User talk:Jefu

Names of modern Japanese emperors
I wanted to let you know that I proposed that we move the discussions related to the names of the latest four emperors to Wikipedia_talk:Manual of Style (Japan-related articles). -- Taku 23:11, August 3, 2005 (UTC)

Japanese dates
I'd like to let you know that the Wikipedia Manual of Style states: "Dates before the adoption of the Gregorian calendar on October 15, 1582 must be given in the Julian calendar and not converted." Thus I am modifying some of your recent conversions of the birth and death dates of Japanese emperors. Only link their Julian dates. &mdash; Joe Kress 22:09, August 16, 2005 (UTC)


 * Your edits to the Japanese emperor articles are incorrect. The dates that are given in the article are not Julian dates, they are dates according to the Japanese lunisolar calendar. I provided Gregorian equivalents of those dates in the footnotes. I knew that the Gregorian calendar wasn't adopted until 1583, but I wasn't aware of the Wiki rule about providing only Julian dates before 1583. In any event, what you should have done is converted the Gregorian equivalent dates that I provided in my footnote to Julian. I'll go back and fix them but please do not change any more articles.

This appears to be a common problem whenever Japanese is translated into English. Since 1873, the Gregorian calendar has been used in Japan. Thus it is now correct to translate ichigatsu as January, nigatsu as February, etc. But before 1873, a lunisolar calendar was used which could have twelve or thirteen lunar months, none of which coincided with either Julian or Gregorian solar months. Appearently, if either you or your source saw the month ichigatsu (or mutsuki), it would be translated as January, which is wrong for a lunisolar calendar. Instead, ichigatsu (or mutsuki) should be translated as Month 1, nigatsu (or kisaragi) as Month 2, etc. If the lunar months are erroneously translated into solar names, how would the intercalary month be translated? It would be ridiculous to translate an intercalary sixth month as June II, for example!

Furthermore, the lunisolar calendar never used a long sequential series of year numbers as does the Anno Domini era. Instead, nengo or Japanese era names were used. For most of the year, a one-to-one correspondence exists between a particular nengo year (first, second, etc.) and a particular AD year. But if the event occurred in juunigatsu (or shihasu), the last month of the lunisolar calendar, but generally equivalent to January, such an event would have occurred near the end of a nengo year, but it would already be in the subsequent Julian or Gregorian solar year. Thus I question the 'Japanese' year for the death of Emperor Konin of Japan as '781'. It would be best to only romanize the nengo, or possibly to translate it, although there appears to be some objection to translating the Showa era as the "enlightenment and harmony" era, for example. Because the last year of Emperor Konin's reign appears to have been designated as the Teno era (if the lists of nengo eras are not garbled by this same translation problem), his death erroneously given as December 23, 781 was really Teno 1 Month 12 Day 23 in the true Japanese calendar. Only after giving a Japanese date in that form should it be converted into the Julian calendar as January 7, 782. &mdash; Joe Kress 21:31, August 17, 2005 (UTC)


 * The problems you discuss above are nonexistent. Japanese dates (at least in the many Japanese language sources that I have seen) do not give the months as one through 13. There are only 12 months, even in Japanese. The thirteenth month that appears in some years is known in Japanese as an uruuzuki, or leap month, and it is given a specific number 1 through 12. So, for example, in the year 706 the uruuzuki was January and the months are counted January, Leap January, February...December. For 711 the uruuzuki was June so the months are January...May, June, Leap June, July...December. You can call translate them into English as month 1, month 2, etc., but there is no particular reason to be so literal and not translate them into the month names we are accustomed to, as there are always the same 12 months, and possibly one leap month every several years.


 * As for the years, Your are correct that the change of years occurs at slightly different times in the Japanese calendar and the Julian or Gregorian calendar. But this has never prevented writers (and many, if not most, Japanese sources give western years as well as the nengō) from simply counting all of the months from one through twelve (including the leap month, if applicable) as belonging to the same year. Thus in the Japanese calendar Kōnin's death would universally be referred to as 781 by the Japanese calendar. And I've never encountered a Japanese source that takes the trouble to convert Japanese dates into Gregorian or Julian dates (unless it is an event that involves another country, like the arrival of Perry in Uraga) so no Japanese sources would note Kōnin's death as occuring in 782, although that is the year in which he died per the Julian calendar. So there is no confusion with years either.


 * So in short, there is no translation problem at all. Japanese sources are quite uniform in the dates that they give for events prior to 1873 (including the Western year), and this translates directly into English, so long as you refer to the uruuzuki as leap [month]. There is a discussion going on in Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (Japan-related articles) regarding this topic that you are free to join if you wish. -Jefu 22:41, August 17, 2005 (UTC)

I never said that when there are 13 months, they are numbered 1-13. I even gave an example of an intercalary sixth month. Months 1-12 are not January to December, the months we are accustomed to. I will continue the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (Japan-related articles). &mdash; Joe Kress 04:10, August 18, 2005 (UTC)

Japanese date conversion sites
Hi, at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (Japan-related articles) you mention that thanks to several online sites, [Japanese dates] are relatively easy to convert. Can you please let us know what those sites are, so we can go take a look at them? Thanks. Noel (talk) 02:23, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

Redirects
You're making a lot of double redirects. You need to check the pages you're redirecting to to make sure they're the page with the article, and not just redirects themselves. Double redirects don't work. Zoe 08:49, August 21, 2005 (UTC)


 * I left her a note, explaining what was going on. Noel (talk) 04:28, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

Macrons in emperor names
I've started in on the emperors. What are we doing about macrons in emperors' names? Should we have e.g. "Emperor Kosho" at "Emperor Kōshō" (with redirects from Kosho)? Noel (talk) 22:18, 22 August 2005 (UTC)


 * That's a completely different debate that has been discussed before and I'm not sure agreement was ever reached. Although I agree that macron titles would probably be better, I think the titles should be left for now without the macrons (as they have been until now) and that we should have redirects at the macron names. (i.e. Emperor Kōshō pointing to Emperor Kosho). A lot of people are against titles with macrons because they are hard to enter into the search box (although I agree that a redirect would take care of it.) Another objection is that the macron letters are not technically part of the English language. Anyway, that's a debate for another day I think. -Jefu 22:34, August 22, 2005 (UTC)

