Hi, I will be your mediator for this case. Please remember that we are here to work toward a consensus for the content dispute. This is not a place for anything but rational discussion. Be forewarned that incivility, personal attacks, etc... do not belong here and will not be tolerated. That said, I have some initial questions. psch e mp | talk 16:35, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
1. For the sake of clarity on my part, please list below all the options your group is considering for the naming convention. Remember I have no background in Japanese, so keep it simple, yet clear.
Hello, and thanks for taking this case. As an attempt to explain what is going on, the following was proposed for as a change to the Wikipedia:Manual of Style (Japan-related articles) (the text is copied from here):
So, going with all the discussion above in "
Macrons in titles" and in "
Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style for Japan-related articles/UTF-8 conversion," I'm proposing a change in the
Romanisation section of MOS:JP as follows (changes marked in bold red):
|
Long O and U can be written as ō/ū, o/u, oh/uh, ho/hu, ô/û and oo/uu. Note that the first two pairings are the most common in use, though the middle two pairs are occasionally used by publishers ( Tenjho Tenge), tradition ( Noh), or personal preference ( Apolo Anton Ohno). Hope this helps to explain. If not, I hope someone else can clarify a bit more.-- み使い Mitsukai 17:33, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
However, article titles must use short vowels and omit apostrophes after syllabic n since macrons are difficult to enter and proper use of apostrophes cannot be expected from people not familiar with Japanese.
Responsible editors, of course, are putting in the proper redirects but 90% of pages are created without any redirects at all. A glance at the seiyu page and I can see Yousuke Akimoto, Ichiro Nagai, Yuichi Nagashima, and Yuko Nagashima that lack redirects to or from their standard romanized names Yōsuke Akimoto, Ichirō Nagai, Yūichi Nagashima, and Yūko Nagashima. Out of all the names I can see on my screen at the top of that page, only 1 of 10 names requiring macrons are properly disambiguated for the 2 most standard spelling cases: hepburn with full macrons, and hepburn with short vowels. Most of those pages do, in fact, have other redirects, but because most editors don't really know about standards spellings and all that, they seem to have missed out some of the links that are most important.
Until now, though, hepburn titles with short vowels have been standard, and as you can see, most of the articles on that page are written with short vowels (though not everyone has been following the Mos). Thus, if a reader (who may or may not understand macrons) was looking for an article on a Japanese person that they thought might have a small page, they could just type in their non-macroned name (which, though I'm not using it as an argument, is the most common way Japanese people write their names on paper) and they'd have the best chance to actually find the article, or a redirect.
If the page had been originally created with a macroned title, and no redirects (an example: Yo Yoshimura doesn't find Yō Yoshimura, and it doesn't even come up in the search). I can speak Japanese, can type in Japanese, but since I don't know the 5 digit code for "ō", and I don't know if his name is actually spelled with a long or a short vowel, I can't get at his article without being given a link to it on some list.
Nobody is arguing about the inclusion of macrons in the actual articles themselves; I personally disagree with using short vowels in the actual article content, because the macrons are more correct and I don't believe seeing macrons makes reading romanized Japanese much more difficult.
I have other, smaller arguments as well, but I'll leave it at this for now. Hope it's not too confusing, I'm in a little of a rush. [NOTE: A few of the redlinks I used in my examples above have now, as expected, been created, but I have kept them red to illustrate my point.] freshgavin ΓΛĿЌ 00:47, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
2. Next, If there is anything you all agree on, please list that.
Well, I don't necessarily agree with all of that, being a bit of a prescriptivist, but as WP:NC(CN) dictates, I'll comply. ;) — Nightst a llion (?) 10:17, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
For what it's worth, the "ô/û" long-vowel romanization is the French way to do things; I've seen it used on many French websites about Japanese topics. We should also mention the "ou" method for long O. This is used in many, many articles currently: Houkou, Houou, Umibouzu, etc. I believe that all sides are in agreement that the romanization we use for article titles should be either Hepburn with macrons or Hepburn without macrons. No "ou", "oo", "ô", etc. is even under consideration as a viable alternative. — BrianSmithson 01:10, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
Thank you all. I've looked at all the information and reasonings. I believe that the main issue is whether the actual article content is located at the title using macrons or the macronless titles. Furthermore, I see a willingness to work together that leads me to believe that if this main issue can be solved, that the editors involved are capable of sorting out the remaining details amicably and without a RfM.
