Jump to content

Talk:Japan/Archive 18

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 15Archive 16Archive 17Archive 18Archive 19Archive 20Archive 21

Environmental Sustainability Index.

The ESI (Environmental Sustainability Index) doesn't really exist anymore, it stop publishing in 2005. The ESI then developed into the EPI (Environmental Performance Index) So, why are we using information from 2005? When we can easily change this and update Japan's new environmental rank. (oh wait, we can't) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Epicpikachu (talk • contribs) 21:58, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

If you can find newer numbers, feel free to add them. ···日本穣? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 22:42, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
I updated the article. User:Epicpikachu (talk · contribs) cannot edit this article because the user is not autoconfirmed yet. ―― Phoenix7777 (talk) 12:15, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

G8

Russia is also in the G8 and it says "It is also the only Asian country in the G8". Russia is, mostly, in Asia. To be changed, or is there a reason to keep? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Osakastrings (talk • contribs) 01:58, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Big Mac Index

"The Big Mac Index shows that Japanese workers get the highest salary per hour in the world" How can this quote be included in the article without a reference and also be considered a serious arguement to whether japan has the highest salary per hour in the world? Japan hardly has the highest GDP per capita at either nominal or PPP rates and it is very unlikely japan has the highest salary per hour. Recommend deletion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 120.17.19.103 (talk) 01:40, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

grammatical error - "which" should be "that" & punctuation error - move comma

Current version of line in first paragraph: "The characters which make up Japan's name mean "sun-origin", which is why Japan is sometimes..." This is an excellent example of how the word "which" is frequently misused and why the word "which" should be confined to dependent clauses only. In this sentence, it is particularly glaring because the sentence ends up with 2 uses of the word "which," WHICH :) makes for clumsy reading. It should read, "The characters THAT make up Japan's name mean "sun-origin," which is why Japan is sometimes..." NOTE ALSO: in my correction, the comma after "origin" was moved INSIDE the end-quote marks, which ( :) again - proper use of which after a comma) is proper punctuation. So, two corrections, please! Petuniawisegood (talk) 12:51, 23 May 2010 (UTC)petuniawisegood, 5/23/2010

I corrected the "which" error. However, the comma issue is one in which current practice is ambiguous. Some style guides are now indicating that the quotes should only go around the part being quoted or the actual definition, and commas and periods should go outside of those quotes unless they are part of the original part being quoted (or, in this case, the meaning of the word being defined). So, the comma remains where it is. ···日本穣? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WikiProject Japan! 17:16, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

This is Good info

the article has some mistakes but this is a great source for info. this is a good place for kids with school projects. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.19.213.129 (talk) 22:33, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

about the prime minister of Japan

There was a request from one of the Japanese user. He says that every time when the prime minister changes or has been nominated, somebody changes the Japan prime minister info on wikipedia. According to the constitution of Japan (chapter 9), even the prime minister shows an intention to resign statement and a new prime minister has been nominated, the emperor has to make an appointment for the nominated prime minister. Once this rite is done, finally the nominated prime minister gets to get his (her) job and start working. Since the rite is not done (or have not even started) i will set the prime minister to Mr. Hatoyama.--Joe Elkins (talk) 14:11, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

I've adjusted the wording to indicate he is the Prime Minister designate. That wording can be changed once the Emperor has confirmed his appointment. ···日本穣? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WikiProject Japan! 17:53, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Suicide Rate

Is the section about the high suicide rate really necessary? It is generally not advisable to report on suicide. I don't see the high suicide rates of many east European countries mentioned on their respective Wikipedia page. Let's remove the blurb about the suicide rates. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.204.8.52 (talk • contribs) 22:17, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not WP:CENSORed. Having said that, using rates instead of total figures makes more sense and comparing those instead of totals. Should be used in Europeans nations as well, where appropriate.Student7 (talk) 19:16, 14 June 2010 (UTC)


I really don't see the reason for mentioning the suicide rate, it seems to be singling out Japan especially if this is a big enough problem as it is. It wouldn't be right to give suicidal people the idea that killing yourself can be a solution to life's problems. I hope the section can be removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Enopy (talk • contribs) 15:31, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Not only is it sourced, but it's notable enough to have its own article. I see no reason to remove it (censorship issue addressed above), and a good reason to retain it. Discussing the high suicide rate in Japan is not giving people "the idea that killing yourself can be a solution to life's problems", nor is it wikipedia's place to take a stand on that issue at all. We are merely presenting the facts as they are. siafu (talk) 15:52, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Just because it is notable doesn't mean it should be mentioned otherwise you might as well include other trivia about Japan that casts the country in a better light. Seems very discriminatory to include the Japanese suicide rate on their page but not the Russian suicide rate on its page or any of the European countries with high suicide rates, you would be surprised too. Just what are you trying to prove? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Enopy (talk • contribs) 21:37, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Put in suicide rates for everyone! There should be no problem. The problem arises when nationalists and other editors with a WP:POV try to censor articles. Information exists. Facts are. We don't "pick" facts. They pick the article. It's clear that suicide rates belong here and in the articles on several other nationa as well. It is published. And to make a large nation "look bad" takes some work if it isn't true. All it takes for "Burkina Faso" is probably some determined editor. Japan is a power with a large number of editors. It is impossible to delete facts or add facts that aren't true. Student7 (talk) 18:39, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Kurils

The Kuril Island are not under Japanese administration and belonging to Russia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.254.94.139 (talk) 00:53, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Precisely. Japan only claims those islands. If Kurils are to be marked in any way, their color should red or orange to differentiate from territories undisputed and controlled by Japan. If in doubt - see more in "Kuril Islands dispute".--80.232.251.18 (talk) 06:27, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

I agree

I was looking for the same thing: Famous People...there is Emperor Akihito, Toshiro Mifune,...of course TORAKUSA YAMAHA...I can say it is a shame you did not add something like this in your article :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.84.21.66 (talk) 09:00, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Third Largest Economy

Every major news paper from the Seattle times to the New York times has declared China the 2nd Largest economy because of the 1st and 2nd quarter results. It would take a rise of 10 percent or more for Japan to overtake China in 2 quarters for China not to be the 2nd largest economy in both Nominal and Purchasing Power. One of the front page articles on Yahoo declared China the 2nd Largest economy in the world in Both Nominal and Purchasing power. Should be update this info, or are we going to wait until 2011 in March when the World bank compiles the info. That would seem a little late for information we already know. What do you guys think, should we update or wait. --Objectiveye (talk) 01:03, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

The figure in the infobox should not be updated till the whole list and all other country articles are. However, the sentence in the article saying its the second largest could probably be reworded slightly to mention its for last year or that its an estimate. Or it could say something like "between (would need to find the year) and 2010 Japan had the second largest economy in the world, but in 2010 it is expected that China overtook it". BritishWatcher (talk) 01:13, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
There's no need to wait for all other related articles to updated as long as the sources are reliable. I've seen news reports and heard them on the radio about Japan now being third largest behind China an the USA. With that many places reporting it, there is no valid reason to not update the article. ···日本穣? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WikiProject Japan! 05:22, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
I completely disagree with Nihonjoe (talk · contribs) while support BritishWatcher (talk · contribs). The figure in the infobox should be consistent with the article "List of countries by GDP (nominal)" which is wikilinked by the figure. This article is not a "headline news". The word "second quarter" is omitted from all the recent news headline. ―― Phoenix7777 (talk) 08:24, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
Okay, it makes sense it should be consistent with the article it's linking to, but that's not what was being discussed before. I don't think we disagree as much as you think we do. No one is saying the article is a "headline news", merely that new information has been published by a reliable source, and the information should be included. I'm fine with waiting until that list is updated, though. ···日本穣? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WikiProject Japan! 20:32, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

How the heck has this article not lost FA status?