Re: Japanese emperors
I just received your message. I was cleaning up many double redirects. As per your message, I will not change redirects for Japanese emperors for now, but there should be a standard of naming articles.--Jusjih 22:41, 22 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Ah, I just saw this. I was working forward from the start of the list, checking everything out, etc. I will drop that for the moment and go straight to moving the emperors you couldn't move. You can follow behind and fix anything. You can look at Special:Contributions/Jnc if you want to see which one I am up to. Noel (talk) 23:25, 22 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Well, I've done the Yamato, Asuka, and Nara period Emperors; that brings us up to #49 out of 125. (I also deleted a flock of bogus "Emperor X" (etc) redirects to Empresses.) My eyes are starting to glaze over (plus to which I'm tired), so I'd better call it a night before I screw something up badly. I'll do the rest tomorrow.
 * Also, if you're going to update all the pages that point to them, please try and do each on in one edit, to minimize the amount of disk you use (each separate version is stored in full on the disk); e.g. edit List of Emperors of Japan once, fixing all of the entries, instead of once for every emperor. Noel (talk) 04:26, 23 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Ditto to what Jusjih said. I'll leave the cleaning to you. It's just that double redirects irritate me more than anything, especially when cleaning up after move wars. &#38738;&#12356;(Aoi) 05:43, 23 August 2005 (UTC)


 * hi Jeff,

I see. Because that was nowhere to be seen on the discussion page on naming convention, therefore I was not aware that such a new rule existed? But I will leave it to you then and the administrators. good luck.. Gryffindor 23:15, August 25, 2005 (UTC)

Japanese emperor redirects
Sorry about that. Randomly landed on the page and it seemed odd. Pengo 00:32, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

Re: Japanese emperors
I (and others) have been working on double redirects from here Computer help desk/cleanup/double redirects/20050713. You might want to check as there may be others. Cheers. CambridgeBayWeather 09:39, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

Older Japenese Dates
Thanks for the heads up. I've looked at the discussion, and think that clarity is the important point. Good luck with trying to achieve it! By the way the key reason for wikifying dates is to make the prefernces/dates work properly, so even if they are ambigous or dubious, it's probably worth doing. Rich Farmbrough 16:18, 20 September 2005 (UTC)


 * It is NOT worth making date preferences work properly if the resulting date links to events that did not occur at the same time as the dated event. The dates are not ambiguous or dubious&mdash;the events are known to have occurred on a specific Japanese date. But that is one or two months after the stated Julian/Gregorian date. &mdash; Joe Kress 21:40, 20 September 2005 (UTC)


 * One or two months after the Julian or Gregorian gives four potential values for each date. The link is not to a specific date anyway, as in the 17th of January A.D. 1226: there will be two links one to 17th January, which is extremely unlikely to be followed, and one to 1226 which is merely very unlikely to be followed.  The solution is to convert back to the lunisolar calender in use, and give the correct western date, specifying old style, new style or both. Rich Farmbrough 16:49, 30 September 2005 (UTC)


 * He means approximately one or two months. It isn't a simple conversion. And I agree with Joe that there is absolutely no use whatsoever in linking "Seventeenth Day of the First Month" or "January 17" or whatever you want to call it, if it isn't actually January 17 by the Julian/Gregorian calendar. You might as well link any date to January 17. And the year could well be a year off as well, if the Japanese date was in the first month but by the J/G calendar it was still December. Bottom line is only J/G dates should be wikified. -Jefu 17:06, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

My edit was incorrect?
Really? What edit?


 * Who are you? (Please sign your comments). If you are the person who just changed the two references to Emperor Heisei, then yes, those edits were incorrect. He won't simply be referred to by that name, he will actually be renamed Heisei Tennō. His name will no longer by Akihito. And because it is a name, it doesn't mean Emperor of the Heisei Era, it's just his name. By recent tradition an emperor's posthumous name takes the same name as the era over which he (or possibly soon, she) reigned, but Heisei should not be mistaken as an adjective. It isn't "the Heisei Emperor" it is simply Heisei Tennō or Emperor Heisei. -Jefu 09:53, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

?
Hi Jefu, I'm afraid I don't quite follow what you meant with your question or are talking about... ? Gryffindor  20:16, 11 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Just out of curiosity, who is this mysterious "we"? I have seen japanese articles where macrons are used. However if you want to move it to Emperor Komyo without macrons, I will not stand in the way. I can help with the fixing of the redirects again in that case if needed... Gryffindor  23:02, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

ps: Listen, I just bumped into this Empress Go-Sakuramachi article with double-redirect, like what on earth is going on there? Is it what that Arrigo did back then? Just tell me what the final version is and I'll help you (apparently plural) out with fixing those double-redirects, this is like insane... Is it "Empress Go-Sakuramachi" or "Go-Sakuramachi Empress"? Gryffindor 23:22, 11 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Yes, I know. This is the legacy that Arrigo left us. They are being fixed. We have made it through about a hundred and have thirty or so to go. You are welcome to help with circular redirects, but only an administrator can move the articles to the proper titles. Thanks. -Jefu 23:25, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Yeah, it's the circular redirects I meant. Maybe I can help fixing the links in each article, and then when the administrator finally moves it, everything will be in place already? But could you tell me what the final status of Empress Go-Sakuramachi is supposed to be? Or maybe I can get in touch with the administrator you are working with and help out in the meantime when you are absent? Gryffindor  09:43, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
 * The problem with changing redirects before moving the article is that people tend to quickly notice them and change them back. I haven't run into any other circular redirects so far, other than the Go-Sakuramachi article (the title will end up being "Empress Go-Sakuramachi"), so it probably isn't a huge problem. I need to bug the administrator soon anyway so that we can finish up the rest of the articles. He's been busy working on something else, so I've been trying to leave him alone, but it has been a few weeks since we last moved any so I'll send him an e-mail. Thanks. -Jefu 11:13, 12 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Well again, I can get in touch with this administrator of yours (I'm asuming this is User:Jnc) as well and help out with the sorting of these articles. I think we could make this a group project because this work is quite substantial that needs to be fixed. Gryffindor  12:59, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

