Talk:Japanese people

Elevens

Japanese are terrible disquisting people, because of there eating habits they`re killing dolphins on a disquisting way and they follow there leaders without thinking of there own. I hope they never come to Holland —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.107.67.168 (talk) 23:22, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Why does the word "Elevens" redirect here? I was looking for the card game... Chris Martin (talk) 21:52, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Since the user who created the redirect is still active, the best way to get an answer may be to leave a message at User talk:Starks. Fg2 (talk) 22:03, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Probably because of this Anime: [1] (see plot summaries) 84.56.122.162 (talk) 07:39, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Cannot understand this sentence

I cannot understand this sentence: "Most modern scholars say that the Yayoi emigrated from the southern The downstream of Yangtze River to northern Kyūshū, though it has also been proposed that they came from southeastern China." The source is in Japanese too, can someone have a look at this? Thanks. -SpuriousQ (talk) 01:21, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing this, Dekimasu. -SpuriousQ (talk) 02:36, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

No problem. Every once in a while editors try to come in and de-regionalize or re-regionalize the article without regard to the sources already in place. I mostly restored the text that described the totality of positions in the sources. Dekimasuよ! 04:23, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Yayoi are not predominately Korean

GENETIC DATA: In many cases, the Ainu are closer to populations in northeast Honshu, whereas Koreans are often closer to southwestern Japanese. ( P.69 Ruins of Identity Ethnogenesis in the Japanese Islands written by Mark J. Hudson.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Koreajapanhistory (talk • contribs) 06:44, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

In historical reality vast sources states that the Yayoi are predominately from Korea. You cannot underestimate " Geographical and cultural location". Korean Peninsula is located nearby ( Islands) that we know today as Japan. Japanese population consists percentage between Han Chinese or Korean percentage. Its very unclear. Exactly Japanese population trace blood kinship to Chinese or Koreans. If Japanese Emperor trace blood lineage to Baekje Kingdom. That probably sums the idea that majority of Yayoi or Japanese trace bloodkinship to Korea/ Koreans not China. I wouldn't be surprised if 6 million or so Japanese trace blood lineage to Korean Peninsula. Massive migration from Korea to Japan existed from 15th century to modern day 20th century. To make my point clear. It is wise to say Korean blood runs deep in Japanese gene pool. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Koreakansaiklan (talk • contribs) 11:01, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Vast sources states that the Yayoi are predominately from China. Including Japanese sources James collins123 (talk) 18:41, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Recently Japanese studies show that the Japanese population consists of around %25.9 are Han Chinese, %24.8 are Korean etc... James collins123 (talk) 18:41, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

to state it is predominately Korean is misleading and it is also wrong. James collins123 (talk) 18:41, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

It doesn't say "predominantly Korean" - it says "predominantly argue". We mention both ideas and have both backed up by cited sources. If you want to change the information as presented, do you have new and/or more definitive sources for us to cite? Dekimasuよ! 00:58, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Really... First of all "Han Chinese" and "Korean"... where the heck are you getting these percentages. They definitely do not seem right, not to mention taht its hard to define exactly "what genetically is Han Chinese/Korean/whatever we're talking about". "Vast sources" are not so "vast" afterall, seeing as I can only find two. Linguistically, Japanese is absolutely nothing like Mandarin or any Chinese language, they are about as different as you get (except for a large amount of borrowing). I'm not saying that the Yayoi were necessarily Korean, but its generally agreed upon by scholars that that is MUCH more likely than Han Chinese. Now, of course, it is highly likely that they have genetic similarity to the Hans, but from a linguistic standpoint, a geographical standpoint (I fail to see why peoples from South China wouldn't move to Taiwan and then south to Indonesia/The Philippines, or on a land route, south the Southeast Asia, as seems to be the general pattern of every.single.other.known.migration (not to mention that peoples usually DON'T move to drastically colder areas)) and a cultural standpoint, Korean is MUCH more likely. Now, that aside, the article currently makes it seem like there is a consensus that they are from South China; there isn't. There are many hypotheses. The most popular is that the Japanese emigrated out of northern Korea (see 'Buyeo'), there are also hypotheses linking them to the Manchu and other Tungusic peoples, or linking them to the Austronesians. However, linking them to the Han is NOT anywhere in teh debate, as far as I'm aware. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Yalens (talk • contribs) 21:34, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

The Origin of Japanese People: Genetic Evidence: DNA tests have confirmed the likelihood of this hypothesis. The Y-DNA (Paternal line) of the modern Japanese is composed of 50% percent of haplogroup O, of Sino-Korean origin. More specifically, subgroup 03 is of Chinese origin, while 02b is Korean. The rarer subgroup 01 and 02 are of southern Chinese or Southeast Asian origin. DNA analysis of the Japanese people ( Frequency in Japan) A: 03 Chinese origin-21% percent. B: 02b Korean origin-32% percent. C: 01 Southern Chinese origin-1% percent. D: 02a Southeast Asian origin-0.1% percent. It concludes majority of Japanese have Korean DNA ( 02b Korean origin 32% percent). —Preceding unsigned comment added by KoreanDNA (talk • contribs) 12:56, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Yayoi are predominately Korean. It's proven fact.

