Talk:List of Japanese inventions and discoveries

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Lack of content[edit]

Is this some form of belittling jokes, making a page and fill it with just one entry? In my opion, this page should be removed. However, considering other nations also have their respective invention list, it'd be fine if people wish to improve this.

I also dont see the merit of these list pages (this is the first I've noticed), the items should have their own articles, or, if of too little importance, can be bundled in others, such as the article of the nation. But that's out of the point.88.159.68.3 (talk) 19:40, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Blu-ray is not a Japanese "invention". Its "inventor" is a number of companies, some American and some Japanese. A Japanese did contribute to the refinement of the blue lazer diode used in the Blu-ray, but blue LEDs were also an existing invention. "The World's First Android" also needs a citation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.11.240.5 (talk) 11:52, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yoshiro Nakamatsu[edit]

I think he is responsible for a few notable inventions. And he could possibly be Japanese as well. --XOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXO (talk) 16:08, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Redundancy and Notability[edit]

While I appreciate the work being done here, there's just too much redundancy and notability issues here. For example:

  • Aberic Acid, Vitamin B, Thiamine, and Vitamin should probably be under one heading, along with cup and instant noodles, to name a few.
  • I don't think it's necessary to list every genre of games/tv/media here either, maybe just the few major ones.
  • Some interpretations of what exactly is a psychological or historical "novel" (attributed to the Tale of Genji) here may be overly superfluous.
  • I am not certain culture-specific items such as "Samurai Cinema" or "Okinawan Martial Arts" can truly be considered "inventions".
  • Most of these invention/discovery listings add cruft and take a certain degree of ethnocentrism, but I think it should still be kept to a minimum.
  • Also, perhaps the a List of Japanese discoveries is needed to distinguish from inventions.

I have no problems with the science and technology sections, however. Just something to think about. ~ AMorozov 〈talk〉 18:10, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Personally, I feel that some of the things in the Art section are unneccessary. Partly because I don't think some can technically be called "Inventions" as such and partly because some are somewhat insignificant, especcially outside Japan, e.g. the Yakuza Film (similar films exist in other countries, and are often called Gangster films or Crime films) --123.50.152.13 (talk) 10:38, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Invention vs discovery[edit]

This article is currently awful and no distinction is made between what is an invention and a discovery (and lets avoid the intellectual buffoonery of trying to precisely define those terms and take the "I know them when I see them" approach, aka common sense). Probably a quarter of the things listed clearly do not belong on this list, especially in the science section. Jason Quinn (talk) 17:47, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How does something qualify as a Japanese invention?[edit]

User:Phoenix7777 is asserting that 唐手:からて (Tang Dynasty hand) , later 空手:からて (empty hand), is a Japanese invention. Does anyone see a problem with this? jmcw (talk) 21:32, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, Karate, as such was first created in Okinawa, based on earlier techniques imported from China and possibly India. Does this answer your question--123.50.152.13 (talk) 10:29, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
First, I have not realized the existence of this article, before you edited this article yesterday. I personally don't like this kind of article, however there is a similar article of United States called Timeline of United States inventions. I somewhat understand your assertion (My guess. You asserted only "Japanese nationalism") that Karate was not invented in Japan, instead it was developed in Japan. However it is much inappropriate to say "Karate was invented in China". Dictionaries say Karate is a "Japanese art". See American Heritage, Merriam-Webster Dictionary. I don't simply deny "Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu was invented in Brazil", although it was developed from jujutsu. Moreover Timeline of United States inventions lists American football is an invention of United States, although it was developed from Rugby and Football of United Kingdom. -- Phoenix7777 (talk) 23:04, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Spiral escalator[edit]

What about the spiral escalator? --84.62.215.188 (talk) 09:58, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See Escalator#Spiral escalators: from Reno to Mitsubishi ;) -- Quiddity (talk) 19:11, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Stub and rework[edit]

For background information, please see RFC/U and Cleanup. With 122 edits, User:Jagged 85 is the main contributor to this article (2nd: 25). The article has been tagged for 1.5 years with additional inline tags for half the entries. The issues are a repeat of what had been exemplarily shown here, here, here or here. I removed Jagged 85's entries (here and here) one by one until I discovered the list contains only a single entry! In other words: Every single entry save "Jujutsu" was added by Jagged 85 in two sweeps. For this reason, I stub the article completely.