Japanese emperor double redirects
Thank you. It's always appreciated. I know that some redirects have a reason for their existence. --Woohookitty 14:29, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

Sorry about that! Thank you for letting me know before I came across any more. I'll avoid any that appear in future lists of double redirects. Flauto Dolce 15:08, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

Same here. I wasn't aware of the moves. (On the positive side, if the Emperor pages get moved, the double-redirect detectors will pick them up and fix them again afterwards....) --Russ Blau (talk) 23:22, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
 * A couple of questions:
 * 1) What is the intended "correct" form of the title of articles about Emperors, once your renaming project is completed?  It might be a good idea to provide a link to a project page that explains what is going on, for the benefit of others who stumble upon these broken redirects (and looking up at the rest of your Talk page, it seems that this happens quite a bit).
 * "Emperor X". See Manual of Style (Japan-related articles).-Jefu 23:28, 3 November 2005 (UTC)


 * 1) What is taking so long?  If there is a consensus on how these articles are supposed to be titled, it should be fairly simple to move them to the correct titles.
 * The correct titles are all blocked from previous edits, so I need an admin's assistance. The admin who was helping me has been embroiled in other things, but I just sent him an e-mail and asked him if we can finish up the rest. We've done about 100 of 130 or so articles, so there isn't much left.-Jefu 23:28, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
 * --Russ Blau (talk) 15:53, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

Proposed Earless Hoichi move...
I noted that you made an edit to that page, and thought you might be interested in my proposal to move it to what is an overwhelmingly more common name - "Earless Hoichi" barely even deserves a redirect. elvenscout742 01:15, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

Re...
I don't want to get in an edit war with you - clearly you know much more about the subject than I at present, anyway - but I'm pretty sure WP convention (at least in the bits right after the Japanese names) is to use Revised Hepburn. It's less vague than the "traditional" one you've been enforcing on certain articles (notably Emperor Jimmu and Empress Gemmei, in my experience). elvenscout742 00:25, 5 January 2006 (UTC)


 * The rule is in Manual of Style (Japan-related articles). While it could stand to be written more clearly, it certainly doesn't forbid the use of m instead of n, particularly in article titles. And note the suggestion to check Google when in doubt. That's why I pointed out that the m is used in the overwhelming majority of instances of Emperor Jimmu and Emperor Temmu on the Internet. The articles were already spelled with m's when I first came to Wikipedia, and I'm not animated enough about using modified Hepburn to implement the change. In any event, my biggest problem with what you did is that it is a major article move, which Wiki policy clearly states should be discussed before being implemented. My second biggest problem is that you only did it to one out of several Japanese emperor articles that would need to be changed to be consistent. And I agree that the romanization in the parentheses following the Japanese should be in modified Hepburn, since modified Hepburn is favored from a linguistic sense. But as for the titles and general use, like I said spelling it with an m is the overwhelmingly popular way of doing it, and it prevents people from running around saying things like Jinn-moo or Tenn-moo which are incorrect. -Jefu 08:21, 5 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I suppose you're right about the article titles. The only reason I moved it without discussion is because at the time I had believed that article was the misfit, rather than the rule. It was only after you undid it all that I checked some others. And if I have your agreement I'll just change the bracketted spelling on Emperor Jimmu. elvenscout742 16:58, 5 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Fine with me. Thanks.-Jefu 22:58, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Capitalisation
I appreciate that the article on the Japanese Emperor had too much capitalisation after I had gone through and capitalised all occurrences :). However, this raises the question of when such titles should be capitalised and when they should not. I've checked other articles like "Prime Minister", "President", and "Kaiser" and found that there is not consistency within articles, which flip-flop between caps and non-caps, although the tendency seems to be to start out with caps and then, part way through the article, move to non-caps. But there are some strange and inconsistent usages, like this sentence: "When the National Assembly is controlled by opponents of the President however, the president can find himself marginalized with the opposition party prime minister exercising most of the power."

The reason I changed to caps for all occurrences of "Emperor" was to ensure consistency, which the article lacked. The other alternative is to use no caps, but this should be applied consistently to all such articles, including Prime Minister, President, etc. (And no exceptions just because Americans are used to seeing the title of their President capitalised!)

I haven't checked the Wikipedia rules on this, but just wondered what your thoughts were.

As for the entire article on the Japanese Emperor, I feel that it is poorly written and could use a bit of tightening up. For instance, the point that the word "emperor" is just an English translation of "tennō" seems to made at several places in the article, as well the point that Japanese emperors are not referred to by their names.

Bathrobe 01:19, 9 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks. Actually, I wasn't making the change to change what you did, so much as what you did drew my attention to the inconsistency throughout the article. In any event, the word emperor should only be capitalized when it is being used as part of a name. It is one of the clearest (though very often not followed) rules in punctuation. I agree that it should be applied consistently, but I don't have the time or energy to find all the articles and correct them. I'll just try to focus on the Japanese history articles and let someone else deal with the others. But prime minister, president, etc. should all be in lower case, unless it preceeds a persons name.


 * As for this article in general, I completely agree that it could use a lot of work. I noticed the same things you did as I was going through it last night and I would fully support a re-write. The paragraph that explains post-humous naming was written by me, and I would like to keep that information in if possible, because there is a lot of confusion over how to refer to Japanese emperors in English (that has been discussed ad nauseum in Manual of Style (Japan-related articles). Thanks.-Jefu 03:55, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

I agree with your points. I guess someone should now go and cut those Presidents and Prime Ministers down to size!

