Talk:Tokyo

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Former good article nominee Tokyo was a Geography and places good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
December 6, 2006 Good article nominee Not listed
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Cities (Rated B-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

This article has comments here.

WikiProject Japan / Districts & municipalities / Prefectures / Tokyo (Rated B-class, Top-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: 13:24, March 1, 2015 (JST, Heisei 27) (Refresh)
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
Checklist icon
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This page is supported by the Districts and municipalities task force.
Taskforce icon
This page is supported by the Prefectures task force.
Taskforce icon
This page is supported by the Tokyo task force.
 
WikiProject Olympics (Rated B-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon Tokyo is within the scope of WikiProject Olympics. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

This article has comments here.

WikiProject East Asia (Rated B-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject East Asia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of East Asia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
Wikipedia Version 1.0 Editorial Team / v0.5 / Vital / Supplemental
WikiProject icon This article has been reviewed by the Version 1.0 Editorial Team.
Taskforce icon
This article has been selected for Version 0.5 and subsequent release versions of Wikipedia.
This article has an assessment summary page.

150-gigapixel panorama[edit]

This 360-degree panorama is supposedly the second largest photo ever made (150 billion pixels) and is really quite amazing. It could be added as an external link. Zerotalk 08:50, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Spelling variant[edit]

Please leave the spelling in the original variant, which is American English. That's what the Manual of Style indicates is the proper procedure. Let's follow it -- makes life easier. Thanks! Samuel Webster (talk) 04:44, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Amazon.com Sales Pages Removed[edit]

Four external links were routed to amazon.com sales pages. Some noted amazons "search" function, apparently as justification. The same search function is available from a number of non-sales sites. Further, these are not sources used for the article. If a sales page is the only link that can be provided, remove the entire book. Please take it to DMOZ if needed. Jay Dubya (talk) 19:32, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Merger proposal[edit]

  • Comment - I fully support this measure, as both Tokyo and the Tokyo Metropolis are synonymous and a merger would just highlight the importance of the urban conglomeration in Wikipedia. Both articles have similar content, and residents from both "areas" would most likely refer themselves as residents of Tokyo to those not from the region. Redflorist (talk) 01:25, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Comment - I think this would be a good idea, as it is quite confusing to have different articles about hte same thing floating all over the place. --Gimala (talk) 18:55, 5 December 2014 (UTC)Gimala

should be merged with Tokyo Metropolis, do not forget Tokyo (disambiguation)--Oursana (talk) 14:22, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