Possible unjaggedized entry:

Jujutsu
Jujutsu, the "way of yielding", is a collective name for Japanese martial art styles including unarmed and armed techniques. Jujutsu evolved among the samurai of feudal Japan as a method for defeating an armed and armored opponent without weapons. Due to the ineffectiveness of striking against an armored opponent, the most efficient methods for neutralizing an enemy took the form of pins, joint locks, and throws. These techniques were developed around the principle of using an attacker's energy against him, rather than directly opposing it.[1] Gun Powder Ma (talk) 11:17, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
PS: It should be emphasized that many removed entries struck me too as Japanese inventions (Videocassette recorder, Karaoke, Judo, Aikido, Quartz wristwatch etc. etc.), but in view of the general unreliability of Jagged 85 it has been agreed that it is better to start all over again in articles heavily edited by him. Editors are welcomed to restore those entries which they know are indeed supported by the references cited. Gun Powder Ma (talk) 11:23, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Some of these "inventions" are completely absurd. "Postmodern videogame"? I'm not sure even Hideo Kojima was aware that his creation is postmodern. The Japanese have genuinely contributed many inventions, but a lot of these entries need to be weeded out.--Ninthabout (talk) 00:10, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I reverted the restoration of the misrepresented version. What use is having a superficially nice and complete article when most entries turn out to be sourced improperly or even outright made up? Gun Powder Ma (talk) 22:40, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The same can be said from some European invention articles like Germany or England but what use is there having an an title claiming an "List of Japanese inventions" when there is not even an list, it's basically saying Japanese haven't invented anything or making this page look like an mistake. Some of it are sourced and some not (like some wiki page) it's still far much better than looking at an empty blank page.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_German_inventions_and_discoveries
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_English_inventions_and_discoveries
I find this load of nonsense, you have an list of English and German inventions that only has half of the no. of references, the other half were asked to required citations + and many were not even given one. Yet when we see Japanese list of inventions more than half of them needs citations and if not than removes to blank page, isn't this biased and hypocrisy ???--- 92.236.36.173 (talk) 8:01, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
The citations generally don't support the text, they are pseudo-citations and misrepresentations, that is the problem. Gun Powder Ma (talk) 12:36, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Gun Powder Ma, you didn't address above comment. If you wish to make a radical change to this article, you should get consensus before blanking the whole article. ―― Phoenix7777 (talk) 13:11, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
But I have already addressed them. You seem to argue that an article with unsourced and misquoted crap is better than a blank page and I disagree emphatically. An empty page is better because it allows knowledgable people to build up good contents from the scratch. Otherwise, this article will remain forever be tagged with multiple templates. Gun Powder Ma (talk) 11:11, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You didn't address there are similar articles like List of German inventions and discoveries, List of English inventions and discoveries and Timeline of United States inventions which is sorted by date of invention. I agree partly with you in that unsourced and misquoted entries should be removed from this article. However I disagree with you in that this article should be blanked because of some of the entries are unsourced and misquoted. Please improve this article by tagging an unsourced entry as {cn} without blanking the whole article. ―― Phoenix7777 (talk) 11:34, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Gun Powder Ma, I've checked about half of those citations from Japanese invention, some of them seem reliable enough but some I'm sure about, I don't see what's so misquoted about those citations you mentioned, other invention wiki page like from the German and English have even dead links for references and also spotted an few which should be open for debate.--- 92.236.36.173 (talk) 8:01, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

