentioned the military alliance part of the sentence could appear to be a weird side note without any importance to impact Japan. -- Tyler 08:08, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
The IP 222.233.205.158 is of Hanaro Telecom which is located in Yeoeuido-dong, Yeongdeungpo-gu, Seoul, South Korea. He is obviously a Korean troll pretending to be Japanese. -- Saintjust 12:47, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
comments
For the individual above who wanted info on Korean influence in Japan. -- Tyler 11:31, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
There are some weird entries at the end that have appeared - ISO something-or-other and sports/vehicle codes. Anyone know how to get rid of them? It makes the page look terrible. John Smith's 21:06, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
i believe that the world war 2 section is biased towards the japanese trying to make it seem as if the united states was wrong for retaliating with force after the attack on world war 2 and that their tactics during the war were wrong. i dont believe this is a discussion of what should of happened, just what happened so i believe the bias should be removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.204.112.31 ( talk • contribs)
Japan did not attack Pearl Harbor for oil. They attacked to destroy the American battleships and aircraft carriers (which at the time were out at sea) to immobilize the American power in the Pacific so they could conquer the Pacific at will. Good friend100 17:53, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
Not my fault when I hear that Japan attacked Pearl Harbor because America dropped the atomic bomb first. Good friend100 18:15, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
Korea is a so not important topic for the Japanese. Please do not use energy for such a Korean. Please think about the introduction sentence of the Anime, the Manga, and the video games. Nintendo is a priority that is far higher than Korean's boast. -- 220.212.102.162 09:39, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
Phonemonkey, the problem is, the people that needs to hear your message, just ignore it. Its a shame when editors vandalize articles by removing information about Korean influence on Japan. Good friend100 18:13, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
Please don't try to downgrade Japan. We never meant to strip Korea or its pride. And besides, most of our culture comes from China, not Korea.
There is an image Image:Hasekura in Rome.JPG in Japan#Medieval era and another Image:RedSealShip.JPG in Japan#Edo era. I like those two images themselves, but they have not much to do with the article, where neither Hasekura nor the ships are mentioned. They are fine in the other article Edo period where readers can find what they are, but I am afraid they are not adequate to be put here. Minamoto no Yoritomo would suite better than Hasekura for "Medieval era". I am not sure about what would suite for Edo era, but an image of a daimyo gyoretsu might be nice if there is any. While I cannot find any, Image:Hiroshige le pont Nihonbashi à l'aube.jpg may also be nice. -- LittleTree 14:55, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
Ok, i'm very, very impressed by the speed at which amusing pranks are removed from the article about Japan, but no one is getting the time to enjoy the unbelievable hilariousness of an article about Japan in which all the R's and L's are reversed. That's classic, you know, and if the web isn't there for amusement, then what is it really for?
This is for the sake of record: [38] - [39] - [40] - [41] - [42] -- Bhadani 16:39, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
Omitting macrons on long vowels is extremely unprofessional. I am aware that the current guidelines recommend omitting them on terms that are common enough to be considered "English".
Lets look at an example. 忍坂 is the old name for a city in Nara. It is read as Osaka (no long vowels, thus no macrons). Then there is the much more familiar 大阪. This is Ōsaka, with in initial long vowel. If you insist on disregarding short / long vowel distinctions, then you can not distinguish between these two words.
Except for long vowels, there does not seem to be any disagreement to distinguish between long constants (Ho_kk_aidō) or vowel clustors (Hokk_ai_dō).
I suspect that the source of this is the inconvenience in inputting macrons. That I can understand. I propose preferring macrons where necessary, but allowing people to disregard if desired. Others who care about such issues, such as myself, can correct places as necessary.
I have noticed two general trends in English books written about Japan. (1) The general, basic text often disregards long vowels. (2) Serious, professional texts rigorously make the distinguish. I would hope that Wikipedia would strive to be a serious, professional reference.
As a long-time resident of Japan and linguist, I am extremely disappointed with the unprofessional policies of Wikipedia in regard to Japan. I would like this policy to change.