  • Comment - Although at face value the two articles appear reference the same topic, I believe that this is an attempt to split the Tokyo article into a Tokyo "city" (i.e. the 23 wards) article and a Tokyo "prefecture" article. Personally, I would advocate such a split since this article, whilst initially mentioning the dual "metropolitan prefecture" nature, is more focused on the city itself (e.g. there are sections on "cityscape"). I think using "Tokyo" to refer to a city and a prefecture with rural districts is confusing for the reader. Although I agree that the situation is different, all other prefectures with a city and prefecture of the same name (e.g. Saitama Prefecture, Saitama, Saitama) are seperate articles. I would agree with a merger if the current status-quo is kept, but advocate splitting the article into city and prefecture articles. JTST4RS (talk) 18:44, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for your quick response. I think we agree completely. Formally Tokyo Metropolis could be for the prefecture, but this article Tokyo gives information about the city and better information about the prefecture as well, see e.g. Izu Islands and Ogasawara Islands and Tama region, whereas Tokyo Metropolis seems more like a stub. Furthermore as about City of Tokyo you have to consider, that there is also Special wards of Tokyo. In short like you I would support keeping up the split between city and prefecture if the split would be made clearer by naming and by the texts. With the status quo I would prefer a merger to one good article, than keeping one stub for formal reasons only. Perhaps you could work on this, it depends or the elaboration or at least the merger. I think the situation is different from other articles of cities/prefectures of the same name, because there exist really cities and prefectures side by side, while only Tokyo officially is no city. I came here via wikidata, because as you can imagine, the situation there is far more complicated. But this article is a key article, so I'd like to have this clear at least. The link in the IB
[[Prefectures of Japan|Metropolis]]
should be altered.
On wikidata the situation is even more complicated. There is Tokyo (prefecture), where this article is linked to, Tokyo, with no en article linked to, Special ward of Tokyo, Tokyo Metropolis, where only Tokyo Metropolis is linked to, see also d:User talk:Zolo: Präfektur Tokio (Q1490), Tokio Metropolis (Q11199581).--Oursana (talk) 15:06, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
I would definitely say that the merger would be the easier, quick-fix solution. If this merger were to go ahead (and if I have understood the French correctly) I agree with what is written on d:User talk:Zolo in that this English Tokyo page should be linked to ja:東京都 as opposed to ja:東京. The "東京都" article's content is similar to the content of the English Tokyo page covering: the geography, economics, culture etc. of modern Tokyo (city and prefecture). The "東京" article on the other hand concerns Tokyo as a capital city, i.e. why Tokyo became the capital and the history surrounding its naming and merely contains links to the modern city/metropolis/prefecture of today.
I would argue, however, that the quick-fix solution is not the best solution. The Tokyo-related articles often overlap in places and sometimes contradict each other (e.g. the Special Wards of Tokyo page states that "all wards refer to themselves as city ... but only Tokyo as a whole would be referred to as a city" whereas this page states (in the lead) that all of the wards are run as cities, and that Tokyo is a metropolitan prefecture and not a city). Unfortunately, I believe a major overhaul of the Tokyo-related articles would be necessary. Since Tokyo is a particularly important topic, I believe that a very strong and clear consensus as to what should be included where would be required to achieve this. This is why, at the current level of participation in this discussion, I am reluctant to cut out huge chunks of the non-city parts of this article and rearrange them in the Tokyo Metropolis article so that it is no longer a stub. I would be willing to assist with such a process if significant consensus can be found. (I believe that opinions of the editors involved with WP:Japan would be greatly beneficial to this discussion, so I will add a post to their talk page).
I have given some thought to a possible Tokyo overhaul on the English Wikipedia, it is only an idea so is likely very flawed. This idea would entail making Tokyo a "city" article focused on the 23 wards and Tokyo Metropolis a "prefecture" article focussed on Tokyo as a prefecture and regions not covered by the 23 wards. The two articles would acknowledge each other in the lead with a sentence explaining the Tokyo situation followed by "this article focuses on Tokyo as ... for more information on Tokyo as ... see ...". The idea would change the "Special Wards of Tokyo" into a list article listing the special wards. The content currently in the "Special Wards of Tokyo" would be merged into the "Tokyo" (city) article. I hope this is useful, JTST4RS (talk) 19:30, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
