Talk:Rising Sun Flag

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Japan (Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Japan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Japan-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. Current time in Japan: 12:35, August 21, 2014 (JST, Heisei 26) (Refresh)
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Heraldry and vexillology (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject icon Rising Sun Flag is within the scope of the Heraldry and vexillology WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of heraldry and vexillology. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 
WikiProject Military history (Rated Stub-Class)
MILHIST This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
Stub This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the quality assessment scale.

Army variant[edit]

Could someone please make an SVG of the variant of the Rising Sun Flag used by the Imperial Japanese Army? Reference material can be found here and here. 86.8.141.80 00:31, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Those flags are definitely modern made and can not be considered as a reliable source. The naval rising sun flag ("off-set", the gunkanki) was used in every ship, in every naval base and is well documented. It was widely used, so it doesn't suppose any problem. The square regimental rising sun flags from the army regiments (every regimental flag had its own regimental markings) were also commonly used, the problem then is the rectangular rising sun flag with the sun in the middle and the 16 rays, the one this anonymous person requested to be made in SVG. It really was the imperial army flag? equivalent to the naval one? I don't know japanese, but if somebody could check those japanese websites maybe the answer could be found in them :
http://military-web.hp.infoseek.co.jp/shiryou/gunki_1.htm
http://www1.jca.apc.org/anti-hinokimi/archive/chronology/senzen/rikugun1870.htm
I guess the years of entering service of the flags are mentioned, and if correct proportions are also mentioned maybe the SVG will have to be subsequently modified. 343KKT Kintaro (talk) 04:05, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Problems with "Controversy" section[edit]

Certain editors appear to be using this section as a vehicle to digress into details about war crimes. Unfortunately none of the numerous sources provided actually discusses the rising flag or its "controversy".
Secondly, there seems to be some confusion between the "Rising Sun" flag, which this article is about, and the "Hinomaru" flag, which is what the 1999 Guardian newspaper articles are discussing. If reliable sourcing cannot be added, problematic statements will be removed. --DAJF (talk) 06:49, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

Ki Sung-Yueng used this flag for the excuse of the criticism to racial discrimination for Japanese with 'monkey' celebration for South Korea in 2011 AFC Asian Cup semi-final with Japan even though there is no Rising Sun Flag in the stadium.[1] After that South Korea is claiming it with advertising as if this flag is associated with Japanese militarism and [[Ja panese imperialism|imperialism]], for their patriotism. [2][3][4]

Recently, the Korean group(일본전범기퇴출시민모임=Society for the Abolition of Japanese War Climinal Flag in English) have started campaign for the abolition of the rising sun flag in N.Y.[5]

In Japan, Rising Sun is the major design from old days. It is appears on commercial product labels, such as on the cans of one variety of Asahi Breweries lager beer.[6] The design is also incorporated into the flag of the Japanese newspaper Asahi Shimbun as well as banners called Tairy?-ki (大漁旗 Good Catch Flag?) flown by fishermen. The flag is sometimes seen with the football club's supporters in the stadium wore red, the team color such as Urawa Red Diamonds, and at an official ceremony.[7] — Preceding unsigned comment added by ‎Natsuv3 (talkcontribs) 02:35, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Present Day Perceptions[edit]

This section is a mess. I started to edit the grammar, but as I'm not overly familiar with the subjects involved I'm not sure what the original is trying to say.PurpleChez (talk) 22:56, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

The Use of the Flag during Wars in Asia[edit]

The meaning of "haevily used" is vauge and it is impossible to verify it until a comprehensive study of the use of the rising sun flags is done, which I have never seen so far. As far as the Japanese army is concerned, one flag was given to a regiment (about 1700 persons) by the emperor and it is unlikely that the use of replicas was permitted. If a soldier wanted to use a flag, he certainly used a Hinomaru flag. There are a lot of such photos. If "heavily used" refers to some ceremonies or celebrations overseas, I have never seen a photo with the rising sun flags flying. Ia Japan, I found the rising sun flags were used in the photos of the celebrations of the victory of the Russo-Japanese War and of the fall of Singapore in the Pasific War. But in both cases Hinomaru flags were dominant. And did Asians other than Japanese have the occasion to see such photos before the end of the war? I think it is after the end of World War II that the rising sun flag came to be seen as a symbol of Japanese imperialism, especially Koreas and Chinese. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kamapy (talkcontribs) 08:37, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