Some things I have noted:
So, let’s talk about this. How do you think an agreement can be reached? (Discuss below) psch e mp | talk 06:03, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
(P.S. Could someone let me know on my talk page how to set Firefox so I can see the Kanji rather than (????). I think it would be helpful as some people involved have characters in their sigs. I currently have UTF-8 selected for the character encoding. Thank You. psch e mp | talk 06:03, 13 March 2006 (UTC))
Ok. Since not one of you has answered my question, and you have gotten off topic (We are not talking about Chinese), I am going to try to clarify what I was asking:
Yes that's it. I see the basic issue as whether the article is located at the macronned title or the macronless title. And yes, the other would be a redirect. Just a note, there are thousands of article naming conventions that require redirects to help with searching. Its not a hard thing to do, it just takes some time. Redirects are useful and expected for this kind of thing. Now, let's think of some ways to come to an agreement :) psch e mp | talk 02:48, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
It'll take quite some time to go through each and every Japan-related article and hold a vote on whether it should have a macron-less or a macroned title. We should establish fixed criteria now for most of them, and hold votes on the few borderline cases that remain later on. — Nightst a llion (?) 10:48, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
I agree that one principle or the other should be adopted. To have variable policies would only lead to inconsistency, confusion, and uncertainty in implementation. Bathrobe 17:41, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
So, since nothing's been posted here for about 10 days now, should we come to a decision? -- 日本穣 18:25, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
Okay, first a list of things about which we agree already:
Based on pschemp's comments about redirects ("Just a note, there are thousands of article naming conventions that require redirects to help with searching. Its not a hard thing to do, it just takes some time. Redirects are useful and expected for this kind of thing."), whether or not someone can easily type the macronned article title should not be an issue. Therefore, can we agree to go with the
WP:MOS-JA as currently written with respect to macronned titles?
I think if we work together to find articles that don't have proper redirects, and then make sure they have them, we can make this work. To help out, I've created a sub-page to
WikiProject Japan:
Redirect requests. Pages needing redirects can be listed here using the format on the page, and any interested editor can then take care of them. --
日本穣 Nihonjoe
06:24, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
I share some of the same concerns as Bathrobe above. However, after seeing " crème brûlée" in many English dictionaries, and after hearing that " Māori" made it into New Zealand English WITH the macron, I have decided not to look back. And so I agree with the spirit of Nihonjoe's Proposal. However, I request that the following amendments and additions be made:
(addendums removed)
Okay, first a list of things about which we agree already:
Based on pschemp's comments about redirects ("Just a note, there are thousands of article naming conventions that require redirects to help with searching. Its not a hard thing to do, it just takes some time. Redirects are useful and expected for this kind of thing."), whether or not someone can easily type the macronned article title should not be an issue. Therefore, can we agree to go with the WP:MOS-JA as currently written with respect to macronned titles?
I think if we work together to find articles that don't have proper redirects, and then make sure they have them, we can make this work. To help out, I've created a sub-page to WikiProject Japan: Redirect requests. Pages needing redirects can be listed here using the format on the page, and any interested editor can then take care of them. -- 日本穣 Nihonjoe 22:46, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
We still need Freshgavin, Mitsukai, Neier, CES, and Nightstallion to sign off on this before we can put the issue behind us and move on to actual work on the site. pschemp, will you ask them to pop in and give their "yea" or "nay" so we can determine if we need to do anything else? Thanks. --
日本穣 Nihonjoe
16:14, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
Since this mediation doesn't (won't? can't?) defer from any of my previous discussions on the issue, I have no choice but to fall back and agree. I apologize for my long absense, if anybody was actually waiting for me to comment. freshgavin ΓΛĿЌ 00:41, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
As all the parties have now commented and agreed to support proposal #2, I consider this issue resolved. The JA-MOS for this will be followed as written, and I encourage discussion of any other details and issues to take place on the page for that project. Certainly this is not the end of the work needed on your project, but I feel the rest can be dealt with without mediation. I would like to sincerely thank all involved for being willing to find a common ground since I realize that compromise can often be painful. I am very impressed with the level of cooperation and civil negotiation that this large group has shown, it is difficult to get two people to agree often, and I think this speaks well of the group and the future of the work on the JA-MOS. Thank you for your patience with me and good luck in the future. psch e mp | talk 05:13, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
;Requested Amendment to Nihonjoe's #2:
If the word in question is in general use in the English-speaking world in a non-macronned form, the non-macronned form should be used in the title and body text. This shall include local usages in
British English (BrE),
American English (AmE),
Canadian English (CaE),
Australian English (AuE), and
New Zealand English.
