User talk:Asakura Akira

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Newest Japan-related articles list[edit]

Thank you for adding Japan National Party to the new articles list. That is absolutely the right place to put such things. Now it has been brought to our attention that it exists, we can nom it for DYK, or work to improve it. Thanks. LordAmeth (talk) 16:06, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for the confirmation. I’m just not too familiar (yet) with the en Japan-project pages & procedures and wanted to make sure the right people can give the article the attention it needs or, at least, needed at the time I found it. --Asakura Akira (talk) 04:26, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

No flagged revisions category up for deletion[edit]

The category associated with the no flagged revisions userbox you have placed on your user page is up for deletion at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2009 April 23#Category:Wikipedia users who oppose Flagged Revisions and you are invited to share your opinions on the issue. Alansohn (talk) 04:49, 23 April 2009 (UTC)


Political Dweeb’s message[edit]

Firstly because I don’t know how to speak any level of Japanese I want to thank you for letting me know what misspellings the Goggle translation system showed in the name of one of Japan Nation Party’s candidates called ‘’Asano Susugi Akira - 浅野光雪’’ who I think you are saying is really called ‘’浅野光雪 - Asano Kōsetsu’’. I wanted to ask you about your comments on the history section of the Japan National Party article where you mentioned I shouldn’t normally use the Google translation system to help with category and format, however could you please explain to me what is a format and a category and when I make Wikipedia articles how do I use them?

User: Asakura Akira

One other important reason I’m sending this message is because I’m doing a long questionnaire on a political ideology called National Bolshevism to ask Wikipedian’s on the discussion page of this ideology whether or not it is anti-Semitic. Some people who’ve influenced the creation of this ideology are anti-Semitic; however a group that I’ve seen on the internet and Wikipedia is Jewish and promotes this ideology - the National Bolshevik Party of Israel.

Another reason why I wanted to know whether National Bolshevism is anti-semitic, is because a Wikipedia article about a controversial Japanese political party calling itself the National Socialist Japanese Workers and Welfare Party is said to support the ideology of National Bolshevism. The article on the NSJWWP says that their ‘’theories allow them to be placed within the wider context of the Eurasianism that forms a part of National Bolshevism.’’ However I want to ask you if they actually believe in National Bolshevism in an anti-semitic form. If so, could you then explain why they contradict that ideology by supporting and promoting ideas etc which are anti-Semitic? For example they are part of an grouping of neo-Nazi organizations and political parties called the “World Union of National Socialists” and discuss on their website something about the far right politicians called Jean Marie Le Pen of the French Front National and Russia’s Vladimir Zhirinovsky of the Liberal Democratic Party of Russia Could you please explain to me what they’re saying about those two politicians?

The introduction to this website has the message saying ‘’We are the Superior RACE’’ - what do the members of this party mean by saying this? Is it simply that because their skin color is a light yellow and not dark, that means they can be part of this special race? One thing NSJAP states on one of their previous websites is that their “fight is principally dedicated to our fatherland (Japan) and Japanese-Turanian race. We also fight for the Freedom of Eurasia as well as that of Japan.” What they say here contradicts a belief they promote which is that they the “fight for the FREEDOM OF THE WORLD against” “race-mixing”., “reconfirm the excellence of Japanese race, preserving the purity of our blood” and believe that “the “ancient relationship between Aryans and Turanians was demonstrated by Reich's official racial theorist Prof. Hans Günther.” So why does NSJAP believe they should support the “Japanese-Turanian race”, that they ‘’are the Superior RACE’’ and “reconfirm the excellence of Japanese race, preserving the purity of our blood”. This statement contrasts with this party’s belief in the racial and national integration of the Aryan race in Europe with the Turanian race in Asia – concept that appears to contradict their belief in racial purity.

“fight for the FREEDOM OF THE WORLD against communism” contradicts what was said about them on the Wikipedia article that their ‘’theories allow them to be placed within the wider context of the Eurasianism that forms a part of National Bolshevism.’’ Which again NSJAP contradicted by supporting Eurasia since they said on their website that they fight for “the Freedom of Eurasia”. NSJAP’s fight to free the world of communism contradicts their support for Eurasia which is a part of National Bolshevism which as an ideology is described by a Wikipedia article on it as “a political movement that claims to combine elements of nationalism and Bolshevism”, “often anti-capitalist in tone” and is “sympathetic towards certain nationalist forms of communism and socialism”. Does NSJAP want to free the world from communism or support this National Bolshevism that combines nationalism with communist and socialist ideology?

On a roughly translated text of NSJAP’s website is something called the “International Front” that may be an alliance NSJAP created of Nazi political parties from parts of the world that may support NSJAP. These Nazi parties are called for example the “Bulgarian National Socialist Front, Iranian National Socialist Workers Party, Greece’s “Golden Dawn/Chrysi Avyi”, Danish National socialist Movement and Norway National Socialism.”

The roughly translated version of “International Front” mentioned other neo-Nazi political parties like the American Nazi Party which was led by George Lincoln Rockwell who’s “principal message was racial separation and attempted to form friendly associations with the Nation of Islam. He praised Elijah Muhammad as the "Black people's Hitler," and for doing the best job in promoting integrity and pride among his people. Rockwell also admired Malcolm X, seeing him as the next true leader for Black America.” George Lincoln Rockwell who previously was more openly offensive when speaking of African or black people, but started to speak of them differently when he became part of a Nation of Islam meeting in Chicago and told an audience of 5,000 Nation devotees that he was “proud to stand here before black men.” He also spoke of the leader of the Nation of Islam, “Elijah Muhammad is the Adolf Hitler of the black man.”

“On Sunday, June 25, 1961, Rockwell and ten troopers attended a Black Muslim rally at Uline Arena in Washington.” They were in their “seats near the stage in the center, surrounded by eight thousand Black Muslims. They were encircled by black journalists, who wanted to know Rockwell’s thoughts. He told reporters he considered the Muslims “black Nazis.” For George Lincoln Rockwell who was the leader of the American Nazi Party, saw that “Nazis and Black Muslims could be allies, since they both sought the same goal—separation of the races. which is what he and his party supports. Yet why does he support the existence of separate races when the Nazi ideology he supports and promotes is about the White Aryan race controlling and ruling the world? It is possibly because the Nation of Islam and the American Nazi Party share a belief in anti-Semitism, since the ANP “also added a platform of Holocaust denial.”

“International Front” Other parties and organizations mentioned there from that rough translation are, for example, at the bottom of the page, Lebanon’s Syrian Social Nationalist Party, which is described by a Wikipedia article on it as having been modeled after the National Socialist German Workers' Party meaning the SSNP tried to be a copy of the Nazi Party. [Another party was America’s National Alliance of Dr William Luther Pierce. There was also a British one called Combat 18.

An American one that is part of the International Front was the White Aryan Resistance [since the roughly translated version of NSJAP’s website on the “International Front” called this group White ARIAN Resistance. This name also appears on the website of an American organization called Anti Defamation League that helps societies counter all kinds of racism, anti-Semitism, showed the WAR group logo and the name of this group as White Aryan Resistance.

Do the above mentioned Nazi political parties support or oppose the idea NSJAP talks about which is of Aryan Europe combined or joined with Turanian Asian? With that list of Nazi political parties above it seems reasonably possible that NSJAP is supportive of Nazism however there are two other political parties called Afrikaner Resistance Movement and the November 9th Society/British First Party that seem to be either partially supportive of Nazism or not necessarily part of it as the following paragraphs explain.

However can you explain to me what these Japanese Nazis are saying about the Afrikaner Resistance Movement and its leader called Eugène Terre'Blanche. Why does the Wikipedia article on the Afrikaner Resistance Movement say that Despite the strong resemblance to the swastika and the historic admiration for Nazism among the far right in South Africa, Terre'Blanche publicly claims to distance the AWB from this interpretation of the emblem. He claims instead that the sevens, 'the number of JAHWEH', 'stand to oppose the number 666, the number of the anti-Christ'. Red is considered to represent Jesus' blood, while black stands for bravery and courage. The inner white circle symbolizes the "eternal struggle". Wouldn’t that mean that the Afrikaner Resistance Movement is contradicting itself here if it was supported by this Japanese political party that may support Neo-Nazism?

From the rough translation of this website’s page that has the title “International Front” It also showed some British neo-Nazi organizations with one of them called the British Nazi Party (which I think is the name of another organization that is called the November the 9th Society, since on their FAQ on their website some time ago they explained they have also been called Britain’s Nazi Party.”

I understood they were British because a logo was there next to the roughly translated name Combat 18. I think that logo was of November 9th Society since there’s a logo on a product of political party’s store called http://www.britishfreestore.co.uk/product_info with a book called November 9th Society Organization Book that looked like the logo on the "International Front" that was beside the name Combat 18]] if you click on the websites top right hand area saying “Click to enlarge” I think it shows the same logo.