One other thing: I feel that macrons don't belong in the normal English text of Wikipedia. To that end, I have changed 'shōgun' to 'shogun' at some places. On the other hand, it is absolutely essential to indicate the use of macrons somewhere. In this case, the article on 'shogun' should indicate that the Japanese pronunciation is 'shōgun'. I don't know how you feel about this. I do notice that the issue has been discussed. I do oppose, however, the substitution of 'ou' for 'ō', which seems to be becoming rather common on Wikipedia.

I originally put a note here concerning problems I had with the article itself. I've rewritten them an placed them on the Talk Page for Emperor of Japan.

Bathrobe 05:03, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Server space
Sorry! I didn't realize the effects of editing were that drastic on server space! Thanks for letting me know, and I'll be more careful about it in the future :) Woogums 20:02, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Emperor of Japan
I really don't know why you reverted me at Emperor of Japan. Mind to explain? --Jiang 18:17, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Your profile say you speak fluent Japanese. Either you can't read Japanese well or your reading are limited to Japanese mass media. Current Tennou is alreadly refered as Heisei Tennou (a neutral reference) while Tennou Heika (His majesty) is reverential one often employed in media. Go and find another Japanese and ask whether "Heisei Tennou is a posthumous title". You might cause some to puke from nose if they are drinking something. My "emperor showa" error was a result of hastly trying to correct this error in so many different places. Now, it appear that you appear to be the source of this. I appreciate if you do the job for me. After all, you know where you made your edit. I don't. FWBOarticle 03:52, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

ahh, do you not realise from my engrish that I'm a japanese?


 * At first I thought you were Japanese, but then based on what you were saying, I figured you were either not Japanese (Chinese or Korean maybe?) or just very young...

I didn't puke from nose but I did say, "wow, who wrote this" in my head. I googled and came up with the answer in one search.


 * You can't come up with "the answer" in one search, because there is no one rock solid answer. But it looks like you understand that now.

What you said was only technically but only partially correct. Moreover, it is quite far off from what is happening in real world. The problem is that many Japanese especially young one don't know the technicality you mentioned. You gross over the fact that the current Tennou is already refered as Heisei Tennou by large number of Japanese.


 * There are a lot of young Japanese who can't name the current prime minister and who have no idea who to use keigo correctly. So I don't care at all how they refer to the emperor. When they all grow up, if enough of them are still referring to the current emperor by his posthumous name, even though it hasn't been given to him (or possibly to her...), then we can change the description in the encylopedia.

Only in official occasion, "Heisei Tennou" is avoided. The neutral expression employed in media is Gen Tennou (Current Tennou). On top of that the current Tennou's official title isn't Tennou Heika, it is "今上天皇" (Current Tennou). So Tennou Heika reference is both technically and linguistically wrong.


 * No it isn't. The entry says nothing about this being his title. It only mentions how Japanese refer to him. And the biggest point is that nobody refers to him as "Akihito", which is what many in the West will be most familiar with. If it makes you feel better, I would support adding a statement to the effect of "However, an increasing number of young Japanese sometimes refer to the current emperor as Heisei Tenno, although this is technically incorrect." And you are also free to clarify how he is referred to in the media.

Just that Tennou Heika being the current title was somewhat typical indication of ignorance of Japanese linguistic that I assume posthumous title to be wrong as well. For this false assumption, I apologise. Please correct your mistake whereever you made it. Plus, please add clarification that "most Japanese refer the current tennou as Heisei Tennou but this is technically incorrect." If you can add "Gen Tennou" reference, it is better. FWBOarticle
 * Look what I found. "今上天皇" is technically incorrect as well. The correct title is "今上". Saying "今上天皇" is repeating the same thing twice []. It appear that there is no actual consensus over this issue in Japan.  Some say Heisei Tennou is valid as well. Thanks. It was enlightening. FWBOarticle


 * First of all, I have no idea who wrote that at the bottom of the article, or how widely accepted that opinion is. But both rationales sound pretty weak to me. Of course everyone will know who you mean if you say Heisei Tenno, but most educated Japanese will also think you simply wrong. The only exception sounds like it might be among Chinese and Korean history scholars, but I wonder if that isn't a custom that was begun by Chinese and Koreans who don't know how else to refer to him, or don't know the rule in Japan.


 * Now you have the right knowledge, you probably get to bust some Japanese of not knowing their own culture. I dodged the bullet because your knowledge was incomplet. hehehe (^^). FWBOarticle


 * Sorry, but I had the right knowledge to begin with. I'm quite familiar with 今上天皇 and its use, and I was already aware that it isn't an official title, just a way of referring to the emperor without using the honorific "heika". And, unless you're wearing a bullet proof vest, I'm not so sure you dodged any bullets here.-Jefu 06:56, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

What you doing usually make the whole thing bloat (hence difficult to follow). This isn't a internet forum. Please summarise your argument and put it in my page. See ya.FWBOarticle

Junihitoe
osu Jefu, I have a question. I am having a disagreement with User:Silentium about the junihitoe, see here. The user claims that the junihitoe is an example of how women were oppressed by heavy clothes, in my opinion this is completely absurd to state. Since I know you are knowledgeable on japanese things, maybe you could share your input Talk:Junihitoe, or maybe you know some other users who know about this? domou... Gryffindor 17:54, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Twelve Level Cap and Rank System
Hi Jeff. I see you reverted 'rei' back to 'rai'. I'm no expert, but 'rei' still looks right to me: it's the pronunciation given in the Japanese Wikipedia article 礼 []. It's also the pronunciation given in a book of Japanese history I'm reading (in Japanese). --Auximines 22:51, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Edits
Thanks for letting me know about the edits... I will try to edit larger chunks of article next time, regards Tensaibuta 14:04, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