Resolved as per "Proposal #2 from Nihonjoe" above--
Endroit
16:31, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
;Requested Amendment to Nihonjoe's #4:
We should use
Oxford English Dictionary (OED), Oxford American Dictionary (OAD), Merriam-Websters Online (M-W) (
http://www.m-w.com/),
Webster's Third New International Dictionary, Unabridged, or
American Heritage Dictionary (AHD) (
http://www.bartleby.com/61/) to determine if a word is "generally accepted" in English. Wikipedia's
List of English words of Japanese origin may also be used as a secondary source of the above. If there is no dictionary entry, but the word occurs in English texts (outside Japan) with any regularity, it may be considered on a case-by-case basis and by discretion and common sense on the part of the editor.
Resolved as per "Proposal #2 from Nihonjoe" above--
Endroit
16:31, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
The macron rules are for "long U" (Ū ū) and "long O" (Ō ō) only. For "long A", "aa" may be used. For "long E", "ei" may be used. For "long I", "ii" may be used.
Names of companies, product names, trade names, and names of organizations should honor the current spelling used officially by that party. For example, use Kodansha rather than Kōdansha, Doshisha University rather than Dōshisha University. If the entity no longer exists, use the most recently used format or (if available) look it up in any of the above dictionaries.
Names of contemporary persons should follow the macron usage / spelling in the following order of preference:
1. Follow any official trade name if available in English/Latin alphabet
2. Use a dictionary entry from any of the above dictionaries, if available
3. Use the name publicly used on behalf of the person in the English-speaking world. For athletes, consult
http://www.olympic.org/, etc.
4. Use the name publicly used on behalf of the person in any other popular Latin-alphabet-using-language (French, Spanish, Italian, Portuguese, German, and Dutch, or variations).
5. If none of the above is available, use the macronned form.
If there is no usage in the English-speaking world (or in any other Latin-alphabet-using-language), macrons should be used. However, exceptions will be made if there are objections. For example Fueki Yuko is popular in Korea (and maybe Japan to a lesser extent), and so Fueki Yūko will be more appropriate. However, if the Korean editors object, Fueki Yuko may be agreed upon in the future.
I would like to see some kind of a rule for modern manga, anime, and otaku usages in the English language. I understand that Nihonjoe and others are more familiar in that area.
Someone should specify a rule for names of non-contemporary persons as well, in a similar fashion. Likewise for place names. If nobody else does, I will.
I am in no way perfect. Please make corrections / changes / additions to my suggested rules above, as you see necessary. Thanks everyone!
Some dictionaries above are not freely available to all editors. In particular, they are Oxford English Dictionary (OED), Oxford American Dictionary (OAD), and Webster's Third New International Dictionary, Unabridged. There should be a general Wikipedia project page (separated from the Japanese macron issue) where a user requests somebody to look up dictionary entries. I volunteer to look up Webster's, because I have access to it now. I don't know who can manage looking up the Oxford dictionaries, though. -- Endroit 17:09, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
You know, "We should use List of English words of Japanese origin as well as generally-accepted print and online dictionaries to determine if a word is "generally accepted" in English" covers all of the suggestions people have listed above. The same goes for "If the word in question is in general use in the English-speaking world in a non-macronned form, the non-macronned form should be used in the title and body text" seems pretty clear and covers all of the objections/clarifications/etc., that have been suggested. -- 日本穣 Nihonjoe 21:32, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
Hi, I will be your mediator for this case. Please remember that we are here to work toward a consensus for the content dispute. This is not a place for anything but rational discussion. Be forewarned that incivility, personal attacks, etc... do not belong here and will not be tolerated. That said, I have some initial questions. psch e mp | talk 16:35, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
1. For the sake of clarity on my part, please list below all the options your group is considering for the naming convention. Remember I have no background in Japanese, so keep it simple, yet clear.
