This 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. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 |
The Map has a bar that states 1000km but the Tokyo prefecture is tiny compared to the bar and yet the article says that tokyo has a area of 2,817 km. Am I reading this right. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.176.142.168 ( talk) 21:54, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
p;km², even though it's much less than 100 km (never mind 1,000) in size. A different box 36 km high and 60 km wide would have an area almost exactly the same as Tokyo (notice it's 2187, not 2817). Look at the detailed map in the Japanese Wikipedia (click the link to 日本語 under Languages in the left column of the article—it's between Nederlands and Norsk) and you'll see that Tokyo is pretty much like that. So yes, it's right. Fg2 ( talk) 00:20, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
so is tokyo like london if the square mile was annexed —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.76.223.111 ( talk) 21:05, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
Is the name of Tokyo just a rearrangement of the name of Kyoto to signify the move of the capital of the country? — Rickyrab | Talk 16:36, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
I would like to add Peter Greenberg's Off-the-Brochure Travel Guide on Tokyo to the External Links.
Peter Greenberg's Off-the-Brochure is interesting, but does not warrant inclusion in the list of external links. These should be links to exception sites with significantly more information that is not on Wikipedia. Whats up skip ( talk) 00:33, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
In the infobox, after the area of Tokyo is an additional value in parenthesis (45th) which does not have an explanation. It would be helpful if this were fixed. Legioss ( talk) 00:16, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
I was looking at the page List of cities by population and I was confused since I remembered seeing a much lower number for the density on this page. Since the List of cities by population page has a reference, I went looking for the correct answer. The latest data I found dates back to 2005 and is available in Microsoft Excel 97 format at the following address : http://www.toukei.metro.tokyo.jp/tnenkan/2005/tn05qytia0210.xls. In that spreadsheet there are different values given. There is Tokyo-to that appears to be a total of all the districts that gives a population of 12576601 people and a land area of 2186.96 km² which gives a density of 5750.7 people/km².
What confuses me is that they list different values for "All-ku", "All-shi", "All-gun", "All-mura", etc... According to my limited knowledge of Japanese, mura means village and ku means something close to neighborhood. I don't know is what "Tokyo-to" means exactly. Is there someone with better knowledge of Japanese that can confirm that "Tokyo-to" means "all of Tokyo" and correct the articles accordingly?
Rome is only sister city with Paris and vice versa. Rome is only partner cities with Tokyo. As in " only Paris is worth of Rome, only Rome is worth of Paris". This quote can be found on both article of Paris and Rome.-- Faizaguo ( talk) 19:29, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
I would like to suggest replacing Image:Tokyo 2006.jpg with Image:Tokyo aerial night.jpg. Arthena (talk) 21:21, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
Fg2 ( talk) 21:36, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
Re: this addition, I don't see why this minor grammatical curiosity is noteworthy, and I note that no source was provided. For comparison, is it important that Ohio State could be read as "O, hi, o state"? Jpatokal ( talk) 09:47, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
I wanted to edit this page but I guess I don't have access. I wanted to update the population density to also include square miles (like on other pages such as Seoul, Beijing, etc).
5,796 (square kilometers) = 2,237.84811 (square mile) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonberling ( talk • contribs) 20:15, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
I took the population density that's currently listed on the page and used google to convert it to square miles.
Here's a link http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=5%2C796+%28square+kilometers%29+in+square+miles
I don't really have any other sources then that, but since its not really new information that should be good enough, right? Thanks for all of your help. Jonberling ( talk) 04:56, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
I see my mistake. Although you could have pointed it out sooner. :) I agree that Fg2's answer is correct. Thank-you very much for you help.
Jonberling (
talk)
03:25, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
This is a nice article, well-referenced and informative. Unfortunately, the lede spends almost all of its content on explaining the various informal/formal statuses of Tokyo. It does not, in other words, act as a summary of the whole article (per WP:LEDE) and is sure to fail any FA nomination for that reason. I propose instead that the majority of that be moved into its own section. Having one section on this may seem excessive, but given the confusion and subtleties, I think it's a good way to move most of the stuff out of the lede. I'm sure a good couple sentences can be cooked up that accurately encompasses all that information. -- C S ( talk) 02:21, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
As a first attempt, to spur some discussion, here is what could be in the lede:
Tokyo (東京, Tōkyō), officially Tokyo Metropolis (東京都, Tōkyō-to), is one of the 47 prefectures of Japan and located on the eastern side of the main island Honshū. Tokyo is unique among the prefectures in being a megacity. For historical reasons, the twenty-three special wards of Tokyo, each governed as a city, are often informally considered as one city, the " city of Tokyo", with over 8 million people. The total population of the prefecture exceeds 12 million.
Because it is the seat of the Japanese government and the Imperial Palace, and the home of the Japanese Imperial Family, Tokyo is the de facto capital of Japan. [1] The name "Tokyo" literally means eastern capital.
-- C S ( talk) 04:31, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
Tokyo (東京, Tōkyō), officially Tokyo Metropolis (東京都, Tōkyō-to), is one of the 47 prefectures of Japan and located on the eastern side of the main island Honshū. The twenty-three special wards of Tokyo, each governed as a city, cover the area that was once the city of Tokyo in the eastern part of the prefecture, and total over 8 million people. The population of the prefecture exceeds 12 million.
Tokyo is the seat of the Japanese government and the Imperial Palace, and the home of the Japanese Imperial Family. The name "Tokyo" literally means eastern capital.
I moved the non-redundant stuff from the lede into its own section. But now it is even worse than when it was the lede. Anyway, I'll look into the archives, as I remember there are some good explanations....but as I recall Fg2 was an important contributor there. If Fg2 has some ideas on how to proceed, I would be glad to hear them. -- C S ( talk) 07:55, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
Here it is for easy access.
Status as "city"
The name "Tokyo" refers variously to Tokyo Metropolis (the prefecture) as a whole, or only to the main urban mass under its jurisdiction (thus excluding west Tama and Izu and Ogasawara Islands), or even the whole of Greater Tokyo Area, which includes Tokyo and parts of Kanagawa, Saitama, Chiba, Gunma, Tochigi, Ibaraki, and Yamanashi prefectures, depending on context. This article is about the prefecture and uses "Tokyo" to refer to it.