The unstubbed version [2] is stuffed full of cn templates. That's not good William M. Connolley (talk) 07:27, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Also, whilst the meson and pion were great discoveries, they cannot be called inventions. Indeed the entirety of your desired "physics" section needs to go, even on your terms William M. Connolley (talk) 07:33, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you persuade me why this article should be stubbed while German, English and US articles are kept intact. Also current (cn) is unnecessary, because the description of this article is a summary of a linked article. We don't need to duplicate citations in the linked article to this article. The citations were added blindly in December 2009.[3] ―― Phoenix7777 (talk) 10:07, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I notice you've put in a bad-faith request for protection, after reverting to your favoured version William M. Connolley (talk) 17:41, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
1. Removed long-time tagged material from this version per WP:UNSOURCED as an attempt at compromise. If this material is again restored or white-washed by removal of the citation needed templates, we better go to some noticeboard. These citation templates date back to as far as December 2009, so there was more than enough time to verify them.
2. It is standard practice in such invention lists that the individual entries cannot pass as mere summaries of the articles on the devices and techniques they link to, but have to be supported by references given in this list. Therefore, I also added citation templates to all the other unsourced material, meaning it too is now liable to be challenged and removed, if not adequately sourced soon.
3. Added [[Template:Cite check]] which states that this article may contain inappropriate or misinterpreted citations that do not verify the text because this is what the problem is all about. Gun Powder Ma (talk) 11:18, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
As I said above, the citations were added blindly to all the entries without citations in December 2009[4] with an edit summary "Added tags to all unreferenced and entries without citations throughout the list".[5] WP:NOCITE says "If a claim is doubtful but not harmful, use the {{citation needed}} template...". The addition of tags blindly to all the entries without citations was not based on this guideline. Actually the entries tagged include Karaoke, Aikido, Judo, and Instant noodle. There is no guideline saying that you can add {cn}s to all the descriptions without citation. If someone added {cn}s to all the sentences without citation, such an edit is considered as vandalism. I understand this article includes many dubious entries. However there is no guideline that permit you to remove all the entries because of it.―― Phoenix7777 (talk) 03:25, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It would seem that GPM's attempt at compromise has failed. You've restored some utter drivel, including the claim that the Japanese invented the meson. How has this junk endured for so long? William M. Connolley (talk) 07:59, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Phoenix7777, WP:UNSOURCED clearly states: You may remove any material lacking an inline citation to a reliable source. Whether and how quickly removal should happen depends on the material and the overall state of the article; consider adding a citation needed tag as an interim step. Since the "lacks citation templates" have been there for nearly three years (!), it has been long overdue to remove this material. Gun Powder Ma (talk) 09:29, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

With the main contributor Jagged 85 now permanently banned for the same reasons which are also central here, namely "long term, systematic, and widespread source misrepresentation", I retract my compromise proposal and support the full stubbing of the list as done here. If the current state of the list as a mere link collection without entries is deemed too unsatisfactory, I would rather propose to make the list a redirect but restoring such problematic contents without verifying is out of question once you read the ANI report. Gun Powder Ma (talk) 09:53, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Concur with the above. Athenean (talk) 16:35, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Jagged 85 list was a mess. Sometimes hilariously so. Like this gem, "The first vitamin to be discovered was the B vitamin, thiamine (vitamin B1), by Umetaro Suzuki in 1910"? Seriously? Not Vitamin A? Guess they must have skipped a letter! Phoenix, you're better off starting a new list.--Ninthabout (talk) 09:58, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Skoss, Meik (1995). "Jujutsu and Taijutsu". Aikido Journal. 103. Retrieved 2007-09-09.

Article of Nonsense[edit]

Why is this an article of useless redirects? What can I possibly learn about Japanese inventions from a redirect to Japanese literature? The List of Chinese inventions is super helpful and informative (even too much info for one article). This article basically reads: "Japanese have invented nothing, but here are some Japan-related topics you may find interesting". Such hogwash.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.92.220.115 (talk) 06:13, 13 July 2011 UTC

I 100% agree, it's basically an useless article with useless redirects, 0% unhelpful and useless. This wikipage shouldn't even be called "inventions" if they don't mention one single invention. So I restored to the long lists. --- :WarriorsPride6565 (talk) 8:45, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
Read the section just above William M. Connolley (talk) 07:25, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Adding Inventions with sources[edit]

92.236.36.173 (talk) 5:22, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Adding

  • Portable electrocardiograph
  • Vectorcardiograph

Havard school of Public of health Takemi Program in International Health Dr. Taro Takemi

http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/research/takemi/about-the-program/dr-taro-takemi/index.html " Born in 1904, Dr. Takemi was educated at the Keio University School of Medicine. One of the first to study the application of nuclear physics to medicine, he was a member of the research team that measured post-atomic bomb radioactivity in Hiroshima in 1945. An inventor as well as a physician-scientist, he built the first portable electrocardiograph machine in 1937 and two years later invented the vectorcardiograph. "

Adding

  • Takadiastase

http://www.japantimes.co.jp/text/fl20090628rp.html

Adding

  • Epinephrine

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epinephrine#Discovery

" Japanese chemist Jokichi Takamine and his assistant Keizo Uenaka independently discovered adrenaline in 1900.[7][8] In 1901, Takamine successfully isolated and purified the hormone from the adrenal glands of sheep and oxen.[9] Adrenaline was first synthesized in the laboratory by Friedrich Stolz and Henry Drysdale Dakin, independently, in 1904.[8] "