Hello, and thanks for taking this case. As an attempt to explain what is going on, the following was proposed for as a change to the Wikipedia:Manual of Style (Japan-related articles) (the text is copied from here):
So, going with all the discussion above in "
Macrons in titles" and in "
Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style for Japan-related articles/UTF-8 conversion," I'm proposing a change in the
Romanisation section of MOS:JP as follows (changes marked in bold red):
|
Long O and U can be written as ō/ū, o/u, oh/uh, ho/hu, ô/û and oo/uu. Note that the first two pairings are the most common in use, though the middle two pairs are occasionally used by publishers ( Tenjho Tenge), tradition ( Noh), or personal preference ( Apolo Anton Ohno). Hope this helps to explain. If not, I hope someone else can clarify a bit more.-- み使い Mitsukai 17:33, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
However, article titles must use short vowels and omit apostrophes after syllabic n since macrons are difficult to enter and proper use of apostrophes cannot be expected from people not familiar with Japanese.
Responsible editors, of course, are putting in the proper redirects but 90% of pages are created without any redirects at all. A glance at the seiyu page and I can see Yousuke Akimoto, Ichiro Nagai, Yuichi Nagashima, and Yuko Nagashima that lack redirects to or from their standard romanized names Yōsuke Akimoto, Ichirō Nagai, Yūichi Nagashima, and Yūko Nagashima. Out of all the names I can see on my screen at the top of that page, only 1 of 10 names requiring macrons are properly disambiguated for the 2 most standard spelling cases: hepburn with full macrons, and hepburn with short vowels. Most of those pages do, in fact, have other redirects, but because most editors don't really know about standards spellings and all that, they seem to have missed out some of the links that are most important.
Until now, though, hepburn titles with short vowels have been standard, and as you can see, most of the articles on that page are written with short vowels (though not everyone has been following the Mos). Thus, if a reader (who may or may not understand macrons) was looking for an article on a Japanese person that they thought might have a small page, they could just type in their non-macroned name (which, though I'm not using it as an argument, is the most common way Japanese people write their names on paper) and they'd have the best chance to actually find the article, or a redirect.
If the page had been originally created with a macroned title, and no redirects (an example: Yo Yoshimura doesn't find Yō Yoshimura, and it doesn't even come up in the search). I can speak Japanese, can type in Japanese, but since I don't know the 5 digit code for "ō", and I don't know if his name is actually spelled with a long or a short vowel, I can't get at his article without being given a link to it on some list.
Nobody is arguing about the inclusion of macrons in the actual articles themselves; I personally disagree with using short vowels in the actual article content, because the macrons are more correct and I don't believe seeing macrons makes reading romanized Japanese much more difficult.
I have other, smaller arguments as well, but I'll leave it at this for now. Hope it's not too confusing, I'm in a little of a rush. [NOTE: A few of the redlinks I used in my examples above have now, as expected, been created, but I have kept them red to illustrate my point.] freshgavin ΓΛĿЌ 00:47, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
2. Next, If there is anything you all agree on, please list that.
Well, I don't necessarily agree with all of that, being a bit of a prescriptivist, but as WP:NC(CN) dictates, I'll comply. ;) — Nightst a llion (?) 10:17, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
For what it's worth, the "ô/û" long-vowel romanization is the French way to do things; I've seen it used on many French websites about Japanese topics. We should also mention the "ou" method for long O. This is used in many, many articles currently: Houkou, Houou, Umibouzu, etc. I believe that all sides are in agreement that the romanization we use for article titles should be either Hepburn with macrons or Hepburn without macrons. No "ou", "oo", "ô", etc. is even under consideration as a viable alternative. — BrianSmithson 01:10, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
Thank you all. I've looked at all the information and reasonings. I believe that the main issue is whether the actual article content is located at the title using macrons or the macronless titles. Furthermore, I see a willingness to work together that leads me to believe that if this main issue can be solved, that the editors involved are capable of sorting out the remaining details amicably and without a RfM.
