Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Japan/Archive/October 2006

Talk & archives for WP Japan
Project talk 2006 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 2007 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 2008 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 2009 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 2010 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 2011 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 2012 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 2013 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 2014 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 2015 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 2016 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 2017 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 2018 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 2019 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 2020 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 2021 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 2022 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 2023 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Task force talk/archives ↔ Baseball (1) Bibliography (1) ↔ Cinema (1) ↔ CJKV (1) ↔ Districts and municipalities (1) Gaijin tarento (1) ↔ Military history (1, 2, 3) Music (1) Mythology (1, 2, 3, 4) Owarai (1) Politics (1) Prefectures (1) Royalty & nobility (1) Science & technology (1) Shinto (1) ↔ Tokyo (1) ↔ Transwiki ↔ = joint task force
Old notice board All of 2004 Jan–Mar 2005 Apr–Jun 2005 Jul–Oct 2005 Nov–Dec 2005 Jan–Feb 2006 Feb–May 2006 Jun–Dec 2006 Jan–Jun 2007 Jun 2007 – Sep 2008
Related talk/archives Anime and manga (index) Hello! Project (1) Pokémon (index, PAC (1, 2), PAC 2) Sumo (1, 2, 3) Square Enix (index) Tokusatsu (index) Trains (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7)
Search the archives:
V·T·E

Image woes

Does anyone else think it's a little bit embarrasing that for the image today, an incorrectly titled article pertaining to Japanese content, namely moé anthropomorphization (see this dialog for details on how this spelling convention was initially forced upon Wikipedia), was used, an article that states no sources other than the equivalent Japanese and Chinese articles, which, !shock! also provide no sources.

While I have no problems with manga fans relating to, and boasting the character Wiki-tan with everything related to WikiProject Anime/Manga, the emblem on her chest detailing the rediculous "クィ" spelling mistake on the Wikipedia logo is not very Wikipedian, and there are scores of us who have worked hard to try to get that misunderstanding removed. This material is not appropriate for representing Wikipedia.

As far as I can tell, this is the first image that holds direct links to the underworkings of wiki itself, and is not initially related to article content. While it is inevitable that such an image should emerge, I am deeply worried about the state of Japanese-themed material on Wikipedia, and indeed the ambitions of a certain number of editors who have the responsibility to correctly portray that information.  freshofftheufoΓΛĿЌ  03:12, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

It's more about the image than the article that the image applies to. This is one reason I tried to promote the image as an example of other topics under the discussion to make it a featured image. -- Ned Scott 03:16, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

I understand why the article was linked, but that doesn't imply that it should have been allowed on the front page. We have many images created by commons users to illustrate certain concepts explained in Wikipedia articles, and for all I know moe anthropomorphization actually does deserve to exist (i.e. there is a source out there somewhere), but since the article right now gives no sourced information (and isn't even in the correct article space), it should be deleted, and the image serves no illustrative purpose.  freshofftheufoΓΛĿЌ  03:25, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

The image would still maintain illustrative purpose as an example on Anime, Maid (anime/manga terminology), and likely others that the image isn't currently on (she's also on Fan service but using a different image). I understand you are upset about the article that the image links to, but the point of the featured picture is more about the picture than those links. In other words, her image description included links to articles that are not in the best of shape, but those articles are not on display on the front page. This is no different than a featured article having it's text on the main page, and that text containing a link to an article that wasn't in the best shape. -- Ned Scott 03:53, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

And the fact that it mocks Nohat's logo, and lack of understanding of Japanese? That doesn't matter? I'm simply trying to point out that the image is not fit for the front page, nor the content that it links to. Rather than voice my complaint where these quality judgements are currently being made, I figured I'd appeal to the community supporting Japan on Wikipedia, hoping that they would have the scope to realize what a horrible picture this is making of Japan.  freshofftheufoΓΛĿЌ  05:37, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