I agree with you in that "heavily used" is inappropriate. So I removed the word[1], However, another editor re-phrased the lead[2], as a result the description was removed. If you have other comment on this article, please comment at this talk page or edit accordingly. ―― Phoenix7777 (talk) 10:10, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

Definition[edit]

As far as I checked, there is no Japanese dictionary defined the flag as military flag. Some design of rising sun flags were/are used as military flag (ex. 16 sun ray rising sun flag). But this article is not for 16 sun ray rising sun flag or naval rising sun flag. Historical definition is not appropriate, because the rising sun flags are still used commonly nowadays in Japan. The definition should be in accordance to the current definition.--Mishichan (talk) 07:46, 3 September 2012 (UTC)


First of all this is an English wikipedia. The flag/design WAS a military flag USED/adopted by the Imperial Japanese Army and later Imperial Japanese Navy. The article states that the JMDSF still uses the Ensign while the JGSDF uses the same design but with a 8 Ray version. Later on it was adopted for civilian use. Even your Source in Japanese states:

http://kotobank.jp/word/旭日旗
Japanese flag with stylized rising sun. The surface of the white flag, Hinomaru that emits light radially are drawn in red. Is adopted as the banner up to defeat the Second World War from the Meiji era, as well as land and Maritime Self-Defense Force is using, in modern times has been used in support of such holidays and sports events in the private sector as well. On the other hand, and recognition is still strong, "a symbol of Japanese militarism-imperialism rising sun flag" in China and South Korea. About the use of the flag of the same tournament international sports such as World Cup soccer W and the Olympics, has been (FIFA) is not something contrary to the prohibition political expression FIFA and the International Olympic Committee (IOC), and South Korea voice of backlash is rising again and again ever since. RedKnight 1 (talk) 08:39, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

This is an English wikipedia regarding the Japanese flag (kyokujitsu-ki). As I said, some designs are used military flag (same as source you indicated), but not limited to military use only and not defined the all rising sun flags are military flag. --Mishichan (talk) 09:19, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
ITS the SAME design. The design evolved from the Hinomaru/Flag of Japan with 16 rays - it was used by the specifically by the Japanese Military - Army first adopting it in 1870, the Navy in 1889 but had similiar rank flag prior1. After WW2 it was re-adopted by the JMSDF, BUT the JGSDF adopted modified 8 version. Later on the flag design was used for civilian use - Asahi Shimbun([3] - First issue did not have rising sun design/logo) etc.

While I don't agree with many attempts by people to link the design to the Swastika - which ironically exists in many Asian Cultures (ie. Buddist temples etc.), I also don't agree with you attempting to downplay its origins. Japanese military flags

Naval Ensign & War flag

Same Designs - t_shirt,t_shirt, t_shirt, Cap, Dog, Sporting event.

RedKnight 1 (talk) 10:15, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

"The Rising Sun Flag is the military flag of Japan" This term is simply incorrect. It is not. It is used in many cases unrelated to army nor navy. This article spreads INCORRECT INFORMATION. Are you intending to do that, RedKnight 1? If you have any objection please show the evidence that the flag was originaly created for Amy. Why don't you use more neutral expression like "The Rising Sun Flag is a traditional flag of Japan well-known as a military flag in Asia"?