That product came from what the November 9th Society “formed” which was a political party under the name British First Party. The N9S's slogan of "We will never change to flirt with public opinion" came to an end when the BFP was introduced, and many other right wing parties turned their back on the N9S/BFP ever being a serious contender in British politics. This has caused friction within the N9S, and many members are believed to have left. Since then, the N9S website has been taken offline and members have been forced to join the BFP or leave.”

However that Wikipedia article on the November the 9th Society has been contradicted since there is now at the moment a website that does exist called http://november9thsociety.org/ that explains on it that the November 9th Society’s “political wing is called the British First Party which is a British National Socialist organization” also the November 9th Society chose to “urge all National Socialists to join the British First Party which is a frontline National Socialist organisation which has a modern approach and policies the average Briton can associate with.”

Yet British First Party seems to contradict itself by instead of openly saying they support Nazism they choose to support the British empire since they say with education the British people “are made to feel guilty for the glorious British Empire.” Other things they say are that British people in education are "made to apologise for the slave trade, even when we were the first to seek its abolition.” Then it says that it wants Britain to “Trade with Europe as it suits us” and “Seek friendly relations with Europe but avoid all treaty obligations”. And then contradicting all of that the goal of the British First Party is nothing less than” what it calls a “national awakening”.

I do not know whether this party is trying to support a British or Nazi empire, “national awakening” or even whether its complete opposition to the slave trade means it will then change by opposing anti-Semitism. However please let me know if you are aware of what the National Socialist Japanese Workers and Welfare Party’s position is in relation to November the 9th Society and if the NSJWWP chooses to support or not to support the British First Party and if the BFP will choose to continue as an anti-Semitic political party.

Going back however to our discussion on the National Socialist Japanese Workers and Welfare Party they’ve got a part of their website which I saw from the roughly translated version of it called “Basic Principles” however I don’t know if that’s what the Japanese version of their website that is not translated says yet I think its about their ideology. Can you explain to me here that if this is their ideology then what does it say they believe in? Because I saw from the roughly translated version of this page here it had some paragraphs under the title “National socialism”. When you place your mouse on this text you will get a small Google box with the original Japanese text, so could you read that Japanese text from the Google boxes and explain to me if NSJAP here either only supports Nazism or anything else?

There are other positions the National Socialist Japanese Workers and Welfare Party has that may contradict their beliefs like for example where on their website they discuss something about the infamous terrorist Osama Bin Laden could you let me know what they are saying about Osama and if the NSJAP supports him. When I roughly translated a website page of NSJAP’s I think it was talking about France’s far right wing political party called Front National whose leader is Jean Marie Le Pen and a Korean cult called the Unification Church which is true since now I looked at it gave the complete name of this Korean cult that was suitably translated as the “Holy Spirit Association for the Reunification of World Christianity”. They also talk about a political organization that Sun Myung Moon called the International federation for Victory Over Communism/国際勝共連合 and Moon had worked with a Japanese World War 2 criminal called Ryoichi Sasakawa and a ultranationalist businessman ex-World War 2 prisoner and Yakuza called Yoshio Kodama who both helped him create what Wikipedia describes as the Japanese chapter of this anti-communist organization.

I checked on Google and found this article that explains how the Unification Church supported the Front National of Jean Marie Le Pen. I do not know if NSJAP supports the beliefs and views of the International federation for Victory Over Communism, Sun Myung Moon, Unification Church, Ryoichi Sasakawa and Yoshio Kodama however the only way for you to explain to me if NSJAP does or does not support or believe in them is to read this roughly translated page of NSJAP’s website where you can put your mouse’s arrow on the text and you can read pieces of the Japanese text to understand it and explain it to me as to whether or not NSJAP supports or does not support these organizations of this Korean cult of Sun Myung Moon and France’s Front National of Jean Marie Le Pen.

One other reason it is important to ask and understand if the NSJAP supports that Korean cult of Sun Myung Moon is because the Wikipedia article on the Unification church says one of the statements its leader called Sun Myung Moon said was about how his teachings have helped Hitler and Stalin be "reborn as new persons". I wanted to understand that if NSJAP supports this cult and this view of Hitler and Stalin from Sun Myung Moon.

The NSJAP seems to discuss on its website about other cults like Aum_Shinrikyo and the Branch Davidians. On the roughly translated version of NSJAP’s website when I placed my mouse over pieces of text that would be highlighted from one of their articles there were Google boxes with the Japanese version of the roughly translated article’s text I have copied and pasted to show to you below so you can explain to me what NSJAP is saying about Aum Shinrikyo.

オウム真理教

文/国家社会主義日本労働者党 山田一成

前回、マルコポーロ誌をめぐる一連の騒動をめぐって私なりの意見を述べさせていただいたが、ユダヤ、シオニスト側の西岡氏に対する反論はなされない侭だった。記者会見で「文芸春秋誌の誌上で回答をだす」と云っていたのにだ。あれだけ世間を騒がせたうえ、改めて言論のタブーを明確にした事件であったのに無責任な結末ではあった。しかしながら、世間では『オウム真理教』である。松本サリン事件から地下鉄サリン事件、国松警察庁長官狙撃事件、オウム幹部銃密造疑惑、坂本弁護士一家と目黒公証人の拉致事件、自衛隊の関与、最近兵器の製造、薬物投与がすべてオウム真理教の犯行であるかのごとく連日、テレビや新聞紙上で報道されている。もし仮にすべてが、オウム真理教の仕業であったなら、そして背後にロシアや北朝鮮などの"国"が介在していなかったのなら、極右から極左に至るまでの"改革"を求めている人達すべてが、猛省しなくてはならないと思う。

我々は、常に「維新だ」「革命だ」などと社会に対して反体制的な立場を若干でもとってきたつもりであったが、それは子供騙し程度のものでしかなかったのだと痛感せざるをえない。 おそらく、日本の人口の一割に満たない程度の知能を持った頭脳集団を幹部に置き、体制(と云うより、システムそのもの)を此処まで否定した勢力というものを我々は、初めて目のあたりにしたのだ。体制にとっての危機感は、全共闘時代のそれを遥かに越えていると云っても過言ではないだろう。今までの政治的事件のほとんどが体制内改革を目指していたのに対して、オウム真理教は絶対的な価値観を振りかざして日本国に宣戦布告をしてきたのだ。あと数回サリンをばら捲けば、日本国との交渉も可能だろう。彼らはおそらくプルトニウムを持ち、中性子爆弾も製造しているはずだ。

いや、本当には持っていなくても、その存在をちらつかせるだけでいい(警察に押収された書類に中性子爆弾の製造法が書かれていたという)。日本国の国際的な信用度はインドかスリランカ程度へと失墜するはずである。世界的な大恐慌が訪れるかもしれない。彼らの云う『日本印度化計画』とはこのことか?この時こそ彼らの主張するハルマゲドンが到来するのだ。と考えていくと、何故か知っているシナリオだと気が付いた。村上龍の『愛と幻想のファシズム』『五分後の世界』を足して2で割ったシナリオではないか。我々こそが実践しようとしていた世界をオウム真理教という宗教団体が、たった今演じているのだ。マルクス・レーニン主義の世界観が瓦解し東西冷戦が終焉を迎える。日本はバブル経済に浮かれて「物質的幸福が至上のものである」とばかりに精神的な価値を嘲笑してきた。一億総不動産屋といわれて政治化から宗教家に至るまで財テクに狂奔していた。

しかし、いつの時代でも真面目に生き「これでいいのか」という疑問を世間に投げ掛けるのが、また若者の特権でもある。既成宗教が墓地経営に血眼になり、新宗教が"宮殿"の様な"記念館"を建てて、ひたすら現世利益を追求している今日、精神的な支柱をオウムに求める若者がいてもいいのではないか。体制に精神的なもの、"真理"と思われるものを追及する若者を受け入れるものが無かったのだから。またこの体制を打倒して、新しい桃源郷を創りだそうという運動が、所謂"オウム現象"ではなかったのか。私事ではあるが、3月18日ほんの数分であるが、村井科学技術庁長官と会話をすることが出来た。村井氏に「権力の弾圧に負けるな」と檄をとばしたところ「頑張ります」と穏やかに微笑んでいた。 私は小さなブラック・ホールを作りたい。そうすれば地球のゴミ問題も解決する」と云っていた村井氏。

彼は自称右翼の在日韓国人・徐裕行容疑者の凶刃に倒れた。犯行の動機を「義憤に駆られた」と云っているそうである。しかし私は、徐容疑者に右翼的な背景を全く感じ取れないのである。 在日韓国人で右翼、民族派の人達は多数いるが大抵日本名を名乗っているのだ。更に所属していた『神州士衛館』という団体名と韓国名とのギャップ。犯行に及ぶ際の檄文が無いこと。犯行後の落ち着き方からいっても、彼は「義憤」に駆られた"右翼"ではないと思う。では、徐容疑者の背景はと云うと、巷間で噂されているようにオウムの自作自演ではないかとか、某指定暴力団の名前が出ているが、私はいずれも村井氏を殺させた真犯人ではないと思う。まずオウム説の場合、村井氏以上に表に出てほしくない人物、土谷正美容疑者等を最後まで匿っているのだ。目黒公証人拉致事件の松本剛容疑者の逃亡を、危険を冒してまで手助けしている。