Some things I have noted:
So, let’s talk about this. How do you think an agreement can be reached? (Discuss below) psch e mp | talk 06:03, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
(P.S. Could someone let me know on my talk page how to set Firefox so I can see the Kanji rather than (????). I think it would be helpful as some people involved have characters in their sigs. I currently have UTF-8 selected for the character encoding. Thank You. psch e mp | talk 06:03, 13 March 2006 (UTC))
Ok. Since not one of you has answered my question, and you have gotten off topic (We are not talking about Chinese), I am going to try to clarify what I was asking:
Yes that's it. I see the basic issue as whether the article is located at the macronned title or the macronless title. And yes, the other would be a redirect. Just a note, there are thousands of article naming conventions that require redirects to help with searching. Its not a hard thing to do, it just takes some time. Redirects are useful and expected for this kind of thing. Now, let's think of some ways to come to an agreement :) psch e mp | talk 02:48, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
It'll take quite some time to go through each and every Japan-related article and hold a vote on whether it should have a macron-less or a macroned title. We should establish fixed criteria now for most of them, and hold votes on the few borderline cases that remain later on. — Nightst a llion (?) 10:48, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
I agree that one principle or the other should be adopted. To have variable policies would only lead to inconsistency, confusion, and uncertainty in implementation. Bathrobe 17:41, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
So, since nothing's been posted here for about 10 days now, should we come to a decision? -- 日本穣 18:25, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
Okay, first a list of things about which we agree already:
Based on pschemp's comments about redirects ("Just a note, there are thousands of article naming conventions that require redirects to help with searching. Its not a hard thing to do, it just takes some time. Redirects are useful and expected for this kind of thing."), whether or not someone can easily type the macronned article title should not be an issue. Therefore, can we agree to go with the
WP:MOS-JA as currently written with respect to macronned titles?
I think if we work together to find articles that don't have proper redirects, and then make sure they have them, we can make this work. To help out, I've created a sub-page to
WikiProject Japan:
Redirect requests. Pages needing redirects can be listed here using the format on the page, and any interested editor can then take care of them. --
日本穣 Nihonjoe
06:24, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
I share some of the same concerns as Bathrobe above. However, after seeing " crème brûlée" in many English dictionaries, and after hearing that " Māori" made it into New Zealand English WITH the macron, I have decided not to look back. And so I agree with the spirit of Nihonjoe's Proposal. However, I request that the following amendments and additions be made:
(addendums removed)
Okay, first a list of things about which we agree already:
Based on pschemp's comments about redirects ("Just a note, there are thousands of article naming conventions that require redirects to help with searching. Its not a hard thing to do, it just takes some time. Redirects are useful and expected for this kind of thing."), whether or not someone can easily type the macronned article title should not be an issue. Therefore, can we agree to go with the WP:MOS-JA as currently written with respect to macronned titles?
I think if we work together to find articles that don't have proper redirects, and then make sure they have them, we can make this work. To help out, I've created a sub-page to WikiProject Japan: Redirect requests. Pages needing redirects can be listed here using the format on the page, and any interested editor can then take care of them. -- 日本穣 Nihonjoe 22:46, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
We still need Freshgavin, Mitsukai, Neier, CES, and Nightstallion to sign off on this before we can put the issue behind us and move on to actual work on the site. pschemp, will you ask them to pop in and give their "yea" or "nay" so we can determine if we need to do anything else? Thanks. --
日本穣 Nihonjoe
16:14, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
Since this mediation doesn't (won't? can't?) defer from any of my previous discussions on the issue, I have no choice but to fall back and agree. I apologize for my long absense, if anybody was actually waiting for me to comment. freshgavin ΓΛĿЌ 00:41, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
As all the parties have now commented and agreed to support proposal #2, I consider this issue resolved. The JA-MOS for this will be followed as written, and I encourage discussion of any other details and issues to take place on the page for that project. Certainly this is not the end of the work needed on your project, but I feel the rest can be dealt with without mediation. I would like to sincerely thank all involved for being willing to find a common ground since I realize that compromise can often be painful. I am very impressed with the level of cooperation and civil negotiation that this large group has shown, it is difficult to get two people to agree often, and I think this speaks well of the group and the future of the work on the JA-MOS. Thank you for your patience with me and good luck in the future. psch e mp | talk 05:13, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
;Requested Amendment to Nihonjoe's #2:
If the word in question is in general use in the English-speaking world in a non-macronned form, the non-macronned form should be used in the title and body text. This shall include local usages in
British English (BrE),
American English (AmE),
Canadian English (CaE),
Australian English (AuE), and
New Zealand English.