Bluequark (talk) 15:06, 18 June 2013 (UTC)


Page protected[edit]

As a result of the recent edit war over the definition (see above) I have locked the article for a period of three days. Please discuss the definition on this page until a consensus is formed. Yunshui  06:56, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Since no-one saw fit to discuss the issue, and the edit-war resumed the moment protection expired, the article has now been protected for two weeks. Please form a consensus on this page, using arguments based on policy and sources. Yunshui  21:39, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
I would like to add the following line to the lead based on this source: http://www.columbiatribune.com/news/2012/apr/19/soccer-teams-use-of-rising-sun-flag-causes-stir/ "The Rising Sun flag was used by the Japanese military until the end of World War II and is considered offensive to countries that were victims of Japanese aggression." Ghostofnemo (talk) 13:52, 12 September 2012 (UTC) Here is another reference: http://japandailypress.com/courting-controversy-olympic-uniform-resembled-rising-sun-flag-149097 Ghostofnemo (talk) 13:55, 12 September 2012 (UTC) Another reference: http://view.koreaherald.com/kh/view.php?ud=20120829001376&cpv=0 Ghostofnemo (talk) 13:59, 12 September 2012 (UTC) One more: http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/opinon/2012/09/164_119758.html Ghostofnemo (talk) 14:00, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
If you can't add this information, please unlock the article. Thanks! Ghostofnemo (talk) 12:30, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
Whilst your finding of sources is admirable, one editor doesn't make a consensus. We need to establish agreement on this page between the parties involved (or at least a solid, policy-based decision), otherwise the edit warring will restart when protection exprires. You have made a good start towards this with the above sources, but the issue isn't so much that the article doesn't discuss the flag's military associations and offensiveness to some other countries, more over whether or not the information should be in the lead paragraph of the article. Since the changes you are requesting would effectively continue the edit-war - the reason this article was locked in the first place - the change is not going to be made in the immediate future. I hope this clarifies things a bit; please drop me a line on my talkpage if you have any questions. Yunshui  12:47, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
I'm sorry, but I don't think an administrator has the right to block reliably sourced, NPOV contributions to articles indefinitely because of a lack of consensus. Not to mention I was not a party to the edit war you are referring to. Why not block the editors at fault instead of all Wikipedia editors? Ghostofnemo (talk) 01:04, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
I've created a "Request for Comment" here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Yunshui Ghostofnemo (talk) 01:21, 15 September 2012 (UTC)
What a pleasant surprise to come back to after the weekend. You appear to be labouring under a couple of misapprehensions here, so let me address those for you. One, I have absolutely no intention of locking this article indefinitely. Because my first protection of the page appeared to have been too short to allow a discussion to develop, I re-locked it for a longer period in the (apparently vain) hope that the editors involved could come to terms. Since that does not appear to have worked either, when this protection expires I anticipate resolving the matter in a different manner. Indefinitely full-protecting a page is almost unheard of, and is certainly not an option I'd even considered for this article. Please don't misrepresent my intentions.
Two, for all but the most trigger-happy, blocking is a final resort, not a first strike option. Blocking the ten or twelve editors involved would achieve nothing more than a lot of frustration and bad feeling, as well as potential collateral damage caused by blocking the numerous IPs involved. If some of the parties involved insist on continuing the edit-war, blocking is an option - one I'm considering - but other methods to achieve consensus should always be attempted first. Whilst you are, as you say, not party to this particular edit-war, adding the text you requested above would make you party to it (since that text, or something very similar, is precisely the subject of the disagreement) - under your "block all edit warriors" rationale, that would require me to block your account as well, no?
The world won't end just because you can't edit one page for another week or so. When the protection ends, hopefully the parties involved will have either accepted that the sources support one position over the other or moved on to other things. If not, well, then we can talk about blocks and topic bans. Yunshui  07:38, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
You seem quite willing to antagonize all of Wikipedia's innocent editors, while seeking to spare the feelings of the minority who violate Wikipedia policies. When you said my well-referenced, NPOV edit "is not going to be made in the immediate future" it implied that 1) I would not have the option of making the edit and 2) that therefore the page would remained locked and you were not going to do it either, and that 3) consensus outweighs accuracy. Do you want something like, "Some people like the Rising Sun flag, but others don't."? Don't you think it's important for readers to know WHY so many people find the flag offensive? As an American, I was frankly shocked to see this flag displayed in Japan and to see it on commercial products. And it's equally shocking that, no matter how many reliable sources support this, it won't be allowed into the article. Finally, it seems like you are overstepping your authority by 1) insisting that all edits to the page are done by consensus and 2) dictating which edits will or will not be allowed. Are you quite certain you are a neutral party in this situation? Ghostofnemo (talk) 10:52, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
The current information about this in the article is misleading. "In the last few years, this flag is considered offensive in countries which were victims of Japanese aggression, specifically in China and the Koreas,[6][7] where it is considered to be associated with Japanese militarism and imperialism." First of all, the flag has been offensive ever since the acts of aggression in the 1930's and 1940's. Second, the countries where this is the case extend well beyond China and Korea: this flag would be considered offensive in Indonesia, the Philippines, Hong Kong, Vietnam, Thailand, Cambodia, Taiwan, Australia, New Zealand, the U.S., and Russia. And third, the flag is not simply "associated" with Japanese imperialism (as if this sentiment developed in some secondary, unexpected, or artifical way), it is a symbol of that imperialism because it was carried by the troops who attacked and/or occupied those countries.Ghostofnemo (talk) 11:17, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
I assumed that "is not going to be made in the immediate future" implied nothing more than that the edit won't be made in the immediate future, i.e. it may be made at some point in the future, just not immediately. I'm sorry that you interpreted to mean something different from what I intended. For the record, were I not acting in an adminsitrative capacity here I would fully support the inclusion of your text; I find the whitewashing of the article unhelpful and would argue that the lead of an article should contain a synopsis of the article's coverage; in this case, that would include the offense that some people feel at the the flag. However, since I've taken administrative action to prevent ongoing disruption my opinion as an editor isn't relevant, so I'm not taking any position in this dispute beyond declaring that it needs to be resolved.
As regards consensus outweighing accuracy, in this arena, it actually does. "Consensus is Wikipedia's fundamental model for editorial decision-making."Since there is evidently a disagreement over the content of this article, consensus-building is an appropriate editorial process to establish the appropriate wording. Insisting that changes be based in consensus is not "overstepping my authority", as you put it, it's simply trying to guide the article's development in line with how Wikipedia works.
Out of pure curiosity, why is it that your changes to the article absolutely have to be made right this minute? Is there some reason that you aren't willing to engage in a discussion over the issue? Yunshui  12:00, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