history of japan
sorry, i didn't mean to be so rude, but it's just that this issue has been hashed out to death in various talk pages, mainly Talk:Japan and Talk:Yayoi period. there was a conspicuous campaign a while back to change reference to historic korea into "korean peninsula" or "asian mainland" while using "japan" for the same periods. this was done by several blatantly biased editors to subtly denigrate korean influence in japan, & this pov returns every so often. as has been repeatedly pointed out by various long-term editors interested in asian history, "korea", as with "japan," is commonly used in reputable publications & academic papers to refer to the civilization & geographic region, before the emergence of a unified centralized state. although it may be technically more accurate in some sense to use "korean peninsula," unbiased application of that principle would require changing mentions of "japan" and "china" in probably hundreds of popular and obscure articles, which is impractical & unnecessary. please review the arguments & citations at various talk pages. thanks. Appleby 14:48, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Nice meeting you again
Hi again... I'm that student of Stan's who you interviewed a couple of months back. Nice meeting you again (on someone's talk page, of all places!) - Sekicho 14:47, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Hello
I know this has nothing to do with Wikipedia, but what is a corporate finance attorney? Thanks. Good friend100 20:50, 4 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Hello. A corporate finance attorney is a transactional attorney, rather than a litigator (meaning he or she rarely gets involved in disputes between parties or criminal cases and never tries cases in court) who primarily represents corporations, rather than individuals, and who focuses on transactions like mergers and acquisitions, securities offerings (like initial public offerings) and other similar transactions.-Jefu 23:06, 4 July 2006 (UTC)


 * I see, thank you for the information. Good friend100 02:06, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

New Japanese city naming debate
Please join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (Japan-related articles). --Polaron | Talk 08:53, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Babelbox ja-1 wording
Hi. I noticed that you fixed Category:User ja-1 a while back. I've added some thoughts on Category talk:User ja-1 that I was hoping to get your input on. Thanks! --23:46, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Template:User simplified:no
Hello, would you consider moving this template to your userspace per WP:GUS? If not, it will probably be outright deleted.-- §hanel  13:24, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Kunrei-s(h)iki
Hello. In your recent post discussing Kunrei-s(h)iki, you make reference to "shinzyuku". There is an extra "h" in there. Your argument would be all the more stronger if you write it "sinzyuku". Unless there is need to comment, I am trying to stay out of another potentionally long debate about macrons. Bendono 05:17, 29 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Good point. I guess I just can't get into bad habits...I'll fix it. Thanks!-Jefu 05:46, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

"Yayoi section" in the Japan article
Jefu,

Will you please take a look at Talk:Japan again? I believe we may still be able to come to consensus between the three of us, including HongQiGong. Please tell us if any of our later suggestions sound alright to you. Thank you very much.--Endroit 01:04, 3 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Will you be willing to support the following version?....
 * The Yayoi period, starting around the 3rd century BC, marked the influx of new practices such as wet-rice farming, iron and bronze-making, and a new style of pottery, brought by migrants from the Chinese mainland and the Korean peninsula. With the development of Yayoi culture, a predominantly agricultural society emerged on the Japanese archipelago.
 * If you can support it, I'm sure we can have some consensus, and have a more stable version. Otherwise, we're back to square one.--Endroit 08:38, 3 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your support. I left a message with LordAmeth and John Smith's to see if they will support it also.--Endroit 09:03, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

いた！
So this is where you've been hiding out! Well, welcome to Wikipedia! （そっちのセリフか. . . ） Madler talk/contribs 15:57, 5 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I traded in one big time waster for an even bigger one...My crowning achievements here are this and this. I created them on a whim a few months ago, and it looks like they've both caught on to a certain extent. I also managed to impose a little harmony and common sense on how people refer to Japanese emperors and fiddled with a few history articles, but I've grown weary of all the misplaced arrogance and petty edit wars over ridiculous stuff. I'm probably going to be moving on from here soon as well.-Jefu 16:12, 5 January 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm with you brother. I only just got here, and I'm already involved in some stupid pissing contests. Still, I'm focusing on Basque, so hopefully I'll be able to contribute something. I like the userboxes! Maybe I'll try my hand at something. I'm a userbox minimalist myself, but I know the temptation... Madler talk/contribs 16:24, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:Bias Warning
Template:Bias Warning has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. --Eloquence* 00:54, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Families and clans
Thank you for following after me and cleaning up my mess regarding "Nakatomi family"-->"Nakatomi clan" and "Mononobe-shi"-->"Mononobe no uji". I remember discussing this issue with someone ages ago, but I never really got a good picture of it. If you could explain to me these distinctions (family/clan and shi/uji), or point me somewhere that explains it, I would be most appreciative. And then we can work on doing this correctly in the future. Thanks. LordAmeth 18:16, 10 January 2007 (UTC)


 * First, I think it should probably be translated as clan. Family implies a much closer blood relationship. Although there were certainly blood ties in the old uji, they weren't necessary, and the blood ties that did exist were often distant. And when discussing these groups in a historical context, you are most often going to be talking about uji, or clans. As for the distinction between shi and uji, I'm afraid there probably isn't any hard and fast rule. There are all kinds of words in Japanese history that have several accepted readings. I've heard Prince Shōtoku referred to as both Umayado and Umayato, for example. The Battle of Baekgang is read as both Hakusukinoe no Tatakai and Hakusonkō no Tatakai. 皇子 can be read Ōji or Miko (so I've heard both Naka no Ōe no Ōji and Naka no Ōe no Miko), etc. Similarly, you have some clan references that use the "shi" or "ji" reading, like Heishi or Minamoto clan. And this isn't necessarily just because those two happen to use the on'yomi readings of the clan name. I've actually heard both Soga-shi and Soga-uji as well as Fujiwara-shi and Fujiwara-uji. The reason I changed them to uji is because that is what the articles use in Japanese Wikipedia (so I'm assuming it is the more accepted reading), and we should probably try to be consistent. Actually, maybe the best thing would be to include both readings.-Jefu 05:10, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Alright. Thank you very much. LordAmeth 06:37, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Category:Kuge of Classical Japan
I'm curious as to why you've started depopulating this category. LordAmeth 14:28, 12 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Sorry. I know you created the category, and it wasn't my intention to undo your work. But I think we should be careful about using the word kuge, because it has had different specific meanings throughout history. Originally it referred to the emperor and the court itself. After cloistered rule it was used to refer to the emperor, as opposed to the cloistered emperor. In the Kamakura jidai, it came to mean court officials in Kyoto as opposed to military officials, or buke (武家), etc. For now, I just started taking out the Asuka period references, like kabane, twelve-level cap and rank, muraji, omi, etc., because kuge is never used in reference to those things. I think maybe the best thing is to name the category something more generic, like Japanese court officials, for example, to cover the items you are trying to cover.-Jefu 15:14, 12 January 2007 (UTC)