I dont think it should have been changed to Continental East Asia yet. If you read the consensus above, "Korea and China" have six votes while "Continental East Asia" has eight. However, Komdori's vote should be stricken see as how s/he is a "Likely" sock of LactosteTI as confirmed by checkuser [43] and I think its weird that the seeming troll 222.233.205.83's vote was allowed to count when that user's comments have all been deleted from this talk page. Tortfeasor 17:06, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
Komdori is a sockpuppet of LactoseTI?
Hey, this argument doesn't have to get so nasty. I agree that "Korea and China" should be used because it was China and Korea that influenced Japan mostly. However, using continental East Asia can be better because it includes all influencing countries in a general term. This isn't an important argument. Both words are good. I'm slightly leaning to "Korea and China" because "East Asia" may refer to somewhere like the Phillipenes or something and that may be misleading because Phillipenes hardly influenced Japan, but probably its really up to how the text is written. If the text is written as if mainly China and Japan has a large influence that may affect what should be used. Just a thought, not taking any sides =) Good friend100 19:34, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
"The following countries/territories are located in geographic East Asia:
I don't see Vietnam on that list. John Smith's 20:38, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
We need to change it to specific countries that influenced Japan, not just a general term. So that includes Korea, China, and maybe India (since Buddhism came from there). Good friend100 20:45, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
It doesn't have to be a "massively long list" as you suggest. The information of how Japan was influenced is already in the text. Just because specificing countries doesn't mean we have to write a whole list down. Also, we are here to make the text more informative? Not just a general term, but specifically? I think we need to do a poll. Good friend100 02:58, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
Koreans want to put Korea in the history in Japan. The evaluation of the article on Japan was lowered to B class because of their puppet and hijack. And, the Korean tries to throw away the article on Korea, and to enter the article on Japan. How should we treat these arrogant refugees? I hate Korean to use my home country to advertise Korea.
-- 219.66.45.30 09:29, 28 September 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. |
Could someone fix the plagiarism? It's been on there for quite awhile, and it's not even a good copy. The plagiarism is more bothering than the Korea↔Japan agenda afflicting this page -- I'd edit it myself, but I don't want to touch this article with a 10 foot pole. Falsedef 16:30, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
If this article is a candidate for a featured article, then the best thing we can do is find and rewrite all the plagiarized parts. Its going to be a pain, but if the editors are pushing for featured article status, then editing the article again is neccesary. Good friend100 13:45, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Japan&diff=66786785&oldid=66784734
The Yamato Court which was probably a Baekje colony, [1] concentrated in the Asuka region, had the strong influence in West Japan and the southern part of a Korean peninsula. During the 5th and 6th centuries, Chinese writing system, Buddhism, advanced pottery, and ceremonial burial were all introduced by the Korean kingdom of Baekje, to which Japan provided military support.
I don't think this article ever mentions that "Japan was a Baekje colony". Ginnre, it didn't "look like it was tempered" it was vandalized. It is a known fact that after Korea was annexed, some Japanese people rewrote some information on the stele. The authencitity of the stele was challenged by Lee Jin-hui in the 1970s. And the stele was an important part of Korean history, now gone because of that cruelty. Good friend100 01:35, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
> PEAKCHE OF KOREA AND THE ORIGIN OF YAMATO JAPAN-- Tyler 07:10, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
Not everything [Chinese writing, Buddhism, advanced pottery] was introduced by Korea. Chinese monks and commoners also went directly to Japan. There is a reason why a lot of Japanese kanji have 呉音 (go-on) pronunciations. Go-on was based on the Chinese dialect spoken around Nanjing in southeast coastal China (呉越地). There is no way it could have came from Korea. The idea that everything that Japan got from China had to be first filtered by Korea is not substantiated. More like modern Korean propaganda. --
Naus
17:53, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
The following is a list of people who were blocked indefinitely for using sockpuppet accounts, primarily to engage in revert wars involving Japan-related articles:
The above persons have also used abusive language against other Wikipedians and, despite previous warnings, insisted on making statements that are in violation of Wikipedia:Assume good faith, Wikipedia:Civil, and Wikipedia:No personal attacks. They also made numerous racist remarks (often misdirected), while accusing others of being racist.