As you can see, I'm discussing the issue. If I were allowed to make the edit (with its reliable sources as references) and it were to be deleted, at that point I could engage in a discussion with the deleting party and ask them to justify their deletion. But at this point, my edit is just a comment on a talk page, so nothing is happening. Finally, if consensus outweighs reliably sourced edits, then Wikipedia is just a reflection of which opinions are popular at the moment, and factual information can be repressed by aggressive editors. Ghostofnemo (talk) 01:17, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

You know what? I'm actually wrong here. I've been persuaded by this discussion to look over the circumstances and edits leading up to this page protection again, and in re-evaluating the situation I've become convinced that protecting the page was actually a mistake. The editors pushing to have the section on the flag's military use and offence-causing nature removed have provided sources, but on more in-depth checking they appear to be forum posts on a Japanese language-learning website; furthermore, I've yet to see any of these editors make edits anywhere else, which suggests sockpuppetry or at least POV pushing SPAs to me. Ghostofnemo, you are right; blocking (or at least final-warning) these editors would have been a more appropriate way to resolve the situation.
I'm going to unlock the article and post the amendments above. It's possible that the protection has served a purpose and that the dissenting editor(s) will have moved on by now, but further attempts to change the lead to remove the military connotations of the flag should probably be treated as vandalism, especially if they refuse to discuss the edit. Ghostofnemo, I apologise unreservedly; thank you for making me reconsider, and I'm sorry for being such an arse. Yunshui  07:14, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Recent edits[edit]

