This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article was listed for deletion on 2004-10-19. The result of the discussion was keep. |
Text and/or other creative content from Kirishitan was copied or moved into History of Roman Catholicism in Japan with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
Especially the military activity section. This long section hardly gives any information about military activity of Japanese converts. Rather speculates about Spanish or Portuguese invasion of China. This invasion never occurred(and therefore should not be mentioned in military activity section). Also claims preparation for a Christian rebellion against Toyotomi Hideyoshi which also never occurred(this section is supposed to be about military activity, not intentions). Not to forget that the author is trying to prove his opinion that Christian daimyo is not less severe than a non-Christian daimyo by mentioning a massacre of Koreans by Japanese who had at least one daimyo(who happens to be Christian) in their rank. How come destruction of Buddhist temples(this is the first time a read about Christian minority destroying shrines of a majority religion in potentionaly hostile country) is mentioned in this section. It is not a military activity.
Also the "propagation strategy" section claims that number of Christians under Christian daimyo "drastically" increased. What does mean "drastically" in this context? Where the commoners drastically forced to accept Christianity? Or was the growth peaceful but just so high that it could be described "drastic" using slang language.
Early policy towards Catholicism section : "By 1579, at the height of missionary activity, there were only about 130,000 converts." I think that this is quite a large number regarding that there was no state support of Christianity or state forced conversions.
St.Francis Xavier as a slave trader - seems ridiculous. I never heard about Jesuits slave trading in Japan. I would like to see the source. Maybe some kind of nationalist propaganda book from Taishō or Shōwa eras.
There is no mention about insane violence towards Christians. The martyrs(including native Japanese) do not have a single section in this article.
The Japanese government responsible for persecution of Christians is being excused while Christians are blamed for the tragedy and evil which followed the ban on Christianity. I read about forced dechristianization and persecution of Christians in Japan from secular sources but never read about forced christianization in Japan, China or anywhere in the Far East.
This article is totally written from anti-Christian point of view. Worst NPOV violation I ever met on wikipedia. This article is trying to excuse the Christian holocaust in Japan.
Isidoros47 ( talk) 10:32, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
Don't be silly. I never said that the secular sources I read were written by Christians. Claiming that every literature that does not excuse religious holocaust in Japan is anti-Japanese is paranoiac.
Isidoros47 ( talk) 22:04, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
At that time, it is history recording that Japan slave is dealt all over the world —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ooggii ( talk • contribs) 02:38, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
Sioraf ( talk) 19:57, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
A Japanese Kirishitan crucifix, 17th century. Feel free to insert it in the article. Photographed at the Paris Foreign Missions Society. PHG ( talk) 15:10, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
Here is an image of the Virgin Mary disguised as Kannon (Guan Yin) from 17th century Japan. Feel free to insert it in the article. Cheers PHG ( talk) 09:04, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
Hey, anyone still here? I got to poking through the article, and I was curious where some of the text came from, so I dug through the edit history. It seems a lot of the unsourced material was added here, in two edits, with not a single source to support them. Furthermore, this was done five years ago. I am concerned that we have allowed unsourced claims to stand for this long... ? That's disturbing.
Basically, there are two things hurting this article. One, most of the sections, while containing what would be useful information, do not have any sources at all. Two, there are concerns about POV, whether or not this article is slanted against Christians throughout Japan's history. If the article were sourced, it would be easier to evaluate for POV, but since it's not it just makes it even harder to tell what's real and what's not, let alone whether undue emphasis is being given.
Given the length of time involved, I don't think we are likely to get any followup as far as what sources could support these claims. What should we do about this material? Would anyone know of some good sources to buttress these claims, if indeed they are factual? I fear if we go through this article with a fine-toothed comb and just delete everything uncited, we may not have any article left! So I'd like to ask anyone who might be watching this article, is there's any way we can salvage/prune this and get some sources before we break out the weed whacker? Whoever wrote this gives the impression of having spent a lot of time studying the topic; seems a waste to just delete it all, but it really does feel like original research to me. I just wish they'd thought to tell us where they got this from so we could make an informed evaluation of it. Would appreciate ideas. Thanks,
-- Joren ( talk) 11:38, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
This article does need a bit of touch up to take out some of the more opprobrious POV issues. But I'd like to put forward, for the record, that if anything it seems biased in FAVOUR of Christian interests. The most obvious example is the utterly ridiculous snipey-snit against "non-religious researchers" viz a viz martyrdom. But the article in general stresses issues, and even nomenclature, that assume a Christian reader. This may be unavoidable, as the topic at hand is likely to be rather more interesting to Christians. Indeed, far from "anti-missionary bias", several of the link "sources" are in Japanese, from decidedly non-scholarly, sketchy Christian missionary groups. Furthermore, if anything, I would hope the article examine in more depth the imperialism of the period and its use of the Christian church as an ideological vanguard in colonizing nations. (The Tokugawa's response seems rather reasonable, if heavy handed, in light of the geopolitics of the time.)