We assumed good faith believing that these were different people we were talking to. Instead, they turned out to be the same people using coordinated, despicable tactics for political purposes.
Not only were your edits misleading and inaccurate, but also poorly worded and lowered the quality of this article. You did not contribute to Wikipedia. Instead, you damaged it and you hurt other Wikipedians with the insulting remarks you made along the way. Your crude remarks and baseless accusations only made your country look worse. Instead of thanking people for making a good Japan article, you only focused on a few Korea-related references with a vigorous obsession that was tasteless and offensive. You are pitiful.
Nobody will take you seriously any longer. You have no right to be a part of Wikipedia. You should be ashamed of yourselves.
In addition, the following users have been blocked for 3RR violation:
If there are others, please add them to the list so that we may know which persons to ignore.-- Sir Edgar 05:15, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
I'm quite shocked that Appleby was running a massive puppet show. I thought many of his posts were very reasonable in the past. But I don't think Wikipedia should be used in a dishonest way like this. Regardless, I don't think his actions were as disruptive or harmful as the above mentioned, at least not from what I've seen in Japan-related articles.-- Sir Edgar 09:24, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
A user wrote that the motto of Japan is "Peace and Progress". However, the user has no information about it (See Talk:Peace and Progress) and it is really doubtful. I think this should be removed.-- Mochi 06:05, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/HSL
Is not Korean's propaganda stopped?
Hi all,
user:220.212.100.227 made a major rewrite of Japan. I thought I should mention this and that I reverted because it was already a FA. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 17:09, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
I don't know who wants to stick with the old version of the article, but should article must evolve and continue to evolve. Suddenly people waking up and reverting like 3 months worth of work should not happen. For three months there were consensus and evolution of the article, so there shouldn't be any huge reason to revert back. 168.253.17.46 23:54, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
Anonymous accounts "working together" how do you know that, where is your fact and evidence to pull an assumption like that. You don't have evidence, so I wouldn't suggest you bring your ideas in larger degree and try to make it a big impact on the article as a whole. UK, Germany articles are all nationalist, heroic, greatest, white great articles. accept it and move on. 168.253.17.46 01:15, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
Just to say, it would be a lot better if you would get a username. Its easier to identify a user and its more formal. Good friend100 03:17, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
Sounds more like your problem. You seem nervous and insecure about the revert to the original version. I know eventually the better original version will prevail and I am willing to take my time to make sure of that.-- Sir Edgar 05:03, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
I suggest you make a wikipedia account. Its more polite to the other editors, instead of barging in without a name or something. Good friend100 03:52, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
I did some searching on the web, and I can nowhere find any confirmation that Japan is officially called the "State of Japan". Could someone please look into this?
Please do not do a large-scale edit without obtaining consensus.
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Japan&diff=next&oldid=67192147
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Japan&diff=67540030&oldid=67537924
The article on Edger has worsened further. A lot of information is deleted, and Korea is added.
Don't assume what other people do. It just makes you look bad. Sir Edgar is trying to help the article. If you believe the "Koreans" are at fault think again. Other the past several weeks, editors have repeatedly deleted all the information about Korean influence on Japan. That is considered vandalism.
"Exxagerate Korean history". Ummm, no, its not exxageration. The fact that some Japanese ancestors are Korean and Korea greatly influenced Japan cannot be denied. Good friend100 23:09, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
Who deleted that section, that was major vandalism and someone should've caught that. No sections should be deleted at all without consensus and from spur of the moment. 168.253.12.197 04:12, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
You are deleting sections that were added to make this article more comprehensive, you are removing these sections. This is absurd. What is your problem? 168.253.14.129
Based on the opinions we received during the article's candidacy for featured status, we have the following tasks:
Fg2 05:55, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
More To-do things:
You guys really need to fix the Yayoi section. If you go in to the Yayoi article, it talks about the Origin as being 300 BC from (2 main thoeries) Korea/China. We are talking about 300 BC. Not 108 BC. But the Japan article here keeps deleting references on 300 BC Korean migration and only state China as the source in 108 BC, while using Korea as a bridge for the Chinese to go to Japan. But if you go in the the Yayoi article it theorizes about Korea as the source for Yayoi culture and also theorizes a Chinese migration as well. Endroit, I know you have always stated that Korea and China via Korean peninsula was the correct term when people were using Korean peninsula only or Korea and possibly China as the source for Yayoi. Please stand up and comment about the new version like you did for China, now that the situation is reversed. Endroit if you had problems with the earlier versions you must have problems with this new version which is one of the worst summarizations we have had so far. Endroit since you have commented so much in the past Yayoi discussions, I hope you make a similar suggestion here. Where did you go when we need you, did you go on vacation, I hope you come back from your leave of absense and stand up for the article to make it a better article like you did before. -- Tyler 09:24, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
I would like to officially protest edits that happened more than 6 times by User:Sir Edgar, which is this one [2]. Please sign your name saying protest and no protest below.
