Talk:Tadao Sato

Requested move (1)

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. 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 move request was: page moved. Vegaswikian (talk) 19:44, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Tadao Satō → Tadao Sato –

This person is known as "Tadao Sato" without the macron in the name on the only book he has published in English. I am not sure why the article title has the macron, since this contravenes the rule here which says that the name shouldn't be macronized if the person doesn't use that form. JoshuSasori (talk) 10:09, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment. A book cover is just art. The authoritative version of the author's name is the one that appears on the title page, which is what the book gets cataloged under. In this case, that would be Tadao Satō, as you can see on WorldCat. The article is out of date. In 2008, a second book of his was translated into English, Kenji Mizoguchi. He also has a macron as the author of that book. Kauffner (talk) 12:53, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I have the book Currents in Japanese Cinema sitting next to my computer as I type this. There is no macron on the name anywhere inside the book, except under a "Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data" section. The name "Tadao Sato" appears without a macron under the author's introduction and repeatedly throughout the translator's introduction. I looked at the above "Kenji Mizoguchi" book on Google book preview, and not only is there not a macron on the cover, there is no macron anywhere, not even on the "Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data" section. JoshuSasori (talk) 01:04, 17 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Support. The default should be not have unusual, nontypeable characters in the title if they can be avoided without difficulty. They make it more difficult to search for the article and more difficult to link to it. The macron is considerably less familiar than the umlaut or grave accent. The macron here seems to be supported by WP:MOS-JA, but those standards go directly against WP:COMMONNAME. I assume the version of the name with the macron will remain boldface in the opening, per WP:LEAD. Kauffner (talk) 16:15, 23 February 2012 (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. No further edits should be made to this section.

Currents in Japanese cinema
As noted in the above discussion about the rename, the book "Currents in Japanese cinema" doesn't use a macron anywhere except in a note for librarians. The other book doesn't use a macron anywhere at all. JoshuSasori (talk) 03:58, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Similarly for Imamura Shohei no Sekai, the name is given as Tadao Sato romanized on the final page. JoshuSasori (talk) 01:43, 11 March 2012 (UTC)


 * I was considering buying Mr. Satō's epic Nihon Eiga-shi as a Christmas present for myself (I wanted a book on film, and when I typed this title into Amazon his name immediately came up). Unfamiliar with his work, I checked Japanese Wikipedia, and was surprised to see there was an English Wikilink. Coincidentally, this person's name is very similar to the last article I started. (Put simply, I did not follow JoshuSasori here!)
 * The policy on Wikipedia is that for modern (living) individuals, we use the macron unless they prefer to spell their name without it. A translated book (he did not write it in English) is no indication of his personal preference. Google Books also lists the author's name as Tadao Satō. Kauffner's above argument that the macron is difficult to type and "unfamiliar" is irrelevant, because Wikipedia has made it very simple to create redirects for variant spellings, etc.
 * I have no intention of getting in another dog fight (hound fight?) with anyone, and I will try to remain civil in this discussion. I hope JoshuSasori and other users will do the same, and I hope JoshuSasori will take into account the evidence I have presented that Mr. Satō doesn't actually use the non-macronned spelling of his name, and take this as an opportunity to prove his good faith and willingness to accept Wikipedia policies. WP:JTITLE is pretty clear that he needs to have personally used the non-macronned spelling himself for the policy of applying macrons not to apply here.
 * (By the way, I did just place the order on Amazon while typing this comment. When I get the book, I will be sure to check if it spells the author's name in roman letters at any point. It must be agreed that a book written by the person in question, rather than a selection of essays compiled and translated by someone else, is a more reliable source on how this person chooses to spell his own name.)
 * elvenscout742 (talk) 07:17, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Requested move (2)