Whatever the stakeholders of this page decide, please remember that not all readers are interested in a paean to one cult's martyrs, but that wikipedia should strive for dynamic disinterest. -- WuShufei ( talk) 12:18, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
Apart from the POV issues, this page duplicates History of Roman Catholicism in Japan, a more normal title, and the word kirishitan is rarely used in English texts. Which is okay for Wiktionary, but not Wikipedia. In ictu oculi ( talk) 11:46, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
This article is peppered with errors. For example, St. Francis Xavier never engaged in trading; he was frantically busy with evangelizing during his short stay in Japan. Juan Fernandes was a Jesuit brother, not a priest. Captured Kirishitan were not all sent to Nagasaki for execution, and the execution-ground in Nagasaki was not Mount Unzen but the slope called Nishi-zaka, which is on Mount Kompira. Some Catholics were indeed tortured (some to death) on Mount Unzen—which is on the Shimabara Peninsula, not in the city of Nagasaki—as well, but the main execution ground for Christians in the Nagasaki region was Nishi-zaka. It is also the place to which the Twenty-Six Martyrs were marched from faraway Kyoto to meet their deaths by crucifixion. All these errors I have gleaned from just a glance at the article; I have no time at present to read it in detail.
Amakusaluke ( talk) 19:24, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
I've removed an old neutrality tag from this page that appears to have no active discussion per the instructions at Template:POV:
Since there's no evidence of ongoing discussion, I'm removing the tag for now. If discussion is continuing and I've failed to see it, however, please feel free to restore the template and continue to address the issues. Thanks to everybody working on this one! -- Khazar2 ( talk) 12:34, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Kirishitan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 04:15, 11 December 2017 (UTC)
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article was listed for deletion on 2004-10-19. The result of the discussion was keep. |
Text and/or other creative content from Kirishitan was copied or moved into History of Roman Catholicism in Japan with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
Especially the military activity section. This long section hardly gives any information about military activity of Japanese converts. Rather speculates about Spanish or Portuguese invasion of China. This invasion never occurred(and therefore should not be mentioned in military activity section). Also claims preparation for a Christian rebellion against Toyotomi Hideyoshi which also never occurred(this section is supposed to be about military activity, not intentions). Not to forget that the author is trying to prove his opinion that Christian daimyo is not less severe than a non-Christian daimyo by mentioning a massacre of Koreans by Japanese who had at least one daimyo(who happens to be Christian) in their rank. How come destruction of Buddhist temples(this is the first time a read about Christian minority destroying shrines of a majority religion in potentionaly hostile country) is mentioned in this section. It is not a military activity.
Also the "propagation strategy" section claims that number of Christians under Christian daimyo "drastically" increased. What does mean "drastically" in this context? Where the commoners drastically forced to accept Christianity? Or was the growth peaceful but just so high that it could be described "drastic" using slang language.
Early policy towards Catholicism section : "By 1579, at the height of missionary activity, there were only about 130,000 converts." I think that this is quite a large number regarding that there was no state support of Christianity or state forced conversions.
St.Francis Xavier as a slave trader - seems ridiculous. I never heard about Jesuits slave trading in Japan. I would like to see the source. Maybe some kind of nationalist propaganda book from Taishō or Shōwa eras.
There is no mention about insane violence towards Christians. The martyrs(including native Japanese) do not have a single section in this article.
The Japanese government responsible for persecution of Christians is being excused while Christians are blamed for the tragedy and evil which followed the ban on Christianity. I read about forced dechristianization and persecution of Christians in Japan from secular sources but never read about forced christianization in Japan, China or anywhere in the Far East.
This article is totally written from anti-Christian point of view. Worst NPOV violation I ever met on wikipedia. This article is trying to excuse the Christian holocaust in Japan.
Isidoros47 ( talk) 10:32, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
Don't be silly. I never said that the secular sources I read were written by Christians. Claiming that every literature that does not excuse religious holocaust in Japan is anti-Japanese is paranoiac.