He is deleting sections, and his only claim is that this was "featured article" now he is saying it should be reverted back not caring how much edit expansion was added to this article. He is deleting expanded section. We are getting vandalized more because of this previous "featured article" status article. Sir Edgar don't ever think of reverting back, don't even try, it will be reverted back as long as you keep doing it. Don't even try. If you don't like it, then copyedit it, don't be lazy and selfish and keep reverting people's work. 168.253.21.234 05:49, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
I would like this article to be protected from Vandalism from Sir Edgar's edits. Please lock it down as long as we don't get vandalized and threatened with reverts from Sir Edgar. Admins please lock it down, until we get sufficient editors to counter Sir Edgar's selfish one sided edits and returning this article to simple form. Please lock it down! 168.253.21.234 05:53, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
The japan article is now 74 kb long... WAY too long. WoodElf 12:13, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
I've added {{sync}} tags to all the big sections. Please start synchronizing with their respective "main articles", and move text and images in accordance with Wikipedia:Summary style. In particular, the following sections seem NOT to be an object of revert-wars, so why don't everyone start there?: Demographics ( Demographics of Japan), Government and politics ( Politics of Japan), Economy ( Economy of Japan).-- Endroit 16:48, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
I want to ask a quick question. WHY is the now 70kb too long? I've checked the pages for major countries in the world and they're 70kb+. Why does Japan have to be cut down? I don't mind things being compacted, provided information is deleted for the sake of it. John Smith's 16:04, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
Great job everyone, but the article is still 68 KB long (note to self:have to work harder ...) WoodElf 15:20, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
Can I just make a quick note. In terms of reducing the size of the article, can we please focus on reducing the history section before cutting out much other information. We need to get that reduced and compacted a lot, so let's not worry too much about saving space elsewhere. John Smith's 21:42, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
Anime was added. -- 61.209.162.75 18:20, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
Due to the incessant edit warring concerning the topic of "Korea" in this article, we request semi-protection of this page. Revision to this page by IP Address users will be restricted. IP Address users are requested to obtain an account at Wikipedia ASAP, if they want to resolve this matter through proper channels. Also, be sure to read WP:Sock, as some people were violating that policy. IP Address users who are currently blocked for this reason, please resolve your blocked status with an admin.-- Endroit 14:09, 12 August 2006(UTC)
I support semi-protection.
I also want to just say that if Wikipedians support edits like the following, I will just have to quit Wikipedia. I don't see the point in staying somewhere that can tolerate bad grammar, poor writing, nationalistic twisting of phrases, and the mention of inane and useless facts.
Your inability or unwillingness to comprehend is not my responsibility.-- Sir Edgar 02:05, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
Please provide evidence to support your belief.-- Sir Edgar 02:05, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
You cannot rely on a single source, the Nihon Shogi, for all your information. The Nihon Shogi has been proven to have many deliberate exaggerations and falsifications.-- Sir Edgar 02:05, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
Nihon Shokiに書かれているエピソードを認めないなら、百済から仏教が千字文が送られたエピソードも嘘になってしまいますよ。Edger君は面白いBaisを見せてくれますね。
eremonial burial
For the above, please refer to the substantial discussion that took place already (see archives).-- Sir Edgar 02:05, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
This just shows your bias.-- Sir Edgar 02:05, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
It is not clear whether they were hostages or visitors. The point is these things were transmitted from Korea to Japan.-- Sir Edgar 02:05, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
Your comment is offensive.-- Sir Edgar 02:05, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
User:211.3.123.212|211.3.123.212]] 17:53, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
-- Sir Edgar 23:53, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
Semi-protection is a good idea, I think.
