Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Japan/Archive/December 2015

FYI Talk:Southern Alps In ictu oculi (talk) 11:43, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

• Sukiyabashi Jiro (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

An IP editor has now twice removed from the Sukiyabashi Jiro restaurant article a short paragraph (and news photo) about President Obama's visit there in 2014 with the comment that it is just a political photo-op and not noteworthy. My view is that a visit by two heads of state (President Obama and Prime Minister Abe) to a restaurant is noteworthy, and it naturally garnered a fair amount of press coverage at the time. The same will also apply to the Jiro Ono (chef) article (about the chef), as that also includes a similar mention of him serving Obama. I'd be interested to hear what other editors here think. Thanks. --DAJF (talk) 06:58, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

My initial thoughts are that if the restaurant was not already notable in its own right, then it would be considered promotional and trying to inherit Obama's notability. However, that is not the case, as the restaurant is already independently notable. Because "notability guidelines do not apply to content within an article", I think we can include the information if it is neutral, verifiable and given due weight. The frist two are no problem, but I can see why the IP might consider it trivial and undue. But on balance, I believe it is a significant event worth including. AtHomeIn神戸 (talk) 07:34, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

I agree. It's certainly more significant in the history of the restaurant than the fire that gets a para! Nick-D (talk) 07:59, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

I also agree. It's worth mentioning, but no more than a sentence. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 19:01, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

I also agree. Actually, Shinzo Abe is not the head of state (the Emperor is), but this does not reduce the significance of the event.--Dwy (talk) 08:37, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

Looking for a translation of アラクうない, 　アラク小屋, and　かみごと from [1]. Thanks. bamse (talk) 10:06, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

• アラク(noun)　あらた(noun, 畬[2]) 焼き畑[3] (relation is unknown) swidden , burnt field See also[4].
• うない(noun)　うなう(verb, 耕う[5]) ploughing
• かみごと(神事[6]) ritual

See detailed explanations of 甲州西山の焼畑農耕用具[7] (This is a copy of the Agency for Cultural Affairs' database.[8])

• "春先に火入れをするハルヤキ[春焼]では...第一年目（アラク）" (The first year of swidden is called アラク.)
• "アラクうない（耕起）"
• "アラク小屋（山の家。ハルヤキをする農耕地のそばに建てる）"
• "かみごと（信仰儀礼）"

―― Phoenix7777 (talk) 09:44, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

Thanks a lot. Just out of curiosity, why do they use katakana here? bamse (talk) 11:13, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

I think a word is written in katakana if it has been traditionally used orally (ja:民族語彙), so it is difficult to find a corresponding kanji like ja:マタギ, ja:アイヌ, and so on.―― Phoenix7777 (talk) 11:59, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

Hey, I just posted this, but I suspect response will be either confused or non-existent on a random talk page related to a linguistics article, so getting input from some Japanese-speaking editors would probably be more productive. I don't want to post the same thing in two places, so anyone interested can check out the page in question. Cheers! Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 06:26, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

Could anyone review Draft:Rika Shiiki? Much appreciated, FoCuS contribs; talk to me! 18:37, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

Could some others look at a new article, Jimon Ogasawara? I don't think there is any question about the existence of this priest, although I wonder if the article does pass notability criteria (there is no JA wiki article, by the way). But I also worry about its tone and stance. It is almost unrelentingly critical until the last paragraph, and most of the sources are from Soka Gakkai related publications (particularly the Daisaku Ikeda books), the organization that has apparently long had a beef against Ogasawara. The user who started the article has not made many edits, but most are on Soka Gakkai related pages. There are writings like this on the net which argue that much of the content of the complaint against Ogasawara was made up by Soka Gakkai (that, of course, is not an RS, but it makes one think this is an article one has to be careful of). I do think there is reliable evidence that Ogasawara was not a wonderful person, especially because of his stance supporting the war (see [9]), but I just feel there is something that stinks about this article. Any thoughts or ideas about what to do with this? Does anyone have any expertise on this matter? Michitaro (talk) 16:10, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

Hi. I'm in the process of running a bot to merge {{Infobox Japan station}} into {{Infobox station}}, following a (frankly tiring) series of discussions (1, 2, 3). I've run into a disagreement about whether to include "Station"/"駅" in the infobox headers post merge. Compare before, after without, and after with.

The main argument for removing "Station" was for consistency. To quote:

I removed "駅" and "Station" because typically in {{Infobox station}} and the other remaining railway station infoboxes, with the exception of Singapore only the station name (e.g. "Great Victoria Street" (Belfast), "Charles de Gaulle – Étoile" (Paris), "Corrientes" (Buenos Aires), "München Ost" (Munich), "Pacific Central" (Vancouver), "Central" (Sydney), "Shanghai Hongqiao" (Shanghai), "34th Street – Hudson Yards" (New York), "King's Cross" (London), "Seoul" (Seoul)) is shown in the header. I personally think it should be removed for consistency, but I don't particularly mind if it's kept.
— User:Jc86035 14:22, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

I had done about 5% of the merge using this reasoning before this conversation. Can I get a clear answer either way? What do we prefer?