Intro/dablink spacing

There is an awkward space after the "This article is about the ethnic group. For the group of people holding Japanese citizenship, see Demography of Japan." header. I don't know why it is there, but what's more, I'm unable to figure out how to remove it!Timneu22 (talk) 15:45, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

The problem is that Template:Infobox Ethnic group has a top margin of top:0.75em. This is too big and inconsistent with the look of other articles. I will take this discussion there. Timneu22 (talk) 02:39, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

The Japanese family of today DOES NOT HAVE 4 KIDS!!!

What an incredible misrepresentation! 24.130.198.167 (talk) 11:25, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

The average is probably something like 1.7 kids. Perhaps you can find a photograph of a family with 1.7 kids. I don't think it's necessary, though, since the photograph in the article does not say anything about matching average numbers of kids, or height relationships of the parents, or any other numerical quantity. It doesn't even say that the children are siblings ("family" can mean more than married couple and their offspring). The picture illustrates a present-day Japanese family. Fg2 (talk) 04:01, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

This Japanese family of today does have four kids. While that may not be the norm anymore, that certainly doesn't make them any less Japanese, or any less of a Japanese family of today. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 17:35, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

There is a more serious misrepresentation in that picture. None of them is making the V sign. Akmoilan (talk) 12:59, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm sure all Japanese walk around making that sign...(9_9) ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 14:29, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Besides, its just suppose to show a Japanese family. Yojimbo501 (talk) 19:06, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Quite a few Japanese adults are illiterate?

The current version of this article states that;

>however, this may not accurately reflect functional literacy rates due to the complex nature of the >Japanese writing system

I've lived in Japan all of my life and have not seen an adult who can't read and write sentences written in Japanese. We are strictly trained to write and read Kanji,Hiragana,Katakana before we enter elementary schools, So almost all of us , including high school dropouts, can read and write in Japanese. I don't understand what you mean by "functional literacy rates",but if you mean by it the ability to read complicated sentence and write in a sophisticated manner, literacy rate would be lower than 60% in most of the developed countries. So I think it's inappropriate to mention "functional literacy rates" when mentioning "literacy rates".

I've deleted the passage cited above since there seemed to be no objection to my opinion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.218.75.204 (talk) 04:50, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Clarification

I'd like to clarify that I think some changes are in order for the origins sections we have in this article. At the same time, the wholesale, and undiscussed, recent removals of references to China were uncalled for. The genetic origins of the Jomon and Yayoi are one thing, but to say that China had no influence on Japanese culture during the Nara Period.... Dekimasuよ! 15:04, 5 July 2009 (UTC) ==

90000

http://www.mofa.go.jp/region/latin/peru/index.html the link says there are 90,000 Japanese descendants in Peru.

Emishi

{{editprotected}} Request add the following Wikipedia reference link Emishi to the ==See also== heading. The Emishi were a distinct group of people/tribes living in northeastern Japan (Tohoku) who fought against central Yamato government control back in the 7th and 8th centuries. 173.66.116.187 (talk) 15:08, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

MINOR CHANGE

{{editprotected}} Oops, forgot to log in. Anyway, request add the following Wikipedia reference link Emishi to the ==See also== heading. The Emishi were a distinct group of people/tribes living in northeastern Japan (Tohoku) who fought against central Yamato government control back in the 7th and 8th centuries. RickardA (talk) 15:23, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

I have lowered the protection of the article. Please make the edit yourself. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 17:23, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Change made. Thank you. RickardA (talk) 12:20, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Delete this paragraph?

It's the last paragraph in the first section under "Origins":

"The study on the population change in the ancient period was also discussed. The estimated population in the late Jōmon period was about one hundred thousand, compared to that of the Nara period, which had a population of about three million. Taking the growth rates of hunting and agricultural societies into account, it is calculated that about one and half million immigrants moved to Japan in the period. This figure seems to be overestimated and is being recalculated today[citation needed]."

