Talk:Osaka/Archive 2

This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

More Photos

I have some of my photos of 大坂 from joy-wheel near Kaiyukan. Should I add them in this article? Laitr Keiows 20:38, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

If they illustrate the article in a new and informative way, sure! In any case, why not put them on Commons. They can go in Commons:Category:Osaka and/or Commons:Osaka. Photos on Commons are available for Wikipedia in all languages, and for all other Wikimedia projects (such as Wiktionary, Wikibooks). Individual Wikipedia articles don't need multiple illustrations of the same topic (e.g. similar cityscapes of the same city) but on Commons there are often lots of similar shots so that people can select the one they like best to illustrate an article. And in a few cases, Wikipedia articles can accommodate additional photos in galleries (see Nikko, Tochigi for an example). So we have lots of possibilities for your photos. Thanks! Fg2 21:46, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Walking Speed?

"They apparently also walk the fastest in Japan - at an average speed of 1.6 metres per second (surpassing even Tokyoites who also walk fast at 1.56 metres per second)."

I am extremely curious as to where this information was found, and more importantly, how the HECK was it measued? Could someone provide a source, maybe? I imagine they would take a representative/distrobuted sample of both Tokyoites and Osakaites and measure their walking speeds...but wouldn't that still be biased since the people sampled KNOW they are being measured for walking speed? How can you measure someone's walking speed without bias? The Linguist 18:04, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

I thought spelling and grammar are your pet peeves? David D. (Talk)

Yes, but I was so astounded the rediculousness of the information that even my detest for bad spelling and grammar was negated. They were replaced by an inquisitive (yet cynical) wave of emotion. The question has yet to be answered. 161.45.160.105 19:11, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

I don't know the reference for this information, however, it is not hard to imagine how it was measured. Nevertheless, you are correct, a citation would be preferable. David D. (Talk) 20:04, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Amazing. Such an amount of complexity in procedure in order to obtain such a tiny tidbit of information. The Linguist 04:25, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Sister Cities Change

Changed The "United States" link next to Chicago, so it's a link, in the Sister Cities section, and added Cedar Rapids, as it is also a sister city. Impartialitationator 02:02, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Osaka's official Osaka and the World page in English does not list Cedar Rapids. Are you sure it's a sister of Osaka, the city? Or maybe it's a sister of one of the cities in Osaka Prefecture? If you have more precise information, it would be helpful. Fg2 21:05, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Second or Third largest city?

The article currently says, "and the third-largest city in Japan, with a population of 2.7 million." But if you look at the all the articles that list Japanese cities by population, Osaka should be Second. Tokyo is not actually a city, so the only city that is bigger is Yokohama, which is 'part' of Tokyo. I think this should be changed, though I did not do it yet because I wanted to see if anyone had objections.

I've always thought that Osaka was the second-largest city, and Yokohama the third. LordAmeth 03:47, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

What do you mean, Tokyo is not actually a city? On the Japanese page for Osaka, it says Osaka's daytime population is the 2nd largest in the country, second only to Tokyo, but the nighttime population is the third largest, after Yokohama and Tokyo. This fact is already in the article, "The city's daytime (9 a.m. – 5 p.m.) population is second in Japan after Tokyo".Mackan 04:33, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

If you don't know that Tokyo is not a city, you might be interested in reading Talk:Tokyo#Note: Tokyo-to is not a city. Various population figures are available for Tokyo, including a total for the 23 special wards that comprise the area that was Tokyo City up to 1943. If you want to use the total figure for those 23 cities and call it a city, then you rank Osaka third. The article on the special wards gives the total as 8.3 million. According to the articles on Yokohama and Osaka, Yokohama has a million more people than Osaka. If you don't want to aggregate the pieces of the former city of Tokyo, then Yokohama is #1 and Osaka #2. Fg2 05:22, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Interesting reading, but... Tokyo-to is of course not a city, but Tokyo is. The Japanese entry on 東京 is clear about this. Also, why would you not count Tokyo when the Japanese page does?Mackan 05:35, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, actually, he has a point. Tokyo-to is a prefecture, not a city. But of course, then the same must go for Osaka and Kyoto, which are both "-fu" and thus prefectures and not cities. And New York is just a conglomeration of five counties, only one of which is New York County. London is just sort of an imaginary large urban area encompassing many other areas along with the much smaller City of London. Washington's not a city, either; it's a district - the District of Columbia. LordAmeth 13:22, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Osaka is the name of a city, and it's the name of a prefecture (fu). The two governments are different. The city is an ordinary city within the prefecture of the same name. The prefecture encompasses the city and other municipalities, as do all other prefectures. The translation "urban prefecture" is sometimes used, but it does not mean a prefecture composed of a single city, and so might cause some confusion. The same is true of Kyoto. The prefecture (fu) extends all the way to the Sea of Japan, and takes in some pretty remote countryside, fishing villages etc. The city of Kyoto is much smaller, and shares the prefecture with many other municipalities. Both Osaka and Kyoto resemble Tokyo prior to 1943: a city and a larger prefecture having the same name. Since then, the governmental system of Tokyo has changed considerably, but the governments of the other two have changed far less (with just the usual mergers etc.). Fg2 23:07, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