Tokyo is unique among the prefectures, providing certain municipal services characteristic of a city, as defined by Japanese law. [2]
Because it is the seat of the Japanese government and the Imperial Palace, and the home of the Japanese Imperial Family, Tokyo is the de facto capital of Japan. [1]
The Greater Tokyo Area, [3] centered on Tokyo but also including Chiba, Kanagawa, and Saitama, is the most populous metropolitan area in the world with a population of over 35 million people. [4]
It makes a point we should keep in the article somewhere: uniqueness among prefectures in providing municipal services to the wards. We should develop this a bit further, describing the services and how and why the prefecture provides them. We can make a historical link to the former Tokyo City. In doing this, it will be good if we avoid giving readers the impression that Tokyo is "less" than other prefectures and "more" like a city.
The reasons for considering Tokyo the capital of Japan are already in the new lead. What's not is the de facto/de jure distinction. We've got a separate article on the topic. We could write a sentence or two for Tokyo (in the lead or elsewhere). But I'm not sure whether this needs text or can simply be an inclusion in the "See also" section.
As for the other paragraphs, the "name" information has grown too much. Having made it clear that this article is about Tokyo (i.e. Tokyo-to, a prefectural-level division of the country), we don't have to dwell on other uses of the name. Still, the Greater Tokyo Area point is worth making, since it's significant to the prefecture. We should lead readers to the main article on the Greater Tokyo Area for details, but we should present the facts that are relevant to Tokyo-to.
Finally, we should decide whether to put what we keep in a stand-alone section, or integrate the material into other sections. If it's stand-alone, we'll need a title, a location in the article etc. Fg2 ( talk) 11:26, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
I'll add to this as the thought strikes:
-- C S ( talk) 02:27, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
I wonder, do we really need quite so many images within the main article text and as a gallery at the end? I removed a number which had minimal relevance to the sections in which they were placed (such as the "Rainbow Bridge" picture in "History" and the "Izumi Garden Tower" and "Cocoon Tower" pictures in "Economy"), but I see they were almost immediately replaced without comment by new editor User:Dasistcafe, who, from the choice of user name and modus operandi, is clearly a reincarnation of User:Ichtrinken. I would also question the need to have images of such a large number of individual buildings and locations in the gallery section. In particular, four pictures of Roppongi Hills is really excessive. Personally, I would like to see images showing general views of districts (e.g. Shinjuku, Ginza, Akihabara etc.) in Tokyo, but images of individual buildings are probably better suited for inclusion in the articles discussing these particular districts or buildings. I would be interested to hear other editors' opinions, as simply removing the images is futile, since they are promptly re-added by the original editor. -- DAJF ( talk) 08:39, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
Apparently what happens is that the editor will just come back and revert. I hope he or she gets the idea after a while. -- C S ( talk) 04:04, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
The population differences between day and night don't add up. I've read the article on the metropolitan government about that, but think it would be best to label that as working population or clarify that a bit more. —Preceding unsigned comment added by alkora ( talk • contribs)
The information is available at http://www.keishicho.metro.tokyo.jp/toukei/bunsyo/toukei19/k_tokei19.htm about reported crimes to the Tokyo Metro Police. Should we put up basic statistics of crime rates in Tokyo? This excel file from the Tokyo police shows 79277 cases for 2007. The information is there, and so I believe it should be included. What do you think? Since many people know that there is such a low crime rate in Tokyo, the numbers should be there to prove it. The full released list from the Tokyo Metro Police can be found here.—Preceding unsigned comment added by alkora ( talk • contribs)
The article currently states:
Tokyo is the seat of the Japanese government and the Imperial Palace, and the home of the Japanese Imperial Family. The name literally means eastern capital.
This is patently wrong. Tokyo does not "literally mean" anything. Rather, Tōkyō "literally means eastern capital". I fixed it once and it was reverted. I put a clarifyme tag on it twice and it was removed. This is not how Wikipedia works. Either fix it or cite it, but stop ignoring the issue. If needed, the issue can be raised outside this article as well. 219.248.51.35 ( talk) 22:47, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
The lead states: "Tokyo (東京, Tōkyō), officially Tokyo Metropolis 東京都, Tōkyō-to)..." First, there needs to be a reference for the "officially". Second, is it officially "Tokyo Metroplis" or is it officially 東京都? I would like to verify this, but there is no reference and when asked for one it was removed. The official webpage, for example, does not use the expression "Tokyo Metropolis", but rather "Tokyo Metropolitan Government". This needs to be clarified and referenced. 219.248.51.35 ( talk) 23:02, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
This article gives the population of Tokyo as 12 million or there abouts (what is the special wards thing?). The 12th edition of The Times Comprehensive Atlas of the World gives the figure 35,467,000 (thirty five million, four hundred and sixty seven thousand). what's going on? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.153.183.16 ( talk) 00:32, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
cheers, figured it was something along those lines. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.146.131.82 ( talk) 21:56, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
I don't mind which weather template is used but the alternative Template:Tokyo weatherbox is a standard style that is used on most major city articles (see Category:Weatherbox templates), if anyone is interested in consistency. Regards, -- Joowwww ( talk) 13:07, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
I noticed with some surprise the notice in the Editing section for External links that asks users to submit a request here before adding a link. I have never before encountered anything like this in Wikipedia. Is this really standard procedure? It seems somewhat contrary to the spirit and the letter of Wikpedia's operating procedures.
In any case, here is the link I would like to add:
This is a unique and valuable web service for anyone interested in experiencing Tokyo and learning more about it, particularly those who are not able to visit the city in person. It is particularly valuable now that Google Maps has discontinued their Streetview service for Tokyo.
Yes, I did recently add a mention of the service to the Cityscape section, and I do understand that such a mention might not be appropriate for one of the body sections of a wikipedia article. In fact, I actually visited the page today with the express intention of removing it from that section and instead adding it to the external links section. I myself hadn't felt completely comfortable with putting it in the body in the first place. Therefore, I was not surprised to see that it had been removed--though I am surprised to discover that one needs some kind of official approval in order to add information to a Wikipedia page.
