Talk:Kyahan

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Requested move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was moved. --BDD (talk) 17:39, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Kiahan (kyahan) → Kyahan – The actual name is "kyahan" (脚絆). "Kiahan" is a misspelling along the lines of "Tokio". Konjakupoet (talk) 10:46, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment "Tokio" isn't a mispelling, it's a different romanization -- 70.24.250.103 (talk) 23:05, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Like at Talk:Jutte#Requested move, Tokio is a misspelling according to the romanization system that is OVERWHELMINGLY used for Japanese words in English and most other European languages. It doesn't distinguish between きょ and きお. Japanese doesn't use pinyin romanization: i is used for い and y is used for や, ゆ and よ. Konjakupoet (talk) 03:36, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
A different rmoanization scheme does not count as a mispelling in another romanization scheme. You can't just say because scheme-X spells it one way and scheme-Y spells it another that scheme-Y's spelling is a mispelling because you're using scheme-X, as you're comparing apples to oranges. Next you'll say that "honor" is a mispelling because you spell it "honour", but they are different dialects, so are not mispellings of each other, they are different spellings of the same word. -- 70.24.250.103 (talk) 22:35, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
"Do not use the talk page as a forum or soapbox for discussing the topic. The talk page is for discussing how to improve the article." Konjakupoet (talk) 13:47, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Then you should never have brought up "Tokio" -- 70.24.250.103 (talk) 04:26, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, please don't talk to me about minor technicalities like that if you think that "honor" is a "dialect" of "honour". And it is not the same thing at all. "Tokio" is not the way to spell 東京 in ANY systematic romanization system of Japanese. Please don't talk down to me about the Japanese language when you clearly know nothing about it. Konjakupoet (talk) 13:49, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Clearly you don't know the adhoc romanizations schemes used by Japanese either. Romanizations as chosen by Japanese people: Tokio Marine Nichido "東京" became Tokio, etc; -- 70.24.250.103 (talk) 04:26, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Additionally, so the same thing doesn't happen here as apparently happened there, my sources are the Japanese encyclopedias Britannica and My Pedia, the Japanese dictionaries Daijisen and Meikyō Kokugo Jiten, and the J-E dictionaries Genius Dai-Wa-Ei Index, Shin-Wa-Ei Daijiten and Progressive Wa-Ei-chū Jiten. GScholar has kyahan win (18>4) and GBooks does too (68>8).
Konjakupoet (talk) 03:36, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • OPPOSE, known authors and authorities on the subject such as Ian Botttomly in his book Arms and armor of the samurai: the history of weaponry in ancient Japan p.185 [1]

and Anthony Bryant in his book Ashigaru 1467-1649 p.63 [2] use "kaihan" to describe these cloth gaiters or leggings. Here is a quote from Ian Bottomley's book p.38 "Brocade kaihan (leggings) were worn under the shin guards".Darkness walks (talk) 05:25, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

NOTE: Darkness walks was found after posting the above oppose !vote to be a block-evading sockpuppet. Konjakupoet (talk) 18:10, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Ian Bottomly is not a student of Japanese history or language. He works in an armoury museum in the UK.[3] In fact, according to his own self-written biography in the above link, the only area he has studied formally is chemistry. Please explain why you think Wikipedia articles should give undue weight to the ideas of non-specialists. Konjakupoet (talk) 06:05, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, even though Bryant proclaims himself to be a Japanese historian with an MA in Japanese, his use of one misspelled word once does not mean that the Wikipedia article on the subject should follow his misspelling. Although currently, neither of the sources you cite appear to use the spelling currently in the article. Do you think we should rename the article to Kaihan? Konjakupoet (talk) 06:11, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Konjakupoet, you seem to have absolutely no respect for anyone, what books have you published on the subject, what job have you held in this field, maybe you can enlighten us on how you have obtained your expertise? I personally do not care what term is used and will remove my opposition since it appears that other authors use an alternate spelling, I am not sure if there is a difference between the leggings worn under armor and the ones worn by commoners, I was pointing out that there are different word being used for what appears to be the same item. Anthony J. Bryant is a fluent speaker of Japanese, he is the author of four books for Osprey Military Publishing on samurai history. He is an historian specializing in Kamakura, Muromachi, and Momoyama period warrior culture. After graduating from Florida State University in 1983 with a bachelor's degree in Japanese studies, he completed his graduate studies in Japanese studies (history, language, and armor) at Takoshoku University in Tokyo, graduating in 1986. Bryant resided in Japan from 1986 to 1992. He also has an M.A. in Japanese from Indiana University. An authority on the making of Japanese armor, he joined the Nihon Katchū Bugu Kenkyū Hozon Kai ("Japan Association for Arms and Armor Preservation"), and was one of four non-Asian members. He has worked as a features editor for the Mainichi Daily News, and as editor for the Tokyo Journal, an English language monthly magazine. Ian Bottomley is a very respected researcher, author and currently the Curator Emeritus of Oriental Collections at the Royal Armouries Museum based in Leeds, a national museum which displays the National Collection of Arms and Armour. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Darkness walks (talk • contribs) 09:03, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think if you were any of the people you seem to think I have insulted you would be justified in reacting that way. My training comes from university, where I majored in Japanese and minored in history -- why is that any of your business? The sources I have cited are more reliable than the ones you have; whether you or I are more reliable is completely irrelevant. And NO, that is NOT an insult toward the authors of your sources. If your source chose to misspell a word because they thought it looked cool, it does NOT mean we have to follow them. WP:MOSJ and WP:Romanization both tell us we should use standard Hepburn romanization unless a variant is extremely common. This is why we have yen[4], but not Yedo[5] or Tokugawa Iyeyasu[6] -- and those latter two are OVERWHELMINGLY more common than "kiahan"[7] OR "kaihan"[8]. Konjakupoet (talk) 12:50, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, I assume you meant Takushoku University? 蛸食大学 doesn't sound like the kind of place I want my historians attending!(笑) Can I assume you don't speak Japanese, DW? I'll start explaining things more carefully for you if you like. Konjakupoet (talk) 12:56, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support standard Japanese word for gaiters, and use in print: GB [kyahan + samurai = 68], [kiahan + samurai = 8]. In ictu oculi (talk) 17:26, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support There is no guideline to use two different romanizations for an article title. We should choose the most common English name which is Kyahan according to the Google Book search.
  • "kyahan" Leggings 271
  • "kiahan" leggings 30
―― Phoenix7777 (talk) 04:47, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I know Ghits are not definitive, and as noted, some of these include a few non-English sources and interlingual dicdefs, but even after adjusting for these I see a consistent preference for kyahan over kiahan in English sources (435:53, or about an 88% margin, by my count). Wilhelm Meis (☎ Diskuss | ✍ Beiträge) 17:47, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Kyahan&oldid=1208065415"