This is an archive of past discussions with User:Michitaro. 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.
Can you tell me anything about the Nakajima Sports Center in Sapporo, and is it notable enough to warrant its own article? Evangp (talk) 05:43, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
The Center was built in 1954 [1], but was replaced by another facility at the end of the 1990s. It was used for concerts and sports events, but perhaps the most famous event was a Rainbow concert in 1978 that resulted in one death.[2][3] Since I am not familiar with notability rules for buildings like this, I don't know if this passes WP:GNG or not. Michitaro (talk) 20:59, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
I've started an English article on Nakajima Sports Center here. If you have anything to add to the article, please do so. It would be especially helpful if you could add the Japanese name in Japanese text. Evangp (talk) 23:03, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
Hello Michitaro. You left a note at a past technical move request about the above article (see your note at bottom of page). You argued that this article might need to be treated differently, mentioning 'modified Hepburn'. Have you reached a definite conclusion about what the correct name should be? The request at Talk:Eitaro Ozawa ended with a consensus to remove the macron accents, but the discussion said nothing about the particular article you commented on. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 04:23, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for the note. The problem I had with the mass move was that this one was different from all the rest. With all the other ones, the user simply added macrons. But with this one, the user added macrons AND changed the romanization. And the change of romanization was in fact in accordance with WP:MOS-JA, by taking what was in an aberrant style and turning it into modified Hepburn, which is the standard romanization system used on Wikipedia. Reversing that move would thus, in this sense, be going against Wikipedia style. The exception to WP:MOS-JA is WP:COMMONNAME, but Taburakashi is a minor enough drama that while one can find evidence for various romanizations of its title, there is just so little coverage in English language media that there is just not the weight of evidence to argue against following WP:MOS-JA. So my personal opinion is to just keep it as is. I don't even think there's enough evidence to argue that the non-macron version is WP:COMMONNAME. Michitaro (talk) 14:12, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for your reply. From what I can tell, the recent move simply undid the change that User:Shahwould performed in December. In terms of pure Google hits, without filtering for WP:RS, the title 'Daikou Joyuugyou Maki' is much more common than 'Daikō Joyūgyō Maki'. You can decide if you want to take any further steps about this. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 17:22, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
Yes, there are probably more Google hits for Daikou Joyuugyou Maki, but many are mirrors of the old Wiki version. And almost none are RS. I tried looking for RS, and frankly there's not even a handful. I just don't think you can judge WP:COMMONNAME when the name itself is not anywhere near being commonly used. So I have opted for a compromise and moved the page to Daiko Joyugyo Maki without the macrons. Michitaro (talk) 21:42, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
Hi! I see you have reverted my edit changing Sadao Nakajima to Sadao NAKAJIMA. I did this to indicate that I thought Nakajima was his family name - and to prevent confusion in English (where the family name usually comes last - rather than first as in Japanese). Putting the family name in capitals is a standard way to indicate a family name from an Asian language such as Japanese, Chinese and Korean in English. Otherwise readers who only read English cannot tell which is the family name and which are given names. Can you suggest a way of removing such confusion for English-speaking readers, please? Many thanks, Sincerely, John Hill (talk) 23:52, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
I understand your reasoning in doing this. I have Japanese colleagues who do that to indicate which is the family name. However, capitalizing names like that is against Wikipedia policy, so no other article in the encyclopedia on a Japanese person has that. Please refer to WP:MOSTITLE, MOS:CT, and WP:MOS-JA. If you think readers may be confused by which name is the family name, please use this template instead: Template:Japanese_name. Michitaro (talk) 00:13, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
Words (not sure if the Japanese characters/translation are correct), if something (JP character) is missing please add/correct it. I spent two hours with this and it's still hopeless, maybe you'll need five minutes? Some of these names (voice) are characters from the manga.