By the way, here is the wikipedia page for Location View. -- Gregapan ( talk) 01:35, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for the response. What you say makes sense. However, if I may address the three points you brought up: 1) Though LV does have coverage of other cities in Japan, the default location is Tokyo. A first time visitor to the site arrives smack dab in the middle of Tokyo. 2) Is the need for registration a disqualifier for any external links? A simple caveat next to the link could inform Wikipedians of this. 3) I would be overjoyed if SV were still available for Tokyo. On my server, whether using firefox or explorer, it has disappeared. There is no button for it anymore, no blue streets. If I've gone loony and somehow forgotten how to access it, please remind me. Yet its disappearance fits with what a Google Japan employee recently told me: that they would likely soon have to remove it due to complaints regarding privacy. You still get it? -- Gregapan ( talk) 23:52, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
SV works for Tokyo--or elsewhere? It's certainly working for the US, etc. I still get nothing, however, when in Tokyo on google maps, though I used to use it frequently. -- Gregapan ( talk) 23:52, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
I was hoping for a link to an ogg audio file by a native Japanese speaker in the first line (example: Honshū). For all I know 'Tokyo' is pretty straightforward and very similar to the default western pronunciation of the name, but it's hard to determine until you've listened to it. Is there a native Japanese speaker who can contribute this? -- MiG ( talk) 16:13, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
A complete guess, but this change (changing "GDP of US$1,191 billion" to "GDP of US$1,191 trillion") may be related to the different ways different folks write decimal numbers. In particular, the user making this change is apparently in Germany where, as written, this number likely looks like 19% more than US$1 billion rather than 19% more than US$1 trillion. Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers) says decimal points, not commas, are used between the integer and fractional parts of decimal numbers and commas are used every three digits in large numbers. Perhaps this particular number would be more clear as "US$1.191 trillion". -- Rick Block ( talk) 16:17, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
To help the interwiki bots figure out how things match up, I've changed ja:東京都 to link to en:Tokyo. ja:東京 also links here. I'm not sure what the bots do if there are two articles from one wikipedia linked to the same article in another, but it's not obvious to me that there's an en: article that better corresponds to ja:東京. If the bots continue to have trouble with this it might be best to remove the en: link from ja:東京. -- Rick Block ( talk) 19:23, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Hello,
I just tried to have consistent things. Some languages have two articles, one about the prefecture (e.g. de:Präfektur Tokio) and one about the town/city (e.g. de:Tokio).
To which one correspond ja:東京 and ja:東京都 ?
Best regards,
Vargenau ( talk) 20:48, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Is there a prefectural fish for Tokyo? WhisperToMe ( talk) 22:39, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
It looks like Tokyo used to much more of a water-city before the 1923 eartquake and the WWII carpet bombing. She had many canals, which were filled in to make place for more people living and business districts. The remaining one were dammed to make sure typhoons cannot force the sea into the city.
This is probably worth discussion in the geopgraphy section of the article.
I believe there are some confusion among some of the readers and editors. Most people think "Tokyo" as in terms of a city (the 23 special wards that replace Tokyo City) rather then the whole prefecture. Also the Tokyo (disambiguation) does not do any justice on the explaining it. — ASDFGH =] talk? 22:49, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
Does Tokyo still compare to financial centres like London and New York? Tokyo is nowhere near as dominant in Asia as London is in Europe or New York in the Americas. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.234.55.222 ( talk) 12:52, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
I propose thaat the picture in the 'Tokyo Metropolis' Box- at the top- be changed. Currently, it's a map showing the location of the city on Japan, which doesn't really give the impression of a city. It would be better if the map were changed to a photo/collage showing streetscenes, as is the norm for most city articles. bob bobato ( talk) 00:57, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
I have photos of Arakawa Gorge - still part of Tokyo, but an area of mountains, rivers, and onsens. If you want me to upload for use, let me know Kunchan ( talk) 12:32, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
List of songs about Tokyo
Thanks.
Civic Cat (
talk)
19:19, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
There is some edit warring regarding the existence of the capital of Tokyo. According to the Tokyo Metropolitan Government, the capital seems to be Shinjuku. See Tokyo Metropolitan Archives News page 7 [3] or TMG Pocket knowledge. [4]―― Phoenix7777 ( talk) 09:27, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
Ok, I am not happy that some one has gone and changed/removed most of the external links even though there is express information on the page that changes to the external links should be discussed first before they are changed. Please see the previous discussion at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Tokyo/Archive_2 (half way down)
While this discussion is over two years old, the content and reasoning is still sound. The Wikipedia policy on external links was followed ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:EL). In particular "Sites that contain neutral and accurate material that is relevant to an encyclopedic understanding of the subject and cannot be integrated into the Wikipedia article due to copyright issues, amount of detail (such as professional athlete statistics, movie or television credits, interview transcripts, or online textbooks), or other reasons."
This is why there was detailed discussion on the linking to pages with external maps and the comparison of pages with maps on them.
I have returned the external link section back to the way it was. If anyone disagrees with this please enter into a discussion and don't just delete links without doing so. Whats up skip ( talk) 00:53, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
NeilN removed the external links I returned to the original place citing "WP:EL". Clearly he has not read or understood the "WP:EL" properly as most if not all of the links I returned fitted this criteria. NeilN didn't bother to grace this page with any discussion on the topic. Unilaterally making edits and then leaving a cryptic note for me like I have never edited on Wikipedia before. I have returned the edits I made previously. Whats up skip ( talk) 07:55, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
You have erred in at least a couple of your assumptions about linking to other sites. 1) "two links to advertising-heavy sites" There is no reference to this in the "WP:EL". Indeed Wikipedia is basically one great big link farm for Google, Yahoo and Microsoft with tens of thousands of links to map pages with advertising in them, so you reason for excluding sites on the basis that they have advertising on them is severely flawed.