I restored the stable version. Because I found Wikipedia:Recentism and WP:UNDUE in the current version, especially in the lead. It is clear if you see the revision history of the article. Most of edits have been done by IPs and newbies since last month. I think the article should be semi-protected and if regular editors want to change the article, talk first and ask for consensus. Oda Mari (talk) 17:57, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Oda Mari, I've reverted you. The majority of those changes were by GhostofNemo, who tried quite extensively above to discuss the matter with other editors, and no one responded to him. And even if that weren't true, you cannot simply revert an IP or new editors contributions simply because he or she is a new editor. If there is something specifically wrong with those contributions, they may be reverted, but you need to actually state what was wrong with those edits. While, on some topics, it's okay to essentially require conversation before alteration, that generally applies to only the most extremely warred over topics, which this is not. And then, of course, if you do revert the editors, and they start talking as Ghostofnemo has done, you need to engage with them.
Please note that I am not actually stating that Ghostofnemo's edits are correct--I haven't reviewed them personally (though I do place a fair amount of creedence in what appears to be a review by Yunshui). I am merely saying that since Ghostofnemo has done his part by specifically proposing changes, citing sources, and providing a reason for them, it's now up to you (or other "regular editors") think he's wrong, then you need to tell him why, provide your own sources, etc. Qwyrxian (talk) 21:45, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Definition of "Asahi"[edit]

I think it's a good idea to mention the usage of the design by Asahi Shimbun and Asahi Breweries, but I think it might need more context. Otherwise, it might suggest the possibility that there is a political reason for their use of the flags. Maybe I'm missing something, but Asahi (wikt:あさひ) means "morning sun" which is a simple explanation for what might otherwise be a confusing issue. I'm not going to add it, because I'm not confident that it isn't more complicated then that, but I thought I'd mention it. Grayfell (talk) 04:08, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Present-day perception[edit]

Sorry, I should have brought this here earlier. After thinking on the matter more, I'm coming to believe that both of the wordings (the current one, and the one I reverted to) are wrong, as I think they both violate WP:NPOV. The previous one, I was definitely wrong to revert to, because calling the countries "victims of Japanese aggression" is clearly not neutral. The problem with the current version, though, in making the link anti-Japanese sentiment, is that it's WP:OR to presume that the root cause of the objection to the flag is the a-J sentiment. Unless we have a reliable source (here, I'm thinking we'd need an academic source looking at the picture from a wide perspective, not just the reporting of a single incident in a newspaper) that clearly explains the "cause" of the objection, maybe we should just end the sentence after "the Koreas". Qwyrxian (talk) 10:45, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

I don't think it's a problem. If it's not anti-Japanese sentiment, what is it? According to the ref. #7, the protester was a graduate student and he said "I was deeply offended". He's too young to actually know the Imperial Japanese military and the World War II. I have no idea what made him feel deeply offended, but probably the education he had, the books he read, or through media. Isn't it anti-Japanese sentiment? See Anti-Japanese sentiment in Korea#Education. Oda Mari (talk) 08:05, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Recent edits by User:RedKnight 1[edit]

RedKnight 1, I think your recent edits were anti-Japanese POV, especially your removal of contents, and I have questions. On this edit, you removed "This flag was used as a flag that symbolizes good luck from the Edo period. " Please explain the removal, The design could be seen in Ukiyoe. See [4]and [5]. You wrote "some countries, especially South Korea and China, where it is considered to be associated with Japanese militarism and imperialism", but according to this, it seems to be only in South Korea. What are those "some countries"? Please provide source. What do you explain the fact that there were voluntary Korean officers in the imperial Japanese army and they fought under the flag? Hong Sa-ik and Park Chung-hee. See also [6]. Please do not victimize Korea. You removed three images and added one to the examples section. Please explain the removal/addition and the change of the section title. There are more questions, but please answer these first. Thank you. Oda Mari (talk) 09:51, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Do you have a credible source? [7]- actually says Meiji author
[8] - Translation doesn't say anything.

The design may have come out of the earlier design Flag of Japan#History - Japan/Land of the Rising; but the article is about the Rising Sun FLAG (旭日旗 Kyokujitsu-ki - [9]. The Hinomaru was the NATIONAL Flag, the rising sun flag was adopted by the military.