The grammar is atrocious. Has any native speaker of English carefully proofread it? I'd point to examples, but it's just everywhere. Check out the section on Japanese-style capitalism, for example. it's every couple of sentences. This definitely makes Wikipedia look bad. And, of course, most viewers can't correct the errors. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.46.117.162 (talk) 22:59, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

I don't know about "FA", but I looked over the beginning of economy. Any discrepancies weren't that obvious to me. If they are to you, why don't you fix them. As it says in the discussion header, "...Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so." Student7 (talk) 20:59, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
Student7, IP editors cannot edit this page because it is protected. 24.46.117.162, why don't you be WP:BOLD and make an account, and help in contributing towards the article? Your assistance would be largely appreciated. -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs email 07:02, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
The article was protected against vandals. Why don't you sign up for a user name? Since I don't understand the problem, how can I be of any help? Student7 (talk) 18:51, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Koreans in Japan

As you can see from the linked Koreans in Japan article, the only way you can squish Koreans down to a half percent is to ignore the 284,840 Naturalized Japanese citizens of Korean descent. Shall we apply the same "logic" to the United States and get the result that 100% of USA citizens are ethnically American? Hcobb (talk) 20:41, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

There's no such ethnicity as "American", so your argument has no basis in reality. If you're talking about citizenship, then any person—regardless of ethnicity—who has American citizenship, is going to be considered "American". There are two definitions of Japanese and Korean we are dealing with here: the ethnicity, and the nationality. Perhaps all that needs to be done here is to reword the information to properly reflect how the various people are defining it: whether as the ethnicity or as the nationality. ···日本穣? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WikiProject Japan! 20:46, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from T0y0d4, 30 August 2010

{{editsemiprotected}} Under the "Government and politics" section of the Japan wiki page in the last two lines of the 3rd paragraph it says: "Naoto Kan has been designated by the Diet to replace Yukio Hatoyama as the Prime Minister of Japan.[45] He is awaiting confirmation from the Emperor before he will officially be Prime Minister."

This is outdated, as Naoto Kan assumed office officially on 8 June 2010.

T0y0d4 (talk) 12:08, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Done Welcome. I borrowed words from Naoto Kan's article. If you would like to express it differently, please open another edit request. Thanks for contributing, Celestra (talk) 13:59, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

"technically at war" deletion

Small point -- I deleted the stuff about Japan being "technically at war" with Russia. This is simply not accurate. Japan signed the Japanese Instrument of Surrender along with representatives from the Soviet Union. With this, the state of war between Japan and the Soviets ended. There was no longer any "technical state of war" between the parties. Moreover, they exchanged diplomats, etc. The fact that a Peace Treaty covering the Kuril dispute was not signed is a red herring because it allows people to throw out the "technical" state of war without any real meaning.--S. Rich (talk) 17:55, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

According to http://www.mofa.go.jp/region/europe/russia/territory/edition92/preface.html "The Joint Declaration by Japan and the USSR of October 19, 1956 ended the state of war and reestablished diplomatic and consular relations between the two countries." On the Russian side, statements up to 2008 mentioned no peace treaty was signed between two nations, but disputes the fact that both nations are at a state of war. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 18:46, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Declaration of war discusses the vague beginnings of war, and we can see that a declaration to start a war is not required. Indeed, we can see different wars going on, petering out, and then reviving. And we see wars that have an end in some formal sense, only to start up again in some other fashion. (India-Pakistan have had lots of wars with each other, and some of them are discussed in WP. Is their conflict one long war or a series of short wars? Were they/are they technically in a state of war (even when they exchange cricket teams)?) Considering how varied and vague a "beginning" of a war is, it is not surprising that the end of any particular war is even more varied and vague. Is a "declaration of peace" or "Peace treaty" necessary for a war or state of war to end? I think not. But we (editors & general population) are using the term "technically at war" without really knowing what it means. I pointed out that Japan surrendered to the Soviets & West with the Instrument of Surrender. Since we know that occurred, how can Japan be in a "state of war" or "at war" with the powers that defeated it and occupied it? And what about all those wars throughout history that ended without a declaration of peace or peace treaty? Are all of those wars continuing in a "technical" sense? In our case involving Japan, we do have a situation where the 1956 declaration attempted to resolve the situation. I thank you, Zscout370, for the information. And since we have a specific reference to it, we can put it in the article and describe the situation with some precision. My main beef is with all those other articles that refer to this nonsensical term "technical state of war".--S. Rich (talk) 20:55, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

The problems I was having with the Russian side is I found very few items from official government sources that spoke about the conflict. A lot of items I found on websites from *.gov.ru was commentary that was saved on government websites that praised Putin (either as President or Prime Minister). The only clear statement I have is from the Japanese; the Russians said peace is present despite the lack of a formal peace treaty http://english.ruvr.ru/2010/06/11/9599212.html User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 04:54, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Development Aid

I have new figures to submit : the OECD 2009 report. In the article, Japan was ranked 3rd biggest donator in the world, but it was false according to the source (Japan was actually 2nd whereas the article stated that it was 3rd behind the UK). But this were the figures of 2004. I've made a quick search and I find this new report. i'm so going to update the article according to this more recent source. Celyndel (talk) 16:57, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Greater Tokyo Area Population

Nowadays, The Greater Tokyo Area has a population of 40 Million People. Please update that fact. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rtyb (talk • contribs) 01:45, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

PLease provide a source for this fact. Thanks. ···日本穣? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WikiProject Japan! 04:57, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Number of Christians

Most English references I've looked at say "one percent." see for example http://www.eni.ch/articles/display.shtml?06-0499. Religion estimates in any country are vague and not terribly accurate. But the preponderance says "1%." Not sure why any text should be given to one outside figure which says less. Student7 (talk) 12:05, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Possible Neutral Point of View problem in "Environment" section

(WP:NPOV)

"...This is due to the advanced technology in hybrid systems, biofuels, use of lighter weight material and better engineering."

This phrase, taken from the "Environment" section of this article, appears to use slightly biased language due to inclusion of the word "better." (WP:WTW) All the other statement in the paragraph are factual, but "better" is not a quantifiable term, and could be considered biased, especially since no source is given to support this particular claim. I request that this article be edited to remove or reword this minor phrase. ~ Gardimuer (talk) 18:43, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Work needed

Hello everyone! This article currently appears near the top of the cleanup listing for featured articles, with six cleanup tags. Cleanup work needs to be completed on this article, or a featured article review may be in order. Please contact me on my talk page if you have any questions. Thank you! Dana boomer (talk) 17:50, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Map of Japan missing?

Where's the map of Japan in the infobox like for example the article of the US has a map of it in the infobox.70.248.117.96 (talk) 04:46, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Looks like there's something weird going on with the commons image. It should be fixed sometimes soon, hopefully. ···日本穣? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WikiProject Japan! 08:45, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Kyujitai

Using kyujitai in such a prominent place as on the data table is inappropriate. Kyujitai hasn't been in use for over 60 years, and is therefore not representative of modern Japan. It would be like writing out Bundesrepublik Deutchland in Fraktur as well as in Latin script on the Germany page. Unless anyone has an objection, I think it should be deleted. Cephalopod (talk) 03:38, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from 124.169.3.166, 26 November 2010

{{edit semi-protected}}

Change the president to the current leader

124.169.3.166 (talk) 12:10, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Already done Kan is the current leader of Japan. Qwyrxian (talk) 12:51, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Accuracy/Consistency

Someone needs to update the 2nd largest ecomony information, either correct this one or correct the People's Republic of China article on nominal and PPP. On the China article it states that they are the 2nd largest economy in nominal and PPP terms. On this article it states they are the 2nd largest economy in nominal terms. This is the same encyclopedia. Please keep the information current and accurate. We need to be consistent. You can't have 2 countries claiming to be number 2 at the same time. Please fix this article or the China article. It is confusing for people trying to research papers for Junior High School. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.214.4.21 (talk) 03:54, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

I've added the claim from China. At the moment, it's only a claim based on numbers from the Chinese government, which the article cited even claims may be suspect. ···日本穣? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WikiProject Japan! 05:20, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Edit request

{{Edit semi-protected}} Could somebody edit the infobox so that "Imperial seal" appears under the actual imperial seal (the yellow symbol) instead of under the flag? 129.100.249.56 (talk) 15:37, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

 Done Thank you for pointing that out. Oda Mari (talk) 16:42, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Economy, 3rd break: EU/USA/Japan/China largest economy etc.