That's the best I can do. Most of these are made-up names and it's hard to confirm how they are pronounced. I also don't know the set words for game software credits, so I did what I could. Note the character names I left in the original name order, in part because some, like Kai no Komori (literally, "Bat of Kai"), can't be reversed. Michitaro (talk) 15:10, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Order of the Golden Heart, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Asian Journal (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
I had thought that the global cut-off date for the medieval era was 1500, as that is when it cuts off in Europe. I see now that I have made a mistake with my Eurocentric thinking. I'll go back and fix it at once, thank you for pointing it out to me. Asarelah (talk) 15:45, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
Hello, Michitaro. You have new messages at PRehse's talk page. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Translation
Hello Michitaro, I'm an italian user of wikipedia (Sakretsu) and I'm looking for someone who can help me translating this text from English to Japanese. It's an example request for permission to use copyrighted pictures, but unfortunately there is no japanese version available yet. I'd really appreciate if you could do this favour to me since it's really hard to find someone who knows japanese very well. I'm sorry if I have bothered you and I'm looking forward to your reply. Thank you for your attention.--Sakretsu (talk) 23:53, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
I noticed that you reverted edits to Looting section. I checked the two sources provided to the section. However I cannot find any relevant description in "Kenneth B. Lee, 1997, Korea and East Asia: The Story of a Phoenix, Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing Group". Moreover the source "Sterling & Peggy Seagrave, 2003, Gold warriors: America's secret recovery of Yamashita's gold, London: Verso Books (ISBN1-85984-542-8)" is considered to be a fiction as described in Yamashita's gold. Although I don't think no looting was existed at the time, the description in the section is based on the false sources. So I think the section should be removed entirely. Please let me know your thought.―― Phoenix7777 (talk) 11:51, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for the note. I'd need more time than I have now to check these out, but my initial impression is that you might be right about the first reference, though the Google Books version of the Lee book does not display much of the section on colonial Korea, and thus cannot be searched easily. One would need to go to the physical book. As for the other source, I see that the Yamashita's gold article does note the controversy about the book, but it does not label it fiction per se. The Looting section is also careful to use such terms as "allege" to note the controversy about the source, which is common practice when maintaining neutrality. And just because the book might be wrong about Yamashita's gold, it might be right about looting. I would advise adding a refimprove section tag to that section for the time being Template:Refimprove_section, and then check these sources later. Michitaro (talk) 12:11, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
Hello. You reverted but I actually edited copy editing issues I can find. Could you please indicate what is the copy editing issues you want to mention for the article? Thank you. —Suzeki6 (talk • contribs) 03:15, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for participating on Wikipedia. I am afraid the changes you made not only did not solve all the issues, they created new ones like removing the capitalization of "November." There are still grammatical and stylistic problems. "He won several competitions include 3rd place" for instance is ungrammatical. If English is not your native language, I suggest you keep the tag there are allow other Wikipedia users who are native speakers to correct the problems. Michitaro (talk) 09:49, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
Hello Michitaro. I'm translating Japanese names but I'm not sure about few ones. If you don't mind can you check these? I'm not sure if they are correct and if there are more "variations"? Thanks in advance!
Hiroki Tajima (田島 弘喜) - hiroki or hiroyoshi or...?
Unfortunately, there is not just one reading for many Japanese names. The only way to get the true reading is to ask the person or to consult with a reference source that has made that confirmation. There are plenty of names where you can be 95% or 99% sure of the reading, but also quite a lot which you cannot (for instance, the film director 諏訪敦彦, for instance, is written in a way most any Japanese would read as "Atsuhiko Suwa", but it is really Nobuhiro Suwa). Personal names are worse in this regard than family names. There are reference books you can access in a Japanese library or in a good East Asian library abroad, which provide name readings, but only in general cases, or in the specific case of famous individuals. They don't help with minor staff credits like these. You just have to go with what is the most common reading. These are what I think are more likely:
Yeah, translating Japanese names can be a pain. Your reply was very useful, I found that 渡川 和久 is really Kazuhisa Watarigawa (Kazuhisa Watarikawa). Thanks! Cheers. --213.22.223.196 (talk) 03:36, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
Japanese film
Thank you, "student and scholar of Japanese cinema, literature, and popular culture", for quality articles such as Noriaki Tsuchimoto (in several languages), for adding references and patrolling new pages, for greeting and warning new users, for tireless moves and project tags, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!