 * 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 not moved. --BDD (talk) 22:53, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Tadao Sato → Tadao Satō – This page was moved to its current location based on two votes (see above). However, one of the arguments presented was flawed in its claiming that pages shouldn't default to the macronned spelling because it is difficult to search/link, etc. Wikipedia allows (encourages) us to create redirects and so on wherever appropriate, and this is not a real issue. The other argument (that of the nominator) was apparently based on a misunderstanding of the policy. Wikipedia uses macrons for the names of people, unless that person specifically uses the non-macronned themselves. The translated book that is cited is no indication that the subject of this article himself chooses to spell his name this way in English. Additionally, and most importantly, I have found that at least one of his books (which he wrote and saw enter print himself) spells his name in roman on the cover WITH A MACRON. Another of his books spells it without a macron. Can we assume he doesn't have a personal preference, then, and go back to the default Wikipedia romanization? elvenscout742 (talk) 07:48, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Before I posted the above move request, JoshuSasori posted a personal attack/assumption of bad faith on my part. This resulted in an edit conflict, so I will just respond here: I clearly explained that this is not about him or me. I am not "hounding" him. I happened across this article on a Japanese critic who as far as I know had never written in English. I was therefore surprised that the article was under its current title. I just want to have a civilized discussion. Why can't we do that? elvenscout742 (talk) 07:48, 25 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Oppose - there is only very, very weak evidence that Tadao Sato uses a macron (grainy picture of a Japanese book cover, a few library catalogues), and there is very, very strong evidence that he is known by the unmacronned form in the English speaking world. It's just possible that there is some incredibly unlikely chain of errors, bizarre coincidences, or a far-fetched conundrum of miscommunications which somehow led to his name being unmacronned on his most famous book, and on other English-language publications, but in all probability this is in line with his own choice. Even if not so, the fact that the books are published without a macron and he is generally referred to without a macron means that this is the name by which he is usually known. JoshuSasori (talk) 01:17, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Oppose - Sato did use a macron in his name in some early publications, and journal and periodical articles. But from late 1990s onwards, there is a trend of 'Westernising' Romaji names by stylising them as English names without macrons to preserve consistency in the English language market outside Japan. However, most still retain macrons in their Romaji names for references, appendixes and English-language publications in the Japanese market. So I suggest having both by stylising this way: Tadao Sato (佐藤 忠男 Satō Tadao). No macron in English and a macron in Romaji. Since en.Wikipedia is in English, his English name shouldn't have a macron, mainly because of the fact he did publish his recent English-language books without a macron in his name, which is in accordance with the trend from the late 1990s and onwards. I'm happy to provide examples of this trend if requested. 0zero9nine (talk) 04:56, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
 * The above argument by JoshuSasori is irrelevant -- that third-party translators have spelled his name without a macron was already established, but how he spells his name is all that matters here. 0zero9nine's argument is interesting though, although it seems to hinge on a somewhat liberal interpretation of the policy here: is there a specific source that says he used to romanize his name with a macron but since the late '90s has changed? General trends are not relevant here, since all that matters is how he spells his name; if there is no evidence that he spells it with a macron then we are still supposed to default to the standard Hepburn on English Wikipedia. elvenscout742 (talk) 12:57, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
 * if there is no evidence that he spells it with a macron then we are still supposed to default to the standard Hepburn on English Wikipedia - you are wrong, please refer to WP:JATITLE. JoshuSasori (talk) 13:02, 27 December 2012 (UTC)


 * All right, elvenscout742. Here you go: Greetings from the President, Tadao Sato, a 2011 letter by Sato as the head of the JIMI (Japan Institute of Moving Images). This alone should be enough; even though it's possible he didn't actually write it in English, but the fact it's published under his name is enough. If that's still not good enough for you, then:
 * There's this profile, at the Japan Agency for Cultural Affairs' World Cultural Forum 2010 (8th), which shows how they styled his name in English. He also held a talk (Japanese Cinema: Up Close and Personal) at the National Film Theatre, another talk at the Japan Foundation UK and another at the Embassy of Japan UK, all in London, last year. His name was spelt Sato in all NFT/JF/embassy literature from these events. Can you honestly tell me that the Embassy of Japan would dare to screw up his name?
 * He's also made contributions to the British Film Institute's department of publications including the BFI's Sight and Sound magazine (his last contribution to this magazine is in 2008). In almost all these instances, he styled his name as Sato. The only times he didn't leave off the macron in his name are, as far as I can see, a 1980 essay and a 1984 essay he wrote for the BFI. This is why I believe he's one of those who chose to observe the Romaji/English trend. Like the others, he didn't do it suddenly and consistently at first. He switched back and forth until the late 1990s when he finally became consistent.
 * All that said, I feel you shouldn't imply that Sato wouldn't notice how his name is spelt in English. He's not that ignorant. You know that Sato, as an academic and the president of a university, would throw a fit if his name was spelt inappropriately, right? Academics usually care about how they are credited, and event organisers do care about getting contributors' names right, particularly if they want them back for future events. So, we should go by the name he's known as in the English-speaking world outside Japan. That's my last word on this topic. 0zero9nine (talk) 16:49, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
 * 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.