 * No need to apologize; I just wanted to make sure, for myself, what the logic was. I wish I understood pre-modern structures better, particularly Heian and pre-Heian, as I'm quite interested in it. But you seem to really know what you're talking about, so please do go ahead and do whatever you think is necessary. The main thing is simply that I felt that many of these articles should be moved to a new category, instead of uncategorized entirely. Just to take one example, the Nakatomi clan is now listed under "Japanese clans" and "Ancient Japan", with no indication in the categories of their important role at court or in the state rituals, etc. As you've likely seen, the categorization scheme I created includes "Aristocracy of Ancient Japan" prior to "Kuge of Classical Japan", since I was trying to be careful with the terminology. Should we make a new category, then, called "Aristocracy of Classical Japan," "Court nobility of Classical Japan," or something else? Thanks for your help in making this functional, and accurate. LordAmeth 17:37, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Macrons
Thanks for your work on use of macrons -- certainly a tedious and thankless task! One comment, though. In general, macrons inside category links should be avoided (See Categorization). An Ō would appear at the end, after the XYZ, and not between N and P where it should be. So, in categories, it seems best just use the non-macron version. Likewise, when the macron comes as the first letter of a title, as in the case of Oyama Iwao, using a macron in the title makes searching for the article more difficult (to impossible for someone unfamilar with macrons).--MChew 16:17, 13 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Regarding your first point, that's good to know. I hadn't thought of that. It's unfortunate, because it means there will be at least one area of irreparable inconsistency. Regarding your second point, I don't agree that macrons should not be used in titles for this reason. You just need to be sure there is a redirect from the unmacroned title.-Jefu 00:55, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Could you please expand on your edit summary of
 * moved Ōyama Iwao to Oyama Iwao: Macrons not to be used in titles ?

in this edit? The WP:MOS-JA no longer makes any distinction between titles and the text of the article when it comes to macrons. Thanks. Neier 21:34, 13 January 2007 (UTC)


 * I agree, it should not have been moved back. The concern you identify about being difficult to find is precisely what redirects are for (and a redirect was created automatically when I moved the article to the macron version of the title). A user will have no trouble finding this article just because the title contains macrons, even if it is the first letter.-Jefu 01:00, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

As an example, if you go to Category:Japanese people, you will note that two names are macroned. Ōno Kurobei and Ōtori Keisuke. Non-macronned Ono Kurobei results in a dead link, and a wikipedia search for Ono Kurobei reveals no results. Non-macronned Otori Keisuke only because the current macronned page is a re-direct from the original non-macroned page. Therefore, anyone not familiar with the Japanese language and/or unfamiliar/unable to use macrons in their search will not find Ōno Kurobei. This is why I believe that macrons should be eliminated from the title as well as from the categorization. The alternative is to re-direct every macronned title from a non-macronned version, which exactly what User:Jefu has done, although many users will either not be so diligent, or else will not go to the extra trouble when they create a new article involving a macronned title. If you feel strongly about moving the title of Oyama Iwao back to Ōyama Iwao, I have no objections, but feel that some policy or consensus should be reached for consistency. Although we are in disagreement on the title, WP:MOS-JA is quite clear when in comes to use of macrons in categories, as User:Neier has once kindly pointed out to me. --MChew 01:14, 14 January 2007 (UTC)


 * The policy is (and common sense should tell any author) that the non-macroned titled should be linked to the macroned title. Anyone who doesn't do this is simply violating policy. I don't think that is grounds for ditching the rule altogether and creating a glaring inconsistency. If one of us does happen to come across a missing non-macroned redirect, we should just create it rather than moving the title back to the non-macroned version.-Jefu 02:28, 14 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Okay. But I think that we will need an administrator's assistance to revert Oyama Iwao back to Ōyama Iwao. Sorry about that. --MChew 04:02, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Portal:Japan
Nice work on the anniversaries section! By the time you finish the input, we will be able to nominate the portal for featured status. Cheers! AQu01rius (User • Talk) 01:46, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Japanese titles
You wrote: “Rv, nobody cares, and this article isn't meant to be a record of everywhere a particularly title is used.” I agree totally. Further, this ’article is now an absolute mess with all its unfounded assertions that seem to be little more than the self-drawn conclusions of Japan buffs drawing on their observations in the highly reliable medium of poorly translated manga! In other words, I think the whole article needs to be torn to shreds and rewritten (the existing headings might be good as an outline) using verifiable sources. Any ideas? Jim_Lockhart 05:48, 13 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I agree fully, although you're probably going to take a lot of fire from the anime folks if you take on this article. I don't really have the inclination (or time) to do a rewrite myself at the moment (I'm trying to keep up with translating/entering information in the "On this day" section of Portal:Japan at the moment), but I will fully support anyone who is willing to undertake such a rewrite.-Jefu 08:16, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

...Which I guess means some care is needed to work their quirks into the article. Hmmm. Well, I suppose manga can be used as illustrations of how some of those “titles”* are used, but often in manga they're used to comic effect (e.g., someone calling himself oresama) or to emphasize a characteristic of a character (e.g., tan for chan to show that someone uses baby talk). I might also be difficult to find sources to substantiate many usages simply because there's probably little research on them... On second though, maybe I'll keep my nose out of this one for a little longer. "* I put scare quotes on “titles” because I suspect it's a misnomer: aren't these actually called “forms of address” of something like that?"Anyhow, thanks for your input. Jim_Lockhart 09:26, 13 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I never really thought about it, but I just looked up Mr. and Mrs. in Merriam Webster and they refer to them as "titles of courtesy", so I guess titles is okay.-Jefu 01:52, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, it seems you’re right there. I did a bit more digging too: I think the problem I had with the title “titles” is that it’s a very broad net, and the article deals with several categories of title—i.e., courtesy titles, honorific titles, and styles (I think we also call these “forms of address”), without much differentiation. The article also mixes usages—by that, I mean current and obsolete ones, as well as ones used seriously together with ones used for effect (comic, sarcastic, etc.). I find the quaint translations such as “Ms. Baker” and such to be quite annoying, since these are not functional equivalents (English doesn’t even have function equivalents for many of these things). Anyhow, I’ve fired off my first salvo and have started looking for sources to substantiate any changes I might make. I get the impression that this will entail a long haul, though, since a lot of arm-chair Japan specialists seem to have invested a lot of emotion and time in this. Best regards, Jim_Lockhart 03:43, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Reversal of image-needed templates
Why are you reversing the templates on the articles that do not have images? Chris 01:43, 26 April 2007 (UTC)