@JTST4RS: I can see keeping two separate articles, but I would oppose moving any content from Tokyo to Tokyo Metropolis. Mainly for the reason that English readers rarely need to know the details about why Tokyo is a prefecture (都), not a city (市). To most readers, Tokyo is a city, and I think that's OK. The main article explains what they need to know well enough.
There would also be practical difficulties in splitting up the "city" part from the "non-city" part. The urban area is huge, so it would be hard to say where to draw the line. For example, the city of Mitaka is right next to the 23 wards, and there is no break when you go from one to the other. For most purposes, it is part of urban Tokyo.
As for what to do with Tokyo Metropolis, I think it's OK as a stub. If we want, we can use to explain Tokyo's unique administrative status as a city, a prefecture, and the national capital. But in real life, the formal English name "Tokyo Metropolis" isn't used very often. The Tokyo Metropolitan Government refers to itself as that, or more usually TMG. But even in their own documents (some of which I've translated) they refer to Tokyo as just "Tokyo", not "Tokyo Metropolis".
One option, which is what I think I would recommend, would be to move Tokyo Metropolis to something like Administrative history of Tokyo Metropolis. Then convert Tokyo Metropolis to a redirect to Tokyo. That would solve the problem of people wanting to add content to Tokyo Metropolis instead of the main article. Also the problem of that arose in the Mitaka article, where they wanted to use the official name "Tokyo Metropolis" but link to the main article, and were forced to use a pipe: [[Tokyo|Tokyo Metropolis]]. We could keep the history tables, which will probably be of interest to somebody. And the language note, which is of interest to people like me, on the rare occasion when you actually do have to translate the "to" in "Tokyo-to". But keep it focused on post-Meiji administrative status, without trying to make it into a History of Tokyo or Geography of Tokyo type article.
@Oursana: I looked at your Zolo talk page and can see your problem. Would changing the name "Tokyo Metropolis" to a redirect to "Tokyo" solve it? I would recommend linking Tokyo (prefecture) to "Tokyo", but if someone did link to "Tokyo Metropolis" would they still end up at the right place, namely the main article "Tokyo"? --Margin1522 (talk) 17:41, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
@Margin1522: Thank you for your reply. I admit that the main reason for advocating a split was to ensure that the main article focuses on the city aspect to ensure that it is relevant to the majority of readers (who will therefore not be confused by the occasional "non-city" aspects). However, I am very appreciative of your point regarding areas such as Mitaka; I cannot see an obvious way around the practical difficulties of separating the two aspects without drawing some sort of "artificial line". If it is not possible to form such a split, I would admittedly prefer to see a merger: I think that the "history" section of Tokyo Metropolis could easily fit into the "1943–present" section of the Tokyo article (which I think, even for a summary, is lacking). I can see how the "language" aspect would struggle to fit into the "Tokyo" article but I am equally uncertain as to how it would fit into an "Administrative history of Tokyo Metropolis" article. Perhaps it would be more suitable to integrate it with Prefectures of Japan#Types of prefecture ? JTST4RS (talk) 12:54, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── That sounds like a very sensible plan to me. If nobody objects, let's go ahead and do that. While we're at it, I found another article -- Tokyo City. That article already has a table that is very similar to the 2 tables in Tokyo Metropolis. I think it would benefit if we also dropped those 2 tables into that article. We wouldn't have to change a word in the existing text and it would complete the story. Also, moving the language paragraph to Prefectures of Japan#Types of prefecture is a great idea. I will volunteer to do that. Depending, it might even fit in a footnote. --Margin1522 (talk) 18:11, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Adding the tables to Tokyo City sounds sensible, in fact the second table is probably superfluous for this Tokyo article since it is covered by "Geography and administrative divisions" (on reflection, the sentences just above the second table in "Tokyo Metropolis" would fit better in this "Geography and administrative divisions" too). If nobody objects to the merger, I will be happy to assist, in particular with the merger of the two "History" sections. JTST4RS (talk) 14:51, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
OK, if you can handle that I will do the language section and the cleanup afterwards. I read the guidelines on merging articles, and it says that we should leave the merge notices up for about a month before proceeding, so perhaps we could return to this around 20 September ? --Margin1522 (talk) 18:22, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for checking the specifics. I will check back periodically with the view of beginning the merge process if there is no change by 20 September. JTST4RS (talk) 21:14, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for your comments, which I will try to summarize, comment and structure into subtitles and paragraphs, where necessary.