You wrote "some countries, especially South Korea and China, where it is considered to be associated with Japanese militarism and imperialism", but according to this, it seems to be only in South Korea. What are those "some countries"? Please provide source.
this joongang Korean? -

Muse Uses Japan's Rising Sun Imagery, Forgets It Pisses People Off
Forbes

Why are they burning the flag?
China halts ministerial-level contacts with Japan
Chinese hold anti-Japan protests over boat dispute

2008 Olympics
The flag is seen by many in Asia as a symbol of Tokyo's wartime militarism.
Japanese sporting fans have been warned not to fly Japan’s “rising sun” flag at the Olympics, because it might anger Chinese, who have been taught to identify the flag with Japan’s militaristic past

Chinese hold anti-Japan protests over boat dispute
Emulating Nazis, returning to militarism
'Abe Gov't Likely to Officially Back Rising Sun Flag' - Japan’s neighbors consider the flag a symbol of Japan’s militarism.
The flag is often deemed offensive in Asia as it symbolises Japanese militarism and imperialism.

What do you explain the fact that there were voluntary Korean officers in the imperial Japanese army and they fought under the flag? Hong Sa-ik and Park Chung-hee
SO WHAT? Russians & Ukrainians served under the Germans while they fought against the Soviets, Indians served under the Germans they were still racist. Chinese served under the Japanese (Wang Jing Wei) but millions of Chinese died fighting against Japan. There was also a wider Korean resistance movement AGAINST Japanese rule.

I am not Anti-Japanese, I like Japanese culture, but Japan has to come to terms with its Imperialist past. I don't think the flag can be compared to the hakenkreuz (it is an over reaction) but there is a reason why they object to the flag/what it symbolizes - you can't whitewash history as you are attempting to do.

RedKnight 1 (talk) 13:53, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

RedKnight1, it sounds like you're not here to build an encyclopedia. If you see your purpose here as being to undo the whitewashing of history or to make Japan "come to terms with its Imperialist past" then, sadly, you're not going to be allowed to edit, because that's not Wikipedia is for. You can't, for example, remove the sourced claim that the flag originated in the Meiji era. Now, you can continue this discussion, and we can even use dispute resolution if needed, but you have to stop reverting to your preferred version in the meantime. Qwyrxian (talk) 22:28, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

RedKnight1, you didn't answer my questions. Please answer them first.
Why did you remove "This flag was used as a flag that symbolizes good luck..."?
Why did you remove the images?
Why did you change the section title? Oda Mari (talk) 09:36, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

In the Philippines[edit]

In the Philippines the term Rising Sun Flag is sometimes applied to the flag used by Gen. Pío del Pilar. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.97.123.47 (talk) 08:18, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Do you have any sources for that? If it's widely enough cited, and that other flag has an article, we could put a hatnote on this article. But if it doesn't have its own article, I'm not sure that there's much we can do here. Qwyrxian (talk) 23:36, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

new suitable section[edit]

I'm from User_talk:Oda_Mari#Rising_Sun_Flag.Oda_mari write "unsuitable for the section" and "small size". So, I make a new suitable section(more large size). My pictures are useful to reinforce the text "sometimes seen at sporting events". --Seisato (talk) 09:08, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Hello, Seisato. The pictures are large enough. The problem with the first picture is that it has too many flags. It is confusing as an example, because it is hard to find the rising sun. The second one doesn't work because it is an animated slideshow. Slideshows are not used on Wikipedia very much. Animated images should only be used sometimes, this is not the right place. The 2nd and 3nd images in the slideshow are good. Please upload those without the animation. I think that one of those would be a good example of the flag at a sporting event. Grayfell (talk) 09:31, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
Please tell me the reason why gif animation is banned. "not very much?" is no reason.Graphics_Interchange_Format is used in wikipedia.It does work fine in my browsers(IE,Fx).I think it's your problem. no reason.--Seisato (talk) 09:55, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
It's a 3.3 megabyte 5-frame image which would be much, much easier to understand as a separate gallery, not a slideshow. It's going to be a slow and inconsistent on slower platforms and on mobile. It's not worth the hassle. By saying 'not very much' I was trying to be polite. Slideshow of images like the one you uploaded not used on English Wikipedia. Like I said, the 2nd or 3rd frames of the image would be better. Per MOS:IMAGES GIFs should be the size that they are intended to be displayed, but at that res, the rising sun flags are too hard to see. There are also MOS:ACCESS issues for those with disabilities. In general, we try to give readers more control over their viewing and reading patterns. Forcing readers to wait for the animation to cycle through to even have a hope of understanding what their looking at is not consistent with that goal. Two editors have reverted, so please discuss on this talk page rather than WP:EDITWARing. Grayfell (talk) 10:26, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
NOT 3.3 megabyte BUT 83.79 KB! You must watch the image.You should stop making false charge. You must show clear evidence of banning. --Seisato (talk) 11:03, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