2) If you had looked back at the discussion you would have seen that http://www.japaneselifestyle.com.au/tokyo/tokyomap.htm was originally accepted as link as it had the best map of Tokyo that could be found on the web. Now at the time the map had 130 interactive points of interest. I notice that now the map is citing over 600 points of interest and there appears to be more text information, links and pictures. In addition to the on page map information the site even makes available the data available as a KML file so people can further use the map information.
This link was later changed to http://www.japaneselifestyle.com.au/tokyo/ as it was argued that the extensive number of unique photographs of Tokyo, plus the additional information found with the photos and elsewhere in the Tokyo section warranted linking to the primary page on Tokyo. I notice that the site is now citing that it has over 1,400 unique photographs of Tokyo. This number of photographs in themselves would probably qualify for a link in the first place.
I personally did not support the inclusion of Wikitravel as I don't really think the information included in there on Tokyo is that great.
If you want to know the reasoning behind the inclusion and exclusion of the other links then you must spend the time reviewing its history. Don't continue your self important editing style where you ignore the extensive work done by other. Whats up skip ( talk) 10:40, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
I wonder who Whats up skip is referring to when he/she writes (in this edit) I see again you have been very arrogant with your editing. You don't bother to look into the extensive history and discussion that took place to determine which were suitable links and why. You have not bothered to wait for a discussion to continue before changing the links to what you think is right. You have a history of doing this sort of thing and it must stop! I don't suppose it can be me, as the history of the article reveals that so far this year I have made two edits to the article, each entirely irrelevant to this matter of external links. Yet the material close to this suggests that "you" is me. It's rather confusing.
Whats up skip, what is your main interest in Tokyo? It seems to me that various sections of it are terrible ("Popular media", which manages not to mention newspapers or magazines; "Education", which is merely a pair of lists; etc), and that there'd be a case for adding certain new sections, IFF they were concise and had a high signal/noise ratio. Perhaps you could work on something here. -- Hoary ( talk) 14:59, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
How about planning a meetup between wiki users around Tokyo in late February 2010? -- Saki talk 08:21, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
Aren't the population figures in the second paragraph a little confusing? I've read it several times and still can't understand it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 111.100.191.184 ( talk) 10:31, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
It isn't consistent. This would make more sense - adding <part of>:
The prefecture is part of the world's most populous metropolitan area with 35 to 39 million people (depending on definition) and the world's largest metropolitan economy with a GDP of US$1.479 trillion at purchasing power parity in 2008.[3] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ssmats ( talk • contribs) 07:37, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
I changed the lead attempting to indicate that Tokyo is a prefecture, not a city. This change was reverted. I've tried a different version. What I'm trying to get across is that Tokyo is a prefectural level government, not a city government, even though "Tokyo" is still widely thought of as a city. I think starting the article with "Tokyo is the capital and largest city of Japan, and is a prefecture" doesn't quite do it justice since Tokyo is not actually a city. We've tried to wordsmith this before. Is the current version more acceptable? -- Rick Block ( talk) 17:50, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
(ja) | (en) |
---|---|
東京都区部 | ??? |
東京 | ??? |
東京都 東京府 |
Tokyo |
東京市 | Tokyo City |
特別区 | Special wards of Tokyo |
江戸 | Edo |
首都圏 南関東 |
Greater Tokyo Area |
関東地方 広域関東圏 |
Kantō region |
I've gotta say I agree with the confusion over the prefecture/municipal district vs urban area defintion of 'city' that this article is trying to straddle. The Tokyo article needs to be about the city, as in the urban area, not the 'city,' the municipal governing region or the prefecture. Explaining the difference in this technicality makes the lead paragraph unclear. There is a translation of the municipal district into the American municipal term 'city' which can also be translated into 'council district.' The problem with the dual meaning of 'city' with respect to this article is that some people's pedantry is creating nonsense such as 'Tokyo is not a city' when what they mean is 'There is no municipal district called Tokyo.' Tokyo IS a city in the simple, non-technical meaning of the word, and thats what this article needs to refer to. If people require an article on the more technical Tokyo prefecture/municipal area then they can be linked to it. Of course there should be information about the local government of Tokyo in this article, but so it dominates the lead paragraph and advises the whole article is only about the prefecture or metropolitan area. Mdw0 ( talk) 03:59, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
Whatever else Tokyo might be, is it a city? In the latest edit to the article, an editor seems to think that it isn't. Well, it's clear that some people believe that Tokyo can't be a city because it's own government chooses to deny that it is one, rather in the same way that Japan doesn't have armed forces because they're called "self-defense forces", or indeed that North Korea is democratic, of the people and a republic because "DPR" is part of "DPRK", innit?
The attempt to redefine "city" to exclude a conurbation such as Tokyo hasn't managed to prevent the publication of books such as:
Ah, but conceivably their publication demonstrates no more than appalling endemic ignorance -- caused by reptilians? -- of the true meaning of "city". -- Hoary ( talk) 02:23, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
Of course, Tokyo city (the administrative unit) has neither a mayor nor a website because it doesn't exist anymore. Yet, there are hundreds of references to kyū-Tōkyō-shi ("the former city of Tokyo"), the Tōkyō nijūsanku ("Tokyo's 23 wards") or the Tōkyō-to kubu ("Tokyo Metropolis wards area") in government websites, documents and even national laws. It is obvious that the former administrative unit is usually meant when anyone refers to a city named Tokyo. (and after the war some including the the Socialist candidate in the first gubernatorial election in 1947, Tagawa Daikichirō, wanted to reinistute the City of Tokyo or review at least some of the changes introduced by Tōjō and the Naimu-shō in 1943 to have tighter control over the wards and Tokyo affairs. But since Tagawa lost to Yasui (and because the people could now, at least, elect the governor thanks to Emperor Douglas) the to-sei was left in place. Even the prefectural administration says
"it has the character of a single city in the area encompassing the 23 special wards." to justify the (ot: very undemocratic – as even after the war Tokyoites were not allowed to elect their special ward/"city"/ku mayors for decades) special rights with regard to the wards' local affairs. --
Asakura Akira (
talk)
15:22, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
I've solicited comments about this at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cities and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Japan. -- Rick Block ( talk) 04:25, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
This 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. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 |
The Map has a bar that states 1000km but the Tokyo prefecture is tiny compared to the bar and yet the article says that tokyo has a area of 2,817 km. Am I reading this right. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.176.142.168 ( talk) 21:54, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
p;km², even though it's much less than 100 km (never mind 1,000) in size. A different box 36 km high and 60 km wide would have an area almost exactly the same as Tokyo (notice it's 2187, not 2817). Look at the detailed map in the Japanese Wikipedia (click the link to 日本語 under Languages in the left column of the article—it's between Nederlands and Norsk) and you'll see that Tokyo is pretty much like that. So yes, it's right. Fg2 ( talk) 00:20, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
so is tokyo like london if the square mile was annexed —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.76.223.111 ( talk) 21:05, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
Is the name of Tokyo just a rearrangement of the name of Kyoto to signify the move of the capital of the country? — Rickyrab | Talk 16:36, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
I would like to add Peter Greenberg's Off-the-Brochure Travel Guide on Tokyo to the External Links.