Consent on two articles about Tokyo and another for Tokyo prefecture/Metropolis[edit]

We agreed best would be to have one article about Tokyo and another for Tokyo prefecture, this is the main topic

Tokyo should be a "city" article focused on the 23 wards and Tokyo Metropolis a "prefecture" article focussed on Tokyo as a prefecture and regions not covered by the 23 wards; The two articles shall acknowledge each other in the lead with a sentence explaining the Tokyo situation followed by "this article focuses on Tokyo as … for more information on Tokyo as … see …".
Perhaps acknowledgements by wikilinks are sufficient and self-explaining; An example for vice versa acknowledgements are de:Tokio
Tokio (auch Tokyo, jap. 東京, Tōkyō anhören?/i) ist eine Weltstadt in der Kantō-Region im Osten der japanischen Hauptinsel Honshū. Sie umfasst die 23 Bezirke auf dem Gebiet der 1943 als Verwaltungseinheit abgeschafften Stadt Tokio und ist damit keine eigene Gebietskörperschaft mehr; stattdessen bilden die Bezirke zusammen mit den Städten und Gemeinden der westlich gelegenen Tama-Region und den südlichen Izu- und Ogasawara-Inseln die Präfektur Tokio.
and de:Präfektur Tokio.
I also like simple:Tokyo:
Tokyo Metropolis (東京都 Tōkyō-to?) is the official name for of the traditional city of Tokyo (東京市 Tōkyō-shi?) (1869-1943) and the associated municipalities of what was formerly Tokyo Prefecture (東京府 Tōkyō-fu?) (1869-1943).[2] It is the capital city and a prefecture of Japan on the island of Honshu.
whereas this article
S1=Tokyo (東京 Tōkyō?, "Eastern Capital") (Japanese: [toːkʲoː], English /ˈtoʊki.oʊ/, About this sound listen (help·info)), officially Tokyo Metropolis (東京都 Tōkyō-to?),[5] is one of the 47 prefectures of Japan.[6]
S2=Tokyo is the capital of Japan, the center of the Greater Tokyo Area, and the most populous metropolitan area in the world.[7]
S3=It is the seat of the Japanese government and the Imperial Palace, and the home of the Japanese Imperial Family.
S4=Tokyo is in the Kantō region on the southeastern side of the main island Honshu and includes the Izu Islands and Ogasawara Islands.[8]
S5=Tokyo Metropolis was formed in 1943 from the merger of the former Tokyo Prefecture (東京府 Tōkyō-fu?) and the city of Tokyo (東京市 Tōkyō-shi?).
S6=Tokyo is often referred to and thought of as a city, but is officially known and governed as a "metropolitan prefecture", which differs from and combines elements of both a city and a prefecture; a characteristic unique to Tokyo.
S7=The Tokyo metropolitan government administers the 23 Special Wards of Tokyo (each governed as an individual city), which cover the area that was formerly the City of Tokyo before it merged and became the subsequent metropolitan prefecture in 1943.
rough Suggestion:
S1/2=Tokyo (東京 Tōkyō?, "Eastern Capital") (Japanese: [toːkʲoː], English /ˈtoʊki.oʊ/, About this sound listen (help·info)) is the capital of Japan, the center of the Greater Tokyo Area, and the most populous metropolitan area in the world.[7]
S6=Tokyo is often referred to and thought of as a city, but officially (wl) Tokyo Metropolis (東京都 Tōkyō-to?),[5] is known and governed as a "metropolitan (wikilinkl) prefecture", which differs from and combines elements of both a city and a prefecture; a characteristic unique to Tokyo.
S7:The city consists out of 23 administrative units. These 23 (wikil) Special Wards of Tokyo are each governed as an individual city, which cover the area that was formerly the City of Tokyo before it merged and became the subsequent metropolitan prefecture in 1943.
S1.2/5=Officially is one of the 47 prefectures of Japan.[6] and was formed in 1943 from the merger of the former Tokyo Prefecture (東京府 Tōkyō-fu?) and the ++former++ city of Tokyo (東京市 Tōkyō-shi?).> (prefecture article)>
S4=Tokyo is in the Kantō region on the southeastern side of the main island Honshu and includes the Izu Islands and Ogasawara Islands.[8]
S3=Tokyo is the seat of the Japanese government and the Imperial Palace, and the home of the Japanese Imperial Family.
It was questioned to move huge chunks of the non-city parts of this article to the Tokyo Metropolis article so that it is no longer a stub, or not to move any content from Tokyo to Tokyo Metropolis. Mainly for the reason that English readers rarely need to know the details about why Tokyo is a prefecture.
Please see simple:Tokyo and simple:Tokyo Metropolis, where I made similar changes

Merge of most parts of Special wards of Tokyo into Tokyo(?)[edit]

Special wards of Tokyo are about the city of Tokyo with view on the special wards, while the first articles have to be thoroughly revised, I am not quite sure about the revision and relation of the 23 special wards; on wikidata and de:WP we have the three items. IMHO we should keep this article about Tokyo with the detailed view to the special wards pretty untouched. At least we should discuss it expressly here.

moving content from Tokyo to Tokyo Metropolis[edit]

this has be discussed in detail. contra:
reason that English readers rarely need to know the details about why Tokyo is a prefecture (都), not a city (市). To most readers, Tokyo is a city, and I think that's OK. The main article explains what they need to know well enough. (will be continued as soon as possible)--Oursana (talk) 12:49, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

