User talk:Mabewa

Welcome

Hello, Mabewa, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} and your question on your user talk page, and someone will show up shortly to answer. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

We hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on talk and vote pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! -WarthogDemon 03:36, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:47, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Mabewa. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Source templates and ref punctuation

Rather than just using the url, please put your references in the correct template, explained in WP:CIT. Also, the punctuation goes before a reference, such as sentence ends.<ref> explained in WP:REFPUNCT. --Zefr (talk) 16:04, 26 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Mabewa. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

February 2018

Welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions, including your edits to Black Sabbath, but we cannot accept original research. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, ideas, and personal experiences—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. Binksternet (talk) 06:27, 13 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Mabewa. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:40, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 21

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Tina Bell, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Punk. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:00, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:25, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:43, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:32, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Bam Bam (Seattle band)

If you need further help with the article, rather than send me a roundabout message through Scott you can either put a message on User talk:Jmabel or respond here. If you do the latter (probably the best choice, to keep discussion in one place), please use {{ping|Jmabel}}. If you do that (and use the four tildes to add your name and date as a signature), I'll get a notification.

Just so you know: I'm not terribly active on en-wiki -- my "home wiki" is Commons -- so I don't maintain a watchlist here, but I should get notifications for any pings. - Jmabel | Talk 13:35, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also, see Draft talk:Bam Bam (Seattle band): you will want to do a disclosure there comparable to the one I did. - Jmabel | Talk 13:45, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the help, Joe. When I do the disclosure, do I just write it under yours, or do I need to add a separate disclosure heading? @Jmabel: Mabewa (talk) 07:56, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's fine to write it under mine. - Jmabel | Talk 14:11, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I imagine you already know about this, but you will certainly want to mention it (with citation) because it will clinch any questions about notability. - Jmabel | Talk 14:14, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nijo castle National Treasure

Hi Mabewa! I reverted your edits to List of National Treasures of Japan (castles) regarding Nijo castle. Please note, that Nijo castle can be found in List of National Treasures of Japan (residences) which is where [1] puts it. -- ~~~ bamse (talk) 22:15, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

But it’s a castle with National Treasures, as clearly documented in Cultural Heritage Online. Why wouldn’t it be listed there? Goten buildings were arguably the most important type of building at Japanese castles, and certainly were more ubiquitous than tenshu. Keep in mind that there aren’t any ‘National Treasure Castles’ per se anyway-there are castles with buildings that are national treasures, and Nijo Castle is one of them. Excluding it is just a product of tourist literature that confuses tenshu (which many Japanese castles never even had) with castles.

And why couldn’t the castle be listed as both a national treasure residence and castle, seeing as all late Muromachi and Edo period お城 were by definition places of residence? Mabewa (talk) 22:45, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This has nothing to do with tourist literature. The designating authority (MEXT) has decided to put it in the residences category and I don't see why we should present it differently. Note that this article is strictly about National Treasures and not about castles in general. Putting Nijo castle (or rather Ninomaru Palace) here would be misleading since it simply is not a castle National Treasure by definition. Similarly you find for instance many shoin in the residences category that are located inside temples but are still not listed in the temple category. For reference we should use the official database in deciding where to put what, IMHO. bamse (talk) 11:28, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

‘ Putting Nijo castle (or rather Ninomaru Palace) here would be misleading since it simply is not a castle National Treasure by definition.’ How is it misleading? 御殿 are by definition *castle* palaces, and one of the most essential parts of a Japanese castle, certainly more essential than tenshu were. They were the heart of Japanese castles, where the lords lived, welcomed visitors, and did administrative work. I don’t think you could find a single expert on Japanese castles who would consider a goten to not be part of a castle. A Japanese castle is not a building but a complex of buildings, and all historical buildings within the moats are castle buildings. The other National Treasure castle buildings include things like the 渡櫓 of Himeji and Matsumoto Castle and Matsumoto Castle-much more minor buildings, and yet they are National Treasures.

Really, the whole idea that the castle (as opposed to some of the castle buildings) is a National Treasure is misleading. The vast majority of Himeji Castle’s turrets and gates (clearly castle buildings) are not National Treasures, but rather Important Cultural Properties. Cultural Properties Online doesn’t apply National Treasure status to entire castles, but rather to Castle buildings like tenshu, kotenshu, yagura and goten buildings like oohiroma, shoin, shikidai, and so on.

Also, I don’t know why you say it’s not ‘a’ castle National Treasure, like we’re talking about one building. It’s six seperate National Treasures, as clearly mentioned in the Nijo Castle Japanese language Wikipedia page and on Cultural Heritage Online.