Sir Edgar, saying things like "I also want to just say that if Wikipedians support edits like the following, I will just have to quit Wikipedia." is not the way to go about making friends/allies on wiki. As someone who has more of an academic historical background than most people here, I find it very frustrating being here sometimes. Indeed most academics avoid this place like the plague because they find it a bit of a joke. So if you want to stay here, that is your choice. It is all of our choices. John Smith's 10:33, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
Japan, however has had a long history with Korea. In ancient times, much of Japan's culture was influenced by the Korean's own culture. There were also several wars between the two countries, as stated in Japan's national history. Korea should be mentioned at the very least once, but not to a point where there is an 'edit war'. It might also help if the Korea page also had some information about it's relationship with Japan. -- Eiyuu Kou 19:23, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
Some requests:
WoodElf 17:34, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
It's absolutely horrific. I'm not going to list each incident, but this article has gone to shit. Just look for yourselves. How can you tolerate this?
1. 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 (i.e. Yayoi-jin) from outside of Japan.
2. Buddhism were introduced by Baekje, to which Japan provided military support.
3. By 1910, Japan amalgamated Korea, Taiwan, and the southern half of Sakhalin.
4. After the atomic bombings, Imperial Japan signalled its willingness to surrender on the condition that the Emperor be allowed to continue as the symbolic head of state.
5. Japan maintains close economic and military ties and remains friends with its key ally and partner, the United States, and therefore the US-Japan security alliance serves as the cornerstone of its foreign policy.
6. With its geographical neighbors, it has several territorial disputes (islands). For example it has territorial disputes with Russia over the Kuril Islands, with South Korea over Takeshima (Korean name "Dokdo"), with the People's Republic of China (PRC) and the Republic of China (Taiwan) over the Senkaku Islands (Diaoyutai Islands), and with the People's Republic of China over the status of Okinotori. These disputes are in part about the control of marine and natural resources, such as possible reserves of crude oil and natural gas. These disputes are just territorial (islands) and doesn't amount to any serious crisis in all of the countries involved.
7. Japan is an economic world power with free-market economy with GDP (nominal) of little over $4.6 trillion as of 2005.
8. Historically, Chinese culture has been the most influential, starting with the development of the Yayoi culture from around 300 BC and culminating with the introduction of rice farming, ceremonial burial, pottery, painting, writing, poetry, etiquette, the Chinese writing system, and Mahayana Buddhism by the 7th century AD.
So some choice of words and grammar isn't perfect. Why don't you fix it instead of overreacting in such an immature manner? Since this article is on a non-English-speaking country, you can bet that non-English speakers were involved in its creation. Some of your points are very valid, but it's a shame you had to spoil them by acting like a child.
62.56.101.167
13:49, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
Endroit, your correction is definitely better. Very readable and elegant English phrasing. Thank you. -- Anonymous user who just happened by here (native English speaker if that matters)
I think its pretty rude to have your own coversation in Japanese while everybody else just sits there and can't read anything.
Sir Edgar, I'm ready to quit Wikipedia because its time consuming and energy sapping when nobody compromises. Good friend100 03:13, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
The country template says Japan is 377 835 sq.km, but the lead mentions 377873. which is it ???
WoodElf 16:10, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
The article Japan is too long, and we're trying to shorten it. Recent additions included valuable material, but there's not enough room for them in the article on Japan. Accordingly, we encourage editors to add material to the main articles that each section links to, such as History of Japan, or to articles they in turn link to, such as Victory over Japan Day or Surrender of Japan. Each topic has some appropriate article and Wikipedia welcomes additions to them, as well as improvements to this and all articles. Fg2 10:30, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
Japanese cuisine is an integral part of its culture and Japanese cuisine is also famous worldwide. Should it not have section under culture?
