Talk:Miyata

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

See also[edit]

http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miyata_(motorfiets) Maikel (talk) 07:28, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Help needed from Miyata Community[edit]

Hello, I created Miyata page (this page) after I purchased my Miyata 710 from a garage sale. It is the one on the top of the page, Miyata 710. Unfortunately this bike was stolen from my building's laundry room even though it was locked. If you know whereabouts of this bike, please let me know. I can prove that I owned the bike. I also reported this theft to the local police station. Play4go (talk) 05:04, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Miyata marketed through Raleigh Dealers?[edit]

When I worked at a bike shop, the Miyata rep told us Miyata's models were designed to fit at price points between Raleigh's models. Is this true? Is this documented? kdbailey (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 21:48, 20 March 2010 (UTC).[reply]

Requested move 8 November 2017[edit]

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

The result of the move request was: no consensus, default to status quo which will mean moving the pages back so the bicycle company is the primary topic. If anything, the discussion was probably leaning towards that anyway – the page view stats and partial title matches are good arguments in favour of the bicycle company being primary. Jenks24 (talk) 12:23, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]


– This article was recently moved away from Miyata, which is now a disambiguation page which lists only partial title matches. It's therefore unnecessary to disambiguate this article from KOGA (redirect from Koga Miyata) and Atsushi Miyata, nor from Miata, and so I'm suggesting that the article be moved back. Courtesy ping Ish ishwar, who performed the original move. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 17:05, 8 November 2017 (UTC) --Relisting. Andrewa (talk) 20:44, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support Unnecessary move. It's not actually a bicycle, it's a manufacturer of bicycles, so should've been (company/manufacturer). BaldBoris 17:45, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    Comment After now seeing the list of surnames I proposed it be move to Miyata (company), inline with all the other bicycle manufacturer articles. It isn't a particularly well known bicycle company outside Japan (or the Netherlands), and so doesn't deserve to be the primary. BaldBoris 16:07, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not convinced ja:宮田 is a dab page in Japanese, German etc Wikipedias. What is the claim of Miyata bicyles that takes precedent over a fairly common surname? @Ish ishwar: (company) would be better. In ictu oculi (talk) 20:16, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hm, I wasn't aware that Japanese convention is to give the family name first, and thus there are several people with articles whose family name is Miyata; nonetheless they should be listed at Miyata (surname). Several of the other pages listed on the Japanese dab page are to topics which could be naturally disambiguated (towns and prefectures, etc) so they are still partial title matches, whereas Miyata is the common name of the bicycle manufacturer. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 21:40, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Who's to say the current Miyata dab page isn't a surname page. In ictu oculi (talk) 06:39, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The {{disambiguation}} tag at the bottom that says it's a disambiguation page, and the entries which are not individuals. If it were a surname page it would list people with the surname exclusively, and use the {{surname}} tag, like (randomly chosen) Venn. Which is also interesting because I would have expected Venn to be a redirect to Venn diagram, or its inventor John Venn. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 13:44, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, the surname is the primary topic, if anything. The company is minor and was primary just by virtue of being the first article created with this name. —Xezbeth (talk) 07:01, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per Xezbeth (and the reasoning of the neutral Ivanvector).  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ >ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ<  12:06, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • For the sake of completeness, here is a list of entries I can find on enwiki which could be added to a disambiguation or anthroponymy page. I did not try to check other wikis; interlanguage links on dab pages are unusual. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 13:54, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Articles (with 90 days pageviews)