Resolved as per "Proposal #2 from Nihonjoe" above--
Endroit
16:31, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
;Requested Amendment to Nihonjoe's #4:
We should use
Oxford English Dictionary (OED), Oxford American Dictionary (OAD), Merriam-Websters Online (M-W) (
http://www.m-w.com/),
Webster's Third New International Dictionary, Unabridged, or
American Heritage Dictionary (AHD) (
http://www.bartleby.com/61/) to determine if a word is "generally accepted" in English. Wikipedia's
List of English words of Japanese origin may also be used as a secondary source of the above. If there is no dictionary entry, but the word occurs in English texts (outside Japan) with any regularity, it may be considered on a case-by-case basis and by discretion and common sense on the part of the editor.
Resolved as per "Proposal #2 from Nihonjoe" above--
Endroit
16:31, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
The macron rules are for "long U" (Ū ū) and "long O" (Ō ō) only. For "long A", "aa" may be used. For "long E", "ei" may be used. For "long I", "ii" may be used.
Names of companies, product names, trade names, and names of organizations should honor the current spelling used officially by that party. For example, use Kodansha rather than Kōdansha, Doshisha University rather than Dōshisha University. If the entity no longer exists, use the most recently used format or (if available) look it up in any of the above dictionaries.
Names of contemporary persons should follow the macron usage / spelling in the following order of preference:
1. Follow any official trade name if available in English/Latin alphabet
2. Use a dictionary entry from any of the above dictionaries, if available
3. Use the name publicly used on behalf of the person in the English-speaking world. For athletes, consult
http://www.olympic.org/, etc.
4. Use the name publicly used on behalf of the person in any other popular Latin-alphabet-using-language (French, Spanish, Italian, Portuguese, German, and Dutch, or variations).
5. If none of the above is available, use the macronned form.
If there is no usage in the English-speaking world (or in any other Latin-alphabet-using-language), macrons should be used. However, exceptions will be made if there are objections. For example Fueki Yuko is popular in Korea (and maybe Japan to a lesser extent), and so Fueki Yūko will be more appropriate. However, if the Korean editors object, Fueki Yuko may be agreed upon in the future.
I would like to see some kind of a rule for modern manga, anime, and otaku usages in the English language. I understand that Nihonjoe and others are more familiar in that area.
Someone should specify a rule for names of non-contemporary persons as well, in a similar fashion. Likewise for place names. If nobody else does, I will.
I am in no way perfect. Please make corrections / changes / additions to my suggested rules above, as you see necessary. Thanks everyone!
Some dictionaries above are not freely available to all editors. In particular, they are Oxford English Dictionary (OED), Oxford American Dictionary (OAD), and Webster's Third New International Dictionary, Unabridged. There should be a general Wikipedia project page (separated from the Japanese macron issue) where a user requests somebody to look up dictionary entries. I volunteer to look up Webster's, because I have access to it now. I don't know who can manage looking up the Oxford dictionaries, though. -- Endroit 17:09, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
You know, "We should use List of English words of Japanese origin as well as generally-accepted print and online dictionaries to determine if a word is "generally accepted" in English" covers all of the suggestions people have listed above. The same goes for "If the word in question is in general use in the English-speaking world in a non-macronned form, the non-macronned form should be used in the title and body text" seems pretty clear and covers all of the objections/clarifications/etc., that have been suggested. -- 日本穣 Nihonjoe 21:32, 6 April 2006 (UTC)