I guess my point was that it seems weird to say that the two bigger cities than Osaka are Tokyo and Yokohama, when Yokohama is included in the Tokyo population. Maybe this should just be clarified, but on the list of Japanese cities by population article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_in_Japan_by_population it says that Osaka is second since Tokyo is not a city. So should this just be clairified instead?

I'm confused. Yokohama is not included in the population of Tokyo. It's in the population of the Greater Tokyo area but not in the population of Tokyo (that is, Tokyo-to), nor in the population of the 23 special wards. Is there some article in Wikipedia that presents Yokohama or its population as being part of Tokyo? (By the way, when you link to a Wikipedia article from anywhere within Wikipedia, it's simple to put the title between double brackets, like this: [[List of cities in Japan by population]]. You can copy and paste the article title from the article itself.) Fg2 02:03, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

You're right Fg2, Yokohama is not included in the population of Tokyo-to. I think I have finally figured it out. As the Yokohama article says - Yokohama "Yokohama is the capital city of Kanagawa Prefecture in Japan, one of the core cities of the Greater Tokyo and Japan's largest seaport. The fact that the former Tokyo City is not administered as a single city makes Yokohama the largest incorporated city in Japan by population." As I said before, Tokyo is not a city proper as the Yokohama article says. Thus Osaka is the second largest city in Japan in population as this article List of cities in Japan by population says. So I propose that the Osaka article be changed and made like the Yokohama article which explains why Tokyo is not counted as a single city and thus Osaka is the second biggest. Also thank you for your help with links.

Your proposal strikes me as reasonable, provided we include some text like the statement you quoted from the Yokohama article to alert the reader that the ranking doesn't include Tokyo (readers seem to expect that it would include Tokyo). Of course, I'm not the only person with an opinion, and perhaps LordAmeth or another person will have something to say.

By the way, if you have a special interest in Osaka, you might want to contribute to Portal:Osaka, which hasn't seen much development. Some other links that might interest anyone with an eye on Japan:

Fg2 02:50, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

I have generally found with Wikipedia that it's just not worth the effort to argue over a lot of things; you guys go ahead and do whatever you think is right with this here issue. I'm not going to revert it, or argue over it. I just think that the definition of what counts as a city and what doesn't seems awfully arbitrary, particularly given Japan's strange administrative arrangements. To anyone ignorant of these administrative details (Tokyo being governed by a prefectural government without any city government), common sense says that it's a city. You have to at least admit that. Is there any part of the prefecture which you would consider to be a city? I find this whole issue to be a very interesting one, and I am glad it is discussed at length on the Tokyo page. But I don't think it should really be used to eliminate Tokyo from the running from largest city in the country and such things like this. It's a farce - it's like talking about the largest/wealthiest/most important cities in China and ignoring Hong Kong because it's a "Special Administrative Region", a Region, not a city. Anyway, there's my two cents. I'll leave you alone now. LordAmeth 11:04, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

I don't mean to be a nuisance, but I must ojbect to saying Osaka is the second largest city - as I said before, Tokyo is a city, as defined on the Japanese Wikipedia entry on Tokyo (not Tokyo-to). The fact that Tokyo isn't administered as one city doesn't mean it's not a city, IT IS, and I think the article would only be so much more confusing if you change it around to account for the fact that Tokyo is not a "proper city" (even with an explanatory text saying Tokyo isn't included). Also, look at the Japanese Wikipedia pages, they put Osaka as third so obviously the Japanese regards Tokyo as a city. Mackan 13:15, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Also, you quote the "list of cities in Japan by population" but if you check out the article it will be merged with Tokyo is number 1. Also if you check the Japanese page [1], Tokyo is number 1. Let's not make things harder then they should be. Tokyo definately falls under the definition of the English word "city", it even falls under the Japanese word 都市. Mackan 13:31, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