Individuals
Other
  • Added pageviews inside the collapse. Miyata has more hits than all of the other pages combined excepting the target of the one redirect, but of course it's not possible to say form these stats whether someone went to Miyata when they were looking for a topic other than the bicycle manufacturer. For what it's worth, KOGA has 1,747 views in the same time period while Koga-Miyata has 635, and I would expect generally the same set of readers to be interested in both of the bicycle manufacturer articles; they co-produced for many years. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 14:09, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    Probably showing that readers are not interested in the company and are just navigating through it to find people with the surname. BaldBoris 16:07, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    What we can glean from the stats is that at most 5,371 people ended up on Miyata intending to find one of the surname articles, because that's the number of views those articles registered, leaving at least 2,209 who did something else when they ended up there (read the article, clicked on one of the hatnote navlinks, gave up, etc). My informed guess is that 2,209 is a decent but high indicator of genuine views for the article, given that KOGA landed close to that number of views and the two brands are tightly related. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 16:31, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thoughts? Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 16:39, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Relisting comment: I'm concerned that there is no evidence offered above that any of the fourteen people listed at the DAB are sufficiently well known or significant that even taken together (and with a former town located in Kurate District, a stub which is the only other entry at the DAB) they could seriously challenge the bicycle as primary topic in English by either criteria. Andrewa (talk) 20:50, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Go with Ivanvector's proposal (with the name entries at Miyata (surname)). The argument made by the opposers above doesn't appear to be that any of the fourteen people individually displace the bicycle manufacturer from WP:PRIMARYTOPIC (i.e. leaving no topic as primary), but that the name itself does. I think there's at least some case that's right (see my reply to Andrewa below). 59.149.124.29 (talk) 10:09, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
But something needs to be at Miyata, even if it's just a redirect to one of these other pages. It's not clear to me what you think should be there. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 15:52, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think either the bicycle company or the surname is primary, which would mean the base title should be a disambiguation page. I may have misunderstood your proposal - were you suggesting putting the surname page at the base title? 59.149.124.29 (talk) 17:30, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I suggested that the surname was primary topic, but I think a dab page at the base term is fine. I was probably understating the prominence of the company. —Xezbeth (talk) 10:21, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per Andrewa's evidence below. Clear WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. The page views also favour this title - as shown in the section I've just added in evidence below, this article leads with 42% of page views, which isn't quite a majority, but bear in mind that most of the articles are partial matches, and many readers will not just type "Miyata" to search for those, (the main second-place contender is Kōki Miyata with 24% of views, for example). Finally, I remind the closer that the proposed target is the stable status quo, in the event of a no consensus close, as it was only recently moved to the current title. Thanks  — Amakuru (talk) 10:32, 23 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Evidence[edit]