First sentence: Discussed by whom? What study? I've tried to figure it out from the preceding text, and cannot. And the last sentence renders the middle sentences rather meaningless. And it's been waiting for a citation for two years. If no one objects (I'll wait a few days for input), I'll just delete the paragraph. --Everything Else Is Taken (talk) 00:24, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Japanese diaspora -- apparent contradiction

The first and fourth sentences below seem contradictory:

"According to the Association of Nikkei and Japanese Abroad, there are about 2.5 million nikkeijin living in their adopted countries. The largest of these foreign communities are in the Brazilian states of São Paulo and Paraná.[22] There are also significant cohesive Japanese communities in the Philippines, Peru, Argentina, and the American states of Hawaii, California, and Washington. Separately, the number of Japanese citizens living abroad is over one million according to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.[citation needed] There is also a small group of Japanese descendants living in Caribbean countries such as Cuba and the Dominican Republic, where hundreds of these immigrants were brought in by Rafael L. Trujillo in the 1930s."

What is meant by "separately"? Does it refer to there being a second source with a wildly different opinion as to the number of nikkeijin? This is unclear and nonsensical. Since there is no citation for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs number, I propose deleting that sentence. Anyone? --Everything Else Is Taken (talk) 00:30, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

NPOV:Asymmetric treating between Chinese and Japanese

Article Japanese people should be written in the following tone:

“

See also: List of ethnic groups in Japan

The term Japanese people may refer to any of the following:

• People who reside in and hold citizenship of Japan
• The Nippon minzoku (sometimes translated as "Japanese nationality"), a supra-ethnic concept which includes all 3 ethnic groups (Ethnic Japanese, Ryukyuan and Ainu) living in Japan that are officially recognized by the government of Japan
• People of Yamato Japanese ancestry, who are often simply referred to as "Japanese" or "ethnic Chinese" in English.

”

And this article should be moved to Nippon minzoku. ––虞海 (Yú Hǎi) ✍ 10:52, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Are “Japanese people” an ethnic group?

They have no unified language, belief, or race. ––虞海 (Yú Hǎi) ✍ 11:06, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

This article follows the same conventions of every other article on ethnic groups. While the article could contain more information on the demographics of Japan, there is already another article on that subject and therefore any additions should be minimal. I have never heard of the Yamato people as being referred to as "Ethnic Chinese". I believe all qualified scholars agree the culture came from Korea. The current population of Japan is a mix of members of all demographic groups and therefore if anything merging articles here rather than declaring this article non-neutral seems the best course of action. In addition claiming the people of one of the most homoginized countries on earth "have no unified language, belief, or race" seems like a pretty bold claim that you need to justify with the burden of proof, not the other way around. Colincbn (talk) 07:33, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

While the fact is, clearly, the so-called “Japanese people” have no unified language, belief, or race, so they're not one ethnic. I've never said “Yamato people as being referred to as "Ethnic Chinese"”, even though I don't know why you imposed that on me. So the term “Japanese people” is similar to such terms like “Zhonghua Minzu”, “Lao Loum”, or “Tai peoples”. So the faculty accuracy is not ensured. ––虞海 (Yú Hǎi) ✍ 13:43, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

In your post above you say specifically:

• People of Yamato Japanese ancestry, who are often simply referred to as "Japanese" or "ethnic Chinese" in English.

This may have been a mistype on your part, but I have no way of knowing that. Also pasting multiple tags at the head of the page without discussion is not the way to do things. We are having a discussion here. Continue to work things out here and only paste tags if multiple editors agree there is a need for it and only if the discussion locks up. Also just because you don't think the Japanese are an ethnic group does not mean they aren't. Now having said that I do think you have some good interesting points. It is certainly true that Japanese citizens are not all the same ethnicity. Also we already have an article on the Yamato people, which is the group this article seems to mainly be about. So perhaps a merge is in order. We also have an article on the demographics of Japan which is what we are basically talking about. Suggesting a merge and placing a tag for that might be a better way forward than claiming the article is non-neutral or otherwise assuming bad faith. Cheers, Colincbn (talk) 05:21, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Also we do not use the Nationalism catagory for peoples. See British people for a good example of how this page should be written. Colincbn (talk) 05:27, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Nintendo employees

Why are there no Nintendo employees on this list, because there should be some on there, especially Fusajiro Yamauchi (founder), Satoru Iwata (president) and Shigeru Miyamoto (creator of their mascot). 82.12.1.173 (talk) 16:01, 12 November 2010 (UTC)