Talk:Lakuen

Lakuen can redirect here
(cur | prev) 04:15, 14 August 2014‎ Prosperosity (talk | contribs)‎ m. . (1,524 bytes) (0)‎. . (Prosperosity moved page Rakuen (Ken Hirai song) to Lakuen: As per official spelling on single cover) (undo | thank)
 * Undone, if there was evidence for that uploading the cover would help, but standard English romanization for Paradise is Rakuen. In ictu oculi (talk) 01:04, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
 * A quick google search can show you that "LAKuEN" is written prominently on the cover. I've added the cover, but this falls under the WP:MJ (not WP:MUS that I put in the comment) guidelines for officially sourced romanisation trumping hepburn. --Prosperosity (talk) 07:23, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
 * User:Prosperosity, but it's not an English cover, those are simply roman letters (mis)representing Rakuen, how is a reader going to find or recognise this? In ictu oculi (talk) 13:45, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Saying "Lakuen" is a misrepresentation of 楽園 is a judgement call on the abilities and/or intentions of Hirai. WP:MJ clearly states, "if an article uses only Japanese-language reliable sources, use the romanization given in them", ans there are English language sources that refer to the title as such. Readers will find and recognise this by accessing the article from Ken Hirai, Ken Hirai discography, the Rakuen discography page or the Rakuen (Ken Hirai song) redirect, typing "Lakuen" or "Rakuen (Ken..." into the search bar, being redirected from google, etc (i.e. all of the standard ways they would access the article anyway). The MOS also states that "redirects for all likely romanizations should be created to make sure people will be able to find the articles easily regardless of which form they use in their search", so I'm not entirely sure what your argument is. --Prosperosity (talk) 22:18, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Since it's become important for you, I googled 'Ken Hirai Lakuen' and got quite a few results, the Barks article from before, JaME Profile and a Japan Times article, as well as mentions at Discogs, CD Universe Amazon and Tower Records. I'll integrate some of these into the article and flesh it out over the next few days, so it's no longer a horrible stub. --Prosperosity (talk) 00:04, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Under WP:BRD when an undiscussed edit is reverted it is best to discuss rather than just do it again. Amazon.com has myriad marketplace retailers and Amazon staff uploading products. The single is uploaded 3 times, 2x as Rakuen, 1x as Lakuen. More reliable perhaps is the album tracklisting upload in the Amazon.com album track listing 楽園 is listed as "Rakuen" a second copy of the album has no tracklisting. Tower and CDUniverse likewise have both. This just illustrates why retailers are not reliable sources, same I believe is true of iTunes, though I could be corrected. In ictu oculi (talk) 02:39, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

Requested move 11 December 2014

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: No consensus to move. Cúchullain t/ c 15:01, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