If there is objection to editing so that it explains about Tokyo like the Yokohama article, then how about just saying that Osaka is the third largest city behind Tokyo and Yokohama. (Although I think this obviously needs to be addressed accross the articles in general since the Yokohama page claims Yokohama to be the largest city. It will also have to be addressed in the other two articles List of Japanese cities by population and List of cities in Japan by population as well. The reason I thought this should be addressed in the first place, is because most people have never heard of Yokohama, and so being ignorant myself, I was curious what two cities were bigger than Osaka. I have been to many triva nights where Tokyo and Osaka are considered the two largest cities with no mention of Yokohama. So how about the article just states that the two bigger cities are Tokyo and Yokohama.

Korean town?

Its 91,500 Korean residents are mainly concentrated around Ikuno Ward, where a famous Korean town, Tsuruhashi, is located.

Is there a Korean town in Osaka? Is that like a chinatown, or is it actual Korean territory (higly doubt that). Can someone explain this? Ninja neko 07:47, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Osaka Korean Town 大阪コリアンタウン is like a Chinatown in Osaka. It is not Korean territory. See for example this sightseeing article which includes photos. Fg2 07:56, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Japanese city article naming debate

Please join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (Japan-related articles). --Polaron | Talk 08:26, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

thats ok

Suggestions for expansion/improvement

Hi, I was just looking at this page for Version 0.5. I noticed that it's assessed as a B-Class article yet I tagged it as only a Start, so I thought I should explain my reasoning:

The most serious problem is that many of the sections are mainly lists, with very little prose
There are no references, inline or otherwise.
The culture section is interesting, but not very encyclopedic. Compare New York City; New Yorkers are often described as rude, always in a hurry, and as people who will walk by while a crime is going on near them. None of that appears in the city article (maybe it should, a little?) - instead it focuses on things like the theatre, etc. If you can find some quotations from famous people saying "Osakans are ...." that would be great, otherwise it reads more like hearsay or opinion.
History is nice as far as it goes, but the teaser in the intro, "Osaka is the historical commercial capital of Japan and is still one of Japan's major industrial centers and ports" got me wanting to learn about that side of Osaka - it's not really covered, yet I know it's an important aspect of the city's history.

For an example of a Featured Article on another global city, see Detroit, Michigan or Mumbai. This is a global city which deserves a great article - I hope that the knowledgable people here can turn it into one. Thanks, Walkerma 05:38, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

lists

Would the page be better served by having some of the larger lists as seperate pages with links?

eg

Osaka Attractions Major companies wards —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Osakadan (talk • contribs) .

I think they are probably fine as is for the moment, unless you can create a substantial article based on the section. Breaking them off into stub articles wouldn't serve any real purpose, and would probably encourage people to suggest they be merged back into the main article. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 17:19, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Major Companies in Osaka

This page is about Osaka city and Osaka prefecture has a seperate page. Some of the companies listed are registered in Osaka Prefecture and not Osaka City. Eg. Hankyu Railways is registered in Ikeda city (which has its own page) and technically should not be listed on the Osaka city page. One solution might be to move the whole section over to the Osaka Prefecture article, or to delete it all together and create a category of companies based in Osaka. Any comments? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Osakadan (talk • contribs) 08:59, 12 February 2007 (UTC).

In my opinion, a list of companies headquartered in the city has a place in the article on the city; a list of companies headquartered in the prefecture would be a more-selective list of the total of all those in the cities. So let's remove from the city article any company whose headquarters are outside the city. I think we did something similar with universities already. Categories are good too, but there should be a section in the article as well. Preferably in prose form. Fg2 09:10, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Sport

Gamba Osaka and Cerezo Osaka of Jleague, Hanshin Tigers and Orix Buffaloes of NPB

any others?