若し村井氏が性格的に権力の追求に耐えかねる人物と考えていたのならば、最初からテレビ等に出演させてはいないだろう。某暴力団の場合は、村井氏との接点がまるでない。仮にオウムと暴力団の係わりあいがあった場合でも村井氏ではなく、早川紀代秀容疑者がその任に当っていたであろうから。では誰がという問題になるが、私はオウムより巨大で世界的な新宗教団体が関与していると思っている。私がこの『卒啄』の誌面で何が言いたかったのかというと、オウム真理教と右翼民族派の関わりである。優秀な理化学系の学者や自衛隊員までを惹き付けてしまったオウムの教えは、この混迷する世紀末にあって、右翼も左翼も示唆出来なかった方向性を示したのであり、オウムの行為そのものを「反社会的だ」といって非難する前に、こんな若者を惹き付けられなかった我々が反省すべきだと思うのである。しがって、街宣車でのオウム批判等は、虚しく感じるのである。我々は決して権力に迎合しない立場であるのだから

※以上、月刊『卒啄』第9号(1995年5月)より転載。


Can you explain to me if the NSJAP supports or opposes these three cults it discusses on its website that are the Unification Church, Branch Davidians and Aum Shinrikyo? The method I used to copy and paste the text from the article on Aum Shinrikyo was what I also used to show you this text below where NSJAP have a text on the Holocaust here so could you explain what they are saying on it and their position on it.

20世紀最大の大嘘

~ホロコーストは作り話である~


文/国家社会主義日本労働者党 山田一成

第二次世界大戦中、確かに民族大虐殺は行われたしかしそれは連合国による広島、長崎、ドレスデンでの無差別殺人のことである。現在のアメリカの成人で、第二次世界大戦中のヨーロッパでドイツ人が約六百万人のユダヤ人を殺したという話を聞いたことのない人は、まずいない。アメリカのテレビ、映画、新聞・雑誌は、このことを繰り返し取りあげる。ワシントンDCでは、巨大なホロコースト博物館を建設中である。●学者は絶滅説に異議を申し立てる しかし、過去週十年のあいだに、ノースウェスタン大学のアーサー・バッツ博士やフランスのリヨン大学のロベール・フ ォーリソン教授のような尊敬すべき学者を多く含む多くの「見直し学派」の歴史家が、広く知られている絶滅説に対して異議を申し立ててきた。

それらの人びとは、数多くのユダヤ人が収容所やゲットーに収容されたことや、多くのユダヤ人が死んだり、あるいは第二次世界大戦中に殺された事実に対して、異議を申し立てているのではない。そうではなくて、見直し説の学者たちは、ドイツにはヨーロッパのユダヤ人を絶滅させる計画はまったくなかったこと、推計六百万人のユダヤ人が戦時中に死んだというのは無責任な誇張であることを示す、充分に明白な証拠を提出しているのである。●ホロコーストの主張は崩れている 見直し学派は、ホロコースト説は何年ものあいだに大幅に変わったことを指摘している。かつて 広く受け入れられていた絶滅説の多くは、最近ではすっかり鳴りをひそめた。

ある時期には、ドイツ人がダハウ、ブーヒェンヴァルトその他のドイツ領内にある収容所でユダヤ人をガスで殺したと主張されていた。その絶滅説は、あまりにも根拠薄弱で、二十年以上も前にまったく影も形もなくなった。いまや誠実な学者で、かつてのドイツ帝国領内に "絶滅キャンプ" が存在したなどという想像上の物語を支持する者はひとりもいない。高名な「ナチ・ハンター」であるサイモン・ヴィーゼンタールですら、一九七五年に「ドイツ領には絶滅キャンプは設置されていなかった」と認めている(典拠、『本と書斎人』ロンドン、一九七五年四月号、五ページ)。

著名なホロコースト学者は現在では、いまは共産主義者が支配するポーランドのアウシュヴィッツ、マイダネク、トレブリンカ、ソビボル、ヘルムノ、ベルゼクの六ヵ所のキャンプだけでユダヤ人大衆がガスで殺されたと主張するに至っているしかしながら、これら六つのキャンプで行われたという "ガス装置" の証拠なるものは、典型的なドイツの全キャンプで用いられている「ガス装置 」と質的になんら変わるところがない。第二次世界大戦終結に引き続く一九四五年から四六年にかけてのニュルンベルク裁判で、アウシュヴィッツ(とくにアウシュヴィッツ=ビルケナウ)とマイダネク(ルブリン)とは一般に "死のキャンプ" とみなされている。たとえばニュルンベルク裁判で連合軍側は、ドイツ人はアウシュヴィッツで四百万人、さらにマイダネクで百五十万を殺害し たと主張した。加えて近年は、これらの収容所で大量殺害が行われたという主張とは相容れない強力な証拠が、次々に提出されている。

They also say that the Japanese should establish a moral state as a national community on the basis of the idea of National Socialism. What does NSJAP mean when it uses the word “moral” and does that mean they think there is something morally right about National Socialism?

There is also something I saw on the roughly translated version of the website of NSJAP where they were talking about (Today’s “Kamikaze”) which you may see [here in Japanese] which I think was a phrase they used for the people who flew the planes into the World Trade Center. Since the people who flew these planes into the World Trade Center were doing it for the ideological supremacy of Islam and for Al Qaeda does this mean that NSJAP supports not only their actions but their Islamic religion?

I want to end this message by saying that the NSJAP’s possible support of neo-Nazi political parties, Aryanism, Islamic fundamentalism and different cults makes their policies sound unclear. Can you please explain to me what their position is on all of those? Finally I want to say I am trying to ask questions on it in a sensitive, cautious and understanding way. Please let me know how far you can understand my message since I will try my best to clarify any difficulties with you, discuss this message here or on my talk page, please reply soon, thank you

Please excuse me for saving this message a third time its so I could improve the meaning of my edit summary. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Political Dweeb (talkcontribs) 16:25, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Political Dweeb (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 16:01, 11 May 2009 (UTC).

If you want to discuss the nature of NSJAP the article's talk page might be the right place. I know very little about that insignificant splinter group and seriously doubt whether it will play any significant role in Japanese politics (unless it resorts to terrorism or other drastic measures, of course).
As for translation requests: If you have a specific request I'll be happy to help; but if you are looking for pages of text and don't want to rely on machine translations I suggest you ask someone who is more proficient. My reading ability of Kanji (without computer user's little helpers) is even worse than the Prime Minister's (see user page:ja-1). --Asakura Akira (talk) 05:16, 30 May 2009 (UTC)


New message to Akira[edit]

I want to explain that because I may not have gotten an answer from you for some few days or weeks, I have asked another Japanese Wikipedian about these questions in my above message. This user called Aotake has at told me that he seems to understand from what he has read from the Japanese texts from NSJAP’s website, is for example with the Japanese cult called Aum Shinrikyo, NSJAP today according to Aotake they “do not directly support Aum but they admire what they did” and yet he says NSJAP is “neutral” on this.

However one of many comments on NSJAP Aotake answered to my questions, is that “they are Holocaust revisionists, yet they use the word holocaust to refer to other genocide or oppression by the USA, Israel”

You would want me to discuss the issues of NSJAP on the Wikipedia article on this party, yet I wanted to ask if you could translate this whole text below and only send the translation of it to my talk page on NSJAP’s position on the Holocaust. This is so I can understand what evidence NSJAP uses to doubt the Holocaust so I can judge to what extent what they say is or is not true. I heard you say you have difficulty reading Kanji, does that mean the text below is in Kanji?

