Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of English words of Japanese origin


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was   キープ...er, keep. -- jonny - m t  04:08, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

List of English words of Japanese origin

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Patent nonsense. This is a list of words translated from Japanese into English and cannot be considered actual English language words. Globalscene (talk) 16:47, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Not notable, or even complete (where's Kaiju?). Ecoleetage (talk) 17:00, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions.   —Dekkappai (talk) 17:06, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Strong keep They are English words, as the title says, and are in common usage by loads of people, they're nto japanese words translated into English. At that rate we could say words like bacteria, virus, exquisite, extremity, rectum, anus, biseps and annuity aren't English at all because they come from latin —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.120.116.179 (talk) 13:12, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep and clean up to remove words which haven't actually made it into the common English lexicon. This kind of information is useful and obviously not patent nonsense. ··· 日本穣 ? · Talk to Nihonjoe 17:38, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Useful, interesting and encyclopedic-- if properly sourced (which should not be very difficult). I think there are some words on the list which are not in common English usage-- except for those with a close interest in Japan, but several words-- honcho for example, which have become so "Anglicized," many English-speakers do not know it's of Japanese origin. Again, if well-sourced and fleshed-out with some history, etc., this could be a valuable list. Dekkappai (talk) 17:43, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Yeah Keep, "anime" seems to be what's offending the original proposer. Other than that, just needs some cleaning. -WikiSkeptic (talk) 18:10, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment I would respectfully point out that the article is called “List of English words of Japanese origin.” The vast majority of the words on this list are not part of the English language (does anyone use words like Makimono, Renga or Zori as part of the daily conversation?).  And the better known words, such as Bonsai and Origami, refer specifically to Japanese culture; they are not English-language words. Ecoleetage (talk) 18:29, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment Yes, and once it's sourced, those non-common-English words can be removed. I would point out that many of these words are very common English. Origami, for example-- it's used to mean "paper folding" and not necessarily for Japanese paper-folding. Same with Bonsai, or Zen. As someone with a strong connection to Korea, where all these concepts exist, I know that they take exception to the English-speakers using the Japanese term for what they consider "Korean" things. But whatever the history behind it, the fact remains, we do use the Japanese terms in everyday English. Dekkappai (talk) 18:47, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Actually, the American Heritage College Dictionary, the closest thing I had at hand, lists bonsai and origami as fully naturalized English words. —Quasirandom (talk) 21:24, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Precisely. See also. We should rely on secondary sources and not subjective determinations of whether an English term "refer[s] specifically to Japanese culture". If it makes it into an authoritative dictionary, it may be presumed to have entered the English language. --22:33, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep: Useful, interesting, encyclopedic, and discriminate -- passes WP:LIST easily. If there disputes regarding specific entries, that's an editorial/content issue. I note, tho', that scrolling through the Culinary terms, to take an example, about half of them, I know and use as an American (and at least a half-dozen are common English words), and of the others, I've heard of about a half, and suspect many of the rest are known by foodies. —Quasirandom (talk) 19:22, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. I interpret the nomination to mean that not all terms on the list can be verified to have passed into use in English. Fine, as many have stated, cull out the bad ones, and keep the rest. Xymmax (talk) 19:55, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - the article casts its net far too broadly, but certainly words like kimono, origami, and perhaps even karaoke are fully naturalized in English. -- BPMullins | Talk 21:09, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Sure, karaoke is commonly used, but it's pronounced, "Carry-Okie." In fact maybe Anglo/American pronounciation adjustments should be mentioned in the article... Dekkappai (talk) 21:18, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
 * That would be better handled in the karaoke article, which summarizes the pronounciation issues quite nicely in the lead. —Quasirandom (talk) 21:21, 2 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep encyclopedic article that could definitely use some trimming. I don't think many people could seriously argue that "Tokonoma" (for example) is an english word of any sort.  The article concept is just fine though. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  21:42, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Clarification Don't get me wrong - the concept is fine. It's just the list (as originally presented) left something to be desired. Ecoleetage (talk) 21:46, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
 * That's an argument for keeping and editing, not deleting. —Quasirandom (talk) 22:31, 2 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep. The list is fine, as the nominator has just said . Editing disputes should be worked out on the talk page. AFD is not cleanup. Call for speedy close. --Dhartung | Talk 22:33, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Actually, the nominator said it was "patent nonsense" - that person never agreed the list was "fine." I said the "concept" of the list was fine, but as it stands (with far too many words that were never integrated into English and other words are used solely to describe Japanese culture), is not fine and is certainly not encyclopedic. Ecoleetage (talk) 02:52, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