Thank you for participating on Wikipedia. The page you cite may be minimally sufficient to decline a WP:BLPPROD, but it is not sufficient to provide WP:VERIFICATION or prove WP:NOTABILITY. That is why I have tagged the article for these problems. Please consult the rules regarding verifiability and notability and provide WP:RELIABLESOURCES that prove that this individual passes the criteria for inclusion in Wikipedia. Please do this soon as articles that have not shown they pass the criteria will be nominated for deletion. Michitaro (talk) 14:11, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
Assist.
Hi Michitaro! Sorry if I'm bothering you again... (after a month) but I need some precious assist right now.. When you have a minute, can you please check these sentences? Are they well "romanized"? No need to translate them, I'm just not sure about the proper "romanization"... Many Thanks in advance. Have a great week.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Asadora, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Fumiko Hayashi. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
First, are you familiar with Japanese? If not, the use of kana has changed historically over time. There is thus what is called "historical kana usage" or "historical kana orthography" (歴史的仮名遣) in which hi ひ was used for we now know as i, or fu for u. That was of course used for old texts, especially those before WWII, but some recent texts, like Only Yesterday, use it to give a nostalgic tone to the title. The title thus is using historical kana usage even though it is a relatively recent text, and thus should be romanized using the standard specified in WP:MOS-JA. If you object to this, you can bring it up at WikiProject Japan. Michitaro (talk) 18:12, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Chiyonosuke Azuma, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Toei. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Thanks very much for fixing the Nihongo for Chocolate and Soldiers (チョコレートと兵隊 Chokorēto to Heitai). Do you think there is a film poster (or DVD cover) for the film anywhere on the web? I had a go but haven't found one, and would be delighted if you can point me to the right place. And perhaps the film is in an archive somewhere, and out of copyright? Again, I would be very pleased if you can help. All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:11, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
No problem. A brief search could only find this as a decent image, probably from the press sheet for the film. The film is definitely in the National Film Center in Japan: [4]. But it is also likely that a print is in the Library of Congress in the USA, though they have still not put up a finding aid for their Japanese film collection. The film is probably in the public domain since even after the Kurosawa court decision, which applied the old copyright law to older films (32 years after the death of the director), this should be clear, since Sato died in 1978. Michitaro (talk) 13:35, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
Sorry for the delay in responding. Yes, it was still inadequate, so I significantly rewrote it. The main problem is that it stated that shingeki was just a retelling of Western theater. That was how it got started, but it was soon dominated by Japanese productions, written by some of Japan's great modern playwrights and literary figures. The article was also inaccurate about the history and the references were poor, given what was easily available on the net. My rewrite is still just the basics and the piece still needs significant expansion. Michitaro (talk) 14:37, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of Japanese films of the 1920s, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Shōzō Makino. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
You think this is going anywhere? I take it Nihonjoe is the guy with the supervote. I don't really care that much about name order issue itself. But I do wish we could get the 1868 sillyness out of the guideline somehow. We could start by proposing a few clear cut cases like this one. Fernando Danger (talk) 12:39, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
I'm not sure if it is going anywhere, but it may be worth trying to make a proposal. I come from a world where everyone uses surname first for Japanese names, so my ideal would be to have all names like that on Wikipedia. But that would likely run into WP:COMMONNAME, so a modified proposal would be to make surname first the default option, with surname last only if supported by WP:COMMONNAME. One could argue that the majority of Japanese names have not even been featured in English language materials enough to make an argument for surname last being more common. It was really interesting the evidence you found for Miyazawa Kenji--even someone that famous seems to appear more with surname first. Someone could, however, argue that such a result is only due to the fact that is an analysis of books, not journalism or the internet (compare [5] with [6]). As I said in the Japan talk page discussion, that is one reason COMMONNAME can be a pain: how do you judge what's common and how do you evaluate different media? Personally, I think that's the reason we should not allow exceptions under COMMONNAME except in rare cases. But I doubt few would agree with that. It would be interesting, though, to test the waters and see what the reaction would be to the proposal: "Surname first, with exceptions only when supported by WP:COMMONNAME." I do feel, however, that getting rid of the 1868 divide would probably be more likely to pass. Presuming that people still feel the modern/premodern divide should stay, redefining that would be an option. Michitaro (talk) 21:02, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
