User talk:Oda Mari

CSP

さて、いかが思いますか。 -- 宝離 15:41, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Wow! すごい。Excellent job! I could find no major fault. But do you mind if I'd do some copyedit? Oda Mari (talk) 05:26, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

On the contrary, I expect that it needs copyediting and I'd be delighted if you'd do some. Indeed, the more copyediting the better. Of course I hope it's as good as possible; this is one reason why I welcome copyediting. As for the other reason: Because I read and write Japanese slowly, I don't relish being drawn into discussions (of course in Japanese) about it at ja:WP. So the closer it is to perfection when it first appears as an article, the more confident I'll be that nobody's going to badger me with questions, and the happier I'll be. ¶ It's an extremely boring article, so the fact that I've never seen anything quite like it at ja:WP is not necessarily a criticism of ja:WP. ¶ Once it's up, it would be good to link to it from the article about his wife. ¶ If you'd like an additional chuckle, look at the edit history of "my" article and click on one or two of the versions made a day or more ago. -- Hoary (talk) 06:42, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

One likely question is about the pronunciation of his name. Note that I have the katakana form ending ンス but the pronunciation (in IPA) ending [nz]. I chose ンス because it's the form that's universally used, e.g. (a) for the Japanese translation of his Aghanistan book and (b) by Magnum. And I chose [nz], because, as a native speaker of English, I know that it's right. And I decided to stick the IPA there in order to do my little bit to counter pronunciation myth among readers of Japanese. -- Hoary (talk) 07:02, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

I did some copyediting. As for his name, his wife uses パーキンス and most of the Perkins related articles use パーキンス. パーキンズ is only 52. So, even though it's not actually correct, パーキンス would be fine. Oda Mari (talk) 10:12, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Thank you!

Edit conflict: I'll look at your edits an hour or so from now. (Dinner's just ready!) Meanwhile. . . .

At least with the little computer I'm using now, the footnote-indexing looks very odd. In English it would be:

. . . sentence ends. Sentence starts. . . .

In Japanese I have:

. . . 文が終わる。文が始まる. . . .

This looks to me as if the note applies not to the sentence that's just finished but instead to the one that's about to start. Maybe I'd better use:

. . . 文が終わる。　文が始まる. . . .

I could stomach putting in all these changes, but not if doing so breaks some rule and it will later all be reverted. Presumably today's featured article meets their standards; it's 岡部幸雄, which uses:

. . . 文が終わる。文が始まる. . . .

Well, that's OK too. But I'd also have to use notes within ローマ字 in the same article, and there I'm not so keen on:

. . . sentence ends. Sentence starts. . . .

Any comments?

footnote dump:

-- Hoary (talk) 10:19, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

サンタ・マリア・デル・フィオーレ大聖堂 is a featured article with a total of six (!) footnotes. And for these too, the number precedes the 読点. So I'll change this draft accordingly. - Hoary (talk) 13:49, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Unfortunately I'm one of the least qualified people within a one-kilometre radius of where I now sit to judge the quality of the copyeditor's edits. Hoever, almost all of them do look good to me. Thank you! Just one little point: you talk of a 長期滞在 in Bangladesh. Pretty obviously it would indeed be 長期滞在 by the standards of Japanese package tours or CNN reporting, but I haven't read (or don't remember having read) about the duration. Did you read something that I've forgotten about? -- Hoary (talk) 11:02, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

I found it here on line 3, saying "1973年にバングラディッシュを長期取材するが..." Is it an excessive interpretation? Oda Mari (talk) 13:35, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

As I've said, I don't remember reading that it was a long time. -- Hoary (talk) 13:49, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

The article's up. -- Hoary (talk) 01:12, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Congratulations! I found nothing wrong with the article. But if anyone asks something, I'll take care of it. Happy editing! Oda Mari (talk) 04:50, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. Of course I'll keep an eye on it myself. Energy permitting, I might also try to add material to bring its content up to that of the English-language version. -- Hoary (talk) 05:01, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Composer's name

Hi Oda Mari. My alter-ego Otis has finished starting stubs for the Tora-san series, but now I'll ask a question I should have asked before starting them... The series composer's name (山本直純) is given at allcinema as "やまもと・なやずみ",[1] but English sources say "Naozumi Yamamoto"[2], [3]. Who's right? (I used allcinema, since it's a Japanese source, and more likely to be correct.)... ah, now I see JA-Wiki gives "やまもと なおずみ".[4]... looks like Otis has some correcting to do... Right? Dekkappai (talk) 18:15, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Hi Dekkappai! It's なおずみ. 直 never reads as なや. なやずみ is a typo. Oda Mari (talk) 04:49, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Oda Mari. I had never heard of "直 - naya", but then there are always "spelling" exceptions I don't know about. Have you ever heard the English spelling-joke? "Ghoti" pronounced "fish"? ("gh" from "enough", "o" from "women", "ti" from "emotion") ;-) Dekkappai (talk) 05:41, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