Hello!

English is not my native language, that's why I bring up the issue here, hoping that somebody will be so kind of taking care oft it :)

The matter is located in the chapter "Economy" in the 3rd break. There is stated: " As of 2010[update], Japan is the third largest economy in the world,[95] after the United States and China, at around US$5 trillion in terms of nominal GDP[95] and fourth after the United States, the European Union and China in terms of purchasing power parity.[96]"

That implies, that Japan is the third largest economy in the world at current prices (before the EU, even if not explicitly stated...) and the fourth largest (behind the EU) only in terms of purchasing power parity. In fact the European Union is both in current prices and in terms of PPP the largest economy in the world (even slightly before the USA). So to clarify things we should either let the EU completely out of the phrase (which I would regret, but at least it would bring clarity) or bring it it in correctly in the whole phrase. We could use these sources:

USA, China, Japan/2010/current prices in US-Dollar:

- http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2010/02/weodata/weorept.aspx?sy=2010&ey=2010&scsm=1&ssd=1&sort=country&ds=.&br=1&pr1.x=52&pr1.y=12&c=924%2C158%2C111&s=NGDPD&grp=0&a=

European Union/2010/current prices in US-Dollar:

- http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2010/02/weodata/weorept.aspx?pr.x=73&pr.y=15&sy=2010&ey=2010&scsm=1&ssd=1&sort=country&ds=.&br=1&c=998&s=NGDPD&grp=1&a=1

The 96-Link, CIA-Factbook, for PPP

- https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2001rank.html


Well thank you for your attention :)!

Benbawan (talk) 22:44, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Energy Confusion

Is it just me, or does the following passage: "As of 2005, one half of energy in Japan is produced from petroleum, a fifth from coal, and 14 percent from natural gas.[132] Nuclear power produces a quarter of Japan's electricity.[133]" add up to 109%? 24.147.233.51 (talk) 23:13, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

I corrected the figures per source. ―― Phoenix7777 (talk) 09:15, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Edit request on "State of Japan"

Excuse me!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I am an user of WIKIPEDIA. I am a Japanese.I live in Osaka. Our country's official name is only "Japan". U.N. says only "Japan". What is "State of Japan"? NOOOOOO! (State of)is unnecessary!!!. it's for Israel and Kuwait and Qatar. I don't sign in so I can't edit. Someone, Please edit and correct the mistake!!!!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.119.44.171 (talk) 01:37, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Apologies, but what are you talking about? The phrase "State of Japan" doesn't appear anywhere in the article, nor has it in recent history. So I don't understand what your concern is. Qwyrxian (talk) 02:38, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

UN education statistics

Wikipedia articles are not sources. All claims must be independently verified, with citations in correct format to show this. John Smith's (talk) 13:39, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

I've also removed "(The same group rates Japan as 5th in science, 9th in math and 8th in reading skills)" as I don't know what it means, or where the citation for that is. John Smith's (talk) 13:42, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Earthquake

A earthquake just hit Japan with a magnitude of 8.9. o_o --64.108.88.33 (talk) 11:39, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Secondary reports upgraded to a 9.0 magnitude. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.253.109.81 (talk) 08:53, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Inappropriate Locator Map

The current map isn't very good concerning the smaller islands under Japanese ownership. It shows the location of Japan compared to Asia and little else.

I have raised issues at the image talk page of the current locator map. To reach a wider public, I repeat them here:

  • Why the dark gray shading of some East-Asian countries and Papua New Guinea?
  • Another thing I would change is the color for Japan. I would use the standard green shade that is used for almost all countries on Wikipedia in their locator maps. Tomeasy T C 15:50, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
I think the old image should be readded to make it akin to other country articles, and propose that another image in the administrative divisions be placed that makes it clear the smaller islands are part of Japan. --Kris159 (talk) 16:24, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
In order for the old image to be readded, its image page must indicate what public-domain source the map was generated from. Nikkimaria (talk) 16:31, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
I agree. The map needs to change or at least become green and get rid of the dark grey.

NyuclearTrigger (talk) 17:05, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Christianity in Japan

Why are the figures I cited unreliable for Christianity in Japan, just because some of them come from missionaries? If anything missionaries should be biased towards overestimating the importance of their religion, yet they're saying Japan is less than 1% Christian. Besides, why do you care, wikipedia quotes from the Christian Encyclopedia all the time, and its author, Barrett, also calculates religious populations for the Encyclopedia Britannica Book of the Year, standard estimates that are used in turn by the World Almanac and innumerable journalists. Why are missionaries unreliable all of the sudden? Kim-Zhang-Hong (talk) 10:01, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

I'm not so sure about your sources, but I am concerned with using the CIA World Factbook for religion estimates. They aren't actually well known for accuracy in this area, as far as I know... Qwyrxian (talk) 10:55, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Because some of them come from missionaries or because they seem too low to you? How about this source then: http://books.google.com/books?id=Fox9YR80V7sC&pg=PA150&dq=half+percent+japan+christian&hl=en&ei=I_eRTY_HNIaSswachJ3QBg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCYQ6AEwADgo#v=onepage&q=half%20percent%20japan%20christian&f=false

Is this reliable? If not then what's missing, I purposely used many sources so that I wouldn't get objections like this are all of them wrong? And if they're wrong then how many Christians do you think Japan has? Kim-Zhang-Hong (talk) 15:18, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Education - problematic statement removed

As the article is in FAR, a bit more detailed explanation: I removed the statement "Japan's education system is very competitive, especially for entrance to institutions of higher education.". The link is dead, but you can check the source article with the link http://sydney.edu.au/news/84.html?newsstoryid=1567.", because

  • the cited article paints a much more critical picture of the Japanese education system, so such an extremely short citation misrepresents it's overall stance.
  • the second half of the sentence has no source (and is partially contradicted by the first source, the source talks about "competitive" regarding results, not access). GermanJoe (talk) 19:10, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Structure

I was looking back through the history of this article, especially from the period of promotion to need for FAR. When it was promoted, the article had a much simpler structure, for better or worse. I've moved the main headers into the orders they were then, as I can't find any explanation for the change and it seems to be the standard on other FA country articles. I recombined foreign relations and military as whoever divided them didn't even change the text, and just cut the previous section in half. It's a fuzzy area, but I think if peacekeeping is discussed that covers both foreign relations and military, as indeed does the security alliance. Furthermore, considering Japan's military has been very small and restricted since 1946, I'm not sure a standalone military section is WP:DUE. One thing I haven't changed, but was also looking at, was the current infrastructure section. Its questionable whether that belongs under Economy (although of course there are overlaps). Chipmunkdavis (talk) 16:11, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Would it be possible to update the top 20 cities population section to the 2010 Japan Census?