Adding

  • Commercial digital recording
  • Digital audio tape recorder

" Heitaro Nakajima resigned from his post as head of NHK's Technical Research Laboratories and joined Sony. Four years earlier at NHK, Nakajima had commenced work on the digitization of sound and within two years had developed the first digital audio tape recorder"

http://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/CorporateInfo/History/SonyHistory/2-07.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.236.36.173 (talk) 17:19, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Adding

Perpendicular recording was first demonstrated in the late nineteenth century by Danish scientist Valdemar Poulsen, who was also the first person to demonstrate that sound could be recorded magnetically. There weren’t many advances in perpendicular recording until 1976 when Dr. Shun-ichi Iwasaki (president of the Tohoku Institute of Technology in Japan) verified the distinct density advantages in perpendicular recording. Then in 1978, Dr. T. Fujiwara began an intensive research and development program at the Toshiba Corporation that eventually resulted in the perfection of floppy disk media optimized for perpendicular recording and the first commercially available magnetic storage devices using the technique.[1] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.236.36.173 (talk) 18:06, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You don't need to quote your sources here. It is best you add your entries one by one in the article, each with an individual edit. That way we can best keep track of your additions. Therefore, I had to revert your wholesale restoration; this material has been shown to be flawed beyond remedy. Gun Powder Ma (talk) 21:02, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No thanks and you reverted to the same useless blank page while not doing anything to improve it. What do you mean flawed beyond remedy? I think it is your logic that is beyond remedy. When you see the Japanese invention list there are more than enough reliable citations and references than say German inventions where 80% of the listed inventions have no damn reference or citations and yet you never remove any material from that page. Adding entries one by one? that would take forever and that's something you even never did to contribute anywhere. I check at the date you removed matarial from 2011 and honestly you haven't contributed anything to this page other than removing the material over and over again despite other people made improvement to it. Just why exactly have't you contributed to the list on anything other than keep removing material from the same wiki page? because I really don't see any other reason for you to keep removing material from this invention wiki pae while not doing the same on other wiki page, other than the fact you're a Chinese wiki user I don't see any other intentions.

92.236.36.173 (talk) 1:36, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Yes: you need to go through them one by one. If you haven't realises that yet, then you haven't read the problems William M. Connolley (talk) 08:48, 14 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please explain why isn't anyone doing the same to the German inventions who's clearly in far more WORSE condition? all I see are lame excuses to remove material of Japanese inventions. Compare to most invention wiki pages the Japanese ones is most better sourced and with most citations. There is no excuse to remove this wiki page and the question is why target only the Japanese invention page when others invention wiki page are far worse with not even citations in most of the listed invention? Go one by one? yeah that happened in 2011 April 5th to almost 2012 nobody had done thing to editted anything and clearly the ones who removed didn't do anything to to improve it. This wiki page is basically trolling people with a stupid blank page and with and completely useless in-directs that has nothing to do with inventions. Who's going to spend doing everything from the bottom of the scratch? it will take enormous effort to accomplish so the only best way is to restore to it's original and improve it in the best you can. My advice... might as well delete this page since nobody is going to be able to learn anything from such useless page this is really bad management of Wikipedia and a waste of people's time.-----92.236.36.173 (talk) 11:59, 14 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see why we need to have a row over this, 92.236.36.173. You want the articles to be filled with entries, we want it to be filled with contents. So why don't you add them one by one, so that other editors can actually follow your additions? Ideally, the final result will be the same, if your sources stand up to the relevant guidelines. Also, it would not hurt if you could get an account given the amount of work and number of necessary edits ahead of you. Gun Powder Ma (talk) 14:03, 17 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Gun Powder Ma,. your opinion on how bad this wiki page is does not make it fact.
show me that example of your so called sources not relevant to the guidelines?
Name some of the inventions or sources that don't fit your guidelines?
As a wiki editor you should be able to give specific examples and help people improve, if you're not able to do this than anyone can simply just say this does not fit with the wiki guidelines and remove any material they want. I'm 100% sure other inventions wiki pages are breaking even much more guidelines according to your logic. Those who removed this page like you did should be responsible with improving the page but had completely did nothing to help it for 8 months since 2011. As wiki editors you should improve the page and help people to get what they want and not wasting people's time with useless indirect. Why start a page or blank a page with indirect if you cannot help nobody to learn anything. It is very poor job and deep bias against from wiki editors to do this. The article is already filled with more accurate CONTENTS than many other wiki pages than say the German inventions.
Again the question is why you are ignoring German inventions while only doing this to the Japanese wiki page? if this is not hypocrisy and bias I don't know what it is.
It wouldn't hurt to get a account but I don't want to be a full time or even part time wiki editor, I don't wish to have account and edit hundreds of things around. I only want to edit little stuff and correct those mistakes. 92.236.36.173| (92.236.36.173|talk) 5:30, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
This article is still bad. I just removed a forum post used as a reference twice. It is known that banned user Jagged_85 was a main contributor of this content, and that he had a history of misusing citations in relation to video game articles in particular, which throws the veracity of the entirety of the video game section into doubt.Dialectric (talk) 12:51, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Jagged_85 was not the only contributor of this thread but since you say this article is bad would you kindly please give some examples of some of the list that shouldn't be here? If you can remove the whole content of this article than it shouldn't stop you from listing a 7 inventions. If you can do this than I'll give up and I'll admit you're right despite there is a page German invention that is far worse than this one talk) 12:51, 1 January 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.236.36.173 (talk) [reply]
You've just restored the article, claiming to have added new citations [6]. But that version is identical to the version of 2012-12-17T23:49:31‎. So I can't see what you mean by "new citations". The old problems remain, so I've reverted William M. Connolley (talk) 19:16, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I WAS GOING TO EXPLAIN THIS IF YOU HAVE GIVEN ME MORE TIME, YOU WERE JUST TOO QUICK. ( or maybe I was just too slow )