20世紀最大の大嘘 ~ホロコーストは作り話である~

文/国家社会主義日本労働者党 山田一成 第二次世界大戦中、確かに民族大虐殺は行われたしかしそれは連合国による広島、長崎、ドレスデンでの無差別殺人のことである。現在のアメリカの成人で、第二次世界大戦中のヨーロッパでドイツ人が約六百万人のユダヤ人を殺したという話を聞いたことのない人は、まずいない。アメリカのテレビ、映画、新聞・雑誌は、このことを繰り返し取りあげる。ワシントンDCでは、巨大なホロコースト博物館を建設中である。●学者は絶滅説に異議を申し立てる しかし、過去週十年のあいだに、ノースウェスタン大学のアーサー・バッツ博士やフランスのリヨン大学のロベール・フ ォーリソン教授のような尊敬すべき学者を多く含む多くの「見直し学派」の歴史家が、広く知られている絶滅説に対して異議を申し立ててきた。 それらの人びとは、数多くのユダヤ人が収容所やゲットーに収容されたことや、多くのユダヤ人が死んだり、あるいは第二次世界大戦中に殺された事実に対して、異議を申し立てているのではない。そうではなくて、見直し説の学者たちは、ドイツにはヨーロッパのユダヤ人を絶滅させる計画はまったくなかったこと、推計六百万人のユダヤ人が戦時中に死んだというのは無責任な誇張であることを示す、充分に明白な証拠を提出しているのである。●ホロコーストの主張は崩れている 見直し学派は、ホロコースト説は何年ものあいだに大幅に変わったことを指摘している。かつて 広く受け入れられていた絶滅説の多くは、最近ではすっかり鳴りをひそめた。 ある時期には、ドイツ人がダハウ、ブーヒェンヴァルトその他のドイツ領内にある収容所でユダヤ人をガスで殺したと主張されていた。その絶滅説は、あまりにも根拠薄弱で、二十年以上も前にまったく影も形もなくなった。いまや誠実な学者で、かつてのドイツ帝国領内に "絶滅キャンプ" が存在したなどという想像上の物語を支持する者はひとりもいない。高名な「ナチ・ハンター」であるサイモン・ヴィーゼンタールですら、一九七五年に「ドイツ領には絶滅キャンプは設置されていなかった」と認めている(典拠、『本と書斎人』ロンドン、一九七五年四月号、五ページ)。 著名なホロコースト学者は現在では、いまは共産主義者が支配するポーランドのアウシュヴィッツ、マイダネク、トレブリンカ、ソビボル、ヘルムノ、ベルゼクの六ヵ所のキャンプだけでユダヤ人大衆がガスで殺されたと主張するに至っているしかしながら、これら六つのキャンプで行われたという "ガス装置" の証拠なるものは、典型的なドイツの全キャンプで用いられている「ガス装置 」と質的になんら変わるところがない。第二次世界大戦終結に引き続く一九四五年から四六年にかけてのニュルンベルク裁判で、アウシュヴィッツ(とくにアウシュヴィッツ=ビルケナウ)とマイダネク(ルブリン)とは一般に "死のキャンプ" とみなされている。たとえばニュルンベルク裁判で連合軍側は、ドイツ人はアウシュヴィッツで四百万人、さらにマイダネクで百五十万を殺害し たと主張した。加えて近年は、これらの収容所で大量殺害が行われたという主張とは相容れない強力な証拠が、次々に提出されている。 If you cannot do any of that there are other texts I would like to ask if you could translate. A group that supports NSJAP called One Water Association with its leader called Kimura Mitsuhiro. [http://kimurasanko.fc2web.com/activity/2003nov.html On Kimura’s website because there is a picture of him speaking at a meeting of the Serbian Radical Party and there is some text beside it so could you translate for me that to let me know if Kimura supports the Serbian Radical Party.

Apart from that there are two other texts I just wanted to ask if you could translate. Here from the website of a political party called New Wind Restoration Party there is a small text which mentions a man I believe may be called Kimura of the One Water Assocation that is also mentioned here. Even though you can’t see an image there you can see out of all these images, one image under the name “katsudo_osaka_151…” which is where I got the http://www.shimpu.jpn.org/hombu/oshirase/katsudo/osaka/heisei_15/katsudo_osaka_151012.htm” website address from.

On Kimura’s website there’s an image of him maybe speaking at a meeting of the political party called New Wind Restoration Party could try translating here the text beside the image of a meeting of this political party to see if Kimura supports this far right wing political party.

Apart from that there is what I think may be a magazine here. Can you understand what it is saying, if so when you scroll down it there is a third page with what I think is a small photo of a French Front National rally on the right side of the page. Around the photo maybe there is some text there. Could you translate that text to see if it is saying that the New Wind Restoration Party supports or opposes France’s Front National.

There is also on a blog from one of New Wind Restoration Party’s members who I think is talking about Jean Marie Le Pen of the French Front National, the neo-Nazi National Democratic Party of Germany, Jorg Haider of the Freedom Party of Austria and one of the texts here, discusses something that on the roughly translated version of this website was called the “Nanking Holocaust” which they may be their way of saying the Nanking massacre. Could you possibly try to translate for me what the above texts, so I can understand what they’re saying or just give me a few short comments summarizing what they’re saying.

Please send the translated texts if possible onto my talk page or here, thanks, please reply to me soon. Political Dweeb (talk) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.235.200.233 (talk) 16:08, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

I’m sorry, but I can only repeat that I’m not the right person to ask questions about the NSJAP. So, just a few remarks:
  • Holocaust denial translation: I don’t think it is a good idea to expand the article solely based on a translation of their propaganda. As far as I can tell from a quick glimpse this is just another piece of dumb and pure holocaust denial.
  • The "One Water Association" you refer to is probably the First Wendnesday Society, Issuikai (ja), which has its name because it met on the first Wednesday (suiyōbi) of each month.
  • The Ishin Seitō Shimpū has its own article that already mentions Kimura's ties to Le Pen.
If you are really interested in substantially improving the articles on uyoku dantai I don't think you should use groups' own propaganda as a basis. (There should be enough English-language material on Japanese ultra-nationalists out there. A quick search for papers available online returns, for example, Mai Wakisaka: Uyoku. The Japanese Right Wing) --Asakura Akira (talk) 19:54, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Taro Aso[edit]

Hi, your reply to me on the article Taro Aso was very enlightening. I would highly suggest you just edit what you told me into the article so confused souls like me searching for why the Japanese political scene is so unstable have a place to go. This article will incur thousands of hits as his political defeat becomes more certain. You are quite qualified to make it better. Colipon+(T) 22:49, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

New Mesaage to Asakura Akira[edit]

On page 10 of this text it says that promoting “anti-communism” and being “opposed to the use of violence” are ideological positions of an ideology mentioned in this text called the “Neo-Right (Shin uyoku 新右翼)”. This phrase is used in another article to describe an “organization” created by “Kunio Suzuki” that’s also mentioned on page 11 this text as the “(First Wednesday Society (Issuikai 一水会, 1972~)”.

My first question here is can you give me a description of these Wikipedia articles on Issuikai and these other two articles on that organizations support of an ideology called New Right?

My second question is can you explain if the previously mentioned texts on Neo or New-right and Issui-kai say that the phrase called Neo-Right is a different ideology that is used in various parts of the world or if Neo-Right is an interchangeable phrase with New-right that means promoting social authoritarianism and free market neo-liberalism in Europe and America.

Political Dweeb (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 08:52, 4 April 2010 (UTC).

Again, I'm not an expert on right wing splinter groups. So, I can't offer you much more than the googlantic Trash Heap. As far as I understand it, the major differences of the shin-uyoku as opposed to the "old" uyoku are its pronounced anti-American stance (see Kimura's visit to Iraq, cf. Austrian right-wing populist Jörg Haider) and its readiness/aspiration to be part of a global "new right" (thus Issuikai's cooperation attempts with the FN). In contrast, the "old" uyoku had placed more emphasis on anti-Communism.
I'm not so sure what you mean by "Neo-Right vs. New-right". If you refer to recent conservative anti-mainstream/Machimura faction LDP premiers Shinzō "utsukushii kuni" Abe or Junichiro ibn Iraq al Koizumi and their political friends — they may be rightist but not uyoku. Their hawkishness (and it's first and foremost that: pro-ampo/pro-American hawkishness) is not all that new (compare anti-mainstreamers Hatoyama, Kishi in the 1950s in the historical context of a very recent defeat & demilitarization) but their free market ideology may be more radical than in earlier times. So they are maybe better termed as neo-liberal than neo-conservative; but then again, since the days of Nakasone sr. the term neo-conservative is widely applied. In any case, they are not directly related to the shin-uyoku. (Their popular appeal, while very different in scope, might be in part related to the same social phenomena, though.) --Asakura Akira (talk) 18:26, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

New Questions[edit]

I've finished what I think was several weeks ago an Open University course which maybe is called distance learning since I do it from home on with reading, listening to CDs and using my laptop and sometimes the OU website at home etc. I've also come back from a two week holiday in Madeira and now since I'm back I may be able to spend time asking questions on and look at political ideologies and politics etc. My response here is that I think I nearly understand what seems a very interesting answer from you and the faction you mentioned called the "Machimura faction" as you can see (here on this Wikipedia page mentions "many Japanese Neoconservatives" are in this faction) and therefore these Japanese Neocons are the people I'm talking about.

Yet I see my question on Issuikai wasn't so easy to understand, while I understand you aren’t an expert on right wing splinter groups as you say yet that’s O.K. just see how you go with reading an explanation that will lead up to my question on Japanese neoconservatism, Issuikai, Ishin Seito Shimpu (which I think may translate as New Wind Restoration Party, please correct me if I'm wrong) and the New Right in a way that is easily understandable to you.