RIII 00:45, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Transport

I've not heared "proximity of ITM to the Kobe, and Kyoto city ". (refer to http://www.env.go.jp/air/report/) What is the material ?

galuboo , 01:05, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Neither entries have a reference, so neither is an definitive reason. To use Hanshin is confusing to most english speaking people,Kobe is more likely to be understood. I do understand why you think Kyoto should be deleted.Osakadan 11:31, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm glad that you say "I do understand why you think Kyoto should be deleted.".

I'm afraid to misunderstand about the sense of distance. I understand you,Thank you.

galuboo 12:14, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

I would say the second sentence should be removed, because:

1) the first sentence stands true in its own.

2) the latter part of the second sentence, "outweighs its noise restrictions" is controversial. I do not think that Wikipedia, as an Encyclopedia, has to take any side; it is a POV. The airport is there, with or without this statement. The environental issue is mentioned in the Osaka International Airport article, where is the right place to elaborate on this.

If the distance to major cities around is what really matters, then simply state, for example, in km or time to travel to the aiport. --OhMyDeer 11:52, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Weather table mistakes

By my calculations, the average high temperature should be 27.7 degrees, not 36.4. The average temperature should be 17.9 degrees, not 16.5. The average low should be 9.8 degrees, rather than -0.2. And the rainfall amount listed under the Year column is a total, not an average. I'm changing the table to correct averages straight down (though I admit to being too lazy to do a weighted average by number of days), including rainfall. 218.225.111.205 03:32, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Ridley Scott's movie Black Rain

I added Black Rain directed by Ridley Scott in the list of Osaka in popular culture since the movie took place in this city. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Themanilaxperience (talk • contribs) 07:33, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Additional External Link

I've added a new external link to a youtube-hosted video entitled "A Day in Osaka". http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=UIJdYVGnSuo It's a step above the 'wandering handycam' video and has been professionally titled and edited. As it has scenes from Sumiyoshi Taisha, Amerika-mura, Dotonbori, Osaka-jo, JR Loop Line, Kita-ku, HEP-5 and Yodobashi Kamera, I thought it would be a good resource for those interested in Osaka to see images of Osakan life. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sweetbixkid (talk • contribs) 14:44, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Edit summary - March 22nd, 2009

Thank you to everybody joining in to expand and improve the article.

Here are some notes related to my edit ---

General:

Wikipedia itself is not considered a reliable source, so please try look for reliable sources other than from Wikipedia in any case.

Politics:

Please consider WP:NOTDIRECTORY. There are a lot better resources other than Wikipedia if only a list of offices existing Osaka is needed. A mere listing is not necessarily needed in the article.

Festivals and events:

"Osaka Marathon" is removed because it is already mentioned below in the Sports section. Please consider it is like a "must" to find a citation from a reliable source especially if it has to be mentioned "the most" xxx.

Sports:

I have removed Gamba from the article because it is a team with its home in Suita, Osaka prefecture, not the city of Osaka.

You may want to consider creating an article for "Sports in Osaka", covering Osaka prefecture including Osaka city though. --Mantokun (talk) 15:10, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Edit note on Politics section on March 25th

Some of the recently added elements, such as the names of the President of the Council and Vice Mayors were integrated into the existing text, removing some redundancy (eg. number of councilors being 89 and with 4 years term, because they were already mentioned). The name of the President is updated to reflect the current assignment since 2008.

Political groups (factions) details are updated in accordance with the data avaialable from the City Council web, and incorporated into the infobox.

Seats by wards is also included in the infobox, by default hidden for space optimization.

-- Mantokun (talk) 06:54, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Osaka from Azumanga Daioh

There should be a disambiguation page.

I'm sure the fans of the anime (including myself) can do what I did, and find her through the Azumanga Daioh page. Or, we could put a little For other meanings or usages of the term, see Osaka (disambig) at the top. LordAmeth 23:03, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

I removed the disambig earlier. Get real, an anime character on the top of the Osaka page? Let's try and keep some encyclopedic level here. Find her through the Azumanga Daioh page. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mackan (talk • contribs) .