Peter Greenberg's Off-the-Brochure is interesting, but does not warrant inclusion in the list of external links. These should be links to exception sites with significantly more information that is not on Wikipedia. Whats up skip ( talk) 00:33, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
In the infobox, after the area of Tokyo is an additional value in parenthesis (45th) which does not have an explanation. It would be helpful if this were fixed. Legioss ( talk) 00:16, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
I was looking at the page List of cities by population and I was confused since I remembered seeing a much lower number for the density on this page. Since the List of cities by population page has a reference, I went looking for the correct answer. The latest data I found dates back to 2005 and is available in Microsoft Excel 97 format at the following address : http://www.toukei.metro.tokyo.jp/tnenkan/2005/tn05qytia0210.xls. In that spreadsheet there are different values given. There is Tokyo-to that appears to be a total of all the districts that gives a population of 12576601 people and a land area of 2186.96 km² which gives a density of 5750.7 people/km².
What confuses me is that they list different values for "All-ku", "All-shi", "All-gun", "All-mura", etc... According to my limited knowledge of Japanese, mura means village and ku means something close to neighborhood. I don't know is what "Tokyo-to" means exactly. Is there someone with better knowledge of Japanese that can confirm that "Tokyo-to" means "all of Tokyo" and correct the articles accordingly?
Rome is only sister city with Paris and vice versa. Rome is only partner cities with Tokyo. As in " only Paris is worth of Rome, only Rome is worth of Paris". This quote can be found on both article of Paris and Rome.-- Faizaguo ( talk) 19:29, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
I would like to suggest replacing Image:Tokyo 2006.jpg with Image:Tokyo aerial night.jpg. Arthena (talk) 21:21, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
Fg2 ( talk) 21:36, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
Re: this addition, I don't see why this minor grammatical curiosity is noteworthy, and I note that no source was provided. For comparison, is it important that Ohio State could be read as "O, hi, o state"? Jpatokal ( talk) 09:47, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
I wanted to edit this page but I guess I don't have access. I wanted to update the population density to also include square miles (like on other pages such as Seoul, Beijing, etc).
5,796 (square kilometers) = 2,237.84811 (square mile) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonberling ( talk • contribs) 20:15, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
I took the population density that's currently listed on the page and used google to convert it to square miles.
Here's a link http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=5%2C796+%28square+kilometers%29+in+square+miles
I don't really have any other sources then that, but since its not really new information that should be good enough, right? Thanks for all of your help. Jonberling ( talk) 04:56, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
I see my mistake. Although you could have pointed it out sooner. :) I agree that Fg2's answer is correct. Thank-you very much for you help.
Jonberling (
talk)
03:25, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
This is a nice article, well-referenced and informative. Unfortunately, the lede spends almost all of its content on explaining the various informal/formal statuses of Tokyo. It does not, in other words, act as a summary of the whole article (per WP:LEDE) and is sure to fail any FA nomination for that reason. I propose instead that the majority of that be moved into its own section. Having one section on this may seem excessive, but given the confusion and subtleties, I think it's a good way to move most of the stuff out of the lede. I'm sure a good couple sentences can be cooked up that accurately encompasses all that information. -- C S ( talk) 02:21, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
As a first attempt, to spur some discussion, here is what could be in the lede:
Tokyo (東京, Tōkyō), officially Tokyo Metropolis (東京都, Tōkyō-to), is one of the 47 prefectures of Japan and located on the eastern side of the main island Honshū. Tokyo is unique among the prefectures in being a megacity. For historical reasons, the twenty-three special wards of Tokyo, each governed as a city, are often informally considered as one city, the " city of Tokyo", with over 8 million people. The total population of the prefecture exceeds 12 million.
Because it is the seat of the Japanese government and the Imperial Palace, and the home of the Japanese Imperial Family, Tokyo is the de facto capital of Japan. [1] The name "Tokyo" literally means eastern capital.
-- C S ( talk) 04:31, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
Tokyo (東京, Tōkyō), officially Tokyo Metropolis (東京都, Tōkyō-to), is one of the 47 prefectures of Japan and located on the eastern side of the main island Honshū. The twenty-three special wards of Tokyo, each governed as a city, cover the area that was once the city of Tokyo in the eastern part of the prefecture, and total over 8 million people. The population of the prefecture exceeds 12 million.
Tokyo is the seat of the Japanese government and the Imperial Palace, and the home of the Japanese Imperial Family. The name "Tokyo" literally means eastern capital.
I moved the non-redundant stuff from the lede into its own section. But now it is even worse than when it was the lede. Anyway, I'll look into the archives, as I remember there are some good explanations....but as I recall Fg2 was an important contributor there. If Fg2 has some ideas on how to proceed, I would be glad to hear them. -- C S ( talk) 07:55, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
Here it is for easy access.
Status as "city"
The name "Tokyo" refers variously to Tokyo Metropolis (the prefecture) as a whole, or only to the main urban mass under its jurisdiction (thus excluding west Tama and Izu and Ogasawara Islands), or even the whole of Greater Tokyo Area, which includes Tokyo and parts of Kanagawa, Saitama, Chiba, Gunma, Tochigi, Ibaraki, and Yamanashi prefectures, depending on context. This article is about the prefecture and uses "Tokyo" to refer to it.