1. I've learnt that the article on Japanese Neoconservatives says that they're more defensive of what was the Japanese empire and promote nationalistic pride yet I see that the Wikipedia article on Japanese Neoconservatives says without any sources that one of the members of the Shigeru Ishiba"Heisei Kenkyukai" faction of the Liberal Democratic Party of Japan wasa "major proponent" of the "US-initiated War in Iraq" where Ishiba had been promoting the idea of"bringing Japan into the multinational force in Iraq in 2003." that has no source but here on this Free Library website it shows an article that I think comes from the Kyodo News International, that says "Defense Agency Director General Shigeru Ishiba indicated Sunday that Japanese troops may participate in the U.N. multinational force in Iraq under a new U.N. resolution and said logistical support for maintaining public security differs from collective self-defense."


2. This shows that as you previously said that the Machimura faction of the Liberal Democratic Party of Japan is strongly supportive of America and has Japanese neoconservatives and Shigeru Ishiba is also a neoconservative of a faction from the Liberal Democratic Party of Japan. Moving on from this I want to explain that a Wikipedia article I created and may critically change further is on a far right political party that in Japanese is called "維新政党・新風, Ishin Seitō・Shimpū"here that name is translated when it is mentioned through an interview with "Mr. Suzuki Nobuyuki" as the "New Wind Restoration Party". When I translated the English version of my Wikipedia article on this political party into Japanese one of the ideologies it believes in was called "New Right". The phrase New Right is also another ideology that has been used by that political organization I mentioned to you called Issui-kai in a different way.

After those two long paragraphs giving an explanation of what I want to discuss in my question. I will now lay out in full my question to you below.

The phrase New Right has to me has many meanings but with Issuikai and Ishin Seito Shimpu that have connections to each other its more different. There are two meanings of the phrase New Right that I'll explain below.

1. This meaning of the phrase New Right seems to be a particular one that books like Ian Adams "politics today Political ideology today Second edition" Andrew Haywoods "POLITICAL IDEOLGIES" and "GOVERNMENT AND POLITICS Political Ideas and Concepts A2" by Diane Cathwell and Jonathan Sutherland say is generally a combination of opposite ideologies that are in what I think are two factions. The first faction is the Liberal New Right that whose liberal parts of the New Right that it promotes are neoliberalism, free market and minimal statism. The second faction called the Conservative New Right promotes the ideology of Social Conservatism AKA the Religious Right but most of the books says it is Neoconservativism that is promoted which represents authority, order, authoritarian in strong state & patriarchal family and nationalism. In short this particular form of the New Right is a combination of two factions representing opposite ideologies that are neoliberal minimal statism and social authoritarianism.


2. The second alternative description of the phrase New Right is an ideology promoted by the previously mentioned Japanese nationalist group called Issui-kai and here the phrase “New Right” is their ideology. while in an article of a text from a university when discussing proponents of this ideology e.g. Issuikai, the ideology is renamed differently as the “Neo-Right (Shin uyoku 新右翼)”. Page 10 Generally this ideology“advocated anti-communism and abrogation” (meaning to simply cancel or remove) “of the Japan-U.S. Security Treaty.” Page10 The Japan-U.S. Security Treaty was what proponents of the Japanese Neo-Right such as Issui-kai took strong positions on like by for example“Issuikai has made Iraq a cause celebre. Focusing on Iraq's troubles since the U.S.-led invasion presents Issuikai with a means of discussing how Japan, too, can remove itself from beneath the umbrella of U.S. military dominance. "We call for the re-examination of the Security Treaty between Japan and the United States of America, and for the ability to protect ourselves," said Kimura, referring to the 1952 and 1960 agreements that put Japan's defense firmly in the hands of the U.S.”"Traditional rightwing groups accepted the Cold War structure and were pro-American and anti-Soviet Union. But the new rightwing groups did not accept the Cold War structure and opposed American hegemony and the Japan-U.S. security treaty," said Yukio Hori, a recently retired professor of politics at Tohoku Bunka Gakuin University and author of several books on Japan's new right movement.”The Neo-Right also want an independent “Japanese cultural ideal”. So in short here the Neo or New-Right Wing promoted by groups like United Front Volunteers and Issui-Kai is about anti-communism, making Japan become a culturally and nationally independently powerful country and oppose American hegemony.

From these two explanations of what I think are various forms of what is called the New or Neo-Right Wing I will give you this question

Since organisations like Issui-Kai and Ishin Seito Shimpu have connections with each other, when they represent the ideology called New-Right, (sometimes renamed as previously mentioned as Neo-right) is it the form that’s 1st described above of social authoritarianism promoted by Japanese Neoconservatism and a neoliberal minimal state or is it the 2nd description of this ideology these two organizations support of anti-communism, anti-American hegemony and Japanese cultural and national independence?

Political Dweeb (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 10:34, 21 July 2010 (UTC).

1. A note on LDP factionalism: Japanese intra-party factions should not be interpreted primarily as ideological groups, particularly in the LDP. The last section of the en-WP article on LDP factions may give that impression; but they are first and foremost groups supporting the intra-party power interest of the faction leader(s). That said, it is obvious that people supporting the same leader often have similar political views. And both the Tsushima faction (Heisei Kenkyūkai) and the Machimura faction (Seiwa Seisaku Kenkyūkai) are seen as "hawks" within the LDP. On the economic front, the Machimura faction – especially since the Koizumi era – stands for economic liberalism; and the Tsushima faction represents the more traditional bureaucracy-guided interventionism (remember Hashimoto & Obuchi in the 90s desperately launching stimulus package after stimulus package).
2. On the Japanese Iraq mission: Among the central issues in Japanese postwar foreign policy and focal points of political debate in the postwar era in general are Article 9 of the Japanese Constitution, the Yoshida Doctrine and the US-Japanese Security Treaty. In the Iraq case, Article 9 was interpreted by a the bureaucracy (in form of the Cabinet Legislation Bureau) and a majority of Japanese as not allowing for any SDF mission in collective defense. Because of that – and coalition partner Kōmeitō's reluctance to change Article 9 or interpret it too widely – the Koizumi administration emphasized that the Iraq mission was a humanitarian reconstruction mission. Members of the Koizumi cabinet, namely Chief Cabinet Secretary Yasuo Fukuda (Machimura faction) and his deputy Shinzō Abe (Machimura faction, it is very useful to have loyal people in the right positions), pressured the Legislation Bureau to change its interpretation of the Iraq mission to that effect.
3. To your last question: The term shin-uyoku is only applied to movements in your second definition of New Right such as the Issuikai and the Ishinseitō Shimpū. The problem here, in my view, is the English translation as "New Right". That's fine as a translation of shin-uyoku per se; but the English term New Right has a different meaning particularly in the Anglo-American political arenas. For that reason it is maybe better not to use the translation and use the Japanese term uyoku as in the WP article on Uyoku dantai. Shin-uyoku corresponds more, if to anything, to the continental European definition of a "New [radical] Right" as in fr:Nouvelle droite or de:Neue Rechte
3b. On Liberal vs. Conservative New Right in the non-uyoku definition: At least one Japanese Neolib/Neocon or Reformist/Nationalist/Traditionalist/Progressive/Militarist/Liberal/Poodle/Cocker Spaniel... (depending on POV, see below) – and the most successful among them – catered to both audiences to some degree: Koizumi's "reform" agenda of privatization and deregulation sought economic liberalization while his visits to the Yasukuni shrine and his anti-terrorism law (basis for the SDF missions in Iraq and in support of US operations in Afghanistan) satisfied traditionalist and nationalist sentiments – though traditionalism may not been his motive (rather what is the Japanese neocons' interpretation of "Japan as a normal nation"); but in the end that doesn't matter: Yoshida's motivation for the Yoshida doctrine was clearly not pacifist. Yet, Article 9 has become a "holy grail" for the pacifist left. Similarly, nationalists were happy to see leading politicians from mainstream parties visiting the Yasukuni shrine in the Koizumi era.
2010. A general note on right/left, liberal/conservative: These terms can mean very different, contradicting things in different contexts. The political "center" in the US or Japan would be seen as a "rightist" position in many continental European countries. The position of most European "conservatives" would be seen as "liberal" at best in the US – if not as "Socialist" or in non-American English: evil. (Economic) "Liberals" in Europe are termed (fiscal) "conservatives" in other places. The Japanese term "conservative" (hoshu) describes pretty much anything that can win elections and is often used interchangeably with "liberal" (jiyū), examples are conservative parties such as the "New Liberal Club" or Yoshida's "Liberal Party". And yes, there may have been a handful of liberals in the Liberal party. The Conservative Party in Japan was a liberal party that split off from the liberal Liberal Party; it then united with conservatives from the liberal Democratic Party to form the liberal (or conservative?) New Conservative Party and eventually joined the conservative Liberal Democratic Party. And you could go on and on... Maybe it is better to avoid these terms altogether as they are a matter of perspective; from my (multinationally messed up) perspective it is better to describe precisely what these groups want instead.
--Asakura Akira (talk) 20:59, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Strange edit summary[edit]