I agree with Grayfell. Because of the other bigger flags, the first one is like Where's Wally?. It's a very bad example. The second one is undue weight on the Asahi Shimbun. The Asahi flag is already used in the article. The new section is not needed. Besides, Seisato, you are the uploader of the images. I think it's inappropriate to push your own images as you cannot be objective. It also could be WP:COI. Leave them to other users to use them or not. Oda Mari (talk) 17:10, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

fix on misquote[edit]

My fix on the misquote here[10] was removed by User talk:Oda Mari because according to him, it "appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder." Anyone has a clue on what's talking about? --Winstonlighter (talk) 22:58, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

It was not a 'misquote'. You directly copied content from the source [11] with very little modification. That is a violation of WP:COPYVIO. Oda Mari was right to revert you, because this is a policy Wikipedia takes very seriously. Write things using your own words, and don't do that again, please.
In addition, the comparison with the Nazi flag needs much better sourcing before being added. It's far from a straightforward comparison. Throwing it in the article like it's no big deal is not really productive. If there are sources making that comparison (not just in passing, like the Independent one) than let's discuss that on this talk page. Grayfell (talk) 03:00, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
The original source [12] didn't mention "strong ant-japanese" which is, however, added to the wiki page. I think there's a very obvious difference between the meaning of "victims of Japanese aggression" (original source) and "strong anti-japan sentiment" (a made-up quote from the source". Rephrasing is needed to avoid copyright issue, but if you really quote this, don't go too far by putting the words into the author's mouth and added something he didn't say. The case that a Japanese supermarket owner who burned the flag faced death threat is not included in this edition because I'm quite curious what you really refer to when you talked about the copyright issue. You talked about the supermarket case, or the article of columbiatribune.com? --Winstonlighter (talk) 17:32, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
The copyright issue is just what I said: you directly copied content from the source. I don't know how to make it any clearer.
I'm not opposed to including the supermarket incident, but it needs to be given due weight. The flag has a long history, and if this one incident is going to be presented as an example, it needs to be sourced as such. If it's just given as one incident, that's more complicated. I think it should be summarized and given a bit more context. Ideally, more sources would be included to establish that the event is useful in understanding the flag's history as a whole. Explain why he burned it and such. The Independent article is from 1992, presumably the trial is over and an actual verdict can be mentioned too, right? Even then, it needs to be written in a WP:NPOV way.
You also added that the flag's use on fishing boats is controversial. No doubt it is, but a statement like that needs a source, and some indication of why it's controversial. Grayfell (talk) 23:59, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
Copyright should be respected but not an excuse to infiltrate your own made-up words into the article. I don't know how to make it any clearer how misleading it is in the previous version, when an editor [[User:Oda Mari] reverted the fix and saw the phrase "strong anti-japan sentiments specially China and Korea" as the synonym as "victims of aggression, including China and Korean". The latter one is the exact phrase used in the cited source, but it should be kept, instead of putting your own opinion under the name of other sources. --Winstonlighter (talk) 09:27, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
Remember that neither I nor Oda Mari were the ones who originally added that phrase. You made several significant changes to the article which introduced WP:OR and WP:COPYVIO problems. Don't get too surprised when that edit is reverted, rather than carefully modified to accommodate a point that wasn't all that clear (at least to me). This is why I suggested taking it to the talk page. By explaining it here, now I understand what you're talking about.
The source's exact wording was a simplification of a complex issue as part of a news story about specific events. Anti-Japanese sentiment and Japanese war crimes are both fairly extreme ends of a spectrum. Of the two options, I agree with your use of the war crimes one, as it seems more specifically tied to why the flag is considered offensive. I'm open to the possibility that might be a better way to explain it, though. Grayfell (talk) 23:53, 5 June 2014 (UTC)