Please be civil. I've changed the disambig link to be generic, so please stop whining about this. The new link points to Osaka (disambiguation). This should be good enough for everyone. Also, I moved this section to the bottom of the page where it belongs (per general talk page rules). ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 09:27, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

If you're gonna ask me to be civil, maybe you too should strive to be civil in your response ("stop whining"). But sure, the new solution works with me but still, I'd like to stress that putting an anime character's bleeding nickname on top of a page about Japan's second largest city shows all to well that Wikipedia's biggest problem isn't really the unsourced articles but how the site is ruled by geeks and their interests (in that I'm not saying that you are a geek). I mean, if her real name was Osaka then maybe we could have a debate on it (but don't forget German Wikipedia where articles on fictional characters are only allowed for exceptionally famous ones), but when it's the NICKNAME? Seriously. Mackan 17:21, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia doesn't differentiate between linking to a fictional character and anything else when they are both commonly known by the same name. That's the whole point of disambiguation links: to point people in the right direction, regardless of what the two articles are about, in cases where there may be some ambiguity. I would bet that most people who have watched or read Azumanga Daioh don't know Osaka's real name because she's given the nickname almost as soon as she appears in the series, and is never called by her real name after that. Even the teacher uses the nickname.

Again, this is what disambiguation links are for, and having one at the top of this article does not in any way diminish the article. If the disambiguation link doesn't interest you, skip over it. There's no reason at all to get so uptight about something so insignificant and unimportant as this. The policies on the German Wikipedia do not apply here, so they are irrelevant to this discussion. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 19:47, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

You don't have to tell me that the German rules don't apply here, geez. That doesn't mean they are irrelevant to the discussion, that's just arrogant, they're the second largest Wikipedia and even though we have different rules it can be interesting to see how other wiki's work. It doesn't really matter though so let's not waste more time by debating it any further. Mackan 20:17, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Additionally, please realise that you are biased about this subject when you refer to yourself as "moé" about anime and manga. I think most editors without such preferences would agree with me. Mackan 20:19, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

I'll admit to liking Azumanga Daioh, but what I described above would apply to any disambiguation regardless of whether it had anything to do with anime or manga. If there are two subjects that are both commonly known by the same name, disambiguation is required regardless of whether you like or dislike one of the subjects. This discussion ultimately has nothing to do with either the city Osaka or the character commonly known as Osaka. The base argument here is whether or not two subjects that are commonly known by the same name should have a disambiguation link at the top of the main article on that topic. The answer to that is a resounding, "Yes." There is absolutely no bias in what I'm describing. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 21:07, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

It doesn't really matter, BUT! I think you are being pretty ridiculous. Let's say somebody puts up a disambig for the George W Bush article reading "For the anime character, George W Bush, See George W Bush (anime character)". Say you click that link, and what do you know, there is an anime character nicknamed George W Bush (real name of the character is deemed to hard to remember... becacuse it is in Japanese? Who knows). NOW can you seriously tell me that sounds like a good idea to you?? You don't think that disambig would be removed pretty quickly? SERIOUSLY! Nobody is perfect but you should admit your bias, and that your argumentation is wrong. Mackan 11:27, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

(9_9). ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 16:08, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

please don't start a flame war on this, i see Ninhonjoe's point we need a disambig page, although isnt there a page in the anime/manga portal?--Lerdthenerd 08:42, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

I live in Osaka and I don't even know what you all are talking about! Osaka is a city in Japan, that is that! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 219.98.27.18 (talk) 01:26, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

People should call her Kaguya Ayumu anyway. Sioraf (talk) 05:32, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

21st century Osaka

I would like to add a small new section on the 21st century Osaka and how it faces the economic and social challenges to reshape itself in modern Japan. I have a very nice picture of the section, 21st century Osaka Igor Berger (talk) 12:15, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

I uploaded the file to commons.

Igor Berger (talk) 20:59, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

History

Modifications are made to what looked like below previously:

>>Historical records seem to indicate that the Yamato people (the Japanese) first came upon the area, at the mouth of the Yodo River, in 663. They met resistance from the native people of the region and fought them for roughly five years, before enthroning their emperor at a site called Kashiwabara.

Naniwa was founded by Emperor Temmu in 683, in what is now Osaka's Hōenzaka-chō District.

In the seventh and eighth centuries, Naniwa served as the site of several emperors' pleasure palaces. The city also served as one of the primary ports, providing economic and cultural contact with T'ang Dynasty China. Naniwa ceased to be the capital in 745, when the Imperial Court moved to Shigaraki no Miya and then to Heijo-kyō (now Nara). It remained a lively port for some time but fell into decline by the 15th century.

– No much clue as to what sources indicates this -- notably the years and the event.