Thanks for your time, and looking forward to finally settling this. — Earwig ^talk 07:04, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

I am not involved in station articles, but I think it is by far preferable (always) to include the "Station" on the end of Japanese station names. A huge proportion of station names are simply the name of a place followed by 駅 ("Sta." as it's written in Japanese); e.g. Shinjuku Station, Tokyo Station, Ikebukuro Station, Shinagawa Station, to name but four in Tokyo, cf. Victoria, Paddington, King's Cross, and Euston to name but four in London. And there are some crazy ones, like Sanoshi Station, which is written 佐野市駅 "Sano-city-station", but is not the central station in 佐野市 ("Sano-city"), which is called 佐野駅 ("Sano-station"). It just seems to me that replicating the Japanese name as precisely as possible is always going to minimise the number of unforeseen problems. Imaginatorium (talk) 07:56, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

I think this is a good enough reason to preserve the Station endings. Thanks for your input. — Earwig ^talk 06:34, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

I agree: preserve the current naming of the stations. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 17:45, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

The replacement is done. Let me know if you see any problems. — Earwig ^talk 03:29, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

No problem, but a small comment... I ended up looking at Shanghai Railway Station, and it's interesting that it looks as though the situation for China is quite different: the "official"? name is given as one thing, while there is something different written on the station itself. (talk page comment) Japan does seem to have more rigid/consistent naming conventions, which supports treating it differently from China, for example. Imaginatorium (talk) 08:04, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

Iwane Matsui, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for a community good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article.

• Can anyone help with this? ミーラー強斗武 (StG88ぬ会話) 13:02, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

This Korean article ([10]) suggests that there is a Japanese term hanakosan for unamrried women. All we have is an entry for hanako-san about a ghost. I did a bit of digging, and it seems that this term may be related to Hanako (magazine), which as noted in this book Yoko Tokuhiro (25 September 2009). Marriage in Contemporary Japan. Routledge. pp. 44–. ISBN 978-1-135-23032-6. has a reader group referred to as "hanako generation" (see also Takeda Hiroko (23 September 2004). The Political Economy of Reproduction in Japan. Routledge. pp. 161–. ISBN 978-1-134-35543-3.). This term is also mentioned in [11], an academic article, which refers to "Hanako-zoku (the Hanakos)". And Satomi Ishikawa (2007). Seeking the Self: Individualism and Popular Culture in Japan. Peter Lang. pp. 131–. ISBN 978-3-03910-874-9. uses the term "Ms Hanako". It seems like a notable concept, but frankly, English materials are sparse, and I can't even figure out a proper name for the stub (or redirect to a section in Hanako (magazine) which should be expanded... but the topic is probably notable stand alone). Any thoughts? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 17:09, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

The article cited says it was written by two English teachers in Korea. I do not think that a passing mention in such an article is a good place to start for information about the Japanese language. "Hanako" is a very common stereotypical name, like "Jane", so could be used to mean practically anything. Imaginatorium (talk) 14:16, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

As far as I understand it, the term "Hanako-zoku" was coined after the readership of Hanako (magazine), and refers to a new breed of young Japanese women in the late 1980s and early 1990s. They were typically a single working woman in their late 20s, living with their parents.

Thanks to the then booming "bubble" economy, they had a decent income. Since their basic living expenses were covered by their parents, they freely spent their own income on expensive brand-name products, traveling abroad, and any other things they chose to enjoy their life. Their economic power as well as their fashionable lifestyle was so conspicuous, that in 1989, the term "Hanako" was given the grand prize for new words/vogue words of the year (silver prize).

However, "Hanako-zoku" was very much a product of the booming economy at the time. During the Lost Decade after the "bubble" bursted, they gradually ceased to exist or to be seen, at least in the same way as they were in their high times (hence the "generation").

I am not sure if we have sufficient English sources to write an article wth, but I believe that the Korean article cited by Piotrus is somewhat mistaken.--Dwy (talk) 07:16, 26 December 2015 (UTC)

I noticed there's a Amateru redirect; I was wondering if a Japanese topic would not be more appropriate (or a disambiguation page) [ such as List of Japanese deities or Amaterasu ] -- 70.51.44.60 (talk) 09:52, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

It seems like an appropriate redirect to me, since that is the name given to the planet. A hatnote pointing to Amaterasu at the top of that page might help, although there is a link later on in the article. AtHomeIn神戸 (talk) 01:02, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

Well Mercury (planet) is not at Mercury; so it doesn't necessarily mean it should redirect to the planet article. Is the planet the primary topic, or some Japanese topic article like Amaterasu? -- 70.51.44.60 (talk) 08:11, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

It seems to me that Amateru is in the end the name of the goddess, so a silent redirect to "Epsilon Tauri b", on the face of it totally irrelevant, is very unfriendly. Can't there be a simply dab page for Amateru? Imaginatorium (talk) 09:04, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

I would say that the primary topic for "Amateru" should be the planet, as "Amateru" is an alternative name for Epsilon Tauri b, but it is not an alternative name for Amaterasu - it is only part of the derivation. So the Amateru page should contain a link to Amaterasu, but it shouldn't be a DAB page. Accordingly, I've added a {{redirect}} hatnote to Epsilon Tauri b for people who might have been looking for the goddess. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 20:01, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

Can someone please translate this page? Google Translate is no help. It is being used to support the sentence, "[Bokosuka Wars is] a game regarded as the progenitor of the strategy/simulation RPG genre". SharkD  Talk  21:30, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

The text to the right of the screenshot states:

シミュレーションRPGの先駆け的作品が登場! (Pioneering simulation RPG work appears!)
部隊を率いて城を取りもどせ! (Leading the force to redeem the castle!)

Hope that helps. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 22:09, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

Okay, it seems the article and citation are not quite saying the same thing. Thanks! SharkD  Talk  00:23, 29 December 2015 (UTC)

@SharkD: Maybe change it to be "[Bokosuka Wars is] a game regarded as a pioneer of the simulation RPG genre". ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 00:44, 29 December 2015 (UTC)