This would be easy if Tokyo was like Osaka. Osaka has a mayor, and Osaka Prefecture has a governor. Osaka "city" exists. But there is no "city" of Tokyo. There is no mayor and no city government. It's all Tokyo.
I can see why WikiData wants two articles to link to: one on the "city" of Tokyo, and one on the "prefecture" of Tokyo. 99% of the cities in the world are like that. But Tokyo is different. It's more like Singapore.
The Japanese Wikipedia has various articles on Tokyo, but the main one is 東京都 (Tokyo Metropolis). That's the article that corresponds to our article on Tokyo, which is named simply Tokyo because in English nobody ever says Tokyo Metropolis. Unless they have to :)
True, there are various problems with the organization of our article on Tokyo. The section on "Geography and administrative divisions" is really large, so the actual information about the city doesn't start until halfway through the article. I think we can do something about that -- e.g. move most of the administrative explanation to another article and get to the good stuff quicker.
But I think I oppose having 2 articles on Tokyo "city" and Tokyo Metropolis. There is no Tokyo "city", only Tokyo.
Sorry I'm really busy now and can't give this the response it deserves, but that's my basic thinking. --Margin1522 (talk) 07:50, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
Personally, I see nothing wrong with having two separate articles even if there is no such thing as Tokyo "city"; I believe that if it is appropriate to have two separate articles there should be two separate articles, even if they are governed by the same entity. For instance, the UK has articles on its (present) ceremonial counties, even though these have no bearing on its administrative divisions - the articles exist since it is appropriate to have articles on them and I cannot see why the same should not apply here; there are clearly city and non-city aspects of Tokyo which could be made clearer in two separate articles. My issue lies in the practicality of defining such a split. The original idea of splitting the 23 wards (which would be named "Tokyo") from the rest of Tokyo (which would be named "Tokyo Metropolis") would exclude areas such as Mitaka and so "Tokyo Metropolis" would still end up being a half city, half non-city article which undermines the point of the split in the first place. I retain my view that if a practical split is possible then the articles should be split, but since there seems to be no obvious and practical split, to me a merger has become the more viable option. JTST4RS (talk) 09:37, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
The problem I see there is that Tokyo Metropolis is the official name of Tokyo. In this case, the policy is to 1) mention the official name, bolded, in the first sentence of the article on Tokyo; and 2) create a redirect from the official name to the article. See Wikipedia:Official_names#Where_there_is_an_official_name_that_is_not_the_article_title.
Sorry, I need a bit more time to think about this. I am looking now at Tokyo (Q1490) (194 entries) and Imperial Tokyo (Q7473516) (15 entries) in WikiData. I want to check what the articles that link to these two items are actually about. I have no objection to moving part of the content of Tokyo to another article, if that would be useful. Also I want to look at Berlin and Hamburg, which are de:Stadtstaat? That is similar to Tokyo. I want to check what their WikiData is. --Margin1522 (talk) 16:23, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
Splitting at this level makes sense, instead of merging Tokyo/Tokyo Metropolis. When somebody searches for Tokyo, they want information on the system of Tokyo (i.e. the mainland Tokyo of the 23 wards, Tama, and by extension the shutoken; how the mainland city part of 東京都 interacts with the rest of Japan and the world), not just the wards or just Tama, and definitely not the islands. I seriously doubt many people are looking specifically for prefectural-level information by typing in 'Tokyo'.
Googling tells me this division is called 東京都島嶼部 (Tōkyō-to Tōsho-bu, islands section) and 東京都本土 or 東京都本土部 (Tōkyō-to honto-bu, mainland section), but honto-bu seems to be used almost exclusively by biologists and Tokyo Metro and not a widely used term. --Prosperosity (talk) 12:33, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
@Margin1522: Thank you for highlighting the title issue, I would completely agree that if a suitable split/distinction between the two articles can be found the "Tokyo Metropolis" page would need to be moved to a more adequate name depending on the details of the split.
@Prosperosity: Thank you for raising the point about prefectural-level information. Would Margin1522's idea of creating a page entitled "Administrative history of Tokyo Metropolis" (or perhaps the more presently orientated "Administration/Administrative structure of Tokyo Metropolis", although this may become similar to politics of Tokyo) be a solution to this? I am not entirely certain that a distinct article for Tokyo's islands is necessary, I personally would have thought that the individual articles on the island groups were sufficient. JTST4RS (talk) 18:28, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