The followings may help: http://www.city.osaka.jp/city/history/history2.html http://bun-eido.co.jp/publish/culture/santo/naniwa.html

60s 08:24, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

- "In 1496, the Jōdo Shinshū Buddhist sect set up their headquarters in the heavily fortified Ishiyama Hongan-ji on top of the ruins of the old Naniwa imperial palace." Having visited both Osaka-Jo castle and Naniwa-no-Miya palace site (which currently exists only as concrete reconstruction of its foundation), this is probably not quite correct. The old Naniwa-No-Miya site is just outside the castle grounds, toward the south (you have to walk about five minutes and cross a busy road to get to it), in an otherwise empty field. So "on top of the hill right next to the ruins of the old Naniwa palace" would probably be more exact. This link shows a (small) picture of the site reconstruction with Osaka Castle just visible in the distance, toward the right. http://www.nomado1230.net/stuff/naniwanomiya.jpg See also this map showing the location of palace and castle on a page from Osaka's History Museum: http://www.mus-his.city.osaka.jp/english_iso-8859-1/access/index.html

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.24.211.103 (talk) 02:19, 2 February 2008 (UTC) ~~

"Over the course of the Edo period (1603–1867), Osaka grew into one of Japan's major cities ... " - I believe Osaka already WAS one of the major cities even in the 15th century - at least by 1440 A.D., as it not? I didn't look up the source, but the author's intentions are confusing. HammerFilmFan (talk) 16:58, 17 July 2010 (UTC)HammerFilmFan

Sister port - Kanpur

Why is the Indian city of Kanpur listed as a sister port of Osaka? Kanpur is at least 1300kms from the sea. Is it a misrepresentation of Kandla port in Gujarat, India ?
Anish Viswa 04:53, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

File:Japan Osaka.png Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Japan Osaka.png, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests December 2011

What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 16:07, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Speculatio about the future ?

I placed a new part about the ownership Osaka has in nuclear power plants... It was removed... Because it would be speculation.

Was it ? Osaka IS and WAS a big pleyer in this field, and up till a year ago Osaka was very happy with this. Now it has changed its attitude: Osaka wants to get away from nuclear power. And not only Osaka, but two fellow-cities in the region, they changed their views too.

Is that speculation? Not at all, it is a big change in Japan, whether the towns can get it their way or not, a mayor governmental player in this field, wants to get away from nuclear power.

Of course this is big news in Japan, where all was more or less set to pave the way to the restart, and in this process the population is massaged into the acceptance that restarts might be inevitable. 1947enkidu (talk) 06:33, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

I agree attitude change is happening and this will be a very important item. But the text talks about what will happen in the future (that is not allowed in Wikipedia) -- you have to wait until it actually happens. Rjensen (talk) 06:55, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Bu the change of attitude is already there, by the way, the wiki does not mention the possession of the stock of Kansai Electric at all, taking all away, was not needed. 1947enkidu (talk) 09:34, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

The Name Osaka

This city was named after the great emperor of INDIA named - Ashoka ( Which means no suffering). This city is named around 1 B.C. This city was the post of entry of First Buddhists from South west Asia. After the cruel emperor surrendered to bhudda, he donated all his money to spread the ultimate knowledge and peace to whole world. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 149.135.145.89 (talk) 11:26, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

Do you have a reliable source for your statement? --Christian140 (talk) 09:17, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

With 250 years of Mugal invasion & 200 years of British rule in India ,it will be difficult to trace a manuscript supporting above fact. The biggest fact will be to look at Japanese alphabet. Their resemblance in pronunciation will definitely point to that. Also meaning of Nagra in sanskrit is City. Up to you mate ..how you take it? --Ozkaat — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ozkaat (talk • contribs) 12:54, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Errors?

The article states Osaka is the city with the third highest population in Japan after Tokyo and Yokohama. It states the population of Osaka is 16 million plus. However, the article on Yokohama states the population is about 3.7 million. If I wasn't so brain-dead I would do the research and edit the article myself. Someone fix this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.62.129.198 (talk) 21:02, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Another likely error is "There were 99,775.5 registered foreigners,". Where does the point five come from? If the number is being counted by a points system, this should be stated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 154.5.155.44 (talk) 18:11, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

Timeline of Osaka

What is missing from the recently created city timeline article? Please add relevant content! Contributions welcome. Thank you. -- M2545 (talk) 14:48, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 8 external links on Osaka. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 10:04, 28 August 2015 (UTC)