Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Japan/Archive/January 2009

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Talk & archives for WP Japan
Project talk
Task force talk/archives

↔ = joint task force
Old notice board
Related talk/archives
Search the archives:
V·T·E

県庁

Do we have a standard for how we translate 『県庁』？ I came across the article Okinawa Prefecture Office which I personally think sounds terrible. But while I'd like to translate it to something that, unlike "office", implies the grandeur and power that the words "City Hall" and "State House" do, I'm not sure what's best. "Okinawa Prefectural Hall"? The disambig page for Kenchōmae Station offered "Prefectural Government Offices" as a translation.

So, do we have a standard? Does the Japanese government have a standard? If no, then we should develop one I think. Yoroshiku. LordAmeth (talk) 23:02, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

"Okinawa Prefecture Office Building" or " . . . Headquarters" seems more complete for an article about a structure (rather than the prefecture's governmental or administrative functions). Compare to Tokyo Metropolitan Government Building. The TMG uses the term to encompass the three buildings in the complex: the twin tower and two lower structures; see official site. I agree that "Okinawa Prefecture Office" doesn't convey a sense of grandeur, but conversely, most of these buildings appear to be routine modern office buildings, lacking visual grandeur (with Tokyo's being an exception). So I'm content with " X Prefecture Office Building" or " . . . Headquarters" or " . . . Headquarters Building," but I'd be very happy if someone comes up with a better suggestion. Fg2 (talk) 01:27, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
I would keep away from "Headquarters" as I've never heard of any governmental office being titled as such unless it was the police headquarters or something similar. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 05:31, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
Aside from "official" government usage, the terms tochō or kenchō can be used in Japanese to refer to both the institution and its buildings (as, for example, in tochō-mae-eki). The Okinawa-tochō itself uses the term Okinawa Prefectural Government as English translation for the institution (e.g. on its website) - also abbreviated as OPG. In analogy to the TMG building, it might be appropriate to call the structure Okinawa Prefectural Government Building (as in [1]). Other sources use the term Okinawa Prefectural Government Office; but this can ambiguously refer to both the building and the institution. --Asakura Akira (talk) 03:01, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Ethnic discrimination in Japan

An article, which was deleted some months ago under a different title, has been substantially re-created under the title Ethnic discrimination in Japan. This is the one with the polemic against Suruga Bank. I've placed a tag requesting speedy deletion on it, and the link may turn red soon. Still, it's worth watching to make sure it doesn't get created yet again (I believe some other version was also speedily deleted). Those of you who patrol new articles, Newest Japan-related Articles and similar lists can be on the alert for it.

I think this is the same as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Discrimination lawsuits and incidents in Japan and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/VAIBS (not Discrimination in Japan, as I mistakenly reported in the deletion summary). Fg2 (talk) 05:09, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Looks like it was slain. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 23:11, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
Indeed it was—again. But keep your eyes open; it keeps coming back under various new names. Fg2 (talk) 02:19, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

National motto of Japan

This edit to the article on Japan added a See Also section, listing Peace and Progress (national motto). The article has an "orphan" template dated November 2006, so it's good to get some links to it. But . . .

Is "Peace and Progress" the national motto of Japan? List of national mottos says "Japan: none." The equivalent Japanese Wikipedia article 国と地域の標語の一覧, which may be a translation or may be separately authoritative, says 「 Japan: なし」.