This is actually my first time doing this so I apologize if the format of this type of change request is incorrect. I noticed that the current section "largest Cities of Japan" is a little outdated and reflects the population of the top 20 Japanese cities from the 2005 Census. The city populations have been updated in the 2010 Japan Census and the new numbers are indicated below (source located at the very bottom):

Rank City Name Prefecture Pop. 1. Tokyo Tokyo 8,949,447 2. Yokohama Kanagawa 3,689,603 3. Osaka Osaka 2,666,371 4. Nagoya Aichi 2,263,907 5. Sapporo Hokkaidō 1,914,434 6. Kōbe Hyōgo 1,544,873 7. Kyōto Kyōto 1,474,473 8. Fukuoka Fukuoka 1,463,826 9. Kawasaki Kanagawa 1,425,678 10. Saitama Saitama 1,222,910 11. Hiroshima Hiroshima 1,174,209 12. Sendai Miyagi 1,045,903 13. Kitakyūshū Fukuoka 977,288 14. Chiba Chiba 962,130 878,056 15. Sakai Osaka 842,134 16. Niigata Niigata 812,192 17. Hamamatsu Shizuoka 800,912 18. Kumamoto Kumamoto 734,294 19. Sagamihara Kanagawa 717,561 20. Shizuoka Shizuoka 716,328

The source for the 2010 Census city population data is located here: www.stat.go.jp/data/kokusei/2010/jinsoku/zuhyou/jinsoku.xls

or just go here and download the "jinsoku" xls: http://www.stat.go.jp/data/kokusei/2010/

Thanks for taking the time to look at and consider my request.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Dbcook256 (talk • contribs) 00:35, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from Dbcook256, 18 April 2011

This is actually my first time doing this so I apologize if the format of this type of change request is incorrect. I noticed that the current section "largest Cities of Japan" in the main Japan article is a little outdated and reflects the population of the top 20 Japanese cities from the 2005 Census. The city populations have been updated in the 2010 Japan Census and the new numbers are indicated below (source located at the very bottom):

Rank City Name Prefecture Pop. 1. Tokyo Tokyo 8,949,447 2. Yokohama Kanagawa 3,689,603 3. Osaka Osaka 2,666,371 4. Nagoya Aichi 2,263,907 5. Sapporo Hokkaidō 1,914,434 6. Kōbe Hyōgo 1,544,873 7. Kyōto Kyōto 1,474,473 8. Fukuoka Fukuoka 1,463,826 9. Kawasaki Kanagawa 1,425,678 10. Saitama Saitama 1,222,910 11. Hiroshima Hiroshima 1,174,209 12. Sendai Miyagi 1,045,903 13. Kitakyūshū Fukuoka 977,288 14. Chiba Chiba 962,130 878,056 15. Sakai Osaka 842,134 16. Niigata Niigata 812,192 17. Hamamatsu Shizuoka 800,912 18. Kumamoto Kumamoto 734,294 19. Sagamihara Kanagawa 717,561 20. Shizuoka Shizuoka 716,328


The source for the 2010 Census city population data is located here: www.stat.go.jp/data/kokusei/2010/jinsoku/zuhyou/jinsoku.xls

or just go here and download the "jinsoku" excel file (in Japanese): http://www.stat.go.jp/data/kokusei/2010/kekkagai.htm

Dbcook256 (talk) 20:46, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Dbcook256 (talk) 20:46, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Nothing wrong with the format, Dbcook256 Done, thanks a bunch. If you're feeling energetic, List of Japanese cities by population may be due for updating. Adrian J. Hunter(talk•contribs) 13:14, 24 April 2011 (UTC)


Nuclear Power???

I was just reading the "Infastructure" section when I found these sentences:

As of 2008, 46.4 percent of energy in Japan is produced from petroleum, 21.4 percent from coal, 16.7 percent from natural gas, 9.7 percent from nuclear power, and 2.9 percent from hydro power. Nuclear power produces 22.5 percent of Japan's electricity.[125]

As you can see, the seem to contradict each other. Does nuclear power account for 9.7 percent or 22.5 percent? Both sources seem credible. It's rather confusing... --Robo56 (talk) 12:26, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Both - "energy" and "electricity" aren't the same thing. Nikkimaria (talk) 16:21, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

[[{{{city_18}}}]]?

Resolved

What actual city does the placeholder [[{{{city_18}}}]] refer to?

Oh, sorry about that, that was due to a typo when I updated the table. Fixed now. Adrian J. Hunter(talk•contribs) 11:55, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

FAR version

The layout version of Japan is maintained based on monthly discussions during the Wikipedia:Featured article review/Japan/archive1. Italiano111 (talk) 09:49, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

That gives neither of you permission to edit-war. Please stop reverting and discuss completely. Nikkimaria (talk) 10:37, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Copied from above talkpage post Chipmunkdavis (talk) 03:45, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
I was looking back through the history of this article, especially from the period of promotion to need for FAR. When it was promoted, the article had a much simpler structure, for better or worse. I've moved the main headers into the orders they were then, as I can't find any explanation for the change and it seems to be the standard on other FA country articles. I recombined foreign relations and military as whoever divided them didn't even change the text, and just cut the previous section in half. It's a fuzzy area, but I think if peacekeeping is discussed that covers both foreign relations and military, as indeed does the security alliance. Furthermore, considering Japan's military has been very small and restricted since 1946, I'm not sure a standalone military section is WP:DUE. One thing I haven't changed, but was also looking at, was the current infrastructure section. Its questionable whether that belongs under Economy (although of course there are overlaps). Chipmunkdavis (talk) 16:11, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

The article did a 3 month FAR process in 2011. During the process many users, among them Chipmunkdavis, agreed with the concept of the article. The process ended two weeks ago. The concept of this article, as a country article among ~190 articles, is not unusual. The sections foreign relations and military should be kept separated, as per FAR. These policy fields are typically unrelated in state affairs, another reason why the sections should be kept separated. Italiano111 (talk) 09:45, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

The concept? The FAR didn't discuss this at all, it was just focused on things that prevented it from being an FA. As for the order, a minority of country articles have it, most of them because you yourself changed it (including this one). Furthermore, Foreign Relations and Military are not typically unrelated, often closely entwined (ala France in Cote D'Ivoire). Besides, as I noted above, military in this article by itself is probably undue. Chipmunkdavis (talk) 10:40, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
So... can I revert back? Chipmunkdavis (talk) 08:24, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Its all been said I assume. Foreign relations and military are typically not related. You won´t find a ministry in any democracy combinig these tasks. These are large independent policy issues in their own right. Military itself, as you might know, is a standard recommendation to be part of any country entry. Italiano111 (talk) 09:55, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

They are typically related, especially in the way that articles (such as this one) have been written. How government ministry's are structured is completely irrelevant. As for military being a "standard recommendation", no it's not, don't bullshit. Chipmunkdavis (talk) 11:45, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
So, considering wikipedia isn't built like a democratic countries government ministries, that argument won't go anywhere. If there's nothing else... Chipmunkdavis (talk) 15:17, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Fails WP:LEAD despite being recently FAR kept

by not mentioning the Meiji period or WWII in the lead, arguably both pivotal events in the country's history, more so than the Upper Paleolithic or the first Chinese writings. Tijfo098 (talk) 11:06, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Also the inclusion of the lowest homicide rate in the lead is questionable. Why not mention for instance that it has a high suicide rates? (I'm not saying that you should included that.) More troubling is that nothing is said about its population density or about its (lack of) mineral resources per capita, both of which have been historically an important factor, at least in the past century; see The Japanese economy pp. 1-6 [1] Tijfo098 (talk) 11:25, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Something more general about low criminality in Japan [2] probably belongs to the lead, but it should be stated in more general terms, and you have to consider it's correlated to its demographics cf. [3]. Tijfo098 (talk) 11:38, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