What the hell are you talking about? -- Ned Scott 06:00, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Could you possibly be a little more specific about what exactly you don't understand? Maybe you'd like to ask Kasuga what his intentions were.  freshofftheufoΓΛĿЌ  06:32, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Maybe you'd like to not assume bad faith on what his intentions were. If I understand correctly, the logo contains a somewhat inaccurate pronunciation of "wi" for the Japanese puzzle piece. I don't know what pronunciation クィ makes, but I assume from your over-reaction that it's "poking fun" at this. What's the big deal? You seem to be assuming major bad faith here, and are coming to some completely absurd conclusions. A completely minor and harmless element of the image should not make one blind to the reasons that is has been deemed a Featured picture. Maybe you just hate anime and how it gives people the wrong impression of Japan? I don't know what your deal is, but it's very obvious that no harm was intended in the image and that it still is an excellent free use image that we have to use on Wikipedia. -- Ned Scott 06:49, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

No doubt it was meant in jest, that isn't the problem. Many ja.WP users voiced concern over the inaccuracy of the logo (I was one, but not nearly the first), but nohat wouldn't/wasn't able to correct it because he considered the logo finished. Kasuga highlights this (as well as a few other strange character choices, which is fine as it is. Featured images are supposed to represent the best quality images that Wikipedia has to offer, i.e. the images that most effectively portray Wikipedia as a promising medium. Wiki-tan takes one of Wikipedia's biggest problems (language bias) and makes it into a joke, which is all good and fine if you're trying to make a point, though since 99% of Wikipedians can't speak Japanese, no point is made and all that is left is people like me who can't believe this kind of stuff is filtered through, and people like you who deny anything is wrong at all. I never really wanted to discuss this, I just couldn't stand the though of this day coming to an end without a proper complaint being filed.  freshofftheufoΓΛĿЌ  07:43, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

I'm not really understanding what is so bad about this image. From the looks of it, it says "ワィ", not "クィ," which is of course an error as it should say "ウィ." The error is unfortunate, as all anyone needed to do was look at the Japanese Wikipedia to see the proper katakana. But the difference between "ワィ" and "ウィ" isn't massive, and I can see how the mistake could have been made. The image should be fixed to the correct kana, but other than that...what is wrong with it? MightyAtom 09:55, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

We weren't actually talking about the logo. We were talking about the Wiki-tan character.  freshofftheufoΓΛĿЌ  12:29, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Then I am doubly-confused. I confess I don't know much about otaku culture, but from reading that article the wiki-tan character seems to be appropriate, and in the spirit of the community. I do agree that Moé shouldn't have that silly "é" on it though...what's up with that? Doing some internet searches for "Moe" shows that wikipedia is pretty much the only place to use the "Moé" spelling. That should be fixed and fast. MightyAtom 23:30, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

I think it's mostly because you're supposed to pronounce the "e" rather than say the mord "mow". I'm fine with it either way since I know how it's pronounced. (^_-) ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 23:48, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Shouldn't that just be a pronounciation note then? After all, we don't call the geisha article "Gay-Sha" even though it is often mis-pronounced. MightyAtom 23:52, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Agree with moving it to comply with WP:MOS-JA. Ehime Prefecture and Shimane Prefecture are no less difficult to pronounce. - Neier 01:02, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

As I specified above, sysop Ashibaka took it upon himself to disobey what was written in the MoS and move a large number of articles to what he admitted to was simply his opinion of what was better. He refused to be reasonable and to either comply with the rules, or to propose a change of the MoS. I wish you hadn't said that Nihonjoe, because we're talking about consistancy, standardization, and keeping the peace here, and we shouldn't be judging things based on our personal opinions. If I was writing articles only for myself, I wouldn't write Daisuke, I'd write dais'ké, or better yet ignore romanization entirely and just write 大輔. That doesn't affect my judgement when I see that what Ashibaka does is not helping Wikipedia.  freshofftheufoΓΛĿЌ  01:45, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Don't go throwing any blame at me, Freshgavin, as I was just expressing an opinion on why it was titled like that. And who cares if Ashibaka is a sysop? If he went against the MOS, then he's in the wrong and you should go move the articles back and fix them. Admins have to follow the guidelines and policies, too. If you have a problem with what Ashibaka is doing, then file a complaint. Just stewing on it isn't going to help things any. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 08:12, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Well, that shouldn't have been done. sake isn't saké. Ehime isn't Ehimé. Moe shouldn't be Moé.MightyAtom 02:40, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Not sure what all that is about, but I moved moé anthropomorphism to moe anthropomorphism. -- Ned Scott 05:05, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Great! ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 08:12, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