Check out this RM, which just opened. It's is the opposite end of the spectrum as Kenji, but I suppose we have to start somewhere. The web hit numbers reflect how much computing time Google allocates for the search. I don't know why they why they would allocate more time for one variant than for the other, but it doesn't tell you anything about which one is more common. All the same, the academic books have to be balanced against the media stories, which do it surname last. (Compare here and here.) WP:WIAN is my model of how a style guideline should be written. It lists various authoritative sources for editors to consult and doesn't issue arbitrary edicts. Fernando Danger (talk) 19:16, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
I don't have a supervote. I just told you how to get things changed. If a consensus is reached to change MOSJA, I'm fine with that. My main point in the discussion was that you were trying to do something the MOSJA said not to do. You know how to initiate a change discussion, so please do it if you would like. I prefer the Surname Givenname order myself, but (as Michitaro pointed out), that doesn't always work. As for the 1868 divide, at the time it was discussed, I seem to remember that (in addition to many academic sources using it), it was a simple way to make the MOSJA simple for that. That's when Japan moved from more traditional into the modern world, and everyone was in agreement that would be the easiest place to make the division for simplicity's sake. Regardless of any of that, again, the decisions are made by consensus, so start up a discussion and let's see what consensus is now. Be sure to publicize it well so we can get a lot of participation. ···日本穣? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 19:35, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
Fernando: As I noted on the RM for Asako Toki, there is a precedent with Otomo Yoshihide, where I used COMMONNAME (and an apparent request from Otomo himself) to argue for a move. I would hate to have to make this argument all the time. Nihonjoe: It's good to hear of your personal preference and I agree that everything should be decided by consensus. Perhaps it is time for a discussion. Michitaro (talk) 01:07, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for making up the proposal (and sorry for the delay in responding). It looks quite good. The main question is whether to add another option that keeps the modern/premodern divide, but changes the definition of that divide:
Change the language "For a modern figure—a person born after the beginning of the Meiji period" to "For a modern figure—a person primarily active after the beginning of the Meiji period"
That might be too many options for proposal, though if the point is in part just to get a sense of where consensus is going, it may be good to lay all the options on the table. Michitaro (talk) 22:24, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
Adding another option would not necessarily create too many, but this option might strike the reader as going in a different direction than the other ones on the list. For a while, I considered making the cutoff date a round number, like 1900 or 1950. That would clarify that the exact date is arbitrary. But from recent comments, my sense is that most editors do not support the entire cutoff date concept. Living pop culture figures are generally given family name last in the RS, although CMOS suggests their names should also be put in the Japanese order. Up to this point, the Japanese have passively accepted foreign copy editors writing their names any which way. But that may be less and less true as time goes on. One day the prime minister may announce, "Hi! My name is Abe Shinzō, and please stop calling me Shinzō Abe!" I guess can we can burn that bridge after we cross it. I suppose my point here is that no one proposal can resolve all the complications in this area. Fernando Danger (talk) 02:37, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
Hi Michitaro! I was translating some short sentences (Golf game staff roll), can you please take a quick look? I think everything is ok but if something is wrong or can be improved please let me know. Many thanks in advance!
つぎはキャディをそだてるゲームだ Lan = Tsugi wa Caddy o sodateru Game da Lan
ねこのここねこコナこねこ = Neko no koko neko Kona koneko
Spark・かんご = Spark Kango
AMとPHがだいすきな ほんだもとこ = AM to PH ga daisukina Honda Motoko
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Neo-dada organizers, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Liberal Democratic Party. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Thanks for looking at the paywalled papers and adding the information to the AfD. I would have changed my vote (from Keep per notability, but Redir for lack of info) to a pure keep if I had seen it before the AfD closed. I really appreciate that you took the time to look all this information up. Best, -- Michael Scott Cuthbert(talk)15:10, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
Hi Michitaro, I would also like to thank you for your insights in the AfD discussion. In particular, I was so impressed by your most recent reply that if I had seen it prior to the close of the AfD, I would've withdrawn my nomination for deletion. I wish that more participants in AfD discussions (myself included) would be this meticulous and thoughtful. Keep up the great work! Best Wishes, Astro4686 (talk) 07:13, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Onel5969 was:
This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage about the subject in reliable sources that are independent of the subject—see the guidelines on the notability of people and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Gajirō Satō and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
Hello! Michitaro,
I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Onel5969TT me03:40, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