I was going to edit this. ( This post is for Dialectric btw )

Sorry but I don't understand your reason for removing this invention. It's introduced by a Japanese game company, meaning this was the first type to seen in video game, it deserves it's credit to be mentioned.

  • parallax scrolling in games:

"'Moon Patrol was one of the earliest side-scrolling shooters and is 'credited for the introduction of parallax scrolling in side-scrolling video game http://www.gamesradar.com/f/gamings-most-important-evolutions/a-20101008102331322035/p-3

use of parallax scrolling, which first appeared in Irem's arcade game Moon Patrol in 1982

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=oe0zNalKkTgC&pg=PA157&lpg=PA157&dq=Parallax+scrolling+is+a+special+scrolling+technique+in+computer+graphics,+seen+first+in+the+1982+arcade+game+Moon+Patrol.&source=bl&ots=5Ih4CjibmC&sig=1-Q5FUIDIjOPoF2NcXIV-kwHJhM&hl=en&sa=X&ei=aTLjUMaGFtDMtAbqjoHYBA&ved=0CGEQ6AEwCQ#v=onepage&q=Parallax%20scrolling%20is%20a%20special%20scrolling%20technique%20in%20computer%20graphics%2C%20seen%20first%20in%20the%201982%20arcade%20game%20Moon%20Patrol.&f=false


  • Post modern game

This too me is controversial but , so I don't mind that it get's removed but that doesn't mean it didn't have a point. Personally the he original Metal Gear Solid on PS1 was already post-modern the difference is the improved and realistic graphics that Metal gear 2 had.

" Despite being controversial at the time, Metal Gear Solid 2 has over the years become accepted as the first truly postmodern video game"

http://www.giantbomb.com/metal-gear-solid-2-sons-of-liberty/61-12388/

" Metal Gear Solid 2, released in 2001, among all of the things it attempted, is regarded as the first fully postmodern savaging of video games, sequels, and video :

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/PostModernism

Metal Gear Solid 2 isn't the first postmodern videogame, but it's the first major commercial release to fall squarely in the postmodernism of video games.

92.236.36.173 (talk) 1:08, 1 January 2012

or maybe I was just too slow - you could try NOT SHOUTING. That would be nice. Also, how about explaining on talk *before* making the edit rather than afterwards? That would remove the fast/slow problem entirely. I don't understand what you mean in your edit summary by "Citations added on wiki and on talk page for discussion". The citations need to be in the article, not the talk page, obviously. And, as I said before, this is the same version of the article which people have pbjected to before. There aren't any/significant new citations William M. Connolley (talk) 19:50, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Neither the giantbomb.com nor the tvtropes.org ref above meet WP:RS as both sites are user-editable, and thus should not be used as references. This is also my reason for removing one of the two parallax scrolling references. I did not remove the entry entirely in that edit.Dialectric (talk) 05:23, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Dude... I was so not shouting just because I used capital letters. I edited the reference in t his article for discussion.
To dialectric, that's why I said I wasn't against you removing "post modern video games" as for you removing parallax scrolling I don't get it all, all sources clearly says that it first appeared Irem's arcade game Moon Patrol in 1982. So anyway, I don't see how a blank article of useless indirects will do any good to anybody other than trolling people, especially when none of you have bothered add anything yet removed the content without improving with anything for almost a year... "
Based on your action, I'll have to remove hundred inventions from the German inventions,British inventions, French inventions which contains no references or citations and obviously does not reach wikipedia standards according to you guys. ---- 92.236.36.173 (talk) 11:24, 2 January 2012