WoodElf 10:00, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
"Japanese cuisine is unique and famous worldwide. It is enjoyed by many around the world and appreciated for its aesthetic quality."
Japanese cuisine is not only cutting raw fish but heavily based on gratitude to nature. The techniques are developed to bring out taste of nature as possible with expression of gratitude to nature and the producers. itadakimasu, gochisosama deshita, and mottainai are very important essence of Japanese food culture and what I am trying to incorporate here. (one of reasons I do not like US kids movies is because kids always waste foods by throwing each other at the last moments..)
Although green tea is sharing very important part, I think it is not solely recognized worldwide as Japanese cuisine.
I also changed the photo because the hotel breakfast matches better with the description and the previous one was so simplest which is difficult even in Japan. The problem of the new one is that it looks so gorgeous for common home-made breakfast while many hotels serve in this style.-- Jjok 00:46, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
Please improve Israel-Japan relations. Thanks, Republitarian 01:55, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
The section on music of japan is rather iffy and could be improved. Any responses? WoodElf 09:04, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
Be sure the material isn't copywrited. Usually 'better' music has an owner or two. -- Eiyuu Kou 19:25, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
This article has the potential to become a FA. To do:
WoodElf 09:10, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
One of our primary objectives is to eliminate any content-based revert-warring in the Japan article. To that effect, we need to raise the standards of verifiability wherever a content-based revert-war occurs in this article. I propose that if any controversial material cannot be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, and if that material is not of top importance to the Japan article, it should be deemed as "not meeting the criteria for inclusion."
"Controversial material" includes statements such as "x came from Korea", which has resulted in persistent revert-wars in this article. In reality, the origin is not always certain (beyond a reasonable doubt), as some things are argued to have come directly from China, some directly from Korea, and some are argued to have originated in Japan. Historical matters in the 6th century and before, are particularly prone to this problem, because verifying and enforcing WP:V is difficult. For this reason, some of such controversial material in this article were already moved to their respective "main articles", mostly into History of Japan. This is not only a stopgap measure to avert a revert-war, but also means 2 things:
Part 1 of this proposal deals with which specific topics to exclude from the Japan article.
Other parts of this proposal shall deal with the wording on "controversial materials" still remaining after this exclusion.
From Sir Edgar's list of 8 problems (see "Wording in this article." above), two problems still remain:
1. 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 (i.e. Yayoi-jin) from outside of Japan. From where "outside of Japan"? 2. Buddhism were introduced by Baekje, to which Japan provided military support. Disputed fact and not important to sentence. The word "were" used improperly.
Parts 2 & 3 of this proposal deals with these 2 specific points respectively.-- Endroit 20:10, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
Any text describing the ORIGIN of the following will be banned from the Japan article, and moved to their respective "main article" according to the manner prescribed in Wikipedia:Summary style: burial mounds ( kofun), burial rituals, Shintoism, shamanism, kanji, gagaku, buddhist chant, "Yayoi pottery" (see Japanese pottery, Korean pottery).