Does anyone have information about the national motto of Japan? Fg2 (talk) 20:53, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

The only information I got is that there is none. Sure, there might be government slogans or phrases used during certain administrations, but no constant motto, like a In God We Trust. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 20:59, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
I haven't found anything either. Tried an advanced Google search for Japan and the exact phrase "peace and progress" in go.jp sites only. There were 22 matches, but I didn't find anything promising. (If I missed something, somebody might be able to dig it up.) So I added a citation-needed template to the article. Fg2 (talk) 06:52, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
北海道新聞 says Japan has no national motto. [2] As far as I know, fukokukyohei is not a national motto, but a national policy. Oda Mari (talk) 09:13, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
And a majorly outdated one at that; I've never heard of fukoku kyohei outside of any context but the Meiji period. LordAmeth (talk) 11:31, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
FYI: Fukoku kyōhei 124.214.131.55 (talk) 11:45, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Oda Mari's reliable source is convincing. As one more step, I tried a Japanese search. Of course I've been searching for the English since the article doesn't give the Japanese. But one would expect the motto, if Japan has one, to be in Japanese. I did an advanced Google search for 標語 with the exact word or phrase 平和と進歩 at go.jp sites and came up with only two hits. Can anyone come up with a better candidate for the Japanese? Fg2 (talk) 11:58, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

As for fukokukyouhei I mentioned above, please take a look at Peace and Progress (national motto). The article says it was the former national motto of Japan. Maybe the aricle should be listed on AfD? Oda Mari (talk) 14:24, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

I've copied this discussion to Talk:Peace and Progress (national motto), and removed the "See also" section linking to the article from Japan. Fg2 (talk) 22:08, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

"KOKUTEN", etc

I like to think that I'm moderately well up on elderly, widely exhibited and noteworthy Japanese photographers, but it was only today that I first encountered Toshiki Ozawa. It's a charming article that is unexpectedly educational; for example, thanks to 1992: Started holding more than 60 solo exhibitions in major cities at home (Tokyo, Nagoya, Osaka, Fukuoka, Sapporo, etc.) and abroad (USA, Russia, Turkey, India, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Dominica, Netherlands, Slovenia, Mexico, China, Taiwan, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Andorra, etc.) I learn for the first time of the existence of one or more major cities in Andorra. The article claims that he's big at the Kaunas Fuji Photo Gallery. (And OR confirms that yes, this does exist: this denizen of Tokyo was strolling through Kaunas in 2005 when he suddenly thought he was seeing a Yūrakuchō mirage, but walked into a three-dimensional gallery. However, it's definitely 画廊 and not 美術館.) The examples of Ozawa's works that are linked to seem to be humdrum nudes and more humdrum touristy scenes, though I could be missing something and anyway it's not for me to judge quality (and if I did, dozens of celebrated photographers would be out on their ear).

Ozawa is big in "KOKUTEN" (so capitalized). Is this something I should have heard of? (This implies that 国展 were held long, long ago but that the outfit running them is long defunct.)

All in all a curious aroma hangs over this article; I'll be asking WikiProject Lithuania about it too. -- Hoary (talk) 01:25, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

I found the same reference you did to the early 20th century prewar organization in the Japan Encyclopedia. However, just judging from what the kanji mean, one can only assume this is a major national exhibit, akin to the Bunten (ja:文展), Teiten (帝展), or Nitten (日展). This would seem to indicate that such a long-running annual national exhibition does goes on under the name 国展, though www.kokuten.com, which may be the official website for such an event, seems to be completely under construction。
My first instinct, however, was that KOKUTEN being capitalized like that could indicate that it's a periodical of some sort... an art journal, perhaps? I have no real reason to think that, and a Google search doesn't find anything of the sort, but it's just a hunch. I may look into this at work.. I'm curious. Good luck finding answers to this mystery, Hoary-san! LordAmeth (talk) 02:48, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
No shinola, and in a prominent gallery, no less. So there could be something to this. Hmm. -- Hoary (talk) 02:54, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
I found this. See this too. Oda Mari (talk) 04:46, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
That last link is very telling, Mari.
The article cites "21st Tokyo International Photographic Group Exhibition. (2008)." That sounds as if it might be a garbled version of something that I know. I'll investigate, but it does seem as if there's both (a) some substance in this article and (b) a lot of puffery. -- Hoary (talk) 05:23, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