 * First, it's ugly and looks like some kind of advertisement (it isn't clear at all that it is a request for someone to add an image). Second, these are reclusive historical figures from more than 1,000 years ago. Images, even contemporary depictions, simply do not exist. The only thing you might get someone to add is a depiction that was drawn very recently and completely made up in the mind of some artist, which doesn't belong in an encylopedia. You have good intentions, but it's just not going to happen.-Jefu 04:07, 26 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Yes, it's not pretty, but it is a standard Wikitemplate when an article does not have an image. Are you saying that even in Japanese texts there are not images of these folks? Chris 02:26, 27 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Yes, that's what I'm saying.-Jefu 03:52, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Gemmei-tennō
Must one learn everything the hard way? I'm still new enough to Wikipedia that I don't quite know how this works: As it happened, I was about to save newly input material about Gemmei-tennō ..., and I was a bit startled when the screen announced that there was an edit conflict. As a consequence, the material I'd just typed was lost. I assume that this probably happens quite often, but it's a first for me. Rather than being annoyed, I'm surprisingly pleased to stumble across an article that someone else is working on at the same time. Cheers to you in Tokyo from NYC. Why don't you make it a point to check back tomorrow? I'll be returning to this later. And tomorrow, you can learn about the discovery of silver in 708 in Musashi -- a first in Honshu ... which explains why Empress Gemmei proclaimed Wadō as the initial nengō for her new reign. Ooperhoofd 02:35, 7 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks, and welcome to Wikipedia. Edit conflicts are (thankfully) somewhat rare, but I always make it a point to select all the text and save it to the clipboard, just in case something happens (sometimes the Wikipedia servers are just too busy...) Anyway, I was in the article correcting some incorrect information that someone entered overnight. I have access to quite a bit of original source material in Japanese (there isn't a lot of good English sources, unfortunately), but I just don't have as much time to spend on this as I would like. If you ever have questions, feel free to e-mail me and I would be happy to help you out or confirm something.


 * By the way, it was copper that was discovered in Musashi (the region that includes modern day Tokyo), not silver. The Japanese word for copper is dō (銅), and since it was indigenous copper, it was combined with "wa", which was the ancient term for Japan.-Jefu 04:11, 7 June 2007 (UTC)


 * A couple of additional clarifications. Apparently the "wa" doesn't come from the name for Japan after all. It is a reference to the copper being relatively pure (without the need for refining). And what happened in 708 (just after the new year, although the date isn't specified in the historical records) was that copper from Musashi was presented to the court in Nara. Therefore, it was probably discovered prior to that, likely in 707. However, the discovery itself isn't noted in the historical record that I know of. After the copper was presented to the court, on the 11th day of the first month, an edict was issued changing the nengō to Wadō.-Jefu 04:33, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Japan taskforces
In order to encourage more participation, and to help people find a specific area in which they are more able to help out, we have organized taskforces at WikiProject Japan. Please visit the Participants page and update the list with the taskforces in which you wish to participate. Links to all the taskforces are found at the top of the list of participants.

Please let me know if you have any questions, and thank you for helping out! ··· 日本穣 ? · Talk to Nihonjoe 08:49, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Using the -tenno suffix
Jefu: Months ago, you invited me to explain my use of the -tenno suffix. Now I have reduced that point-of view to a relatively concise argument which is posted here: I don't doubt that you will have a crisp opinion about what I've posted. --Ooperhoofd 23:19, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (Japan-related articles)

Pre-Meiji Period: Use of Japanese era name in identifying disastrous events
Would you consider making a contribution to an exchange of views at either of the following:
 * Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Disaster management
 * Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Japan

As you may know, WikiProject Disaster management came up with entirely reasonable guidelines for naming articles about earthquakes, fires, typhoons, etc. However, the < >< < > format leaves no opportunity for conventional nengō which have been used in Japan since the eighth century (701-1945) -- as in "the Great Fire of Meireki" (1657) or for "the Hōei eruption of Mount Fuji" (1707).

In a purely intellectual sense, I do look forward to discovering how this exchange of views will develop; but I also have an ulterior motive. I hope to learn something about how better to argue in favor of a non-standard exception to conventional, consensus-driven, and ordinarily helpful wiki-standards such as this one. In my view, there does need to be some modest variation in the conventional paradigms for historical terms which have evolved in non-Western cultures -- no less in Wikipedia than elsewhere. I'm persuaded that, at least in the context of Japanese history before the reign of Emperor Meiji (1868-1912), some non-standard variations seem essential; but I'm not sure how best to present my reasoning to those who don't already agree with me. I know these first steps are inevitably awkward; but there you have it.