Any banned material may be reconsidered to be included in the Japan article again, if one of the following 2 criteria are met:
Please comment on the above, and discuss any ideas, changes, criticisms, or suggestions you may have.-- Endroit 20:10, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
We need to discuss, modify, and reach consensus on the following text, in the "Jomon and Yayoi eras" section:
Sources for this text:
Please comment on the above, and discuss any ideas, changes, criticisms, or suggestions you may have.-- Endroit 20:10, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
If the references state Korea and Korean penisula more than East Asia, East Asian Continent or Mainland Asia, shouldn't we follow the references. -- Tyler 06:46, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
I like the "continental East Asia" myself--it's short and to the point. Does anyone truly believe this phrase will lead to confusion? I really doubt it--instead, it seems people want to squeeze in the name of whatever their favorite present day country is, when such a reference is really unnecessary--just making things longer. Komdori 15:21, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
I agree with Komdori. I like the "Eastern Asia" or "Continental East Asia" because, "Continental East Asia" is obviously including a region of the Korean peninsula. I seem to some people wants to using a word of "KOREA". Why does someone insists persistently on the using "Korea"? I guess that it give rise to an unnecessary edit war about interpretation of "Korea".-- Watermint 10:44, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
I am trying to find out which wording is acceptable to which user. Multiple choice is allowed here. Please modify youself in the list (realign yourself), and specify which choices are acceptable. Pease also comment in the above section, on your reasoning for the choice(s), if you haven't already.-- Endroit 22:10, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
Please explain the difference between a Ancient Korea culture and a Ancient Chinese culture. If the difference between an ancient South Korea culture and a Chinese culture cannot be understood, this vote is not academic. -- 211.3.112.206 12:11, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
There's already been a long and drawn out discussion about terminologies over at the Yayoi article itself. Those that believe "China" did not exist is sorely mistaken, as that English word itself is a reference to the Qin dynasty. It came from the Sanskrit word cina. If editors are still in doubt, all you need to do is click on History of China and note that the article does not begin at 1911 or 1949, but that it begins at the 16th century BC. The suggestion to eliminate references to "China" and "Korea" here would also necessitate we elimate references to the word "Japan" and change it to "Wa" at articles such as the Yayoi article. --- Hong Qi Gong 17:32, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
It is difficult to discuss the rice farming and iron manufacturing as an equal. According to the current studies, the gene of Japanese rice is directly imported from china.-- Questionfromjapan 15:08, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
We need to discuss, modify, and reach consensus on the following text, in the "Classical era" section:
Sources for this text:
{{
cite book}}
: |editor=
has generic name (
help)Please comment on the above, and discuss any ideas, changes, criticisms, or suggestions you may have.-- Endroit 20:10, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
Just more things to ponder. The sentence above has stripped away almost everything such as pottery, burial practices, intro of Chinese writing system, shamanism, rank system, etc cause it is considered un-important, difficult to word, and various other reasons. I believe the sentence was more about these cultural ideas, when and how it came to Japan and the impact it had on Japan. As we know Buddhism seems to have had an impact on Japan. Apparently the military assistance is disputed at the time around 530-580 AD (if it actually happened, when, were the troops actually sent or was it just talk of it, how many etc) what kind of impact this troop info had on Japan appears to be not important. How significant was the military alliance part to the sentence if you don't mention that in 670 AD they lost the war and their was a migration of Baekje scholars to Yamato. Without the part about Baekje migration being mentioned the military alliance part of the sentence could appear to be a weird side note without any importance to impact Japan. -- Tyler 08:08, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
The IP 222.233.205.158 is of Hanaro Telecom which is located in Yeoeuido-dong, Yeongdeungpo-gu, Seoul, South Korea. He is obviously a Korean troll pretending to be Japanese. -- Saintjust 12:47, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
comments
For the individual above who wanted info on Korean influence in Japan. -- Tyler 11:31, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
There are some weird entries at the end that have appeared - ISO something-or-other and sports/vehicle codes. Anyone know how to get rid of them? It makes the page look terrible. John Smith's 21:06, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
i believe that the world war 2 section is biased towards the japanese trying to make it seem as if the united states was wrong for retaliating with force after the attack on world war 2 and that their tactics during the war were wrong. i dont believe this is a discussion of what should of happened, just what happened so i believe the bias should be removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.204.112.31 ( talk • contribs)
Japan did not attack Pearl Harbor for oil. They attacked to destroy the American battleships and aircraft carriers (which at the time were out at sea) to immobilize the American power in the Pacific so they could conquer the Pacific at will. Good friend100 17:53, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
Not my fault when I hear that Japan attacked Pearl Harbor because America dropped the atomic bomb first. Good friend100 18:15, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
Korea is a so not important topic for the Japanese. Please do not use energy for such a Korean. Please think about the introduction sentence of the Anime, the Manga, and the video games. Nintendo is a priority that is far higher than Korean's boast. -- 220.212.102.162 09:39, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
Phonemonkey, the problem is, the people that needs to hear your message, just ignore it. Its a shame when editors vandalize articles by removing information about Korean influence on Japan. Good friend100 18:13, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
Please don't try to downgrade Japan. We never meant to strip Korea or its pride. And besides, most of our culture comes from China, not Korea.