47 Prefecture Coin Program

This was a surprise to me-I just saw a ¥500 coin, brass on the outer ring, nickel on the inside, with "Hokkaido-47 Prefecture Coin Program" on it. To me this sounds like the 50 State Quarters program, but there's nothing on the 'pedia. Anyone? Chris (クリス • フィッチ) (talk) 13:20, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

On jawp, there's ja:記念貨幣#地方自治法施行60周年記念貨幣. --Sushiya (talk) 13:35, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
I didn't know of these commemorative coins. I found these. [3], [4], [5],[6], and [7]. Oda Mari (talk) 15:07, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Can anyone here describe the Japanese GA process for a Signpost article?

I'm thinking about doing a Wikipedia:Signpost article on foreign GA processes. I have the beginnnings of an article at User:Peregrine Fisher/Workspace/. Is anyone familiar with the French wikipedia GA process (or FA) and could you describe it on my workspace page? Thanks. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 19:47, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Discrepancy on the invention of the fork

List of Chinese inventions and Fork have two different answers. The “List of Chinese inventions” states that the Chinese invented the fork. While on the “Fork” page, it states that the Japanese invented the fork. I am not able to verify the claim. Thanks, Marasama (talk) 23:14, 19 January 2009 (UTC)


Well, obviously the claim "But Japan had forks first" is wrong. The Fork page explains that bone forks were found in Qijia culture tombs. Qijia era is an early Bronze age period. There wasn't even a Japan then. Not to mention the references to fork in ancient Greece and the Hebrew Bible, all of which predate the existence of a Japan-like entity. Indeed, just going back through the page history, the reference is for the fact about Qijia. A vandal then added "But Japan had forks first" later, as you might expect. --C S (talk) 21:19, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
As an aside, in response to queries on why use "primitive" devices like chopsticks, I've often found it provocative to comment to people that chopsticks were apparently invented by the Chinese after the fork, which makes chopsticks more advanced thank forks :-) --C S (talk) 21:22, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
By the way, other than for the purpose of provocative comments, it's probably not wise to conflate "Chinese" and "Qijia". So the inclusion criteria for List of Chinese inventions seems a bit nebulous. --C S (talk) 21:36, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

The ref for the Qijia claim is missing information like the title and publisher. I suspect that if you were to say "volume 6 of Needham" to someone that studied China, the first thought would be the magnum opus "Science and Civilisation in China" by Joseph Needham. Fork doesn't seem to be heavily watched, so I would suggest asking people at the China project for someone who has the book and can check this (actually, maybe it's on Google Books too). --C S (talk) 06:31, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

A quick favor, perhaps?

Hi all. I've been doing work on Tosa class battleship, and found File:Japanese Navy Aircraft Carrier Kaga 1928.jpg this photo of the Kaga, after it was converted into an aircraft carrier. The only problem is, the caption on the file is in Japanese, which I don't read. So, I thought I might pop in over here, and see if any Japanese-speaking editors could help me with a quick translation. Thanks. Parsecboy (talk) 00:16, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

The Description given on that page reads: "Kaga Japanese Navy Aircraft Carrier. Photo of it under construction at the Yokosuka Arsenal. The age of the 3rd level of aircraft carriers." ... I am a bit unclear on the translation of ３段 (sandan) which I translated as "3rd level". Dan can mean a rank, class, grade or level. LordAmeth (talk) 20:38, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
Perhaps it's the 3rd generation of aircraft carriers? ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 03:57, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
No can do...Akagi would have been 2nd generation, if anything—Hosho would have been the first generation. Good idea though :) —Ed 17 (Talk / Contribs) 04:00, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
Hmm...perhaps "class", then? At that point, were there three different types/styles of Japanese aircraft carriers? Also, you mention "Akagi", but the description indicates "Kaga", not "Akagi". Was Akagi a Kaga class carrier? ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 04:47, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
The photo is from 20 November 1928. It is in the collection of the Yamato Museum in Kure, Hiroshima. LordAmeth (talk) 00:38, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
Thanks a lot for your fast reply. I was under the impression that it was still under construction (the scaffolding and so forth), but I hoped to get confirmation from the caption. Thanks again. Parsecboy (talk) 00:41, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
No problem. LordAmeth (talk) 03:32, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