Tokyo is unique among the prefectures, providing certain municipal services characteristic of a city, as defined by Japanese law. [2]
Because it is the seat of the Japanese government and the Imperial Palace, and the home of the Japanese Imperial Family, Tokyo is the de facto capital of Japan. [1]
The Greater Tokyo Area, [3] centered on Tokyo but also including Chiba, Kanagawa, and Saitama, is the most populous metropolitan area in the world with a population of over 35 million people. [4]
It makes a point we should keep in the article somewhere: uniqueness among prefectures in providing municipal services to the wards. We should develop this a bit further, describing the services and how and why the prefecture provides them. We can make a historical link to the former Tokyo City. In doing this, it will be good if we avoid giving readers the impression that Tokyo is "less" than other prefectures and "more" like a city.
The reasons for considering Tokyo the capital of Japan are already in the new lead. What's not is the de facto/de jure distinction. We've got a separate article on the topic. We could write a sentence or two for Tokyo (in the lead or elsewhere). But I'm not sure whether this needs text or can simply be an inclusion in the "See also" section.
As for the other paragraphs, the "name" information has grown too much. Having made it clear that this article is about Tokyo (i.e. Tokyo-to, a prefectural-level division of the country), we don't have to dwell on other uses of the name. Still, the Greater Tokyo Area point is worth making, since it's significant to the prefecture. We should lead readers to the main article on the Greater Tokyo Area for details, but we should present the facts that are relevant to Tokyo-to.
Finally, we should decide whether to put what we keep in a stand-alone section, or integrate the material into other sections. If it's stand-alone, we'll need a title, a location in the article etc. Fg2 ( talk) 11:26, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
I'll add to this as the thought strikes:
-- C S ( talk) 02:27, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
I wonder, do we really need quite so many images within the main article text and as a gallery at the end? I removed a number which had minimal relevance to the sections in which they were placed (such as the "Rainbow Bridge" picture in "History" and the "Izumi Garden Tower" and "Cocoon Tower" pictures in "Economy"), but I see they were almost immediately replaced without comment by new editor User:Dasistcafe, who, from the choice of user name and modus operandi, is clearly a reincarnation of User:Ichtrinken. I would also question the need to have images of such a large number of individual buildings and locations in the gallery section. In particular, four pictures of Roppongi Hills is really excessive. Personally, I would like to see images showing general views of districts (e.g. Shinjuku, Ginza, Akihabara etc.) in Tokyo, but images of individual buildings are probably better suited for inclusion in the articles discussing these particular districts or buildings. I would be interested to hear other editors' opinions, as simply removing the images is futile, since they are promptly re-added by the original editor. -- DAJF ( talk) 08:39, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
Apparently what happens is that the editor will just come back and revert. I hope he or she gets the idea after a while. -- C S ( talk) 04:04, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
The population differences between day and night don't add up. I've read the article on the metropolitan government about that, but think it would be best to label that as working population or clarify that a bit more. —Preceding unsigned comment added by alkora ( talk • contribs)
The information is available at http://www.keishicho.metro.tokyo.jp/toukei/bunsyo/toukei19/k_tokei19.htm about reported crimes to the Tokyo Metro Police. Should we put up basic statistics of crime rates in Tokyo? This excel file from the Tokyo police shows 79277 cases for 2007. The information is there, and so I believe it should be included. What do you think? Since many people know that there is such a low crime rate in Tokyo, the numbers should be there to prove it. The full released list from the Tokyo Metro Police can be found here.—Preceding unsigned comment added by alkora ( talk • contribs)
The article currently states:
Tokyo is the seat of the Japanese government and the Imperial Palace, and the home of the Japanese Imperial Family. The name literally means eastern capital.
This is patently wrong. Tokyo does not "literally mean" anything. Rather, Tōkyō "literally means eastern capital". I fixed it once and it was reverted. I put a clarifyme tag on it twice and it was removed. This is not how Wikipedia works. Either fix it or cite it, but stop ignoring the issue. If needed, the issue can be raised outside this article as well. 219.248.51.35 ( talk) 22:47, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
The lead states: "Tokyo (東京, Tōkyō), officially Tokyo Metropolis 東京都, Tōkyō-to)..." First, there needs to be a reference for the "officially". Second, is it officially "Tokyo Metroplis" or is it officially 東京都? I would like to verify this, but there is no reference and when asked for one it was removed. The official webpage, for example, does not use the expression "Tokyo Metropolis", but rather "Tokyo Metropolitan Government". This needs to be clarified and referenced. 219.248.51.35 ( talk) 23:02, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
This article gives the population of Tokyo as 12 million or there abouts (what is the special wards thing?). The 12th edition of The Times Comprehensive Atlas of the World gives the figure 35,467,000 (thirty five million, four hundred and sixty seven thousand). what's going on? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.153.183.16 ( talk) 00:32, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
cheers, figured it was something along those lines. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.146.131.82 ( talk) 21:56, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
I don't mind which weather template is used but the alternative Template:Tokyo weatherbox is a standard style that is used on most major city articles (see Category:Weatherbox templates), if anyone is interested in consistency. Regards, -- Joowwww ( talk) 13:07, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
I noticed with some surprise the notice in the Editing section for External links that asks users to submit a request here before adding a link. I have never before encountered anything like this in Wikipedia. Is this really standard procedure? It seems somewhat contrary to the spirit and the letter of Wikpedia's operating procedures.
In any case, here is the link I would like to add:
This is a unique and valuable web service for anyone interested in experiencing Tokyo and learning more about it, particularly those who are not able to visit the city in person. It is particularly valuable now that Google Maps has discontinued their Streetview service for Tokyo.
Yes, I did recently add a mention of the service to the Cityscape section, and I do understand that such a mention might not be appropriate for one of the body sections of a wikipedia article. In fact, I actually visited the page today with the express intention of removing it from that section and instead adding it to the external links section. I myself hadn't felt completely comfortable with putting it in the body in the first place. Therefore, I was not surprised to see that it had been removed--though I am surprised to discover that one needs some kind of official approval in order to add information to a Wikipedia page.