Hi - can you explain the meaning of the edit summary you used here? —  Tivedshambo  (t/c) 16:35, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

It's just that while creating those electoral district articles it's hard to remember what interesting districts have already been done. And by adding little notes in the initial summary it's easier to keep track of some kind of political geography: in this case an area in otherwise urban Kinki that feels – and votes – more like a Ura-Nihon (lit. "Japan's back", i.e. Japan's thinly populated, aging and economically underdeveloped (save for all the bridges to nowhere that the iron triangle has bestowed upon the Japanese electorate) Sea of Japan coast) district in Chūgoku or Tōhoku with a second generation seshū ("hereditary") politician holding the seat: People there write 谷垣 on ballots since the 1960s.
I hope it didn't offend anyone. It wasn't meant to and I apologize if it did. --Asakura Akira (talk) 17:11, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
Ok. Not knowing anything about Japanese politics, I'd wondered if Kinki was one of the candidates, in which case it could be taken as a personal attack. Just be a little careful with edit summaries like this to prevent misunderstanding. —  Tivedshambo  (t/c) 17:40, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
I'll try to be careful. And if you happen to come across a candidate running for political office named South Carolina, Waziristan or 近畿 please let me know: I'll apologize personally for having called him an economically troubled region and in the case of Mr. or Mrs. Kinki a backwater in economic development and demographic structure that has no chance of competing with powerhouses such as Mr. Tokyo, Ms. Ōsaka or even HIH Ms. Kyōto. --Asakura Akira (talk) 18:35, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

New Message from Political Dweeb[edit]

Hello I wanted to get a rough idea of what policy positions the party called Ishin Seito Shimpu supports, by the way I wrote the Wikipedia article on it. So I want to ask if it is possible for you to look at this party’s foreign, cultural, educational & economic policy and give me maybe a small or short explanation of this political party’s positions on each of these policy positions or just two in particular e.g. foreign and education policy if possible.

Political Dweeb (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 21:30, 21 December 2010 (UTC).

Okayama 2nd district (1928–1942)[edit]

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Okayama 2nd district (1928–1942), and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.tsumura.org/profile/index-e.html.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 13:17, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Political Dweeb's message[edit]

Hello there its me again. Its been a while since I heard from you on my questions about the policies of the above mentioned Japanese political party called Ishin Seito Shimpu that translates as New Wind Restoration Party. Would it be possible maybe for you to give me a general idea of their cultural policy and their position on the Japanese economy, whether they support a mixed economy, free market economy or are protectionist, please respond soon if possible, thanks.

Political Dweeb (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 18:26, 16 May 2011 (UTC).

As I tried to explain before, I'm not an expert on extremist groups and not a very fluent Japanese reader; if you cannot read their website yourself or better, find scientific sources that explain their positions, I'd suggest to give up writing about them on Wikipedia. --Asakura Akira (talk) 12:11, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification[edit]

Hi. When you recently edited Tokyo At-large district, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Masaharu Nakagawa (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:34, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification[edit]

Hi. When you recently edited Japanese House of Councillors election, 2013, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Minoru Kawasaki and Chiaki Takahashi (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:50, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 7[edit]

Hi. When you recently edited List of political parties in Japan, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Takashi Kawamura (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:18, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 14[edit]

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

List of members of the Diet of Japan (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Satoshi Inoue, Minoru Kawasaki, Kōji Satō, Chiaki Takahashi, Masaharu Nakagawa and Takeshi Maeda
List of Speakers of the House of Councillors of Japan (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Democratic Liberal Party
List of political parties in Japan (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Democratic Liberal Party

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:28, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 6[edit]

Hi. When you recently edited Politics of Osaka, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Akira Nishino (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:58, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 13[edit]

Hi. When you recently edited List of political parties in Japan, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Kizuna (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:00, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 25[edit]

Hi. When you recently edited Tokyo Metropolitan Assembly, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ōshima Subprefecture (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:35, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Are you Japanese?[edit]

Are you Japanese? If you are not Japanese, why do you use Japanese name? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.102.104.124 (talk) 07:41, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

I fail to see why this is relevant to my edits in Wikipedia. And besides, your question is not put very precisely: What does "being Japanese" refer to? Citizenship, language, cultural identity, biological descent, ...?
I'd guess you are not an IP address, so why do you use one as your name? --Asakura Akira (talk) 15:37, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

You are coward. Shame on you!!!!![edit]

Why do you take care not to commit yourself? You must answer my question. Shame on you!!!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 219.107.184.183 (talk) 19:23, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 3[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Social Democratic Party (Japan), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Democratic Reform Party (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 14:14, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 8[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Aichi Prefectural Assembly, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Takashi Kawamura (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:01, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 15[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Toshiko Takeya, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Masaharu Nakagawa (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:43, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 22[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Shinzō Abe, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Takeo Kawamura (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:58, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 2[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Nagasaki 3rd district, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page New Frontier Party (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:44, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 20[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Results of the Japanese general election, 2012, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Shun'ichi Suzuki and Akihiro Nishimura (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:19, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 1[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Japanese House of Councillors election, 2013, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Masako Mori (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:26, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Tokyo[edit]

In the nest of articles about Tokyo, I hope it is clear that my goal is to be a follower, not a leader. --Ansei (talk) 14:52, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Please review Tokyo (disambiguation). --Ansei (talk) 15:01, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
I'm not a native speaker, and while I know for certain that many English-speaking people understand "Tokyo" as the city (whether it exists as an administrative unit or not) or the metropolitan area surrounding it, not the "Metropolis"/prefecture with its beautiful, but hardly metropolitan remote corners, it is not my place to "lead" any effort to reorganize how the English Wikipedia describes it. I point out inconsistencies and I do press for sensible interlanguage links to avoid multilingual confusion (Example: If someone is "born in en:Tokyo" that includes the possibility that he was born on Iwo Jima, but in that case he was born hundreds of miles away from de:Tokio. If at least the interwiki links are consistent, any reader will be able to see easily that en:Tokyo and de:Tokio describe different topics). But the leaders in any discussion about fundamentally changing the way en.wp organizes Tokyo articles must the many experienced and less experienced editors that have created all the great articles that already exist in en.wp about Tokyo. --Asakura Akira (talk) 16:11, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
There is an idiom which explains how we agree. We may be "on the same page", are we not? Thank you. --Ansei (talk) 19:01, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Investment of time and care[edit]

Re: "Tokyo ranting" section on your userpage

If I may, I feel obliged to object to the participle. The well-reasoned and thoughtful parsing of a complex subject is not "ranting". In my opinion, the verb rant has a derogatory implication. Your investment of time and care in working through this subject with me is appreciated. --Ansei (talk) 17:30, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. But for one thing, I can never be sure about what a majority of English editors and readers think of when they say "Tokyo" without specification, all I know is that many do not think of Tokyo (Kumotori to Marcus island) – repeating the argument doesn't change that uncertainty until someone conducts a global poll among English speakers. And the repeated reference to administrative structure can be very annoying if you want to write about anything else relating to Tokyo; this second reason why it might be perceived as "ranting" is at the same time a major motivation why I do not tire of the attempt to dissect "all the Tokyos" (I've done it before Wikipedia). It is a lot easier to write or talk about something you can clearly define. And most things that are interesting about Tokyo – people, cityscape, people, nightlife, and still more people... and a few government statistics related to the major cities in the country – refer exclusively to Tokyo (23 wards), not Tokyo (62 municipalities). Others relate to Tokyo (23 wards) plus suburbs within and without the prefecture, in other words the Tokyo metropolitan area, but still not "Tokyo Metropolis". And then there are a few things, mostly of interest to politically concerned citizens, "political geeks" (I believe this is the 21st century expression), to "Metropolitan" taxpayers and legal experts, explicitly related to Tokyo (62 municipalities). But I know, notably from editing experience in de.Wikipedia where I was at first not fully convinced that its "pigeonholing approach" to Tokyo was optimal, that these matters can still (and even more efficiently) be described in all detail once you have separated "the other Tokyos", all you have to do is be careful where to link to; but that is true for other places as well: en:New York describes the state, de:New York is a disambiguation that leads you to the city, the state, the metropolitan area and other things, and ja:ニューヨーク is about the city, not the state.
So, take the word choice as hint of an apology to those who do not care at all if Tokyo has one, 23, 49 city governments or none at all and only want to write about the latest skyscraper or railway, and to those who can think of only one Tokyo today and cannot see why anyone or other language versions might have a different idea of "Tokyo" (which would indicate that my clumsy efforts to explain why were insufficient). --Asakura Akira (talk) 15:05, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
I wonder if it might be helpful to ask Bamse to help us with an opinion. In articles about Tokyo, Tokyo Prefecture, Tokyo Metropolis, etc., there may be an easy way to harmonize the differences between en:Wikipedia and de:Wikipedia. Please see User talk:Bamse#Tokyo.