That could work too. We don't really need distinct articles about Tokyo-fu and Tokyo-shi, and it feels inappropriate to arbitrarily break up the history of Tokyo at this level. Adding any historical data to the main Tokyo article, and putting any data on the changing administrative structure into a single article with a single narrative. --Prosperosity (talk) 02:25, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
After considering it, I think I would like to suggest renaming "Tokyo Metropolis" to "Tokyo Metropolitan Prefecture". Then convert "Tokyo Metropolis" to a redirect to "Tokyo", and use "Tokyo Metropolitan Prefecture" as a destination for things that people want to move out of "Tokyo".
"Tokyo Metropolitan Prefecture" allows us to distinguish Tokyo-to from "Tokyo Prefecture" = Tokyo-fu. It seems to be a popular term in the academic literature, and in general. We could use it to explain the details of the government and the various things that the government does -- sister cities, the islands, CO2 initiatives, etc. That would leave us free to concentrate in "Tokyo" on the more city-ish content. The two articles would be closely linked -- there would be pointers in "Tokyo" saying, "For details see Tokyo Metropolitan Prefecture". I think this might satisfy the desire in some other languages to handle the prefecture separately. But the main article would still be "Tokyo". --Margin1522 (talk) 20:33, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
Looking at the Japanese articles, the main one is "Tokyo-to", which has basically the same structure as English "Tokyo". The article on the 23 wards is also basically the same. Then they have one called simply "Tokyo", which is kind of an odd article, about "Tokyoness". Most of it is content that is duplicated elsewhere, plus image galleries. To me the one memorable thing about it is the story of the name -- how Tokyo came to be called that instead of Edo. We have that in the Etymology section of Tokyo, but I'd like to move it somewhere else. To a history article maybe. It's not important enough for the prominent place we give it. --Margin1522 (talk) 20:33, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
@Prosperosity: I think we need to keep separate articles on Tokyo-fu and Tokyo-shi. They are separate in other languages, and they are really separate topics. Tokyo-fu is a stub now, but it could be expanded from the Japanese version. There is a lot of material there, although it's pretty dry. --Margin1522 (talk) 20:33, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
If we had an 'Administrative history of Tokyo Metropolis' page, these would just serve as information forks. Besides, having something exist on other Wikipedias isn't a good reason for doing anything (or not doing anything). What would the Tokyo-fu article be about, if its history is to be housed at the 'History of Tokyo' article and its administrative history at 'Administrative history of Tokyo Metropolis'? --Prosperosity (talk) 01:08, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
In en.wikipedia, I think "Tokyo" should be the main article encompassing all three of Tokyo-to, Tokyo-fu and Tokyo-shi. According to the article's current intro:
Tokyo (東京 Tōkyō?, "Eastern Capital") (Japanese: [toːkʲoː], English /ˈtoʊki.oʊ/, About this sound listen (help·info)), officially Tokyo Metropolis (東京都 Tōkyō-to?),[5] is one of the 47 prefectures of Japan.[6] Tokyo is the capital of Japan, the center of the Greater Tokyo Area, and the most populous metropolitan area in the world.[7] It is the seat of the Japanese government and the Imperial Palace, and the home of the Japanese Imperial Family. Tokyo is in the Kantō region on the southeastern side of the main island Honshu and includes the Izu Islands and Ogasawara Islands.[8] Tokyo Metropolis was formed in 1943 from the merger of the former Tokyo Prefecture (東京府 Tōkyō-fu?) and the city of Tokyo (東京市 Tōkyō-shi?).
The en.wikipedia article "Tokyo" therefor is (currently) about Tokyo-to but includes historical information (which may be split off into other pages) about Tokyo-shi and Tokyo-fu. We could perhaps clarify the last sentence along the lines of "The official government entity called Tokyo, Tokyo Metropolis (東京都), was formed in ..." -- Rick Block (talk) 04:34, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
@Prosperosity: Yes, it's true we should do what's best for the English Wikipedia, regardless. But there are advantages to harmonizing with WikiData. 1) If you do read articles in multiple languages (which is why we have interlanguage links) it's convenient to have the articles be on the same topic. 2) Wikidata handles the interlanguage links automatically, so that now we don't have to place them in the text of the article, like we used to. So we want this to work well. --Margin1522 (talk) 12:09, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