I've edited the lead slightly to introduce more of history. I added note of expansion and then WWII in history, as well as the atomic bombing, which is extremely important in Japan's history. I have avoided editing demographics for now, because the current information in the lead is cited, and I can't find it in demographics, which would again result in a failing of WP:LEAD. I think the information in the lead should be present in the health subsection. Chipmunkdavis (talk) 09:53, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Edit Request from cnel90, 11 May 2011

{{edit semi-protected}} Can somebody please update the gini coefficient? CIA.gov has a figure for 2008 which is 37.6. The source is here: https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/fields/2172.html

Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by cnel90 (talk • contribs)

 Done Thanks! CTJF83 15:57, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

The genocide in Hiroshima

Croatian writer Giancarlo Kravar: In the history of warfare in one day was not killed so many people like the atomic bomb "Little Boy" at Hiroshima, 6 August 1945. year. According to reliable information on the site, killing 80,000 people, a consequence of radiation were later died another 120,000. It`s the time this crime to call by his real name - genocide, and the U.S. President, Nobel Peace Prize, Barack Obama, apologize to the proud Japanese people in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.85.114.62.130 (talk) 07:30, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

This is Talk:Japan, a place to discuss improvements to the Japan article, and not a WP:FORUM. If you have something to add to the encyclopedia project, please take it to Talk:Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki; this belongs there, and not here. -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs email 08:28, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
Unless I misunderstand the meaning of the term, genocide only applies if the primary motive is ethnic-based, (geno-cide,) so I don't think this would qualify, although one could argue for mass murder. Or maybe I'm being pedantic. Zazaban (talk) 02:17, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Need to edit/update "List of Japanese cities by population" section

The "List of Japanese cities by population" article needs to be updated to reflect 2010 Census numbers. The article url is found here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_in_Japan_by_population

I placed this request in the article page shown above too. I am not sure how to format or edit this but I have provided a format that may be ideal for this article (prefectural capitals shown in bold):

Population Rank City 2010 Population 2005 Population % Change Absolute Change Area Density Prefecture Region
1 Tokyo 8,949,447 8,489,653 5.42 459,794 240.1 37,274 Tokyo Kanto
2 Yokohama 3,689,603 3,579,628 3.07 109,975 168.9 21,845 Kanagawa Kanto
3 Osaka 2,666,371 2,628,811 1.43 37,560 85.8 31,077 Osaka Kansai

I have all of the data for all Japanese cities and can build a table like this for this page for all cities over 200,000 plus all prefectural capitals. The source for this data is found in the link below:

http://www.stat.go.jp/data/kokusei/2010/jinsoku/zuhyou/jinsoku.xls

I hope this helps and let me know if I can provide the 2010 Census data (in excel format and structured the same format as the above example) to someone who would like to manipulate it or if I can create a table for this page using the above format.

Dbcook256 (talk) 23:33, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

You can edit the current template at Template:Regions and administrative divisions of Japan. Unfortunately, it would be a bit much to include all the prefectural capitals here, but the table at List of Japanese cities by population can use much expansion. Chipmunkdavis (talk) 06:12, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from Bmoq, 1 September 2011

{{FIFA Worldcup Host nations}} Bmoq (talk) 15:59, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Wouldn't this specifically belong at Japan national football team? Not everything to do with "Japan" should have a navbox, otherwise we'd have 47 navboxes at the end of each country page. -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs email 16:03, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
I agree, it's too specific for a country article. — Bility (talk) 17:29, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Car usage factoid.

> New and used cars are inexpensive [in Japan]

To the contrary! One can only buy a car in Japan after providing proof for ownership or long-term entitlement to a garage slot, for the car's parking use. Garage space rent per year costs more than the price of the car it houses!

Without garage access, the only legal option in Japan is called a "keicar", a diminutive gizmo no honest person would dare to call an able-bodied car. Keicars are as small or even smaller than a Fiat 126 / 500 or about 3/4th of a Mini Morris Minor. A Geo Metro, a.k.a. Suzuki Swift is too LARGE to be an official keicar! 91.82.37.212 (talk) 20:58, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Official name of Japan

I would like to ask for clarifications of why the official name of Japan is the "State of Japan". Although the direct translation of 日本国 (Nihon-koku or Nippon-koku) is the "Sovereign State/Country/Nation of Japan", there is no mention of the said title in the official English translation of the Constitution of Japan, which states that the official title of the country in English is purely Japan from the government's official website. Another source of the official name of the country can also be found in the cover and Identity Information Page of the Japanese passport in which only 日本国 and Japan appear, instead of "State of Japan". Although the Japanese language adds the kanji 国 (koku) to any country which has "State of" (e.g. Israel) inside its official name, that does not not apply to Japan itself. Almost every government website including the Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs has no "State of Japan" within its title (Someone please prove me wrong and show me an official English translation of a Japanese source which say so). Authoritative sources outside Japan include the CIA World Factbook and Encyclopaedia Britannica have both listed the official name of the country as purely "Japan" without any description to the country. I would like to invite those who claim that the "State of Japan" is the country's constitutionally endorsed official name translated into English to please present me with a government source which says so. Raiolu (talk) 15:44, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

I have made clear that State of Japan is a literal translation into English to address your concerns. The fact is "Nippon-koku" or "Nihon-koku" cannot mean the same as simply "Nippon" or "Nihon". Chrisieboy (talk) 11:08, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
Yes, I thought this was fairly well accepted but I had assumed that, for whatever reason, a desision had been made to drop "State of.." from the article. It seems Raiolu removed it without consulting the talk page first. I support your reinstating of the formal, literal translated name back into the intro. -Peter (talk) 22:10, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
I understand Chrisieboy's argument that "Nihon/Nippon-koku" does not match "Japan". Literal translations are one thing, but are they the officially recognized title(s), let's say in the English language? A literal translation of 国 as I earlier stated can mean "Country, Nation or (sovereign) State". Yes Chrisieboy is correct if the Japanese government uses the "State of" description as the official title in their English documents or publications, but that clearly does not seem to be the case, as it is purely, "Japan". In an international setting, when English is commonly used, is the Japanese emperor officially titled as the Emperor of the "State of Japan", or is the Prime Minister officially called the Prime Minister of the "State of Japan"? If that is the case, I could also say that since Puerto Rico is known as "Estado Libre Asociado de Puerto Rico" in Spanish, so the conventional long form in English should be the "Associated Free State of Puerto Rico" instead of Commonwealth of Puerto Rico? I believe it is acceptable to state the English literal meaning of the country's official name in its native or national language in the article, but if it is not the universally accepted (see sources in my earlier post) English form of the conventional long name, then the "State of Japan" should not be in conventional long name field. What I propose is "Japan /dʒəˈpæn/ ⓘ (Japanese: 日本 Nihon or Nippon; formally 日本国 Nippon-kokuⓘ or Nihon-koku, literally the State of Japan)..." while in the infobox under Conventional Long Name, it should be purely "Japan". Raiolu (talk) 12:46, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
I'm happy with that. Chrisieboy (talk) 18:41, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
Yeah, that seems okay. I'll change the infobox long title. -Peter (talk) 22:23, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
Glad to see this was settled amicably. Two thumbs up! Raiolu (talk) 06:03, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from , 27 November 2011

Kgwikip (talk) 11:53, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

 Not done, non notable & promotional blog--Jac16888 Talk 12:18, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Map used

Hello all, i fail to understand the usage of world map in wikipedia which is not politically correct. i see a part of Kashmir being depicted as part of Pakistan in the map used here. since it is disputed, i request to use appropriate map. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.68.253.208 (talk) 17:20, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

You're kidding, right? I can barely even see Kashmir on this map. In any event, take it up somewhere else--this is a standard globe/map templating that WP uses for most of it's country articles. Qwyrxian (talk) 02:29, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Difference between Nippon and Nihon

Nihon and Nippon are not different names, but simply different ways to pronounce it in order to simplify pronounciation. A "hardened" h-sound in Japanese becomes a "b", and as an exclusive to the h-soundset, "double hardening" makes it a p-sound. To further harden the sound, what we call a double consonant is used, to make it have more impact. (The tiny tsu/つ in にっぽん indicates the double consonant effect. The maru/small circle at the ほ indicates the hardening of the h sound).