My quick Google gave the first few pages all on the bicycle. The images option gives me only bicycles! Other evidence? Andrewa (talk) 21:01, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Well, we can see some cases like Furuno, Fujikura, or Kubota, where the company is primary even though that name is also a surname. In those cases, not just the web results but the top hits in reliable sources (Google News & Books results) are almost all about the companies' products, even though the companies are rather obscure to the general public. Contrast that with cases like Nomura or Tokuyama, where the companies (Nomura Group and Tokuyama Corporation) aren't clearly primary and the GNews & GBooks results are about a bunch of different things. The GNews & GBooks results for Miyata resemble the latter group a lot more than the former group. 59.149.124.29 (talk) 10:09, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't try googling because I assumed the results would be skewed by my search interests (I own two Miyata bicycles and put stuff on the internet about it often enough). Some of the images you saw are probably mine. My feeling is not that individuals with the surname outplace the bicycle manufacturer as a primary topic, even taken together; it's more like they're very close when the individuals are taken together so at least by the numbers there's no clear primary topic. But nonetheless something has to live at Miyata. I guess if you believe Google's "see results about" filter (search for "miyata" and see the box that comes up at the right) I get 9.19M ghits for Miyata the company, and 134k for Ichiro Miyata the fictional character from Hajime no Ippo; those are Google's only two filter options. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 13:27, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Of the Japanese companies name after places I've found, Toyota looks like the only one taking the primary. Others use the full name (Yamaha Corporation, Yokohama Rubber Company, Kawasaki Heavy Industries, Komatsu Limited), or Kawasaki motorcycles, Iiyama (company). Suzuki is primary named after its owner. I support the alternative proposal, as like I previously suggested, its not a hugely well-known global company (I take back my initial statement about its notability after doing some research), although I'm slightly jealous of your two Miyata frames Ivanvector ;). The full company name (Miyata Cycle Co., Ltd.?) maybe an alternative. Andrewa, it can't be Miyata (bicycle) as it isn't actually a bicycle like the articles in Category:Bicycles. BaldBoris 17:31, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
None of these examples seem relevant. For example, Yokohama is a famous city, the second largest in all of Japan in fact, and Yokohama Rubber Company is rarely referred to as Yokohama, and then only in very restricted contexts. Miyata, Fukuoka, unlike Yokohama, is so not-famous as to be bordering on non-notability, with the result that the bicycle and its manufacturer are relatively common referents of Miyata in English. So the key argument for the move does not apply at all to Yokohama, nor as far as I can see to any of the other examples given (for a variety of reasons). Andrewa (talk) 07:13, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Renaming the company article to the full name would suit natural disambiguation and solve one of these problems, but TBH I'm not really sure what the full name is. Some variation of "Miyata Cycle" or "Miyata Sport" is the name of their bicycle division, but they also manufacture fire extinguishers under a brand of the Morita Group. When I'm not on my mobile I'll try and find it in one of the book sources, I added some yesterday. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 11:35, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Also, Miyata is also named after its original founder/owner. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 11:38, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Alright I've been doing some research (obviously) but I can't tell you what the present full name of the company is, except that it's probably in Japanese since they don't have a very active presence in the west these days. I suggest, then, that the article should be titled "Miyata" (and not "Miyata Manufacturing" or "Miyata Cycle" or whatever) with whatever disambiguator we decide to go with. Other titles could be redirects: I've found Miyata Manufacturing, Miyata Cycle Works, Miyata Cycle Co, Miyata Gun Works, Miyata Sport, Miyata Group, and probably others (Koga Miyata is a related partnership, and I think Miyata Kōgyō just translates to Miyata Company). Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 14:01, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
So it's either Miyata or Miyata (company) then. I get the feeling Miyata (company) would be the best bet; no overwhelming support for Miyata. I never usually contribute to moves, but this all seems very unnecessary. It's disappointing Ish ishwar hasn't got anything to say. BaldBoris 14:21, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
i dont have any opinion except that Wikipedia should not use primary topics. It's a bad policy that should be changed. Losing this policy would have prevented the 2000 words being typed above and prevented people to having to read them. Anyway, just do what you think is best. – ishwar  (speak) 19:11, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Agree totally. I've tried before to suggest that if there's any doubt we should disambiguate, or ideally have a DAB at the base name whenever there are three or more topics that could go by the same name. Good luck. Andrewa (talk) 22:44, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Disagree totally. Primary topics are one of the bedrocks of the article titling policy. Although disambiguation pages aren't as horrible as some people at the New York debates used to claim, and where primacy isn't clear, it's fine and good to have a dab page at the base title, I am also convinced that it is correct to avoid them where the primary usage is clear. And in this case Andrewa's evidence tells us the primary usage is clearly the bicycle.  — Amakuru (talk) 10:36, 23 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with most of this. All I'm saying is that (1) in cases that primary topic is controversial, the default should be to disambiguate (and yes, the NYRM2016 fiasco is a factor in my thinking this), and (2) if I were setting up Andrewpedia I wouldn't use primary topic or anything similar at all, it's a Wikipedia invention that IMO has proven far more trouble than it's worth. But I mention (2) only for completeness, there are many better silly ideas on which to spend my time. Andrewa (talk) 18:12, 23 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Page views[edit]