The Kaga was the third aircraft carrier built by Japan and it and the preceeding two were considered to be separate classes of carriers. So, perhaps the caption means that Kaga was the third carrier class as well as the third carrier. Cla68 (talk) 05:42, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

I'm no expert on aircraft carriers, but surely "３段" is just referring to the ship being a 3-level type (main deck plus two flight decks)? In other words, "3段空母時代" could be translated as something like "the golden age of 3-level aircraft carriers". --DAJF (talk) 05:56, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
DAJF is right. 3段/sandan means the story number of the flying-off deck/hangar in the context. See ja:航空母艦#船体・飛行甲板, HMS Furious (47) and HMS Glorious (77). Oda Mari (talk) 06:17, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
Ah, that makes sense. Thanks, DAJF & Mari-san. LordAmeth (talk) 21:50, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
Yes, the ship did originally have three decks (compare with Kaga's semi-sistership Akagi: File:Japanese aircraft carrier Akagi　3deck.jpg). Thanks again, all. Parsecboy (talk) 12:52, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Could someone add the kanji names and/or links to the Japanese articles for the following new entries on Imperial Japanese Navy destroyers?

Sorry for the long list, but all the red links on this list were bothering me so I started articles on them. Cla68 (talk) 08:11, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Category:日本の駆逐艦 is a useful resource Fg2 (talk) 10:00, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
Done. If someone could check them, it would be worthwhile. Fg2 (talk) 10:29, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Bloodtype