Isidoros47 ( talk) 22:04, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
At that time, it is history recording that Japan slave is dealt all over the world —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ooggii ( talk • contribs) 02:38, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
Sioraf ( talk) 19:57, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
A Japanese Kirishitan crucifix, 17th century. Feel free to insert it in the article. Photographed at the Paris Foreign Missions Society. PHG ( talk) 15:10, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
Here is an image of the Virgin Mary disguised as Kannon (Guan Yin) from 17th century Japan. Feel free to insert it in the article. Cheers PHG ( talk) 09:04, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
Hey, anyone still here? I got to poking through the article, and I was curious where some of the text came from, so I dug through the edit history. It seems a lot of the unsourced material was added here, in two edits, with not a single source to support them. Furthermore, this was done five years ago. I am concerned that we have allowed unsourced claims to stand for this long... ? That's disturbing.
Basically, there are two things hurting this article. One, most of the sections, while containing what would be useful information, do not have any sources at all. Two, there are concerns about POV, whether or not this article is slanted against Christians throughout Japan's history. If the article were sourced, it would be easier to evaluate for POV, but since it's not it just makes it even harder to tell what's real and what's not, let alone whether undue emphasis is being given.
Given the length of time involved, I don't think we are likely to get any followup as far as what sources could support these claims. What should we do about this material? Would anyone know of some good sources to buttress these claims, if indeed they are factual? I fear if we go through this article with a fine-toothed comb and just delete everything uncited, we may not have any article left! So I'd like to ask anyone who might be watching this article, is there's any way we can salvage/prune this and get some sources before we break out the weed whacker? Whoever wrote this gives the impression of having spent a lot of time studying the topic; seems a waste to just delete it all, but it really does feel like original research to me. I just wish they'd thought to tell us where they got this from so we could make an informed evaluation of it. Would appreciate ideas. Thanks,
-- Joren ( talk) 11:38, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
This article does need a bit of touch up to take out some of the more opprobrious POV issues. But I'd like to put forward, for the record, that if anything it seems biased in FAVOUR of Christian interests. The most obvious example is the utterly ridiculous snipey-snit against "non-religious researchers" viz a viz martyrdom. But the article in general stresses issues, and even nomenclature, that assume a Christian reader. This may be unavoidable, as the topic at hand is likely to be rather more interesting to Christians. Indeed, far from "anti-missionary bias", several of the link "sources" are in Japanese, from decidedly non-scholarly, sketchy Christian missionary groups. Furthermore, if anything, I would hope the article examine in more depth the imperialism of the period and its use of the Christian church as an ideological vanguard in colonizing nations. (The Tokugawa's response seems rather reasonable, if heavy handed, in light of the geopolitics of the time.)
Whatever the stakeholders of this page decide, please remember that not all readers are interested in a paean to one cult's martyrs, but that wikipedia should strive for dynamic disinterest. -- WuShufei ( talk) 12:18, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
Apart from the POV issues, this page duplicates History of Roman Catholicism in Japan, a more normal title, and the word kirishitan is rarely used in English texts. Which is okay for Wiktionary, but not Wikipedia. In ictu oculi ( talk) 11:46, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
This article is peppered with errors. For example, St. Francis Xavier never engaged in trading; he was frantically busy with evangelizing during his short stay in Japan. Juan Fernandes was a Jesuit brother, not a priest. Captured Kirishitan were not all sent to Nagasaki for execution, and the execution-ground in Nagasaki was not Mount Unzen but the slope called Nishi-zaka, which is on Mount Kompira. Some Catholics were indeed tortured (some to death) on Mount Unzen—which is on the Shimabara Peninsula, not in the city of Nagasaki—as well, but the main execution ground for Christians in the Nagasaki region was Nishi-zaka. It is also the place to which the Twenty-Six Martyrs were marched from faraway Kyoto to meet their deaths by crucifixion. All these errors I have gleaned from just a glance at the article; I have no time at present to read it in detail.
Amakusaluke ( talk) 19:24, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
I've removed an old neutrality tag from this page that appears to have no active discussion per the instructions at Template:POV:
Since there's no evidence of ongoing discussion, I'm removing the tag for now. If discussion is continuing and I've failed to see it, however, please feel free to restore the template and continue to address the issues. Thanks to everybody working on this one! -- Khazar2 ( talk) 12:34, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Kirishitan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 04:15, 11 December 2017 (UTC)