In the article, it appears to be considered very different names. However, assuming I explained well enough, it should be rather clear that it is not considered as such. They can be used interchangeably, even though the "standard form" is Nihon. Nippon is often used for things as sports events, speeches, or other places where you want impact on the country name. I suggest a change of the explanation into something along the lines of "The Japanese name for Japan is Nihon (日本, にほん), however, it is often pronounced as Nippon (にっぽん, same kanji), when the speaker wishes for a greater impact, such as in speeches, or at sports events.".

(I'd edit it myself, but it's a semi-protected article, and I haven't had a user here until now. Far too lazy, seeing I was able to edit other articles anonymously. ;) ) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joushou (talk • contribs) 15:43, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Japan itself differentiates between the two 'forms' of the name. This is the correct usage. It would also be a bad idea to favour one Anglicised spelling/pronunciation over the other - no one pronunciation is 'official'. Peter (talk) 17:42, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Tokyo is not capitol city

Tokyo is not the capitol city of Japan, as Tokyo is not a city at all. It is a prefecture. onggoybuhay at gmail dot com — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.54.2.122 (talk) 05:33, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

See the article Capital of Japan--it is the de facto capital, even if it is not legally so. And there's no reason why a prefecture can't be a capital of a sovereign state; the capital of the US is Washington, D.C., which is a "federal district"; New Delhi, the capital of India, is both a city and a district. Qwyrxian (talk) 08:42, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
Additionally, the capital of the UK is London - a large metropolitan and administrative region (for administrative purposes called "Greater London) which includes the City of London
In the case of a "capital city" (and the word city is optional) city is basically synonymous with any large metropolitan or named area with a lot of people. Whilst Japan is not a city administratively, it is a metropolitan by standard definitions and technically a 'city' in the simplest sense of the word. -- Peter Talk page 14:10, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

File:Byodoin Phoenix Hall Uji 2009.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Byodoin Phoenix Hall Uji 2009.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests March 2012
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Byodoin Phoenix Hall Uji 2009.jpg)

This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 21:35, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Check citations

"After Singapore, Japan has the lowest homicide rate (including attempted homicide) in the world.[10] "

After checking the cited link, the word Japan is no where to be found. Please either find the correct citation or remove it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.255.27.41 (talk) 02:12, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

The actual info is [4]; but I'm going to need to read it more carefully to figure out exactly what it verifies; my quick glance shows Japan tied for lost rate in Asia (w/Hong Kong and Signapore, see p. 94), but I want to read more closely before editing. Qwyrxian (talk) 03:25, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Cuisine

The article claims "The Michelin Guide has awarded Japanese cities more Michelin stars than the rest of the world combined," but the Michelin Guide page contradicts this. The reference given for this claim is in Japanese, and my knowledge of that language isn't good enough for me to absolutely say that the reference does not support the claim, though I'm pretty sure it doesn't. I'd recommend striking this last sentence in the cuisine section, unless someone objects. Kemperb (talk) 20:01, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

First mobile bulletproof

Croatian writer Giancarlo Kravar: "Bulletproof". It`s called the world first iPhone that is bulletproof. Produced by Japanese company "Marudai". It looks like a brick, weights over two pounds and costs 650 dollars. Who likes - is welcome.85.114.62.130 (talk) 14:07, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

I've noticed that Croatian writer Giancarlo Kravar from Rijeka, Primorsko-Goranska says a lot of things. However, does Croatian writer Giancarlo Kravar know that Wikipedia article talk pages are not used as discussion forums? -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs email 16:00, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Infrastructure

"As of 2008, 46.4 percent of energy in Japan is produced from petroleum, 21.4 percent from coal, 16.7 percent from natural gas, 9.7 percent from nuclear power, and 2.9 percent from hydro power." should have "percent of energy in Japan is produced from" be replaced with "percent of energy capacity in Japan is from". The numbers look suspect though, as that is closer to the production values from 1990. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Basroil (talk • contribs) 04:04, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Nuclear-free Japan

Croatian writer Giancarlo Kravar: Japan switched off its last working nuclear-reactor at Tomari in Hokkaido, living country without atomic-electricity. Nuclear-free Japan, a good example for other countries. 85.114.62.130 (talk) 13:52, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

I've added that info with a source (though, without the editorializing, of course). Qwyrxian (talk) 23:20, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Positive influence

Japan is supposed to have the best positive influence in the world by country (source).--MärgRätik (talk) 12:34, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Airports

In article Japan it says that there are 173 airports in Japan and in article Transport in Japan it says that there are 176 airports. Which is correct? 195.26.73.130 (talk) 20:12, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

Japan`s Pensioner oldiest the conqueror of Mount Everest

Croatian writer Giancarlo Kravar: Japan `s Tamae Watanabe Pensioner (73 years) is the oldest woman in history to conquer one of the peaks of Mount Everest, 8850 meters high peak on the north side of the mountain. She did this together with four members of the team.78.2.79.80 (talk) 20:23, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

10/10 quality post, would read again on a more serious note, why is the IP from Canada? -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs email 21:19, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

Same-sex marriage to Mickey Mouse

Croatian writer Giancarlo Kravar: Mickey Mouse in Disneyland in Tokyo announced that the theme park is now open to same-sex marriage. The only problem is its high cost. However, it might attract tourists from around the world in the "land of the rising sun."78.2.79.80 (talk) 21:17, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

The thinnest screen in the world is made of soap

Croatian writer Giancarlo Kravar: The thinnest screen in the world is made of soap! It was invented by Yoichi Ochai, Tokyo University, and the image is displayed on the bubble. Unlike conventional screens, soap bubble varying transparency and reflection on what the image shows a combination of several of these screens can create a 3D effect, said Alexis Oyama, a member of the research team. This innovation will soon be presented at Siggraph conference, which will be dedicated to computer graphics and interactive technology.93.137.42.0 (talk) 16:55, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Great. But not sure if this can really be incorporated into the article.-- Peter Talk page 20:02, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
Definitely not--and this has the tone of being copied exactly from somewhere else, anyway. Qwyrxian (talk) 23:22, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
Tidbits from "Croatian writer Giancarlo Kravar" have been put on many talk pages by a few IPs. Usually far too detailed to include, and never with a source. CMD (talk) 11:53, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
Needs consideration or reconsideration I think.

Galfromohio (talk) 03:55, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Perhaps someday it could be added to the soap bubble article. Or even just soap. ☮Soap☮ 04:01, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

I feel that Wikipedia benefits if people are encouraged to explore. Thus Wikipedia would surely benefit from mutual links between Portal:Japan and this article, but maybe it's best to get a consensus before going ahead. LittleBen (talk) 04:17, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Population census

Why population_census = 128,056,026?
On http://www.stat.go.jp/english/data/kokusei/pdf/20111026.pdf write: The population of Japan is 128,057,352 as of October 1, 2010.
And no mention of the number 128,056,026. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.149.21.208 (talk) 17:18, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Invented memory that will survive even the apocaliypse!