When going through some articles on Japanese people, I noticed that a number of them had the peculiar distinction of listing the person's blood type This has apparently to do with the pseudoscientific Blood types in Japanese culture. At first glance, this happens ins ome 200 articles (these plus the same search with bloodtype). I would suggest to remove this from all articles (just like we would remove the zodiac sign from people's biographies), but since this seems to be a mostly Japan-related subject, I'll let the people here discuss this. Fram (talk) 09:42, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Being somewhat familiar with Japanese culture, I'm not surprised to see blood type included in many of the bios of notable Japanese people. As long as it's sourced adequately, I think it's probably ok. In that case, I would suggest wikilinking the mention of the person's blood type to the "Blood types in Japanese culture" article to provide background to those unaware of the importance of this information in Japanese culture. Cla68 (talk) 03:07, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
Well, I'm prejudiced, because I like information... it's a weakness... and blood type is a bit of information that is nearly always included in profiles of these actresses, models, etc. But as there currently seems to be a movement afoot to ban even filmographies, I suppose blood type is the least of our worries information-wise. Maybe some day the Deletionists will get their way and we'll click on Wikipedia to see a beautiful, "無mooo... go buy yourself a copy of the Encyclopædia Britannica... 無mooo..." Dekkappai (talk) 03:46, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
A filmography is important in the biography of an actor or director, as it is (one of) the things take makes the person notable. The blood type is a piece of trivial information only included because some Japanese apparently attach some paranormal/pseudoscientific qualities to it, just like some Western people do to the sign of the zodiac (which we also normally don't include). The bloodtype of a person is not a defining characteristic in what makes him or her notable anymore than shoe size, average heartbeat rate, ... It is the type of info one would expect on a fan site, next to the favourite colour of the actor, but not the kind of thing that should be in an encyclopedia unless it has true importance (someone who died because he got a transfusion with the wrong bloodtype is a notable fact, but that is not the case here). Many articles give the impression that it is the most important characteristic of a person by being the only thing included besides name, birthdate, and a list of roles. Education? Career overview? Influences? Who cares as long as we know the bloodtype! (Hikaru Ijuin, [Chiaki Ōsawa], Miyuki Kitagawa (includes star sign as well:-( ), Risa Uchida (one wonders what the importance is of the height for a voice actor), ...). We should not imitate fan sites and teen magazines. Fram (talk) 11:06, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
Since bloodtype is frequently known and disseminated in Japan, it should appear, because it is how Japanese people view themselves. A bio on a Japanese person should include views on how Japanese view themselves. Bloodtype is a basic human characteristic, and unchanging, along with hair color (dyeing isn't changing) and eye color (contacts aren't changing the true color either). A mature individual's height doesn't change unless they get amputated, or have heightening surgery. 76.66.198.171 (talk) 14:25, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
Whether something is an unchanging characteristic has little to do with whether it is suitable for inclusion. Otherwise the article on Kurt Vonnegut would describe his eye and hair color, physical measurements, etc.
Do articles on Chinese usually include their zodiac, like the Rat, Dog, etc.? If so, then I can see why one would argue blood types should be included for Japanese. But I don't think we usually include details just because a person is of importance to people of a certain nationality who considers those details important. Otherwise we would include the zodiac in bios of Englishmen, like Joseph Needham, who is a pretty famous and influential figure in China. --C S (talk) 18:37, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
According to what people from the project have said thus far, it seems that we should put blood type into articles like Hirohito, right? (apparently he is type AB) --C S (talk) 18:45, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
If Kurt Vonnegut appeared on a police blotter, his height, eye and hair color would be present, so I don't see a good reason why not include it into the article. Basic physical characteristics describe a person and should appear in the articles. If Kurt Vonnegut were a ship, we'd describe his beam, length and displacement, and his career as a ship. 76.66.198.171 (talk) 06:48, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
I don't believe there is a widespread consensus to include such data. Typically people that write articles on models, actors, etc. like to include this info, but even when available, such info is not included in articles on authors, scientists, religious figures, etc. Your ship analogy is horrible. People and ships are completely different, so obviously we can't expect the same criteria for articles on those two topics.
I find your statements thus far confusing. Initially you started off by saying that since bloodtype is important to Japanese, it should be included in Japanese bios. Now you seem to be saying any kind of basic physical characteristic should be included into biographical articles. So this would mean including bloodtype info, when available, into any bio. This (apparent) position is, in my opinion, not likely to find consensus.
You haven't followed up on my queries about your argument that info that is important to Japanese readers should be included. Should the Emperor Showa (Hirohito)'s blood type be included into his article?
In particular, are we supposed to include bloodtype into articles on anybody that Japanese people think enough of to have a general view of? Or is this merely to be limited to ethnic Japanese? --C S (talk) 07:28, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
We include details that are significant to the subject of the article. Blood type is significant enough for Japanese celebrities that many of them publicly announce their blood types. Their blood type is part of their persona and image. That's why I suggested that their blood type be linked to the "Blood type in Japanese culture" article, so that anyone confused as to why it's included will be able to click the link and gain an understanding, and therefore deepen their understanding of the intrical levels of Japanese culture. Cla68 (talk) 07:33, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
Your statement had me rubbing my eyes a bit. We certainly do not include details based on how significant they are to the subject of the biography. If a Nobel prize winning physicist believes that his most important accomplishment is his cookie jar collection, we certainly don't include details of his collection because he thinks it's so important. Whether he considers his bloodtype to be important or not is irrelevant to whether we decided to include it.
I understand that a great many Japanese believe in this blood type business. That's not the issue. But I have trouble understanding why that is relevant to why we decide to include it. There are a number of people in Japan that don't believe in this stuff, nor advertise their blood types. You are suggesting that we take into account whether blood type is part of someone's "persona and image" in order to decide whether to include it. That not only seems infeasible as a policy, but taken to the natural generalization (considering the wide number of beliefs all over the world and the number of topics covered in Wikipedia), it quickly becomes ridiculous. --C S (talk) 08:02, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Bloodtype is important in biographies / profiles of Japanese actors and models because they are always included in Japanese biographies / profiles of Japanese actors and models. For us to say it not to be included in English Wikipedia articles on Japanese actors and models just because we don't think it should be is to impose our own POV. Bloodtype is not included in biographies / profiles of American authors. For us to say it should be, just because it's important to Japanese model / actor profiles would be to make a WP:POINT. Dekkappai (talk) 07:35, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