OK. I went through and chaned all the "Moé"s to Moe, but only on that article MightyAtom 06:10, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. (^_^) ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 08:12, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Moé has now been moved back to Moe (slang). -- Ned Scott 07:19, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Article assessment

The Article assesment section of the Portal page does not make it clear who should or should not determine the quality and importance parameter for Japan-related articles. Is it ok for anyone to do this or just WikiProject Japan admins? Shouldn't the Portal page be updated to include this info? Cheers, Bobo12345 06:46, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Are you talking about Portal:Japan? Or a different page? ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 08:26, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, got my P's mixed up! I'm talking about the Wikipedia:WikiProject Japan page, not the Portal. Bobo12345 08:57, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I clarified it. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 08:34, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Song and album names

I believe it is time to define how to handle japanese song names. At least two users are changing song names from proper case to uppercase just because the typography is in uppercase. Thus, articles are being reverted to proper case, uppercased, proper case, uppercase, etc, which is pretty awful because that makes them unstable. See Carols (song) for an example.

I am sure if the WikiProject Album decides that it should not follow the typography, these users will state that japanese albums are special, thus I am bringing this directly here. Any idea? -- ReyBrujo 04:55, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

You may want to review An old discussion on the Japan MoS page first. There is a consensus there that nothing is special about the Japanese songs. Neier 05:10, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

I agree. Japanese songs should be listed no differently than any other song, and should use standard capitalization rules. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 16:24, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Renaming survey

Please come participate on Hideyoshi's invasions of Korea, where a survey is being conducted on moving the article to Japanese invasions of Korea (1592-1598). It would be very good to get some opinions from people not normally involved in the article. Thanks! ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 16:23, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Pronunciation

The article Miyako-jima has pronunciation in IPA. It appears incorrect, but unfortunately, I don't know IPA. Can someone who knows IPA check it? Fg2 00:41, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

The IPA seems to be for non-nihongo (Miyako and Okinawa dialects), so it is hard to judge if it is correct or not. Neier 04:27, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

What's the policy on including IPA in articles? I noticed it the other day on the Shinzo Abe article and, not being familiar with linguistics, I thought it was a typo! Isn't it a bit ugly for those who can't read it? Bobo12345 00:57, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Manual of Style (pronunciation) says "Pronunciation in Wikipedia is indicated using the International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA)." It further says "Pronunciation transcriptions based on traditional English spelling are deprecated. Forms such as pro-NUN-see-AY-shun may be misinterpreted by people whose first language isn't English. They can however be used in addition to the IPA version so that it's easy for people who don't know the IPA to understand them."

In my opinion, the IPA requirement together with the OGG sound file requirement make Wikipedia close to useless for pronunciation.

I also think the Abe pronunciations are incorrect due to the inclusion of accent (stress) marks. It seems to be the usual "Japanese is not English. Spanish is not English. Therefore Japanese is Spanish." reasoning, placing stress on the penultimate syllable.

But again, I don't know IPA so I don't have a basis for changing it.

For laughs, see the pronunciation of Ryoute before it gets deleted. Fg2 01:15, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Good one (Ryoute).

I brought up IPA a long time ago, as an alternative to the romaji currently employed in the nihongo template (especially to keep English words, co-opted to Japanese names, from being listed in romaji like sutajiamu.) I didn't (or don't) know enough about IPA to make a strong argument for its use, but, it is the standard of WP and seeing romaji as a pronunciation when someone may be expecting IPA could be confusing. Neier 04:25, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

I fully support IPA, though I don't see a reason not to include (our perverted version of) Hepburn in 99% of the cases. If there is a dispute on how it is pronounced because of dialect, the most local and relevant dialect should be used, not unlike our policy with British and American English. Since the pronunciation of Japanese before the classical period is often disputed, in general modern pronunciations should be used.  freshofftheufoΓΛĿЌ  06:34, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