Croatian writer Giancarlo Kravar: Japanese companies via Hitachi has revealed the way in which data can save hundreds of millions of years, Croatian daily 24 hours. Precise laser to 2 centimeters big quartz glass embed the binary data and do virtually indestructible, the memory that will survive even the apocalypse!78.2.86.100 (talk) 03:50, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Aww man how exciting! Thanks for the quality news update, Croatian writer Giancarlo Kravar! -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs email 04:06, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

RFC

There is a Request for comment about the question "does a largest cities template/city population template add value to the articles about nations (esp. featured ones)?" This is an open invitation for participating in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Requests for comment/City population templates. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. Mrt3366(Talk?) (New thread?) 09:03, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Why does this article belong to Category:Empires?

I'm not sure why this article has been placed in that category - Is Japan currently considered to be an "empire" in any sense of the word? Also, Category:Japan currently belongs to Category:Empires. The Japanese Empire was indeed an empire, but what is the reason for this article's apparently anachronistic (or outdated) classification? Jarble (talk) 00:59, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Second largest producer of automobiles inaccurate

Currently third according to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_motor_vehicle_production — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.50.18.130 (talk) 19:11, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Wikivoyage

Needs a link to wikivoyage in the sister projects box. 86.45.191.101 (talk) 19:11, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Literal translation of name incorrect

The literal translation of Nippon-koku or Nihon-koku is [the] Country of Japan, not [the] State of Japan. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.89.88.185 (talk) 02:12, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

There are more definitions to state than the American definition. In our case, it refers to sovereign state, which is a more proper and accurate term for the common colloquial use of the word "country". -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs email 02:47, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Economy

It is mentioned that Japan is the third largest economy by purchase power parity (PPP), which is untrue since that position is now occupied by India. 59.182.93.67 (talk) 16:39, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

Please provide a reliable source for that claim; ideally, it would help to know what Japan's current position is. Qwyrxian (talk) 22:57, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
Here are the references from the CIA page and IMF page. Similar reference can also be obtained from the World Bank.
CIA
IMF

Infobox seems to break Kanji character display

The text "formerly 日本國", "formerly　日本國" or "formerly Nihon-koku (日本國)" in the Infobox in the lede seems to be broken; it displays as 日本国.   LittleBen (talk) 12:57, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

I think you're referring to the |Kyujitai_name = 日本國. This isn't a valid tag for the Infobox Country template, and shouldn't be there. I've removed it. If this isn't what you're referring to let me know. Canterbury Tail talk 15:37, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
Yes, what Canterbury Tail wrote. |Kyujitai_name = 日本國 isn't a valid parameter for that infobox, so it just won't display anything. ···日本穣? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 16:21, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
It was entered in the Infobox as 日本國, but was actually displaying as 日本国, regardless of whether it was wrapped in a {{lang}} template or not. The same kanji 國 displays correctly later in the article: <Quote>"the full title of Japan was Dai Nippon Teikoku (大日本帝國)<UnQuote>. LittleBen (talk) 02:14, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
I looked at the article yesterday and never saw any problem. The parameter Canterbury Tail removed wasn't displayed anywhere anyway. The lead said "formally", not "formerly". What lead says is written in the lead, not in the infobox. Try replacing "国" with random characters, like "AAAAAAAA", and click the preview button. You will see what part displays where. ---Moscow Connection (talk) 04:39, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Bolding in first sentence

May I ask why Nihon, Nippon, Nihon-koku, and Nippon-koku are bolded in the first sentence of the article? WP:BOLDTITLE says Do not boldface foreign names not normally used in English. As far as I know, none of those four names are normally used in English. Am I missing something? -- tariqabjotu 16:55, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

On a related note, why is the order of the two Japanese names flipped between the short form and the formal terms? ("Nihon or Nippon" and "Nippon-koku or Nihon-koku")--Khajidha (talk) 20:30, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 26 May 2013

Japanese drives on the right not the left please fix asap . 190.213.194.53 (talk) 03:17, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

Not done: No, they don't. --ElHef (Meep?) 03:26, 26 May 2013 (UTC)
(edit conflict) note: Right- and left-hand traffic#Japan refers. I added a link to that section from the infobox entry here.Begoon talk 03:30, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

Kimura last man born in the 19th century

Croatian writer Giancarlo Kravar: Japanese Jiroemon Kimura is the oldest man in the world and the last to be born in the 19th century. The world has come 19.april 1897th year, and over 116 years lived during the four emperors and as many as 61 governments from Masayoshi Matsukata to Shinzo Abe.78.2.65.78 (talk) 14:22, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Sure, we have an article about him at Jiroemon Kimura. But he's not important enough to be included in the article about the country. Qwyrxian (talk) 21:17, 2 June 2013 (UTC)
Qwyrxian, we get these quite a lot. -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs email 12:14, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

No mentioning of Mount Fuji?

I really think that the article should contain a list of notable sites, like eg. Mount Fuji (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mount_Fuji). My preference would be to sort Mount Fuji or other geographic sites into the Geography section, but eg. purely historic sites elsewhere. 80.135.150.208 (talk) 10:51, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Year of Japan's Opening to the West

Would like to change the year mentioned (from 1853 to 1854) in the third paragraph to be more accurate as the year that Commodore Matthew C. Perry actually succeeded in opening Japan to the West (with the Convention of Kanagawa in 1854). Currently, the text reads "...which was only ended in 1853 when a United States fleet pressured Japan to open to the West." Cortikal (talk) 22:52, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Numerous errors

"The pronunciation Nippon is more formal, and is in Japanese used for most official purposes, including international sporting events."

Nippon/にっぽん is not in any way more formal than Nihon/にほん. I have no idea how anybody could ever get this idea or write this down.

"the de facto capital city of Tokyo" "Capital and largest city Tokyo"

Tokyo is not a city. It is a prefecture.

"Official languages None[1]"

While technically correct, it seems strange to not mention Standard Dialect, the official administered dialect by MEXT and NHK.

"Currency Yen (¥) / En (円 or 圓) (JPY)"

It seems strange to include 圓 here. That character hasn't been used in the past 100 years. It would be like including the alternative capitalization of "united States of America" on the USA page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 240F:6:1928:1:68D7:BDE7:4DAF:2E8C (talk) 00:19, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

I've removed the alternate currency symbol because as you point out, it's quite outdated. I've also removed the "largest city" parameter; that one could arguably say, since Tokyo is often considered a "metropolitan prefecture", which is like a city. The problem is that if we don't include it, we have no "largest city" in Japan, and it would be very odd to call, say, Osaka the largest city.
On Nippon vs. Nihon, I haven't changed, as I don't feel confident making a decision either way. I look for the input of other editors. Qwyrxian (talk) 03:25, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
"百圓" on an old 1948 banknote.
"NIPPON GINKO" on a banknote.
As for the Nippon/Nihon thing, it's not to say that one is more "formal", because they are both used in formal, official writing, however it does happen to be the case that "Nippon" appears more frequently in official circumstances; for example, it's quite common to see the romanization in places like "NIPPON GINKO". Regarding 円/圓, I wouldn't mind its removal since it isn't really used much today, but just to clarify that saying that it's been out of use for "100 years" is a bit of a stretch, since the kyujitai form 圓 would have still been in use by 1945, if not later. -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs email 06:32, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
The Japanese page on Japan makes absolutely no mention of stating whether Nihon or Nippon is more official, only stating that both are used, and furthermore gives a list of official organizations that use both. "切手などに「NIPPON」と描かれ（紙幣発券者も「にっぽんぎんこう」である）、ほか日本放送協会、ニッポン放送、日本武道館、日本体育大学、日本郵便などで「NIPPON」（にっぽん）表記を用いる一方、「NIHON」（にほん）表記を用いる例は、日本大学、日本航空、日本経済新聞、JR東日本・JR西日本、日本ユニシス、日本相撲協会、日本オリンピック委員会などがある。なお、（国会に複数の議席を有したことのある）日本の政党名における読みは、以下の通り。" Quick translation: "Stamps and other post items write "nippon" (in Roman), NHK, Nippon Budokan, Japan Educational University, Japan Post, and others use "Nippon" (either in Roman or official pronunciation), and then Japan University, Japan Airlines (JAL), The Nikkei (Japan Economics Newspaper), JR East Japan, JR West Japan, Japan News, and the Japan Sumo Association, and the Japanese Olympic committee, among others, use "Nihon", as either official Romanization or official pronunciation." It then goes on to list a large number of major political parties which use Nippon then a large number that use Nihon. At the very least, we should defer to the Japanese Wikipedia page on Japan and make English Wikipedia also state, "Both pronunciations exist" and then not make any additional statements on which is more official or which is more common, unless there are some good sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.112.115.101 (talk) 06:58, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
That sounds like a good idea as well. -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs email 08:25, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Edit request, 6 November 2013