My pleasure. You are always welcome. English spelling itself is a nightmare to me. And "spelling exceptions"! There are too many in English. I didn't know the joke. It's funny. But actually it's not a laughing matter to a non-native speaker. Keep warm and happy editing! Oda Mari (talk) 06:13, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Dekkappai, I e-mailed allcinema and pointed out the typo yesterday. They corrected it. Check out the link. Regards. Oda Mari (talk) 04:39, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Great! I've seen other mistakes like this at allcinema-- I'll be sure to ask you next time. Happy editing! Dekkappai (talk) 05:20, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Nomination of German-Japanese relations

Hi there. Over the past weeks I majorly expanded the article on German-Japanese relations and really need people to go scan my contributions. I want to set a high quality standard since I'd love to have it featured some day. I'd really appreciate your participation on its nomination for a Good Article at Talk:German–Japanese relations. Thanks in advance! --Gliese876 (talk) 11:07, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Vank

The previous Vank page edited by abusive sock accnt, and POV edits.Prickily catcus [5]660gd4qo (talk) 04:36, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

I see. Regards. Oda Mari (talk) 04:48, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

But I think the neutrality of the article is still in question. Oda Mari (talk) 04:53, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

For adding the internal link to the Sea Shepherd operations/detainment. I missed it. Oberonfitch (talk) 05:03, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

My pleasure. Happy editing! Oda Mari (talk) 15:31, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Removal of 'spam' link.

As far as I can see those were just advertisements that are automatically generated by Google and thus occasionally as with even newspaper sites odd advertisements appear - for example the Guardian website since the first page has a dating service. If we are going to start prudishly removing links because occasionally ads produce 'inappropriate' text then we may as well remove links to every site that has any sort of ads. I certainly have never seen a 'meet Japanese ladies' link on that site when I've visited. I'm not sure how the Google algorithm works for producing ads, but it perhaps depends on your general surfing habits, and is thus independent of the site itself.

If you type, "Kanji Romaji" into Google it is the first link:

http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=kanji+romaji&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8

and it has around about 2,000 fans on Facebook alone (just look at the comments to see how much I and others appreciate that tool), so it seems to me absurd to remove a link to a free resource that converts Kanji to Romaji - a huge challenge no doubt and a useful resource. Especially, as that link has been on that page for at least 6 years.

And I disagree that this is a 'personal website'. 'Personal' does not mean 'created by an individual', and thus I don't see that link going against any of the guidelines mentioned. 202.122.63.6 (talk) 15:39, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Did you really read Wikipedia:External links#Links normally to be avoided thoroughly? #11 says "Links to blogs, personal web pages and most fansites, except those written by a recognized authority. (This exception is meant to be very limited; as a minimum standard, recognized authorities always meet Wikipedia's notability criteria for biographies.)" Isn't that the site a personal web page? I think it's a site built by Gary Ross. As for the advert, it's strange and funny. Because I am a Japanese woman. If you do not like the removal of the site, use talk page and ask for consensus, And please do not remove your previous post, I won't restore it though. Oda Mari (talk) 15:57, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

"personal web pages". You are defining a personal website as one that happens to be build by an individual, but that's not what 'personal website' means anymore than say Bob Dylan is a personal musician as opposed to say the Rolling Stones. A personal website is one that is promoting a personal viewpoint etc. Looking at the notes to J-Talk it is powered by chasen which is the University of Nara - thus is it no longer an personal website? The point here is that 'personal' and 'number of people involved in its construction' are in no way related. (The front page shows that it is a community too.) As for the "Japanese woman" thing, that's not strange to me at all :-)

As for asking for consensus, surely it should be the other way round. I updated a link. It was removed. I fixed it with an explanation and it has been removed again. I don't want to get into an edit war, but as far as I can see the link should be restored as it's been there for years and years and thus already has defacto consensus. Thus I believe it should be restored and the consensus for it's removal should be sought. Not consensus for putting back a useful resource that has been there for years. 202.122.63.6 (talk) 16:42, 18 February 2010 (UTC)