I don't see IPA and Hepburn as competing, but as complementary. IPA conveys pronunciation. Hepburn does that too (like IPA, only to those who know it), but its primary function is to provide a system for deciding which letters to substitute for kana. Please do not misunderstand me -- I am not trying to start a debate about whether to get rid of one or the other! The present system works well. Fg2 06:42, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

I hope I wasn't misleading. I support complementary use, and I too have not come across any problems with the current system.  freshofftheufoΓΛĿЌ  09:32, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Local elections, agian

The list of local elections have now grown quite large, we have now info or about 20. How about adding as a project on the project frontpage under the "Projects". I think I have run out of sources on where to find english material, so people with knowledge of japanese would be very welcome to help out. --Jonte-- 12:04, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Do you have a link? ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 09:08, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Hmm...here, right? Category:Elections in Japan ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 09:14, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Yes, there is is. As you can see I've added quite a few. However I found this wonderful webpage, Japan Elections so I guess I've not run out of sources yet. --Jonte-- 11:30, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:Shinzo Abe with KSG Students.jpg

I think a cropped version of Image:Shinzo Abe with KSG Students.jpg might possibly be a better photo of Shinzo Abe in the infobox of his article than the one we have now. But seeing the uploader's (lack of) contributions, I'd like someone to confirm:

1. Whether this photo of Abe was taken in March 2006 (as the image metadata suggests).
2. More importantly, whether this photo is indeed free use. (Any copies of this photo elsewhere?)

Thanks! Awyong Jeffrey Mordecai Salleh 17:08, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

(P.S. There's no info on the image itself on its description page, which doesn't help things either. The only info on the image comes from its caption in Shinzo Abe which says this was taken when Abe was at Harvard. Awyong Jeffrey Mordecai Salleh 17:14, 8 October 2006 (UTC))

Hmm...it's listed as public domain and Creative Commons, which doesn't make any sense. Perhaps you should post a question about it on the creator's talk page? ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 18:32, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Kabuki names

I've begun a conversation on WP:MOS-JA asking for support in naming all Kabuki actors (pre- and post-Meiji) in a consistent fashion. Though this would ignore the overall guidelines for 和式/洋式 naming, I think that correctness and consistency is more important in this situation. Please let me know what you think over at WP:MOS. Thank you. LordAmeth 22:10, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Project tagging milestone

We've reached a milestone of sorts: over 5000 articles have been tagged as part of the project. You can see the numbers on the main project page. Thanks to everyone who has helped tag articles, and thanks to everyone who continues to tag articles. (^_^) ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 08:04, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Shibumi

The link Shibumi currently redirects to some author guy (Trevanian). Is this concept important enough to merit an article and hijack the redirect? --Gwern (contribs) 00:30, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

There is an article shibui, so I have redirected it there. I'll pipe it with a disambiguation link.  freshofftheufoΓΛĿЌ  00:43, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! I didn't know it could be called shibui - I ran into it in the context of an Onion article. --Gwern (contribs) 02:38, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

What qualifies as Japan-related?

Some one added the WikiProject tag to Kimiko Tohomiko, but I'm not sure this qualifies as Japan-related. Although the character is Japanese she comes from an American cartoon. Is that the normal procedure? Jay32183 21:09, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

In this particular case, I'd wager not. Feel free to remove it. But overall I'd say it's pretty flexible. Despite being an American cartoon, Xiaolin Showdown could I think qualify as being China-related. So would Jackie Chan Adventures, I'd say. (hm... is Splinter-sensei "Japan-related"?...) LordAmeth 22:08, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

I could see the case for including the character. I have never seen the show, but according the the article she speaks Japanese on the show, and her ethnicity is a major part of her character. In any case, I don't see the harm in having the article tagged.MightyAtom 23:45, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

I didn't have a problem with either, I just didn't want to burden a project with undue work. Anyone in this project should feel welcome to edit the page, of course. Jay32183 23:55, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Article needs help

The Japanese people article is in a pretty poor state. Although I've removed the section on nonverbal language it has factual inaccuracies, problems with breadth, and tone trouble. I've nominated it for consideration at Wikipedia:Article Creation and Improvement Drive. Please stop by the article and help it get to a place where it's safe to link to (it's already linked to from over 1500 pages). Dekimasu 10:32, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Project directory