There is an image Image:Hasekura in Rome.JPG in Japan#Medieval era and another Image:RedSealShip.JPG in Japan#Edo era. I like those two images themselves, but they have not much to do with the article, where neither Hasekura nor the ships are mentioned. They are fine in the other article Edo period where readers can find what they are, but I am afraid they are not adequate to be put here. Minamoto no Yoritomo would suite better than Hasekura for "Medieval era". I am not sure about what would suite for Edo era, but an image of a daimyo gyoretsu might be nice if there is any. While I cannot find any, Image:Hiroshige le pont Nihonbashi à l'aube.jpg may also be nice. -- LittleTree 14:55, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
Ok, i'm very, very impressed by the speed at which amusing pranks are removed from the article about Japan, but no one is getting the time to enjoy the unbelievable hilariousness of an article about Japan in which all the R's and L's are reversed. That's classic, you know, and if the web isn't there for amusement, then what is it really for?
This is for the sake of record: [38] - [39] - [40] - [41] - [42] -- Bhadani 16:39, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
Omitting macrons on long vowels is extremely unprofessional. I am aware that the current guidelines recommend omitting them on terms that are common enough to be considered "English".
Lets look at an example. 忍坂 is the old name for a city in Nara. It is read as Osaka (no long vowels, thus no macrons). Then there is the much more familiar 大阪. This is Ōsaka, with in initial long vowel. If you insist on disregarding short / long vowel distinctions, then you can not distinguish between these two words.
Except for long vowels, there does not seem to be any disagreement to distinguish between long constants (Ho_kk_aidō) or vowel clustors (Hokk_ai_dō).
I suspect that the source of this is the inconvenience in inputting macrons. That I can understand. I propose preferring macrons where necessary, but allowing people to disregard if desired. Others who care about such issues, such as myself, can correct places as necessary.
I have noticed two general trends in English books written about Japan. (1) The general, basic text often disregards long vowels. (2) Serious, professional texts rigorously make the distinguish. I would hope that Wikipedia would strive to be a serious, professional reference.
As a long-time resident of Japan and linguist, I am extremely disappointed with the unprofessional policies of Wikipedia in regard to Japan. I would like this policy to change.
I dont think it should have been changed to Continental East Asia yet. If you read the consensus above, "Korea and China" have six votes while "Continental East Asia" has eight. However, Komdori's vote should be stricken see as how s/he is a "Likely" sock of LactosteTI as confirmed by checkuser [43] and I think its weird that the seeming troll 222.233.205.83's vote was allowed to count when that user's comments have all been deleted from this talk page. Tortfeasor 17:06, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
Komdori is a sockpuppet of LactoseTI?
Hey, this argument doesn't have to get so nasty. I agree that "Korea and China" should be used because it was China and Korea that influenced Japan mostly. However, using continental East Asia can be better because it includes all influencing countries in a general term. This isn't an important argument. Both words are good. I'm slightly leaning to "Korea and China" because "East Asia" may refer to somewhere like the Phillipenes or something and that may be misleading because Phillipenes hardly influenced Japan, but probably its really up to how the text is written. If the text is written as if mainly China and Japan has a large influence that may affect what should be used. Just a thought, not taking any sides =) Good friend100 19:34, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
"The following countries/territories are located in geographic East Asia:
I don't see Vietnam on that list. John Smith's 20:38, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
We need to change it to specific countries that influenced Japan, not just a general term. So that includes Korea, China, and maybe India (since Buddhism came from there). Good friend100 20:45, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
It doesn't have to be a "massively long list" as you suggest. The information of how Japan was influenced is already in the text. Just because specificing countries doesn't mean we have to write a whole list down. Also, we are here to make the text more informative? Not just a general term, but specifically? I think we need to do a poll. Good friend100 02:58, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
Koreans want to put Korea in the history in Japan. The evaluation of the article on Japan was lowered to B class because of their puppet and hijack. And, the Korean tries to throw away the article on Korea, and to enter the article on Japan. How should we treat these arrogant refugees? I hate Korean to use my home country to advertise Korea.
-- 219.66.45.30 09:29, 28 September 2006 (UTC)