Talk:Hokuetsu Seppu

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles

Japan Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Japan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Japan-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project, participate in relevant discussions, and see lists of open tasks. Current time in Japan: 13:13, November 16, 2024 (JST, Reiwa 6) (Refresh)JapanWikipedia:WikiProject JapanTemplate:WikiProject JapanJapan-related articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Japan to do list:

Peer review: None
A-class review: None

Featured content candidates –

Articles: None
Pictures: None
Lists: None

Good article nominations: Vinland Saga (TV series), Godzilla Minus One
Add requested images to articles that need them.
Pages for Deletion: Participate in Japan-related deletion discussions.
Improve and expand Japan-related stubs.
Create some requested articles.
Help translate an article from the Japanese Wikipedia into English.
Assess unassessed articles

Title

Is there any particular reason why this page is not located at Hokuetsu Seppu? There should not be any need to distinguish between similarly named topics. I have created a redirect, but without a convincing reason, I suggest moving this page there. Bendono 12:50, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No problem as far as I’m concerned. I don’t remember why I chose to append “book,” but I think it was because of something I saw in the guidelines.

Fwiw, my copy of the Iwanami book is the 35th printing issued in 1988; is the rationale for changing the republication date to 1978 (22nd printing) that the 22nd printing is a 改版? I also have an earlier issue (18th printing from 1971), but the only real difference is that they re-set the type in a more-modern face; i.e., using post-war instead of pre-war–style glyphs. Jim_Lockhart 14:01, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the response. I went ahead and moved the page.
As for the reprinting date, yes, I changed it to 1978 because it was a 改版. Actually, I was a little surprised to find the reprint date listed in the bibliography which lead me to look it up. Now that I think about it though, I suppose a 改版 and a reprint are different things, though. My copy from 1990 is the 40th reprint. Bendono 14:29, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I’m a little busy with work right now, otherwise I would have done it immediately. Your rationale for the republication date is reasonable enough, especially given that the glyphs are different and the printing, better (as far as I can tell, there are no content changes). I think an argument could be made for citing 1990 as well, though, if the date is followed by 発行.

Some day I’m going to get around to filling that article out with more from the Japanese article, and possibly some material of my own based on copies I have of the book as the English translation. Happy editing, Jim_Lockhart 14:40, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]