Hello. The WikiProject Council has recently updated the Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory. This new directory includes a variety of categories and subcategories which will, with luck, potentially draw new members to the projects who are interested in those specific subjects. Please review the directory and make any changes to the entries for your project that you see fit. There is also a directory of portals, at User:B2T2/Portal, listing all the existing portals. Feel free to add any of them to the portals or comments section of your entries in the directory. The three columns regarding assessment, peer review, and collaboration are included in the directory for both the use of the projects themselves and for that of others. Having such departments will allow a project to more quickly and easily identify its most important articles and its articles in greatest need of improvement. If you have not already done so, please consider whether your project would benefit from having departments which deal in these matters. It is my hope that all the changes to the directory can be finished by the first of next month. Please feel free to make any changes you see fit to the entries for your project before then. If you should have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you. B2T2 15:19, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Japanese Prints

My interest is in Western prints (also very badly covered), but in looking at the whole area I have been suprised to see there is no overview (that I can find) of the Japanese print-making tradition. There are articles on individual artists eg Hokusai & Ukoie? floating world art. Otherwise there is a short article on woodblock printing that hardly mentions Japan, an article on prints and printmaking that deals almost exclusively with contemporary American printshop practice, ditto for woodcut. nothing much in Japanese art.

I know next to nothing about the subject myself, but would like to link to such an article from the ones I am doing on western art - Old master print etc. If there is anything already, or if it gets written, I'd be grateful if someone could let me know. Johnbod 13:18, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

I am gradually working on expanding the rather pitiful coverage of individual artists, and a lot of the terminology of the culture surrounding them. However, I was rather intimidated by the idea of doing an overall article on "Japanese prints" or on the process of making woodblocks... one of these days I might get around to it and give it a try. But if you are interested in the individual artists, please feel free to keep an eye on my work... LordAmeth 18:27, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Unusual request: some Japanese language outreach please?

I'm an administrator who's blocked an anonymous IP address twice for what I have to treat as vandalism, yet I suspect this may be someone whose English language skills are very limited. The IP address is 222.225.117.108. The only edits they've made are to formula 1 racing finish tables and they haven't responded to questions. The IP address originates in Japan so maybe a bilingual Wikipedian could leave a note on this editor's talk page? Please help if you can. Thanks, Durova 19:57, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

19th century photographers in Japan

I don't know anything to speak of regarding this WikiProject, but I'm sure that if Pierre Rossier is a worthy addition to the project, then Felice Beato, Kusakabe Kimbei and other 19th photographers in Japan ought to be as well. so I'm adding the WikiProject-Japan tag to each. Please let me know if I've erred. Thanks. Pinkville 00:20, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

As long as a firm link to Japan can be established, I think it's fine to include them in the project. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 00:32, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

That's good. There's no doubt in these cases that there's a firm link to Japan, but I'm not sure I'm going about this the right way. Do I simply have to add the WPJ tag to each article talk page, or is there some list I need to add to...? Pinkville 01:02, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

No list! Just go ahead and add the tag, and the rest is automatic! MightyAtom 01:11, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Yes, automagical. (^_^) ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 01:13, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Wow, that really is automagical. Frabjous! Pinkville 01:51, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Niseko

Was wondering if anyone has the time and inclination to edit the Niseko page and patrol recent changes? The page has become a bit of a travel brochure and seems so I'm trying to wikify it as well and also steer well intentioned editors to put more travel related information in wikitravel. Cheers --Saganaki- 04:46, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Toilets in Japan

Toilets in Japan is up for a featured article review. Detailed concerns may be found here. Please leave your comments and help us address and maintain this article's featured quality. Sandy (Talk) 16:52, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

I've done a little bit of citation work on this article. Others are welcome to join in. There are quite a few articles which could be used for reference on the talk page, in addition to the articles already cited in the article. If everyone helps out a little bit, we can get this article whipped back into shape in no time. (^_^) ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 07:53, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Five Charter Oath