 * It does seem I misread the top lines and pegged you as the nom. Sorry about that. --Dhartung | Talk 06:47, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
 * If you think the "concept is fine," does that mean you are changing your "delete" vote above? —Quasirandom (talk) 18:17, 3 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep AfD is not cleanup, and this article is far from "patent nonsense." Maxamegalon2000 06:22, 3 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep of course. As I replied to the nominator's question on the article's talk page, Oxford and Merriam-Webster agree that many of these are English words derived from Japanese. Fg2 (talk) 06:44, 3 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete per Wikipedia is not a dictionary since this is nothing but a list of dictionary definitions. The many references to dictionaries above prove the point.  If we were to compile other similar lists, such as List of words of Greek origin, then we would have the entire English language which, being a mongrel language, is composed of nothing but loan words.  Colonel Warden (talk) 08:11, 3 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep. The article is not patent nonsense. The words are not translated. They are Japanese words now used as English language words as well. Oda Mari (talk) 15:40, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep I disagree that the article is patent nonsense, as several others note above. In the absence of any other real reason to delete, then, the article should be kept. UltraExactZZ Claims~ Evidence 16:43, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I provided a policy reason to delete: a list of words is just dictionary material and Wikipedia is not a dictionary. Have you or anyone got an answer to that apart from WP:INTERESTING and WP:ILIKEIT? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Colonel Warden (talk • contribs)
 * Lists of loanwards, especially if a very restricted list of words, are perfectly acceptable. WP:DICDEF only applies to individual articles with one definition, not an entire list of related words, most of which are linked to the relevant articles. There have been plenty of reasons given that do not qualify as just WP:INTERESTING and WP:ILIKEIT. ··· 日本穣 ? · Talk to Nihonjoe 22:13, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm not seeing any such reasons let alone plenty of them. Colonel Warden (talk) 22:24, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, it seems a large number of people disagree with you. ··· 日本穣 ? · Talk to Nihonjoe 23:20, 3 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment It looks as if this will be a keep, but I have to agree for the most part with the nominator that this is patent nonsense. As someone else noted, the vast majority of these words are not considered to be English words, in the sense of making it into the English vocabulary.  To reflect words that are commonly used by speakers of English (karaoke, tsunami, ramen noodles), you would have to cut this one by 90 percent.  Nobody knows what "Hikikomori" is, or "keiretsu" or  "umeboshi".   It's a good subject... but it's executed by somebody who doesn't have a clue.  Article needs to be written with common sense.  Mandsford (talk) 23:42, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment This isn't a list of words in an english dictionary, many are in the dictionary but explicitly say they are Japanese. Honcho for example isn't listed as an English word in the Merriam dictionary. Another example is "anime", which is short for animēshiyon according to Merriam, and animēshiyon is derived from the English word animation. This article has become extremely blurry in its definition of an actual English word, as oppose to cultural contributions from other countries. This article is also based purely upon opinion. Whether one word is accepted or not is vaguely defined by the general population as to whether its in a dictionary. This method is not a valid method and furthermore most of the crowd do not bother to carefully read or analyze why or whats in the dictionary. "Its in the dictionary so it must be".
 * In the end it is utterly impossible for this to be considered encyclopedic due to reasons stated above. This is more like a list of popular words said by English speaking folks. How does one word get in here? Its purely subjective and depends on opinion, and a common reason is "I use that word alot". Effectively almost any Japanese word can be on this list and I can claim any word on this planet regardless of language that it is indeed an English word because I use it maybe I sit around and repeat it to myself all day but regardless I'm using it. Some of the words people claim fit this article should not be here but in Culture of Japan.
 * Furthermore none of the people here have provided any useful defense for the article. Other than WP:USEFUL WP:INTERESTING,
 * Globalscene (talk) 00:34, 4 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep but this list definitely needs to be pared down.  I don't agree with either the authors of the article, or the nominator, both of whom seem to be under the impression that these are all "popular words said by English speaking folks"; only 10 percent are commonly used, and fewer than that (kamikaze, tsunami, honcho, sayonara e.g.) aren't thought of as unique to Japan.  A list of words derived from a particular language is an encyclopedic subject.  The makers of this list seem to think that we don't have enough "Japanese words", hence additions like "umeboshi".  I've half a mind to go in and edit this down to something reasonable, waiting to see if someone else wants to restore it.  Of course, some would just say I've half a mind...Sayonara suckers! 21:38, 4 May 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mandsford (talk • contribs)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.