Two approaches[edit]

Looking at existing articles in various languages, there seem to be two main approaches:

  • ONE BIG ARTICLE -- Japanese, English, French, Spanish, etc. (194 entries in Q1490)
  • TWO BIG ARTICLES (city, prefecture ) -- Japanese--Oursana (talk) 09:57, 6 October 2014 (UTC), German, Chinese, Simple (15 entries in Q7473516)
    • 23 wards subarticle -- Japanese, English, German, French, Chinese, Simple (37 entries in Q308891)

To accommodate this, we have 3/4 categories at Wikidata.

  • d:Q1490 Tokyo (capital of Japan with 13 million inhabitants, and one of 47 prefectures of Japan)
  • d:Q308891 special ward of Tokyo (special municipality that builds up the center of Tokyo)
  • d:Q7473516 Imperial Tokyo (the 23 wards in the Eastern part of Tokyo prefecture that used to form a single city)

*d:Q11199581 Tokyo Metropolis --Oursana (talk) 09:41, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Looking at the discussion at d:User talk:Zolo, it seems that (Q7473516) was intended to be about "Tokyo in general, without getting precise about its administrative status". In other words, it was created to accommodate the oddball article 東京 (d:Q7473516 Imperial Tokyo)--Oursana (talk) 09:55, 6 October 2014 (UTC) on the Japanese Wikidpedia. In my opinion, we should ignore that article. It is neither the ONE BIG ARTICLE or TWO BIG ARTICLES approach. It's a small, unusual article that other languages probably don't need to link to.
If we are going to have 3 categories, I think one of should be for Tokyo Prefecture as prefecture. Note that some of the ONE BIG ARTICLE entries are entitled "Tokyo Prefecture" in the native language. That doesn't matter. What matters is that they are one big article, and should link to the one big article in other languages. But German and Chinese do have separate articles on Tokyo Prefecture as such. WikiData should have a "Tokyo Prefecture" category for that. And we could discuss whether we want to accomodate that approach on the English Wikipedia. The Chinese and German articles are nicely organized. I think they are worth looking at.

So I see 3 things we should discuss:

  1. Abolishing the "Tokyo Metrooplis" article. It's a stub, no languages or other articles link to it, and it's occupying a name that should be a redirect to "Tokyo".
  2. Whether to go with TWO BIG ARTICLES and establish a separate big article for the prefecture (Tokyo-to), as distinct from Tokyo. If we do that, I suggest the name "Tokyo Metropolitan Prefecture" for the prefecture article.
  3. Whether to keep ONE BIG ARTICLE. That way we could move content like the islands, history, etc. freely between Tokyo and other existing articles. --Margin1522 (talk) 12:09, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for your comments. I am still in favor of solution two. I would suggest redirect from Tokyo Metropolis to "Tokyo Metropolitan Prefecture"--Oursana (talk) 22:32, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
I think a redirect from Tokyo Metropolis to "Tokyo Metropolitan Prefecture" would be fine, provided there was something substantial there. We could move of the local government material there, and some of the history. We could do the administrative history there, and the history of the city (the earthquake, the fire bombing, the real estate bubble, etc.) in Tokyo. This would be quite a job, but it might be worth it. Maybe people could look at the pair of articles simple:Tokyo and simple:Tokyo Metropolis to see what they think. --Margin1522 (talk) 12:26, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
Are there any official or major sources that refer to Tokyo-to as "Tokyo Metropolitan Prefecture", like the Japanese or US governments, World Fact Book, etc? A quick search didn't have any on the first page. Calling it that implies that it is some sort of wide spread official name in English, as opposed to one decided by people at Wikipedia (which Wikipedia editors don't really have the authority to do). I'm not happy with "Tokyo Metropolis" myself since it's quite vague, so if this were to happen a better title might be Tokyo Metropolis (prefecture). --Prosperosity (talk) 12:41, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
FWIW, "Tokyo Metropolitan Prefecture" gets 463K hits on Google, vs. 292K hits for "Tokyo Metropolis". Neither one is used very much on the .gov domain. Both are used in Google Books, rarely, with the edge going to "Tokyo Metropolis", no doubt because the Tokyo Metropolitan Government itself prefers "Tokyo Metropolis". Normally that would settle matters except.... it sounds strange and few people use it. Here is a link to a discussion group for professional translators. If you scroll down halfway, you can see people being very reluctant to use "Tokyo Metropolis" because it sounds like a Godzilla movie. My sentiments exactly. Plus, as you say, it's vague and readers won't understand that it means "prefecture" unless we explain it. That being the case, why not put it in the title? It does get all those hits on Google, so it's not like we're making it up. About "Tokyo Metropolis (prefecture)", we could do that. But my impression is that parentheses are usually used when the same word occurs in multiple titles, like Peter Robinson (journalist) and Peter Robinson (politician). But we are only going to use it once. That's my opinion anyway. I'm less worried about the title than whether we should have the article in the first place. --Margin1522 (talk) 17:41, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
Though more time consuming, I think that the two big articles is the way forward. Personally, I think that the "Tokyo" and "Tokyo Metropolitan Prefecture" idea is great. I believe that it retains the main focus of keeping a split; the typical reader gets an article focused on what they want to see in "Tokyo" (the "city aspects", historically significant events for Tokyo, Tokyo as a world city, climate, population etc.) and the reader who wants to know how Tokyo functions on a local level and as a prefecture can benefit from a separate "Tokyo Metropolitan Prefecture" article. Equally, it avoids the practical difficulties of splitting "Tokyo" along a geographical boundary. Although some discussion may be needed to workout exactly what should go where (I think that the simple articles are a good starting point, there are a few grey areas though - without due caution, there is a risk that the two "history" sections could overlap), I think the idea in essence is a great one; the articles seem distinct enough for editors to know what should go where. I also hope it will help to resolve issues such as one I found here. As for the name, I think "Tokyo Metropolitan Prefecture" is fine. I agree with Margin1522's point that "Tokyo Metropolis (prefecture)" makes it look like there's something else that is entitled "Tokyo Metropolis". Though I would not object to "Tokyo Metropolis" redirecting to "Tokyo" (since it is its official name), I think that redirecting "Tokyo Metropolis" to "Tokyo Metropolitan Prefecture" would be marginally better since the only reason I can think of as to why someone would go to the effort of searching for "Tokyo Metropolis" instead of just "Tokyo" would be because they want to know more about the "prefecture" aspects of Tokyo, for which "Tokyo Metropolitan Prefecture" would be more suitable. JTST4RS (talk) 22:51, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
Oh, some of those references to "Tokyo Metropolitan Prefecture" on google (like this, this and this) are for 東京府, since 府 was the literal designation for any metropolitan prefecture/urban prefecture (like Hakodate-fu) back in the early Meiji, as opposed to the rural 県 prefectures. So "Tokyo Metropolis (prefecture)" would be disambiguating "Tokyo Metropolis (sprawling city system that we call Tokyo)" (東京), "Tokyo Metropolis (prefecture)" (東京都) and "Tokyo Metropolis (former prefecture)" (東京府). --Prosperosity (talk) 03:01, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
This may be just a personal preference, but I really want to keep "Metropolis" out of article titles, because of Godzilla. "Metropolis" was also the home city of Superman and there's no way we can keep English readers from thinking of that. "Tokyo Metropolitan X" is OK, where X is anything, but not "Metropolis".
I didn't realize that Allinson uses "Tokyo Metropolitan Prefecture" for the 府. Apparently he uses it for both 府 and 都. I did check Google for simply "Tokyo Prefecture", and that seems to fall into two groups. Travel guides use it informally to refer to the current 都, and academic writers use it to refer to the historical 府. The latter seems quite well established, so I think "Tokyo Prefecture" = 府 is OK as is. --Margin1522 (talk) 08:11, 10 September 2014 (UTC)