By the way, here is the wikipedia page for Location View. -- Gregapan ( talk) 01:35, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for the response. What you say makes sense. However, if I may address the three points you brought up: 1) Though LV does have coverage of other cities in Japan, the default location is Tokyo. A first time visitor to the site arrives smack dab in the middle of Tokyo. 2) Is the need for registration a disqualifier for any external links? A simple caveat next to the link could inform Wikipedians of this. 3) I would be overjoyed if SV were still available for Tokyo. On my server, whether using firefox or explorer, it has disappeared. There is no button for it anymore, no blue streets. If I've gone loony and somehow forgotten how to access it, please remind me. Yet its disappearance fits with what a Google Japan employee recently told me: that they would likely soon have to remove it due to complaints regarding privacy. You still get it? -- Gregapan ( talk) 23:52, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
SV works for Tokyo--or elsewhere? It's certainly working for the US, etc. I still get nothing, however, when in Tokyo on google maps, though I used to use it frequently. -- Gregapan ( talk) 23:52, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
I was hoping for a link to an ogg audio file by a native Japanese speaker in the first line (example: Honshū). For all I know 'Tokyo' is pretty straightforward and very similar to the default western pronunciation of the name, but it's hard to determine until you've listened to it. Is there a native Japanese speaker who can contribute this? -- MiG ( talk) 16:13, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
A complete guess, but this change (changing "GDP of US$1,191 billion" to "GDP of US$1,191 trillion") may be related to the different ways different folks write decimal numbers. In particular, the user making this change is apparently in Germany where, as written, this number likely looks like 19% more than US$1 billion rather than 19% more than US$1 trillion. Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers) says decimal points, not commas, are used between the integer and fractional parts of decimal numbers and commas are used every three digits in large numbers. Perhaps this particular number would be more clear as "US$1.191 trillion". -- Rick Block ( talk) 16:17, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
To help the interwiki bots figure out how things match up, I've changed ja:東京都 to link to en:Tokyo. ja:東京 also links here. I'm not sure what the bots do if there are two articles from one wikipedia linked to the same article in another, but it's not obvious to me that there's an en: article that better corresponds to ja:東京. If the bots continue to have trouble with this it might be best to remove the en: link from ja:東京. -- Rick Block ( talk) 19:23, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Hello,
I just tried to have consistent things. Some languages have two articles, one about the prefecture (e.g. de:Präfektur Tokio) and one about the town/city (e.g. de:Tokio).
To which one correspond ja:東京 and ja:東京都 ?
Best regards,
Vargenau ( talk) 20:48, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Is there a prefectural fish for Tokyo? WhisperToMe ( talk) 22:39, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
It looks like Tokyo used to much more of a water-city before the 1923 eartquake and the WWII carpet bombing. She had many canals, which were filled in to make place for more people living and business districts. The remaining one were dammed to make sure typhoons cannot force the sea into the city.
This is probably worth discussion in the geopgraphy section of the article.
I believe there are some confusion among some of the readers and editors. Most people think "Tokyo" as in terms of a city (the 23 special wards that replace Tokyo City) rather then the whole prefecture. Also the Tokyo (disambiguation) does not do any justice on the explaining it. — ASDFGH =] talk? 22:49, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
Does Tokyo still compare to financial centres like London and New York? Tokyo is nowhere near as dominant in Asia as London is in Europe or New York in the Americas. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.234.55.222 ( talk) 12:52, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
I propose thaat the picture in the 'Tokyo Metropolis' Box- at the top- be changed. Currently, it's a map showing the location of the city on Japan, which doesn't really give the impression of a city. It would be better if the map were changed to a photo/collage showing streetscenes, as is the norm for most city articles. bob bobato ( talk) 00:57, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
I have photos of Arakawa Gorge - still part of Tokyo, but an area of mountains, rivers, and onsens. If you want me to upload for use, let me know Kunchan ( talk) 12:32, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
List of songs about Tokyo
Thanks.
Civic Cat (
talk)
19:19, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
There is some edit warring regarding the existence of the capital of Tokyo. According to the Tokyo Metropolitan Government, the capital seems to be Shinjuku. See Tokyo Metropolitan Archives News page 7 [3] or TMG Pocket knowledge. [4]―― Phoenix7777 ( talk) 09:27, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
Ok, I am not happy that some one has gone and changed/removed most of the external links even though there is express information on the page that changes to the external links should be discussed first before they are changed. Please see the previous discussion at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Tokyo/Archive_2 (half way down)
While this discussion is over two years old, the content and reasoning is still sound. The Wikipedia policy on external links was followed ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:EL). In particular "Sites that contain neutral and accurate material that is relevant to an encyclopedic understanding of the subject and cannot be integrated into the Wikipedia article due to copyright issues, amount of detail (such as professional athlete statistics, movie or television credits, interview transcripts, or online textbooks), or other reasons."
This is why there was detailed discussion on the linking to pages with external maps and the comparison of pages with maps on them.
I have returned the external link section back to the way it was. If anyone disagrees with this please enter into a discussion and don't just delete links without doing so. Whats up skip ( talk) 00:53, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
NeilN removed the external links I returned to the original place citing "WP:EL". Clearly he has not read or understood the "WP:EL" properly as most if not all of the links I returned fitted this criteria. NeilN didn't bother to grace this page with any discussion on the topic. Unilaterally making edits and then leaving a cryptic note for me like I have never edited on Wikipedia before. I have returned the edits I made previously. Whats up skip ( talk) 07:55, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
You have erred in at least a couple of your assumptions about linking to other sites. 1) "two links to advertising-heavy sites" There is no reference to this in the "WP:EL". Indeed Wikipedia is basically one great big link farm for Google, Yahoo and Microsoft with tens of thousands of links to map pages with advertising in them, so you reason for excluding sites on the basis that they have advertising on them is severely flawed.