Translation of seishin...
JoshuSasori has altered my translation of seishin as "psychology" and changed it to "spirit". The word can mean both, although it doesn't usually mean "spirit" in the way the English translation now implies (it looks like "spirit of the times"/Zeitgeist or some such, which is closer to the Japanese kokoro or some such). It could theoretically be translated as "spirit" rather than "psychology" (indeed it might be preferable), but it would depend on the content of the book, and JoshuSasori has said that he has not read the book. Additionally, the synopsis on Amazon states: "Because Im's father was a leftist (?), he experienced significant hardship, and after moving from one job to another, before throwing himself into film-making. Through detailed analysis of Im's life and works, [this book] explains the han (bitterness, resentment) that is a major traditional topic of Korean film, [and it is] a ground-breaking thesis on Korean culture."

I admit that I have not read the book either, but given the above I judged that "psychology" was probably the superior translation.

It seems we can avoid the issue entirely by changing the reference to 韓国映画入門, which he co-authored with 李英一. The question is whether we want to stick to a work he wrote all by himself and face the issue of interpreting the title of a book none of us has read, or go out of our way to mention that he co-authored a book on Korean cinema.

(And by "reference" above I mean "言及" and not "参照". :P )

elvenscout742 (talk) 14:47, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
 * For what it's worth, both 'spirit' and 'psychology' are incorrect in the context of the title Kankoku-eiga no Seishin: Im Kwon-taek to sono Jidai. Makes much more sense to translate it as The Ethos of Korean Cinema: Im Kwon-taek and His Times. 0zero9nine (talk) 20:21, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't know why you think so. "spirit" is perfectly OK as a translation here. You can check this by Googling for "*の精神" "spirit of *" and find millions of places where the translation I supplied is used. "Ethos of..." is another possible valid translation though. JoshuSasori (talk) 23:38, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I wasn't disputing 'spirit' as a translated word. I was saying that, for me, it doesn't work as part of the title. You know that "の精神" can also be translated as "mind(set) of" (in the sense of 'mentality'), "(spiritual) psyche of", "(mental/spiritual) state of", "spirit of (a fighter)" (e.g. the goal/intention/spiritual purpose of a fighter), etc. 精 is a state of being and 神 has a sense of purpose. If it's just 'spirit', then 神 wouldn't be needed. His suggestion 'psychology' (or 'psyche' in a clinical sense, which is what I think he meant) doesn't work either because 精 wouldn't be needed otherwise.
 * I would personally choose 'psyche', as in 'The Psyche of Korean Cinema', but it doesn't work in English as it's more clinical in English. So, I felt 'ethos' would make a good compromise as it's a common catch-all word in that sense. My contribution was only intended as a suggestion, though, so it's entirely up to you and others to consider it or not. No skin off my nose. :) 0zero9nine (talk) 03:00, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
 * OK, thanks for clarifying that. JoshuSasori (talk) 04:19, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
 * @Elvenscout754: "psychology" in Japanese is 心理 (shinri). If it was about psychology it would be called "韓国映画の心理". You can check this in any Japanese to English dictionary. I challenge you to find examples where ”* の精神" is translated as "psychology of *". Here is a Google search to get you started: . JoshuSasori (talk) 23:55, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
 * JoshuSasori, the actual meaning of the word, and how it is translated in different contexts, is not defined by J-E dictionaries. J-E dictionaries only give a limited number of possible translations. The translator's dictionary ALC does indeed fail to put "psychology" under seishin, but it does put "psychological" under seishin no, and hurting someone's seishin is to cause "psychological harm". Therefore, my translation was valid as far as the information I had went. I ment "the psychology of Korean cinema" as in the "mentality", not like the study of the mind or some such. I am however open to 0zero9nine's solution of "psyche", and given your above post I would guess you feel the same way. I am therefore changing it to "psyche". elvenscout742 (talk) 05:11, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
 * OK then, it's not very important. JoshuSasori (talk) 05:13, 26 December 2012 (UTC)