As you may know, Bamse was recently given the Barnstar of National Merit for his work on National Treasures of Japan. --Ansei (talk) 14:30, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Quite honestly, I don't care much for barnstars and the like; but the contributions I've seen with the knowledge that they were from Bamse are excellent, so in this case I agree with the formalized system of merit recognition. If Bamse wants to help: sure.
In my view, the interlanguage difference in itself is not much of a problem. The easiest way to resolve it is: 1. reintegrate Tokyo Metropolis into Tokyo, 2. leave everything else as it is and 3. live with the fact that de:Tokyo or ja:Tōkyō have no equivalent in the English Wikipedia.
It only becomes difficult if you think – as I know some en.editors and readers do – that the current pidgeonholing of Tokyo in en.wp does not properly explain the subject and needs to be changed. But as I have said before: I'm not the one to lead that debate.
--Asakura Akira (talk) 14:34, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
P.S.: You wrote that I have a "fully-developed point of view". While that is true – in my point of view, an authoritarian power grab by an unelected central government in 1943 (admittedly with little resistance from elected politicians or us Tokyoites, in many cases even wholehearted support) should not be described in euphemisms –, I don't see why it is relevant in this context: As I've said, the definitions of "Tokyo" in different language versions were long there before I made my first edit. All I ask for are sensible interlanguage links. If Iwo Jima is in one Tokyo, and more than a thousand kilometres away from another Tokyo, those two Tokyos are obviously not the same. (And both statements are true: Iwojima is part of the prefecture since 1891, but it is certainly not part of the city under any common definition of a city.)

Disambiguation link notification for June 13[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Kumamoto 4th district, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page People's Democratic Party (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:25, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

On official names[edit]

Hi, Akira! I saw your user page section about official names in non-English speaking countries and thought you may be interested in this section: China_Executive_Leadership_Academy_in_Pudong#The_name - If there are differences between "official English" and the original language, they may be documented. WhisperToMe (talk) 20:22, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

One of several possible ways of conveying those differences. As a reader, I appreciate not being kept in the dark about what is lost&found in translation. --Asakura Akira (talk) 17:20, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

August 2013[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to House of Councillors may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • proportional, class of 2010) will be filled by LDP proportional list runner-up [[Tsuneo Horiuchi]] (''kuriage-tōsen'', see [[Elections in Japan]].<ref>[[Jiji Press]], August 1, 2013: [http://www.jiji.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 19:26, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

About your edited post on the List of mergers in Tokyo[edit]

About your edited post on the List of mergers in Tokyo, I wanna thank you for cooperating. But I was just curiously wondering, do you know if there's any info of how the city of Tokyo was established? Like of the 1st 15 wards of 1889, which one of them was considered the true center of Tokyo? And which is the total number of hamlets that created them in the first place? jlog3000 (talk) 19:25, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