Bujjisomasekhar (talk) 18:28, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Not done: please make your request in a "change X to Y" format. --Stfg (talk) 18:46, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

A lot of this reads like its from some American text book, misses out Japan's importance in world history etc, I have added some details to the lead. --JTBX (talk) 12:02, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

And I've reverted because some of what you added was non-neutral (like the way you described the end of WWII) and some of it (like the name etymology) isn't important enough for the lead. While editing is not locked for featured articles, a strong deference is given to consensus versions, so you'll need to discuss further here to show consensus has changed to accept your new additions. Qwyrxian (talk) 13:17, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

I agree, for instance poverty statistics are placed under the 'export's sub-section of the economy header. 81.158.209.177 (talk) 22:40, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Crime in Japan

I'm not an expert in the subject but I was wondering if anyone is interested in updating a small section about Crime in Japan. This past week I've been reading a few articles about the Japanese crime syndicates, but maybe there's someone who knows a lot more here. Just a suggestion. ComputerJA (☎ • ✎) 07:55, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

1880's Insurrections?

The article introduction states: "Periodic insurrections and civil disturbances continued into the 1880s." What insurrections or civil disturbances occurred in the 1880's? I beleive the Satsuma rebellion of 1877 was the last challenge to the Meiji central government. Can anyone tell me what 1880's era insurrections this refers to? --Westwind273 (talk) 07:25, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Seeing no disagreement, I changed it to "1870s". --Westwind273 (talk) 04:12, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
Satsuma Rebellion should be mentioned, "1870s, since the Satsuma Rebellion", w/e. OccultZone (Talk) 04:15, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Nicely written entry

This is a nicely written article.58.156.153.194 (talk) 23:38, 15 March 2014 (UTC)Spatial

Help with small text in old Japanese

I'm doing an essay on the Ainu people and I badly need a first hand source. There is a small text in this Google book [5] on page 19, which should be a decree that banned the Ainu from fishing. I would be really grateful if someone could assist me with a quick translation. Thanks in advance. Val-Ainu1 (talk) 22:11, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

You would probably find better luck asking at WT:JAPAN instead, you'll find plenty of people who can help you there; this talk page isn't a general request page. --benlisquareT•C•E 10:32, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for the tip, sorry for posting here Val-Ainu1 (talk) 15:35, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

typo in "Geography" section

I think the following sentence in the Geography section: "The Ryukyu Islands, which includes including Okinawa, are a chain to the south of Kyushu."

Should read: "The Ryukyu Islands, which includes Okinawa, are a chain to the south of Kyushu."

cheers, RWCedits (talk) 14:29, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia! I removed "including". Thank you for pointing that out. Happy editing! Oda Mari (talk) 15:28, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

Capital + Largest City in Japan

I fixed the source of the article. Tokyo is the largest city too and the capital because I knew that Tokyo is the largest populated city in the world and love that place. I visited Tokyo before since July 2013 for going to Vietnam. --Allen Nguyen Talk 01:40, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, but you are wrong. Tokyo is not a city. There once was Tokyo City, but not anymore. Please take a look at the article Tokyo. Oda Mari (talk) 07:46, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
I thought Tokyo is a city, and it's a largest in Japan and in the world including the Chiba Prefecture area. --Allen Talk 19:17, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
Tokyo is a metropolitan prefecture. Shinjuku, Tokyo is a city, Shibuya, Tokyo is a city, and Chūō, Tokyo is a city, however Tokyo isn't a city in the strictest sense. --benlisquareT•C•E 20:12, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
Tokyo must be a city and it's a largest prefecture area in Japan. --Allen Talk 17:57, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
The official translation of each ward, or 区, is "city"; see the lead paragraph of Special wards of Tokyo. The official website of each of these wards feature an official English translation going along the lines of "X City"; Shinjuku is a city, and 23 of them make up Tokyo. Not even the Tokyo page explicitly refers to a Tokyo City, except for the historical reference. Also, I don't understand your comment, why is it that Tokyo "must be a city"? --benlisquareT•C•E 12:31, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

Article 9 of the Constitution

The following sentence in the lead section should be changed: "Japan maintains a modern military with the world's eighth largest military budget, which can be used to enter wars with other countries if needed under a reinterpretation of article 9". Firstly, the latter part is too detailed for a lead section. Secondly, it is misleading because Japan could enter war with other countries for the purpose of individual self-defense even before the 2014 reinterpretation. I propose the latter part to be deleted. KreutzerSonata (talk) 01:26, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

You're right, I've restored the lede back to how it was before. Supersaiyen312 (talk) 01:49, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

The most beautiful article

I am deeply honored to be able to see it. Cliffswallow-vaulting (talk) 05:26, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Nihon vs Nippon

I previously had consensus that the English article should not stated that one pronunciation is more formal than the other. As the article is currently semiprotected, I request that somebody please remove the offending portion.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Japan&oldid=569190852 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.112.115.101 (talk) 03:11, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

Agreed and Done. Thanks, Adrian J. Hunter(talk•contribs) 06:18, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

Airports of Japan

This article says that Japan has 173 airports, without any source supporting it. However, the article List of airports in Japan and Economy of Japan both says that Japan has 98 airports, with a source supporting it. Is it just me, or is this a mistake? --Horai 551 12:42, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

Tokyo + Chiba

Actually, Tokyo's a city not a region in Japan. And also the Chiba Prefecture was there with Tokyo along with Haneda and Narita airports in the city. --Allen talk 22:04, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

Issue likely stems from the differences between Greater Tokyo Area, Tokyo Metropolis, and Tokyo. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 23:13, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

Recent edit warring

There appears to be two parts to the edits in question. First part is just moving the natural disaster info down and removing the redundant info. The second part is the use of Yamato people. So what's the reversions about? The first part seems completely legit to me. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 02:32, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

I agree, it's a really slow-mo edit war. We're only talking about the natural disaster, that looks like a careless revert on his part. Supersaiyen312 (talk) 00:42, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

International groupings

I've removed the unnecessary membership groups from the lead, as the only reason for adding it was apparently because the USA and United Kingdom has it too. However, those articles are completely different and they also include a lot of more notable content as well. I don't think it is neccessary to copy everyhing from those articles for whatever reason. Look at South Korea's page for example. It mentions a lot of non-notable content in the lead. Should we copy all of that as well? I don't think so. Feel free to give your thoughts, I'm mostly addressing the user Knsn57. I mostly agree with Benlisquare. Supersaiyen312 (talk) 04:05, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Japan/Archive_18&oldid=1253785272"