Talk:Katsura Imperial Villa

Name
I propose to move this page to "Katsura Imperi Villa." That's what the Imperial Household Agency calls it, although Katura Detached Palace is a literal translation of "Katura Rikyu". --Nanshu 06:41, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)


 * I agree that "Katsura imperial villa" is the best name for it (although I think the lower-case is more appropriate, as that is Wikipedia style) - "detached palace", although a good literal rendering of rikyū, is a bit too specialist for the average reader here.
 * As some data on what it is called in English-language books on it (see the list I just added to the article), the Gropius book calls it "Katsura Palace". Itō (he spells his name "Itoh" in Western publications) calls it "Katsura" and "Katsura villa" (with one "Katsura imperial villa") in the Katsura book, and "Katsura villa" (with one each of "Katsura Detached Palace" and "Katsura Imperial Villa") in the Imperial Gardens book. The Naito book mostly calls it "Katsura", with an occasional "Katsura Palace", and one "Katsura Detached Palace"! So there is no consistency.
 * I don't think it's disrespectful to use the lowercase "imperial villa" in the title - the most recent Katsura book (published in Japan, as well) uses "imperial villa". So unless there is an objection, I will move it.
 * I would like to expand the article a lot (based on these books, all of which I have), but it will have to wait a bit - I'm very busy with other things right at the moment. Noel (talk) 17:42, 6 September 2005 (UTC)


 * In my view, "Imperial Villa" is part of a proper name and should be capitalized. Wikipedia policy does not lowercase proper names. Buckingham Palace is analogous. So I'd capitalize the words, not out of respect, but because they're part of a proper name. But lowercase wouldn't be the worst outcome. Fg2 20:33, September 6, 2005 (UTC)


 * Well, that was my initial assumption too, that it was a proper name, and so would have capital letters. So I was a bit surprised to see that books (including a number of major ones specifically on the topic, by serious scholars) don't use the capitals. Noel (talk) 02:26, 7 September 2005 (UTC)


 * The Imperial Household Agency who is responsible for the buildings lists them as "Katsura Imperial Villa" and "Shugaku-in Imperial Villa" (or Shugakuin, however you want it) all capitalised... I would say they would probably know best how to write, since they are actual caretakers. Also Buckingham Palace is also not written with a small "p". Gryffindor [[Image:Flag of Austria (state).svg|20px]] 02:45, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

World Heritage?
I removed the text stating that KIV is a World Heritage Site. My reason is that it is not on the list at. If I've looked at the wrong list, please revert, and I'd be grateful if you'd let me know the source. Fg2 02:23, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

I also just found out from the worldheritagesite.org and this Kyoto city website that the Imperial Villa is not one of the World Heritage Sites in Kyoto. There are 17 buildings in the Kyoto prefecture that are recognized as part of the "Historic Monuments of ancient Kyoto" World Heritage Site, Katsura is not among one of them. - 6 October 2005

Heavy vandalism reverted
Some anon vandalized this article fixed atm...

NPOV
Though I agree that the villa and garden are amazing, the lead section uses some vague, POV and unsourced statements like "...one of Japan's most important large-scale cultural treasures.", "Its gardens are a masterpiece of Japanese gardening, and the buildings are even more important, one of the greatest achievements of Japanese architecture.", "...provides an invaluable window into...". Interestingly the villa is neither a world heritage site nor a National Treasure of Japan. Why? Maybe its importance could be supported by quotes of architects (Bruno Taut) or other people. PS: The "How to get there" section looks a bit like wikitravel and could be removed in my opinion.bamse (talk) 16:34, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

An explanation why the villa is not a National Treasure is given on page 13 (center column) of this book. According to this reference, the Imperial Household Agency says that the villa (and other properties they own) is protected sufficiently and does not need additional protection by the national treasure law. Another reason the book suggests is, that making the villa a national treasure would mean they had to allow public access, thereby ceding some rights. Both arguments might be valid for it not being a World Heritage Site either.bamse (talk) 08:19, 30 November 2009 (UTC)