Anyway, if you are going to make the argument that Nijo Castle shouldn’t be included despite having a whopping six National Treasure buildings, the idea that those buildings somehow aren’t castle buildings is not the way to do it. You could, for example, make a page about National Treasure *tenshu*, but it makes no sense to arbitrarily include tenshu and yagura but exclude goten buildings. Mabewa (talk) 12:59, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Similarly we are not putting anything amazing in the World Heritage Lists, but only what UNESCO decides should be there. bamse (talk) 11:30, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

‘ Similarly we are not putting anything amazing in the World Heritage Lists, but only what UNESCO decides should be there.’ Yes, UNESCO decides what is and isn’t a World Heritage Site. Similarly, the Japanese Cultural Affairs Agency decides what is an isn’t a Japanese National Treasure aka 国宝. And the Japanese Cultural Affairs Agency has designated six buildings of the Nijo Castle Ninomaru Goten as National Treasures. And they use the word 二条城 in all of those designations, so it’s extremely clear that they consider the 二条城二の丸御殿 buildings to be part of Nijo Castle.

For example, the link below showshow they list the Oohiroma ‘ 二条城二の丸御殿大広間.’ It’s not the 二の丸御殿大広間, but the ‘Nijo Palace Ninomaru Palace Oohiroma.’ (I might add that the word ‘Ninomaru’ itself refers specifically to a *castle’ Bailey, so anything with 二の丸 as part of its name is clearly part of a castle anyway).

https://bunka.nii.ac.jp/heritages/detail/174942 Mabewa (talk) 13:51, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am not saying that Nijo castle (Ninomaru Palace) is not a National Treasure. I am just saying that the Agency for Cultural Affairs puts it into the residence category (and so should we). See here (種別：近世以前／住宅). With "by definition" I simply meant that the Agency defines what a "castle NT" is and what a "residence NT" is. And apparently they preferred to put it into the "residence category". bamse (talk) 21:25, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As for the counting, they do distinguish between NT and number of buildings (see for instance page 7 of this recent designation). And in their view there are indeed 5 National Treasures at Himeji and all of Ninomaru Palace is essentially just 1 National Treasure. If you feel strongly about this topic, perhaps we should take it to WT:JAPAN? bamse (talk) 21:25, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Nijo Castle Ninomaru Goten is definitely classified as six National Treasures, not one. The castle has six National Treasures, each with its own name, and 22 Important Cultural Properties, each with their own name. This is clearly explained on the Japanese language Wiki page for Nijo Castle. Cultural Heritage Online has a separate page for each of the individual National Treasures *and* (this is very important) some other structures of the palace complex, like the Karamon or Daidokoko, have ICP status, not National Treasure status.

Just to give you an example, here's Cultural Heritage Online's page for the Tozamurai/Kurumayose (which share NT status):

https://bunka.nii.ac.jp/heritages/detail/194360

And here is for the Kuroshoin:

https://bunka.nii.ac.jp/heritages/detail/122514

And here is for the Shiroshoin:

https://bunka.nii.ac.jp/heritages/detail/156245

I could go on, but you get the idea.

At any rate, even if they *did* classify the entire Ninomaru Goten complex as one NT (as opposed to 6 NT and 4 ICP), it would still be a castle that contained at least one NT, just like Himeji, Matsumoto, Inuyama and Hikone.

I think that part of the problem here is the common confusion between 'tenshu complex' and 'castle'--there are 5 Japanese castles with tenshu and/or tenshu complexes that are National Treasures, but 6 Japanese castles with NT castle buildings.

And a related problem is that there are actually no 'National Treasure Castles,' but rather castles with one or some buildings that have been given National Treasure Castles. Hikone is another good example: the tenshu complex (tenshu, tsukeyagura, Tamon yagura) is a National Treasure, but that's only a small part of the overall castle, which contains dozens of other Edo-period castle buildings, mostly with Important Cultural Property status. Also, notice that there is *no Japanese-language Wiki page* for 'National Treasure Castles,' and I strongly suspect that this is because there aren't any Japanese castles that have been given National Treasure status. The whole 'national treasure castle' thing is, as I said, a product of tourist literature, which generally contains many inaccuracies about Japanese castles.

At any rate, I question the need for this page even existing, but if it has to exist, it should either A. Include Nijo Castle, as it certainly does have NTs, and they are certainly castle buildings or B. Be reworded to something like 'List of National Treasures of Japan (castle *towers*). This would summarize the five other castles accurately, as all of the other NT castle structures are tenshu, kotenshu, or various kind of yagura. Granted, calling some of the yagura, especially the 渡櫓 a 'tower' is a bit of a stretch, but as yagura are often translated as 'towers' in English, such a designation would be less misleading, as it would exclude the goten buildings of Nijo Castle and also avoid making the false claim that there are any entire castles that are NTs.