2) If you had looked back at the discussion you would have seen that http://www.japaneselifestyle.com.au/tokyo/tokyomap.htm was originally accepted as link as it had the best map of Tokyo that could be found on the web. Now at the time the map had 130 interactive points of interest. I notice that now the map is citing over 600 points of interest and there appears to be more text information, links and pictures. In addition to the on page map information the site even makes available the data available as a KML file so people can further use the map information.
This link was later changed to http://www.japaneselifestyle.com.au/tokyo/ as it was argued that the extensive number of unique photographs of Tokyo, plus the additional information found with the photos and elsewhere in the Tokyo section warranted linking to the primary page on Tokyo. I notice that the site is now citing that it has over 1,400 unique photographs of Tokyo. This number of photographs in themselves would probably qualify for a link in the first place.
I personally did not support the inclusion of Wikitravel as I don't really think the information included in there on Tokyo is that great.
If you want to know the reasoning behind the inclusion and exclusion of the other links then you must spend the time reviewing its history. Don't continue your self important editing style where you ignore the extensive work done by other. Whats up skip ( talk) 10:40, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
I wonder who Whats up skip is referring to when he/she writes (in this edit) I see again you have been very arrogant with your editing. You don't bother to look into the extensive history and discussion that took place to determine which were suitable links and why. You have not bothered to wait for a discussion to continue before changing the links to what you think is right. You have a history of doing this sort of thing and it must stop! I don't suppose it can be me, as the history of the article reveals that so far this year I have made two edits to the article, each entirely irrelevant to this matter of external links. Yet the material close to this suggests that "you" is me. It's rather confusing.
Whats up skip, what is your main interest in Tokyo? It seems to me that various sections of it are terrible ("Popular media", which manages not to mention newspapers or magazines; "Education", which is merely a pair of lists; etc), and that there'd be a case for adding certain new sections, IFF they were concise and had a high signal/noise ratio. Perhaps you could work on something here. -- Hoary ( talk) 14:59, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
How about planning a meetup between wiki users around Tokyo in late February 2010? -- Saki talk 08:21, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
Aren't the population figures in the second paragraph a little confusing? I've read it several times and still can't understand it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 111.100.191.184 ( talk) 10:31, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
It isn't consistent. This would make more sense - adding <part of>:
The prefecture is part of the world's most populous metropolitan area with 35 to 39 million people (depending on definition) and the world's largest metropolitan economy with a GDP of US$1.479 trillion at purchasing power parity in 2008.[3] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ssmats ( talk • contribs) 07:37, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
I changed the lead attempting to indicate that Tokyo is a prefecture, not a city. This change was reverted. I've tried a different version. What I'm trying to get across is that Tokyo is a prefectural level government, not a city government, even though "Tokyo" is still widely thought of as a city. I think starting the article with "Tokyo is the capital and largest city of Japan, and is a prefecture" doesn't quite do it justice since Tokyo is not actually a city. We've tried to wordsmith this before. Is the current version more acceptable? -- Rick Block ( talk) 17:50, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
(ja) | (en) |
---|---|
東京都区部 | ??? |
東京 | ??? |
東京都 東京府 |
Tokyo |
東京市 | Tokyo City |
特別区 | Special wards of Tokyo |
江戸 | Edo |
首都圏 南関東 |
Greater Tokyo Area |
関東地方 広域関東圏 |
Kantō region |
I've gotta say I agree with the confusion over the prefecture/municipal district vs urban area defintion of 'city' that this article is trying to straddle. The Tokyo article needs to be about the city, as in the urban area, not the 'city,' the municipal governing region or the prefecture. Explaining the difference in this technicality makes the lead paragraph unclear. There is a translation of the municipal district into the American municipal term 'city' which can also be translated into 'council district.' The problem with the dual meaning of 'city' with respect to this article is that some people's pedantry is creating nonsense such as 'Tokyo is not a city' when what they mean is 'There is no municipal district called Tokyo.' Tokyo IS a city in the simple, non-technical meaning of the word, and thats what this article needs to refer to. If people require an article on the more technical Tokyo prefecture/municipal area then they can be linked to it. Of course there should be information about the local government of Tokyo in this article, but so it dominates the lead paragraph and advises the whole article is only about the prefecture or metropolitan area. Mdw0 ( talk) 03:59, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
Whatever else Tokyo might be, is it a city? In the latest edit to the article, an editor seems to think that it isn't. Well, it's clear that some people believe that Tokyo can't be a city because it's own government chooses to deny that it is one, rather in the same way that Japan doesn't have armed forces because they're called "self-defense forces", or indeed that North Korea is democratic, of the people and a republic because "DPR" is part of "DPRK", innit?
The attempt to redefine "city" to exclude a conurbation such as Tokyo hasn't managed to prevent the publication of books such as:
Ah, but conceivably their publication demonstrates no more than appalling endemic ignorance -- caused by reptilians? -- of the true meaning of "city". -- Hoary ( talk) 02:23, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
Of course, Tokyo city (the administrative unit) has neither a mayor nor a website because it doesn't exist anymore. Yet, there are hundreds of references to kyū-Tōkyō-shi ("the former city of Tokyo"), the Tōkyō nijūsanku ("Tokyo's 23 wards") or the Tōkyō-to kubu ("Tokyo Metropolis wards area") in government websites, documents and even national laws. It is obvious that the former administrative unit is usually meant when anyone refers to a city named Tokyo. (and after the war some including the the Socialist candidate in the first gubernatorial election in 1947, Tagawa Daikichirō, wanted to reinistute the City of Tokyo or review at least some of the changes introduced by Tōjō and the Naimu-shō in 1943 to have tighter control over the wards and Tokyo affairs. But since Tagawa lost to Yasui (and because the people could now, at least, elect the governor thanks to Emperor Douglas) the to-sei was left in place. Even the prefectural administration says
"it has the character of a single city in the area encompassing the 23 special wards." to justify the (ot: very undemocratic – as even after the war Tokyoites were not allowed to elect their special ward/"city"/ku mayors for decades) special rights with regard to the wards' local affairs. --
Asakura Akira (
talk)
15:22, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
I've solicited comments about this at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cities and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Japan. -- Rick Block ( talk) 04:25, 29 May 2010 (UTC)