As pointed out by Cla68, this is not just a matter of actors and models. This is a strong Japanese cultural belief that goes into many aspects of Japanese society. Many Japanese believe that an athlete or politician's bloodtype is important. Should their bios thus include such information?
Let me comment on POV. We are certainly allowed to make editorial decisions of what is or is not appropriate for English Wikipedia. This includes naming things according to what is familiar to English speakers, not Japanese. This is not a violation of NPOV. Your argument is rather flawed because I can use the very same argument to claim that your view is POV. After all, if the non-Japanese point of view is that blood type is an unimportant detail, then for you to emphasize that blood type is important is to favor the Japanese POV.
Again I ask, why should a person of nationality X have the X POV dominate in their article? This is not done for anything else on Wikipedia, so why blood type and Japanese? --C S (talk) 08:02, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
If it's included in all the literature, all the sources on these subjects, and it is, then the authorities on the subject believe it is important, so we include it. But then you've read this over and over and you refuse to comprehend. I see no point continuing this. Dekkappai (talk) 08:15, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
It's funny but I don't see the problem in communication as being my "refus[al] to comprehend". If you are unwilling to debate your points further, then that's fine. Simply bow out as you are now. I believe what I've done is make cogent arguments and I've been ready to defend them.
Now you make a different argument. And rather than "refuse to comprehend" it, I will explain why it doesn't make sense to me. You can, as you choose, not address my points and simply insinuate that I am somehow at fault for stubbornly refusing to understand your blatantly obvious truths. Your recent argument is: that bloodtype is included in "all the literature" and "all the sources on these subjects". This would appear patently false. For example, I doubt a New York Times profile on a famous Japanese actress would necessarily include such data. You believe the "authorities" have decreed the blood type info to be of importance. But obviously you and I have different ideas of what the "authorities" are. I am sure that many magazines in Japan and tabloid-ish periodicals would include such information. But I am also fairly certain that there are more scholarly sources of information that do not. --C S (talk) 08:38, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
Is it included in all sources and literature? Let's see: Ryuichi Sakamoto is a famous Japanese musician, both in Japan and worldwide. His biography on his official site does however not mention his bloodtype (or his height, weight, or favourite colour).[8]. Another example, from an article where Wikipedia currently includes the bloodtype (and that "shoulder massage" is a hobby of her...) Yui Horie: TV.com has a biography, which does not include such trivialities as blood type and hobbies[9]. Fram (talk) 09:12, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
Ryuichi Sakamoto? Oh right, who could ever forget his centerfold in Weekly Playboy? I like the Hirohito "analogy" better. I'm sure we all hope that the writers of articles on world leaders are following the template set up in articles on bikini models. Anyone know Gandhi's bust size off-hand?
No, it's not included in all sources and literature, it's included in sources and literature on Japanese idols. Let's look at some sites that actually cover the field we are discussing-- Web idol dictionary, XCity's AV idol dictionary, Urabon navigator.... Try looking through those three for starters, and let's see if they include blood type. Now, if we find a profile of Hirohito, Gandhi, or Ryuichi Sakamoto in any of these databases, maybe then we can discuss whether to include blood type, bust size and other information pertinent to their public personae...
And why is bloodtype so important that it's nearly always included in these profiles, and has been for decades? Well, let's assume for a moment that we are in another culture-- one that puts some validity on the claim that blood type defines personality. (And the Japanese are not the only country that is "wrong"-- i.e. thinks differently than the Anglosphere-- on this. Take a look at the Korean film My Boyfriend is Type... REMOVED BY BLOODTYPE-REMOVAL-BOT for example.) These "idols" are known for their figures, their public appearances, and their personalities. Figures and public appearances are given through numbers, films, TV & magazine appearances. Personality is given through blood type. I think it's silly, you think it's silly, but the sources that cover these subject include them, not sometimes, but nearly always. We don't include this information on U.S. writers because sources on U.S. writers don't think that data is important. Sources on Japanese idols do. To remove sourced information which is considered important in subjects from another culture just because we in the Anglosphere think its silly is to impose cultural bias on Wikipedia.
Anyway, I'm done here. If it comes up for a !vote, someone please notify me. Dekkappai (talk) 19:55, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
It has nothing to do with regional cultural bias, but with the difference between teenage pop magazines (and websites) and encyclopedias. We bring encyclopedic information about pop idol, we don't bring pop magazine information about teenage idols. Western magazines also include sign of the zodiac and favourite pet, colour, ... of teen idols like Tokyo Hotel (to keep things Japan-related). However, we don't. Tell me, please: if the Asahi Shimbun has an interview with a popular TV star, singer, mangaka, voice actor, ..., do they include in general his or her bloodtype? Fram (talk) 20:29, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Hoax?