Lakuen → Rakuen (Ken Hirai song) – In favour (1) restoring article creator's title and text stable from 2009-2014 before undiscussed move. (2) only 20 Google Books refs (all hits from one publication, Billboard) all have "Rakuen" in Japan Chart listings. (3) "Rakuen" is the universal romanization of Japanese 楽園 "Paradise" in English books including the many other "Rakuen" songs (4) iTunes has "Rakuen" Amazon, Tower CD Universe have different editions selling under different titles. Other retailers are equally inconsistent. Against: (1) cover has artwork LAKuEN, though album tracklist has 楽園. (2) 2002 article by Eric Prideaux in the English language Japan Times (3) the english version of Barks.jp article, JaME Profile if this is a reliable source for romanization. .... in the face of this three possible solutions Rakuen (Ken Hirai song) per WP:CONSISTENCY with other 楽園 "Paradise" songs, Lakuen (unrecognizable), Lakuen (Ken Hirai song) (compromise). A more important issue than title perhaps is lead, Rakuen has been changed to Lakuen throughout article and Billboard reference "Ken Hirai Rakuen" removed, but both Rakuen and LAKuEN need to be present in some order in the lead sentence. The secondary reason for this RM is to restore the Billboard name somewhere which has been removed entirely from article. Please comment on lead issue in responses. Thank you. In ictu oculi (talk) 02:32, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
 * As far as transliteration goes, Lakuen is normally deprecated per WP:MOS-JP, but there is some allowance for alternatives: "If an article uses English-language reliable sources and those sources use a particular form of romanization to name a topic, give preference to that romanization in the article title and body text" and, normally only applied to names, "Use the form personally or professionally used by the person (such as on their official website or official social media profile), if available in the English/Latin alphabet." I suggest asking for comments at WT:MOS-JP. Dekimasu よ! 03:34, 11 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Support move back to the original title – I understand the "Against" points, but the "For" points for "Rakuen (Ken Hirai song)" seem to me to be more compelling. --IJBall (talk) 03:43, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Oppose - Evidence for the romanisation of the word 楽園 in general doesn't specifically help us when choosing a romanisation of a specific song title, if the song author has gone out of their way to tailor a romanisation. The officially sourced cover clearly has "Lakuen" written on it (you can see it again in a picture of the CD's booklet and an official flyer as "Lakuen", and while many sources indeed use "Rakuen", "Lakuen" is in use in citable English language publications (i.e. the Barks, JaME and Japan Times articles above). This is in line with WP:MJ's "determining common usage" section, which gives preference to "English-language reliable sources", or sourced Japanese sources that romanise a topic's name. In my experience, this section of the MOS is consistently used to justify using names for game/musician/TV series/etc articles so that they match whatever is used by the official body (TV station, record company, etc), which is why I moved the page without discussion. That an official body used a specifically chosen romanisation, and that this style was picked up by several reliable sources was enough evidence for me that this was common usage.
 * I don't know if the WP:CONSISTENCY argument works here. If you know the standard romanisation of 楽園 is rakuen then it makes sense, however if you don't, and simply pick up the CD, it would be natural to use "Lakuen" was that what was written on it, as you point out how many retailers have done.
 * Oh, and I removed the Billboard reference because it was literally, without giving a direct link or any context to the information. I'd be happy if you added it back, with a proper and fully formatted reference. All instances except the title reading were changed to "Lakuen" because that's what the MOS dictated should be done (pick a spelling and stick with it throughout the article), so if we decide to move the page to Rakuen, then it should all be consistently Rakuen. --Prosperosity (talk) 10:27, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
 * WP:CONSISTENCY would also apply to English sources calling this song "Rakuen" - as for "so if we decide to move the page to Rakuen, then it should all be consistently Rakuen" yes it should, but LAKuEN can still be shown in lead, as a stylism, as it was before you removed all uses of Rakuen from the article. I am restoring lead as created. In ictu oculi (talk) 02:33, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
 * That was an interim consistency while we discuss the title. Its current title in article space is Lakuen, so all mentions of the song should be Lakuen ("In all cases, the same romanization should be used for the article title and the body text (within that article and within the body text of other articles)."). If it is decided to move the page to Rakuen, then we can change them all then. I'm confused as to why you have a problem with what the MOS says, it seems fairly straightforward.
 * Also, please cite references properly. " " is insufficient, it doesn't link to a webpage or reference a book, state the publisher/author/access date, and doesn't even use the reference template. If you don't use proper formatting I'll remove it again and replace it with something that uses proper format styles. --Prosperosity (talk) 03:43, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
 * You should restore the lead of the article to the state it was before you altered and moved it. The Billboard refs are: Mar 18 p.52, Mar 25 p.56 Apr 1 p.80, Apr 15 p.56, Apr 22 p54, Apr 20 p.72 May 13 p.122, May 20 p.88, May 27 p.64, Jun 3 p.70 Jun 10 p.58 Jun 17 p.88, Jun 24 p.98, Jul 1 p.48 In ictu oculi (talk) 03:47, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Incidentally, I do not want to receive any further communication about this article. Thanks. In ictu oculi (talk) 03:53, 16 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Oppose: As per the guidelines at WP:MOS-JA, the non-standard romanization "Lakuen" is fine if it is the form officially used and also used in multiple reliable sources. I would submit that the sources we have for "Lakuen" (Japan Times, Barks, Jame World, etc) have actually done their homework and bothered to check the actual title of the single they are discussing, rather than just machine-translating as in the case of Billboard and iTunes. Also, In ictu oculi complains that the renderings "Rakuen" and "LAKuEN" also need to be added to the article lead, but that are already included, so I don't see what the problem is. In short, it would be bizarre to name the article "Rakuen" when the single itself clearly reads "Lakuen". --DAJF (talk) 00:13, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
 * The issue I would take with this point is that all of the pages linked to from the Rakuen disambiguation page are equally able to be transliterated as "Lakuen," were one so inclined and not limited by a particular system of romanization. This implies that the base title Lakuen is automatically as ambiguous as Rakuen, which would suggest Lakuen (Ken Hirai song). Dekimasu よ! 05:36, 12 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Sorry, but I'm not quite sure what you mean by this. I don't think anyone is suggesting that any other "Rakuen" articles should be rewritten using "Lakuen" unless that is the way they are commonly rendered. The discussion is solely about Ken Hirai's single, which is officially rendered (on the cover) as "Lakuen". And if this article is the only one using "Lakuen", there is no obvious need for disambiguation in the title. --DAJF (talk) 06:01, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
 * As far as I know, none of the others on the dab is commonly rendered as either "Rakuen" or "Lakuen." However, they are all commonly rendered as 楽園, which can be transliterated as either "Rakuen" or "Lakuen." The fact that Wikipedia (and Hepburn romanization) prefers to transliterate ら as "ra" and not "la" does not mean that the transliteration "Lakuen" thus becomes unambiguous; that transliteration is still as applicable to the other articles listed at the dab as to this song. The pronunciation of the titles is identical either way, alveolar flap. Dekimasu よ! 07:30, 13 December 2014 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.