Okay, I've just removed tons of unsourced material from the german invention list but I can't be bothered with the rest of the wiki page, they look like to much work for me but PERSONALLY THEY SHOULD ALL BE REMOVED FOR IT;S EXTREMELY FLAWED PAGE.. Anyway we can remove parallox scrolling and post modernism game from the list but that doesn't mean we should remove the whole page. ALSO I STILL DON'T GET THIS, ANY SOURCE WILL CLEARLY STATE THAT PARALLOX SCROLLING WAS FIRST INTRODUCED BY A JAPANESE VIDEO GAME COMPANY even in this book [2] yet you still don't find this good enough?

Adding more invention to the list

  • tooth patch

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/09/16/japanese-invention-could-end-tooth-decay/ Japanese invention could end tooth decay

Scientists in Japan have created a microscopically thin film that can coat individual teeth to prevent decay or to make them appear whiter, the chief researcher said. The “tooth patch” is a hard-wearing and ultra-flexible material made from hydroxyapatite, the main mineral in tooth enamel, that could also mean an end to sensitive teeth. “This is the world’s first flexible apatite sheet, which we hope to use to protect teeth or repair damaged enamel,” said Shigeki Hontsu, professor at Kinki University’s Faculty of Biology-Oriented Science and Technology in western Japan.

92.236.36.173 (talk) 12:01, 2 January 2012

Please don't restore an old version of the article with misused sources. If you want to contribute to the article, you should find a source that is considered reliable, like an academic book or journal, and create new content instead of copy and pasting deleted entries that have proven to be flawed.--Ninthabout (talk) 17:50, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Capacity Measurements, Areal Density, And PMR[1]
  2. ^ http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=oe0zNalKkTgC&pg=PA157&lpg=PA157&dq=Parallax+scrolling+is+a+special+scrolling+technique+in+computer+graphics,+seen+first+in+the+1982+arcade+game+Moon+Patrol.&source=bl&ots=5Ih4CjibmC&sig=1-Q5FUIDIjOPoF2NcXIV-kwHJhM&hl=en&sa=X&ei=aTLjUMaGFtDMtAbqjoHYBA&ved=0CGEQ6AEwCQ#v=onepage&q=Parallax%20scrolling%20is%20a%20special%20scrolling%20technique%20in%20computer%20graphics%2C%20seen%20first%20in%20the%201982%20arcade%20game%20Moon%20Patrol.&f=false

Thank God the Japanese invented Vitamin B1...[edit]

...imagine all the horrible deformities and mental retardation that must have been rampant before they did so in the early twentieth century.

But in all seriousness, and this point has been brought up before, shouldn't we just list discoveries separately?

Cheers, Λuα (Operibus anteire) 01:16, 6 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Separate discoveries from invention[edit]

I propose to do like for the list of chinese invention and discoveries. There should be an article named japanese invention and an article named japanese discoveries. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thundergodz (talk • contribs) 22:37, 2 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Good idea. I plan to separate inventions and discoveries. WikipedianUser123456 (talk) 09:23, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Please don't. Separating the Chinese article into inventions and discoveries was already a mistake. The line between an invention and discovery can be surprisingly fuzzy at times. For example, on the Chinese article it is confusing and vague as to where certain innovations, such as new industrial processes ought to be put. A case could be made of it being either an invention or discovery or both. Moreover, the vast majority of country related invention lists do not make such a differentiation. Alphacolony (talk) 15:30, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 24 external links on List of Japanese inventions and discoveries. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:18, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 16 external links on List of Japanese inventions and discoveries. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:13, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Video Game Section problems[edit]

It seems The Stealth Game and Survival Horror may have been some "contradictions" with the articles of two said genres. The worst, I've spotted an article that lists Survival Horror games, and unexpectedly seen some older games like Hunt the Wumpus and Deathmaze 5000 being present. Despite the fact that Japan coined Survival Horror. --Kurt R. (Zirukurt01)✉ 10:50, 18 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_Japanese_inventions_and_discoveries&oldid=1208252829"