The newly-created 1703 Genroku earthquake article pushed just the right buttons for me. Obviously, these are questions that I'd been pondering for some time; and this became a convenient opportunity to move forward in a process of building a new kind of evolving consensus. --Ooperhoofd (talk) 18:28, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Talk:Hirohito
An RFC on content you have commented on has opened, comments are welcome.  MBisanz  talk 01:50, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Daijō-kan and Kugyō
In the context of your constructive comments abut Kugyō last Spring, it's possible that you'd be interested in scanning User talk:Amake. As you can see for yourself, the issues at hand flow from User:Bueller 007's critical observations concerning: In addition, these threads would seem to have relevance in the following contexts: You understand that most articles evolve independently; but, in my view, these would seem to be inextricably inter-related. --Ooperhoofd (talk) 01:12, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Daijō-kan -- see Talk:Daijō-kan.
 * Kugyō -- see Talk:Kugyō.
 * Talk:Daijō Daijin
 * Talk:Sadaijin
 * Talk:Udaijin
 * Talk:Naidaijin
 * Talk:Dainagon
 * Talk:Chūnagon

On this day
I have a quick question. I've been working on the Portal:Japan and I noticed that you added most of the current entries for "On this day." I've started to translate some of them, but I was wondering where you got these entries to begin with. Thanks Torsodog (talk) 02:05, 23 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi. Thanks for pitching in. I've translated a lot of them, but it's quite a chore. I don't remember now where I got these exactly, but I copied them from some website about 5 years ago. If you Google "今日は何の日", I'm sure you can find a lot of similar sites. I should note, however, that they should not necessarily be trusted. In the process of translating (and looking up each event to get more information, etc.) I also confirm its accuracy. Some of them can probably be taken out too. I've noticed that they sometimes tend to focus on a lot of very obscure sporting events, for example, that may not belong in a proper historical "on this day" compilation.-Jefu (talk) 03:02, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Portal:Japan - On this day
Hi, I see your request on WikiProject Japan talk and see the latest "On this Day" Portal:Japan/Anniversaries/April/April 30. I'd like to know what criteria do you employ to select items. There are a lot of Japan-unrelated items like Rue Goerick, Hitler suicide (well it may have affected Japan, so arguable) etc. Cheers, --Aphaia (talk) 01:23, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Btw jawiki has their own "on this day" separated by monthly. The May items are found at ja:Wikipedia:今日は何の日 5月 etc ... they are of course under GFDL, and they have 357 sets of course. While they contain still non-JP related items, would you like to reuse them? --Aphaia (talk) 01:26, 30 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I generally remove everything that is not specifically about Japan or someone who is Japanese in the process of translating. And I think using the Jawiki stuff (and also using it to confirm what I have collected) is a great idea.-Jefu (talk) 04:06, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

It looks like I've only dumped in January through April, as you point out. However, I have entries for the entire year, and I even have some of them (like the months of July and August) translated already. I'll work on continuing to dump in what I have, whether Japanese or English, so that we can at least have a full set of entries to start with.-Jefu (talk) 04:14, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I tried to clean up Portal:Japan/Anniversaries/April/April_30, while I keep it in Japanese. Hope you like it :) I think you could invite people to clean it up on ja:WP:Chatsubo or ja:WP:VP (your Japanese is excellent btw), specially before you put them into English. Cheers, --Aphaia (talk) 08:55, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

WP:Hornbook -- a new WP:Law task force for the J.D. curriculum
Andrew Gradman talk/WP:Hornbook 20:07, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Irukanokubizuka.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:Irukanokubizuka.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created [ in your upload log]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 09:14, 2 May 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:14, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia 10th Anniversary
I attended the Japanese Wikipedia 10th Anniversary get-together in Kyoto. There seem to be very few people actively editing English articles on Japan. There also seems to be little teamwork between Japanese and non-Japanese Wikipedia enthusiasts in Japan. I wonder if you think that organizing a belated Wikipedia 10th event in the greater Tokyo area would help? LittleBen (talk) 14:14, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Notification: changes to "Mark my edits as minor by default" preference
Hello there. This is an automated message to tell you about the gradual phasing out of the preference entitled "Mark all edits minor by default", which you currently have (or very recently had) enabled.

On 13 March 2011, this preference was hidden from the user preferences screen as part of efforts to prevent its accidental misuse (consensus discussion, guidelines for use at WP:MINOR). This had the effect of locking users in to their existing preference, which, in your case, was. To complete the process, your preference will automatically be changed to  in the next few days. This does not require any intervention on your part and all users will still be able to manually mark their edits as being minor in the usual way.

For well-established users such as yourself there is a workaround available involving custom JavaScript. If you have any problems, feel free to drop me a note.

Thank you for your understanding and happy editing :) Editing on behalf of User:Jarry1250, LivingBot (talk) 21:05, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:02, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

File:Clans01.gif listed for discussion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Clans01.gif, has been listed at Files for discussion. Please see the to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Kelly hi! 09:03, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

Files listed for discussion
Some of your images or media files have been listed for discussion. Please see Files for discussion/2016 June 30 if you are interested in preserving their usage. Thank you. ★ Bigr   Tex  19:34, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
 * File:Prefecture01.gif
 * File:Prefecture02.gif
 * File:Prefecture03.gif
 * File:Prefecture04.gif
 * File:Prefecture05.gif
 * File:Prefecture06.gif

Asian 10,000 Challenge invite
Hi. The WikiProject Asia/The 10,000 Challenge has recently started, based on the UK/Ireland The 10,000 Challenge and WikiProject Africa/The 10,000 Challenge. The idea is not to record every minor edit, but to create a momentum to motivate editors to produce good content improvements and creations and inspire people to work on more countries than they might otherwise work on. There's also the possibility of establishing smaller country or regional challenges for places like South East Asia, Japan/China or India etc, much like The 1000 Challenge (Nordic). For this to really work we need diversity and exciting content and editors from a broad range of countries regularly contributing. At some stage we hope to run some contests to benefit Asian content, a destubathon perhaps, aimed at reducing the stub count would be a good place to start, based on the current WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon which has produced near 200 articles in just three days. If you would like to see this happening for Asia, and see potential in this attracting more interest and editors for the country/countries you work on please sign up and being contributing to the challenge! This is a way we can target every country of Asia, and steadily vastly improve the encyclopedia. We need numbers to make this work so consider signing up as a participant! Thank you. -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 04:54, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

May 2020
Hello, I'm Sundayclose. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, List of backmasked messages, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Sundayclose (talk) 03:59, 17 May 2020 (UTC)