Yikima Fg2 (talk) 10:27, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Seems likely, for various reasons starting with the fact that "yi" is not normally a Japanese sound and that "YuYu", while it could be a nickname for a Yuko or Yuriko, is not a family name. LordAmeth (talk) 11:07, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Japanese Gladiators TV show

Does someone know where to find info on the Japanese versions of American Gladiators? I found out there's something called Bang! Bang! Bang! apparently... 76.66.198.171 (talk) 14:28, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

WP:VG reliable sources help

I would appreciate it if someone could come by Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Sources and make a short list of Japanese video game websites/magazines that can be considered reliable. Thanks! SharkD (talk) 02:17, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Mao Asada

Folks, the language template at the top of Mao Asada is distracting and unnecessary, and takes away from the infobox below. Can you wikify the Japanese text into the first paragraph of the article? I am not good with coding and don't want to mess it up, but it really would improve it. Chris (クリス • フィッチ) (talk) 19:55, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

I removed the East Asian template and put the Nihongo template inline in the first sentence. Is this what you wanted? Fg2 (talk) 21:31, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
It's just what was needed, thank you! But your edit was undone by an anonymous IP, there is a lot of edit warring there, can we somehow get it semiprotected? Chris (クリス • フィッチ) (talk) 03:02, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
Is there a way to add the hiragana in there somewhere? That may be why the IP wants that other infobox in there. Cla68 (talk) 03:12, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
Sure, but that's in the Japanese article, only one click away. Anyone who wantss the kana can simply click the link and they have the information. Fg2 (talk) 03:44, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Japanese Cultural Festival

I wonder if somebody from this project could review the naming for the Japanese Cultural Festival article. I've placed my concerns on the talk page. Thanks. -- Whpq (talk) 20:33, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

cal.syoboi.jp

I have started a thread about cal.syoboi.jp being a reliable source on the Reliable Sources Noticeboard and someone has commented that someone who speaks Japanese needs to take a look at it to determine its reliability. Is there anybody available who could do so? Thanks. Note: This has been posted on both the WT:ANIME and WT:JAPAN talk pages. NOCTURNENOIR ( t • c ) 20:49, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

What kinds of diplomatic activity does the Chongryon do? Any sources for that?

What kinds of diplomatic activity does the Chongryon in Japan do? Any sources? On Talk:Diplomatic_missions_of_North_Korea#Chongryon there was a debate over whether the Chongryon would count as a diplomatic mission of North Korea? Does the Chongryon do official DPRK government communication in Japan? What else does it do? WhisperToMe (talk) 20:34, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Japan/Archive/January_2009&oldid=1238781649"