I've run through the list of pages which Ivanvector compiled above, looking at just page views since 8 November, which was the first full day with the article at the current title. Results show the bicycle page at the top with 42%, and only Kōki Miyata coming anywhere near with 24% of views. Thanks  — Amakuru (talk) 10:54, 23 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Updated page views
The obvious problem with these stats is that you're only looking at time when this discussion was open. Pages with discussions advertised on busy noticeboards tend to have a spike in views, and if you were looking at this though WP:RM you'd have to come here first before seeing any of the other pages. I've also been working on the article at the same time so that will unnaturally elevate the views. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 12:06, 23 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Prominence[edit]

Just throwing some more fuel on this fire:

  • Miyata (the manufacturing company) is among Japan and the world's oldest and longest continuously operating bicycle manufacturers (1890-present, only a handful of European brands are older and even fewer still exist today), made a bicycle by request for the future Emperor in 1892 at a time when bicycles were generally viewed with disdain in Japan as foreign toys, supposedly (needs sourcing) developed several important framebuilding technologies, part of a long-term partnership (1977-2010) which produced bicycles which competed in several Tours de France and won a stage in 1981, has a documented claim for manufacturing the first all-Japanese motorcycle (1913) as well as the first motorcycle mass-manufactured in Japan (1933), possibly a manufacturer of the first indigenous Japanese service rifle (1880s) although I have yet to find a source which explicitly confirms, and one of the earliest Japanese automobile manufacturers (1910)
  • Kōki Miyata is a living Japanese voice actor with an impressive list of bluelinked credits going back to 1993, including leading roles in several notable franchises (Digimon, for example)
  • Kazuyuki Miyata is a living Japanese mixed martial artist with a 24-fight MMA career (2004-present) who has competed and placed unremarkably (didn't medal) in Olympic freestyle wrestling (2000)
  • Miyata 310 is a frankly unremarkable 1970's-80's model of Miyata bicycle frame
  • Mayumi Miyata is a Japanese musician known for her remarkable talent with a traditional Japanese instrument, who has worked with an impressive list of composers worldwide (most of whom I'm completely unfamiliar with, but also Björk)

I only checked the top few results from Amakuru's list, and clearly I'm more familiar with one of these topics. Just offering this as another way to look at the situation. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 19:50, 23 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Moving along[edit]

This has already been relisted once and has fallen into the backlog list again, and discussion has pretty much been dead for several days. My (involved) interpretation of the discussion is that there is no clear consensus any way on the primary topic issue, and so we've landed on this:

Any disagreement? Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 19:42, 26 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. (Disclosure: I am involved above, as relister and in several comments.) We need to move on, and this would improve reader experience, which is our bottom line. Andrewa (talk) 14:33, 27 November 2017 (UTC).[reply]
  • Oppose. No consensus means we should go back to the previous status quo before a bold move, which is Miyata the company as primary topic. Which is also the arrangement suggested by reliable sources and page views. I see no reason to go with anything else.  — Amakuru (talk) 15:01, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • That would also be acceptable IMO. But leaving it as is is not. Andrewa (talk) 15:29, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Well, "no consensus" is a pretty flat read of the discussion. This went a lot of ways:
  • We have a pretty clear consensus that this article should not be titled Miyata (bicycle). Even the original mover hasn't expressly supported this.
  • We have no real agreement or good information on what the formal long title of the company is, as it's changed many times and they don't currently have much of an English-language presence. I think there's agreement as a result that the title should be "Miyata" per WP:COMMONNAME, which doesn't solve the disambiguation issue.
  • There's been a lot of discussion on whether the manufacturer is the primary topic, or the surname, or no primary topic. My view of this is that there's no consensus emerging on this point specifically: several editors made good arguments but none stand out as definitive and none have gained broad support, and if we don't reach consensus on the primary topic then by default there is no primary topic. And if there's no primary topic then per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC we should have a disambiguation page at the base title.
Furthermore, if there is no primary topic then just blindly reverting the move leaves us with a situation that goes against the guideline, which would be unstable. I'd rather not do that. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 15:37, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Re "by default there is no primary topic" - where does that come from? I was not aware of any default or preference when it comes to having a primary topic or not having one. Both are viable situations, and it's up to editors to determine which ones holds. But we do, however, have a procedure with regard to no consensus, and that is that the status quo should prevail if there's no agreement. And the status quo, all the way from this article's inception in 2006 until a bold move 20 days ago, was that it *is* the primary topic. In the event that we don't agree, then, it should go back to how it was. That's how things have always worked.  — Amakuru (talk) 16:00, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
What I mean is, if we talk about different options for a primary topic (we did) but we don't agree on which one is primary (we didn't) then that leaves us without a primary topic. But I do see what you're saying, that if the manufacturer was considered the primary topic for a long time before we started talking about it and not agreeing on any proposal to change that situation, we should go back to the original condition. I think this is more of a case of it having been the primary topic because it was never challenged, it just got here first, and "what came first" is not a valid primary topic argument. But I'm not going to keep disagreeing with you; moving on is moving on. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 16:14, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified (February 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Miyata. 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) 00:42, 3 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

4XX Series not shown in list of models[edit]

I realize that the 4xx series wasn't very long-lasting in Miyata's model lineup but believe it still deserves a place on the list. Could someone write a little blurb of those models ?? 2001:56A:7D16:300:E9BF:C5:B596:8E69 (talk) 00:23, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Miyata&oldid=1204032631"