Is this a reasonable title for the article? I'm not well versed in the relevant history, but I've only ever heard "Charter Oath" or "Oath in Five Articles" or some such. "Five Charter Oath" just doesn't make sense to me in either English or Japanese. Unless there are objections, I'd like to move it to Charter Oath or Oath in Five Articles.--Monocrat 05:06, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Britannica has it as "Charter Oath." The Japanese title is similar to "Five Charter Oath," but honestly that isn't very good as a direct translation of the title either, so I don't see any real reason to keep it where it is. ...Actually, as I look at this more, I'm surprised that there's no real discussion of the document at Meiji Restoration, where it came from in the first place. At the least, the Meiji Restoration article isn't complete without a discussion of the Charter Oath. At most, "Five Charter Oath" could be merged back into it. Dekimasu 05:39, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

I agree that discussion of the Restoration is not complete without discussion of the Charter Oath (it is discussed in Meiji period, however). Nevertheless, I think the Oath deserves its own article: there's material to discuss in its formation and initial application, and Jansen (in Making of Modern Japan) discusses how it serves as a coda for reforms in Occupied Japan. Fun stuff.--Monocrat 05:58, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

"Five Charter Oath" is a decent translation of the Japanese. Seems better than just "Charter Oath," since they seem to have stuck the "5" in there for a reason. If you wanted a nice flourish, and to include the 御, you could go with "The Honorable Oath of Five Charters" or something like that. I suppose since it is a historical document, the article should go with what ever the most common title is, then offer a note indicating the direct translation. MightyAtom 06:17, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

"Charter Oath" or "Five Charter Oath" appears to be the most common usage in most English-language sources, and "Five Charter Oath" reflects the Japanese title more accurately than simply "Charter Oath". Japanese sources regard it as a major benchmark in the development of post-Tokugawa Japan, and it deserves its separate article outside of the "Meiji Restoration" article, although certainly the "Meiji Restoration" article needs to make some reference to it.--MChew 07:51, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Maybe you can explain it to me, but I don't see "Five Charter Oath" as acceptable English. The entire oath is a charter, and there are five articles in it. There are not five charters. I would argue against the current title on those grounds alone. Am I missing something? Dekimasu 11:29, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

In the Cambridge History of Japan, it's consistently "Charter Oath"; authors sometimes describe it as having five articles. If it's desirable to mention the number, "Charter Oath of Five Articles" might be a reasonable alternative. But is that really better than simply "Charter Oath"? Fg2 12:03, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

It all depends on how important you consider the original Japanese name. It is 五 (five)箇条 (charters)の(of the)御(honorable)誓文(written oath). Removing the "5" is like translating the 10 Commandments into Japanese as "The Commandments." 5 is part of the official name of the document. If I was doing the translating, I would definitely leave it in.MightyAtom 14:20, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Interesting point about the Ten Commandments, but I think the important thing is how to translate 箇条. For what it's worth, Jim Breen's WWWJDIC, for what that's worth, generates "items; errors; articles." While "charter" might be a viable meaning of the term in some circumstances, I think it fails here.--Monocrat 14:34, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, 箇条 is probably better translated as something like article, clause or provision...charter would be 憲章. MightyAtom 22:17, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

So that means the choices are to (a) make up a title that no one uses (e.g. the suggested Oath in Five Articles), (b) use a title that preserves "five" but isn't correct English (Five Charter Oath), or (c) use a title that is different from the Japanese but is correct English (Charter Oath). I like accuracy, but I don't think we can make up our own names for widely-discussed historical documents, so I vote for (c). Dekimasu 01:44, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Keene uses "Oath in Five Articles" in his biography of Emperor Meiji, and Gordon uses "Five-Article Oath" in his Modern History of Japan, so either is valid in that regard, but the English-language preference seems to be Charter Oath. I propose we move the article to the last and place a redirect in the first, presenting both versions in bold in the actual article. I would prefer to omit all reference to "Five Charter Oath" apart from a redirect to whatever we choose.--Monocrat 02:04, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

I think that sounds like a good solution. Sometimes we are saddled with poor translations from the past, but if they have become the commonly used word, then...しょうがない。MightyAtom 03:26, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Tried and failed to make the change (Charter Oath has an edit-history. A proposal has been made on the talk page. Should have done all that first. Sorry.--Monocrat 03:51, 1 November 2006 (UTC)