By the way, regarding Hikone, the tenshu, tsukeyagura and Tamon yagura share one NT status, not two. The Wiki page lists the tsukeyagura and Tamon yagura as having separate NT status from the tenshu, but this is not the case. As you can see, it's 彦根城天守、附櫓及び多聞櫓 (tenshu, tsukeyagura and Tamon yagura). So those should be collapsed into one NT:

https://bunka.nii.ac.jp/heritages/detail/189233 Mabewa (talk) 01:15, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the Agency for Cultural Affairs classifies their National Treasures into the following categories: 神社, 寺院, 城郭, 住宅, ... which in my view quite nicely matches the article titles in Lists of National Treasures of Japan. I don't see what your issue with this is, since I simply replicated what is in the official database. Nowhere in the article it is claimed that there are National Treasure Castles! Instead it is phrased as "nine entries of National Treasures from five castles" and "in some cases multiple structures have been combined to form a single entry" and also the type of structures are mentioned.

All of the six NTs at Ninomaru Palace are listed under the SAME designation number (00075), so it is one NT, while the NTs at Himeji have five DIFFERENT designation numbers (00011, 00012, 00013, 00014, 00015). I am putting this discussion on WT:JAPAN to get a second opinion. 20:22, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

BTW, also at Cultural Heritage Online, if you do a search for National Treasure residences (under 分野) you will find Nijo Castle / Ninomaru Palace there, but not if you search for National Treasure castles. bamse (talk) 21:40, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Part of the problem is that we are looking at two different governmental sources that show somewhat different information (bunka.nii.ac.jp (aka Cultural Heritage Online) vs kunishitei.bunko.jp). But two important thing here:

1. We both agree that Nijo Castle is a castle, that the Ninomaru Goten complex is part of that castle, and that the Ninomaru Goten complex has at least one National Treasure. Therefore it should either at least be mentioned on the Wikipedia page about National Treasures belonging to Japanese castles, *or* the name of that page should be adjusted to cover only castle towers or defensive structures. I'm openminded about either option, but the idea that all mention of Nijo Castle should be scrubbed from a page that claims to cover 'castles,' of which goten are certainly a part, doesn't make any sense.

2. IF indeed one numbers = one NT status, then Hikone Castle should get one listing, not two. kunishitei.bunko.jp gives it two entries (one for the tenshu and the other for the two connected turrets), yet only one number, while bunka.nii.ac.jp just gives it one listing. And confusingly, kunishitei.bunko.jp lists nine 'castle' NT as you say, which would either mean that a. Hikone Castle has 2 NTs that share the same number (0045) or b. Hikone Castle has 1 NT, and the missing 9th NT is... Nijo Castle Ninomaru Palace? So which is it?

Anyway, there are obvious contradictions here that need to be rectified in one way or another. Mabewa (talk) 00:05, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hikone ist 1 NT (as explained in the footnote). The other NT (each with different registration number) are: Matsue (1), Matsumoto (1), Inuyama (1) and Himeji (5). That adds up to 9. Don't ask me why the structures at Himeji are counted separately. The number 9 does not only appear if you look at the registration numbers but also in all reports of new designations such as [https://www.bunka.go.jp/koho_hodo_oshirase/hodohappyo/pdf/94122701_01.pdf this] on the last page. bamse (talk) 16:44, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think I've figured this out. From asking around about this in the Japanese castle community, it seems that the difference is simply due to a change in the numbering system that the Agency for Cultural Affairs uses. They started out by giving different NTs at the same location different numbers, but then shifted to giving them separate names but keeping the same number for all locations at the same site. Himeji has a different number for every NT just because it was added earlier than other castles. But it's the name of the NT (usually accompanied by a separate page on Cultural Affairs Online) that determines what is or isn't a NT, not the number.

So, really, if this interpretation is correct, Matsumoto Castle has five NTs, not one, Hikone has five NTs, not one, and Nijo Castle has five NTs, not one. And I do suspect that it is correct, because Japanese language sources nearly always state, for example, that Matsumoto Castle has five NTs, or that Nijo Castle has six NTs.

It IS true that NT status can incorporate more than one structure, but when this is done, both structures are listed together in the name with 及び connecting them. So, for example, the Shikidai and Kurumayose are lumped together in Nijo Castle as '遠侍及び車寄,' and that's one NT. The tsukeyagura and Tamon yagura at Hikone Castle are lumped together as 附櫓及び多聞櫓, and that's one NT.

All of this also applies, by the way, to Important Cultural Properties. Mabewa (talk) 06:02, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for clarification. In any case it seems that the Agency for Cultural Affairs is keeping track of both numbers as they list 9 (件数) and 17 (棟数) as possible numbers for castle National Treasures. At least for the time being I would prefer to stick with the 件数 numbers for consistency among all of the NT lists on wikipedia. bamse (talk) 17:31, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]