I'm not really sure what you are looking for. Generally, the city as a city was around as Edo before. So, I have several openings to an answer
1. In cultural/geographical terms, the Tokugawa castle in what is now the Imperial palace in, Chiyoda, Chiyoda-ku, Tōkyō-to has been the political centre of the country since 1603. So that would be Kōjimachi-ku, Tōkyō-shi, Tōkyō-fu in 1889. The Prefectural Government Building (after 1898 simultaneously Tokyo City Hall, after 1943 Tokyo Metropolitan Government Building, destroyed in the war, rebuilt on the same spot (I think), now the site of the Tokyo International Forum) was also located in Chiyoda-ku (Marunouchi) until 1991.
2. In terms of modern administration, the first seat of the prefectural government of Edo-fu renamed Tōkyō-fu was set up in 1868 in what had been the Edo residence of the Yanagisawa clan. (see Tokyo Metro Archives 東京府開庁 which also includes an image of Karasumaru Mitsunori/Mitsue (both readings can be found in literature; I'm not sure), the first governor after the capitulation of Edo.) Now, as the prefecture did not even encompass all of what later become Tokyo City, you might say that the prefectural government was at that time the city government. It was also the direct successor of the two bugyō which had administrated Edo for the Tokugawa: The prefecural government was created by merging the two.
3. As for the wards, the ja:郡区町村編制法 (gun-ku-chō-son-hensei-hō) of 1878 might be what you are looking for. It subdivided all prefectures into gun (rural districts/counties, further subdivided into towns and villages) and ku (urban districts – why do I not call them "wards"? Because in '78 they were only wards (subdivisions of cities) in Tokyo, Kyoto and Osaka. Elsewhere they were cities as a whole, e.g. what is today Hiroshima-shi was then Hiroshima-ku). The 15 districts that would become wards of Tokyo City in 1889 were established by that law in 1878 (The implementation varied from prefecture to prefecture, see the ja article, Hokkaido and Okinawa are altogether different well into the 20th century.). These gun and ku also served as electoral districts for the newly established prefectural assemblies. (There had been unofficial assemblies in some places, cf. Freedom and People's Rights Movement; but only by the ja:府県会規則 (fu-ken-kai-kisoku) of 1878 were they established as elected assemblies with a (very limited) authority recognized by the state.)
3b. Of course, there had been subdivisions before that; but I would say, that these do not yet conform fully to modern ideas of a structure of local government. But, if you want to go further, the next step back would be the ja:大区小区制 of 1871. Before 1871 since the Boshin war, you had prefectures (ken and fu for the Tokugawa-held areas and the shogunal cities) and the feudal domains (han) existing in parallel (ja:府藩県三治制, fu-han-ken-sanchisei) and it starts to get messy as all the feudal stuff was still floating around, and the ancient Imperial order of the 8th century – while much of it was little more than a shell of names, titles and positions serving no practical purpose by the 19th century – was never formally abolished in many cases. But for the pre-restoration situation, you'd better ask someone else; I have merely a basic overview over the Edo period, and only selective islands of interest surrounded by a sea of ignorance in the earlier periods.
4. Tokyo City was created in 1889 when the new Prussian-inspired (or rather in substantial parts: written by a Prussian, cf. Albert Mosse) municipal codes (ja:市制 (shi-sei) of 1888 for the new cities, ja:町村制 (chō-son-sei) of 1888 for the towns and villages – while pre-existing, there was a major territorial reorganization/consolidation among them – and ja:郡制 (gun-sei) of 1890 for the counties/districts) were implemented.
Sorry for the lengthy reply; but "any info" was a rather unspecific request. For a comprehensive overview in English, Steiner's Local government in Japan is to my knowledge still the best choice; but I'd be grateful if someone could point me to a different source (because I do not have it in my permanent collection and found it too expensive to buy, and because it is somewhat outdated in parts).--Asakura Akira (talk) 20:36, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
Sadly, first off, I don't either speak nor understand Japanese. Secondly, so Tokyo was already a city before the modern municipality system in 1889? And does it mean that Tokyo/Edo never belonged to any -gun like the other "pre-Meiji" -ku (or boroughs) like Hiroshima-ku? jlog3000 (talk) 20:41, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
That depends on what you mean by "city": If city means city (administrative unit named shi), no. If "city" means just city – well, what else would you call Edo in 1867?
Not never, but not for a long time: Edo was separated from the Toshima county/district of Musashi Province after the Tokugawa had won. But I'd have to look up the precise date. (just for reference, ja:豊島郡 (武蔵国))
Just to avoid misunderstandings: Early Meiji cities (ku) did not belong to counties either. In 1878, you were either in a city/urban district (ku) or a county/rural district (gun). If you are from the U.S. and familiar with Virginia's subdivisions (or from Europe where similar structures have been in existence, e.g. in Prussia), you might prefer to call Japanese ku/shi explicitly independent cities because that's what they are. --Asakura Akira (talk) 21:09, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
I see. So there were cities even during the pre-Meiji era, but known as -Ku. But in the cases of Tokyo, Kyoto and Osaka (prior to 1889), which counties/districts (-gun) were the nearest or closest by within its boundaries? For example? the early stages of Takaoka-Shi and Toyama-Shi (both from Toyama-Ken) were within Imizu-Gun and KamiNiikaka-gun, respectively. Also, Yokohoma-Shi was within Kuraki-Gun. And another thing, where can I find a list of the first 300 prefectures of Japan back when the prefecture system was established and when the han system was abolished? jlog3000 (talk) 21:21, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
I was not referring to the pre-Meiji era. The ku I have been talking about are the ones established by the 1878 law; they were the precursors of the 1889 shi. --Asakura Akira (talk) 21:25, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
Oh, that. But what about the samples I mentioned (like Yokohoma and the -gun nearest to it)? jlog3000 (talk) 21:27, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
Under the reorganization of 1878, the city of Yokohama was separated as Yokohama-ku from Kuraki-gun. Only towns (machi/chō) and villages (mura/son) belonged to gun.see P.S. below --Asakura Akira (talk) 10:58, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
Now, Yokohama also had a special situation with regards to prefectural government. The reason lies in the Edo era: Yokohama had been a treaty port forced open by the Western great powers in the unequal treaties. In these treaty ports, the shogunate established directly administrating bugyō as in the major cities. And when the Tokugawa were ousted in 1868, these were (at least temporarily) transformed into fu, urban prefectures like Tokyo, Kyoto and Osaka. But most of these were transformed into ken after a very short time – if I may believe ja:神奈川奉行, Kanagawa-fu only existed from June to September August to Novemberfix: transformed to Gregorian calendar for consistency--Asakura Akira (talk) 23:02, 23 October 2013 (UTC) 1868 before it was renamed Kanagawa-ken. Of course, this is Kanagawa Prefecture; but in the very early days, it governed little more (or maybe even less) than what would become Yokohama City. But still, the city area would remain part of Kuraki-gun until 1878. --Asakura Akira (talk) 22:12, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
I see your point, and my apologies for misunderstanding. By the way, where can I find info related with the following: the 1878 and 1889 Municipalities Re-Organization Laws (with the -ku [or urban districts/independent municipalities] and the -gun [or rural districts with towns/villages within them]), and the one related with the first 300 prefectures of Japan? If any, please lemme know, it would be much appreciated. Because I've tried so hard to analyze the beginnings of the country's local government system history. jlog3000 (talk) 22:21, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
The first parts in this bilingual series of papers available online from the National Graduate Institute for Policy Studies might give you something to start. For the creation and consolidation of the prefectures, – I presume you mean in English/Latin script – I'm not aware of any comprehensive overview. --Asakura Akira (talk) 23:02, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
I'll take your advice on that. But about the other one (the creation and consolidation), is there a Japanese version (which I might try hard to translate it)? jlog3000 (talk) 11:03, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
Will this (also covers the 1868–1871 period when prefectures and domains coexisted: [1]) suffice? --Asakura Akira (talk) 17:23, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
I'll go try out your suggestions. jlog3000 (talk) 17:55, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
P.S. to clarify/correct what I wrote above about the 1878 reorganization: What I should have written is something along the lines "only what would become towns and villages in 1889/90 belonged to gun". Because the subdivisions of cities also were named chō/machi (as is still the case e.g. with Nagatachō in Chiyoda-ku or Naitōmachi in Shinjuku-ku) and I'm not sure right now if even some villages were subdivisions of ku; but in retrospective, the units corresponding to modern municipalities were the ku for the cities and those machi/chō and mura/son that were part of gun. For example, these had already something you may call a mayor (kuchō in the cities, kochō in the rural towns and villages). --Asakura Akira (talk) 10:59, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
I see your point about the towns/villages belonging to the -gun. But my point is that does it exist a list of -ku (or cities/boroughs/urban districts of the 1878 re-organization) that led to the first 30+ -shi of 1889? If so, which of them "belonged" or "were separated from which -gun? Like my examples of Yokohama-ku/-shi formerly apart within Kuraki-gun, and Toyama-ku/shi apart within KamiNiikawa-gun. Also, before 1889, did each of the -ku were subdivided into small hamlets? Like this example: Niigata-ku (of Niigata Prefecture) annexed the small neighboring hamlet of Sekiyado to create Niigata-shi (one of the nation's first 30 cities since the 1889 Municipalities Re-Organization Law). jlog3000 (talk) 11:32, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Again: the ku of 1878 did not belong to gun anymore. They became exclusive. As I also mentioned, the introduction of the modern system of shi/chō/son as municipalities in 1889/90 involved a major territorial reorganization. So, counties lost more territory to the ku when these were turned into shi and annexed further territory or altogether new shi were created; but the separation of cities/urban districts/(in the three major cities:) wards and counties/rural districts dates to 1878.
  • Yokohama-ku was separated form Kuraki-gun in 1878 as I said before. (Yokohama city gov.: history (ja)) As for Toyama: Niikawa-gun (historically of Etchū Province, temporarily of Niikawa Prefecture, at that time of Ishikawa Prefcture, since 1883 Toyama Prefecture Toyama pref. gov.: History (ja)) was split into upper (Kami-) and lower (Shimo-) Niikawa in 1878 according to ja:新川郡 (Still later, there was also a Central/Middle (Naka-) Niikawa county). From a quick online search, I find no indication of a Toyama-ku in Ishikawa Prefecture, and it seems that the city was only separated from the county when the shi-sei was implemented in 1889. But to be sure, you'll have to look it up yourself in a reliable source.
  • The same private, but in those cases I tried to verify in scientific/administrative/archive sources reliable website I gave you for the prefectures, also has a section on counties (which includes the ku as they were separated): [2] and one on municipalities [3] (but incomplete, only for about a dozen prefectures and only from 1889 – the local subdivisions before that were so small in most cases that a comprehensive list of pre-1889 subdivisions would be very long indeed; the latter are often included in ja.wikipedia articles on individual municipalities, though). I would have to search myself with a little more time to refer you to a published, comprehensive list in a book or scientific journal; and again, that would probably be in Japanese only, I expect. I remember from working with user:NordNordWest in the de.wikipedia when he created the great "Greater Tokyo" map that a professor at Tsukuba university (link is included, there are sections in English) was working on digitalizing the territorial change of administrative units in Japan which proved somewhat less useful than expected in this case as the redirection of the lower Arakawa river in 1930 apparently screwed up the database in Tokyo city's Eastern suburbs that were annexed in 1932; but as far as I remember, that, too, involved only the changes after 1889. But maybe you find something useful there.
--Asakura Akira (talk) 12:45, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
Oh, I see. But thanks for the help. I'll go try out most of the articles in the Japanese version of Wikipedia. Oh, one last question or doubt. About the maps with the 1889 subdivisions, like this example: [4] (and there was a -shi (which is the municipality with a "*" or asterisk) within a -gun just in case) Who found those and how did he find them? jlog3000 (talk) 13:29, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
For details, you'd have to ask the author of the maps. As far as I've seen those county maps show the territory of a county as it was until/in 1878 (and as, in most cases, had been since ancient times as they go back to the Imperial government based on Chinese model in the 7th/8th century), but the municipal borders as they were established in 1889. Once anything became [independent] city (shi or 1878–1889: ku) it was no longer part of the county. Which in the case of Kanazawa city was in 1878 as Kanazawa-ku, at least according to ja:石川郡 (石川県). --Asakura Akira (talk) 13:50, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
Once again, thanks for the help. And I can see the point because these maps show the thin black borders as of April 1, 1889 (since about 15,859 municipalities were established from the almost 72,000 1878-pre-Meiji era hamlets). jlog3000 (talk) 14:13, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
By the way, on the same website, there is a complete list of all cities/shi since 1889: [5] (note that implementation of the municipal codes also varied from prefecture to prefecture which is why I often wrote 1889/90 instead of just 1889 – the first cities were all designated as shi in 1889) According to this, there were initially 40 shi after the initial implementation, i.e. by February 1890. Of these, all except for Tokyo city still exist, though one (Akamagaseki, present-day Shimonoseki) was renamed later. In the column on what the shi had been immediately before (直前), it also lists how some were created directly from areas which had been part of counties until then, others were successors to ku [which had already been separated from the counties before], and again others involved a ku and additional territories from gun. --Asakura Akira (talk) 15:01, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
Back to that website, I don't seen any font or script (neither English or Japanese), despite that the links work. And I'm using Mozilla Firefox. jlog3000 (talk) 15:12, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
The pages are Shift JIS encoded. In some browsers and/or on some websites, I have to set that manually as automatic recognition fails. (I assume you have already the basic capabilities for displaying Japanese characters. Help:Installing Japanese character sets) --Asakura Akira (talk) 15:22, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
It all makes sense. I just have to adjust those first in order for me to see those encodes, am I correct? jlog3000 (talk) 15:40, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
I'm not sure I understand what exactly your problem is. If you have trouble viewing Japanese pages in general, the steps described on the Wikipedia help page that I linked or in numerous other places on the web should solve it. If your problem is only with that specific website, the only explanation I can think of is the one I offered you – in Firefox, the character encoding is in the "View" menu. Otherwise, I'm at a loss – and probably not the most qualified person to ask as it's been a while since I dealt with all that technical stuff. For me the website works just fine, I have discovered it to be a very useful collection of data – and so far, I haven't found any major error in published sources. Does it work now? --Asakura Akira (talk) 17:56, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
Don't worry. I just recently solved it. Sorry for the trouble. jlog3000 (talk) 18:49, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

July 2014[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Chiba Prefecture may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 17:23, 29 July 2014 (UTC)