Talk:Heisei period

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Japan / History (Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Japan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Japan-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. Current time in Japan: 23:57, March 22, 2017 (JST, Heisei 29) (Refresh)
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This page is supported by the History task force.
WikiProject East Asia (Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject East Asia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of East Asia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Old talk[edit]

---Huh?--- Isn't the date off by one? According to the current table, 1998 is ten years after 1989, which doesn't sound right...


Regarding the sentence "The name was introduced by Akihito"

According to my recollection, the name was introduced by Keizo Obuchi. At the time, he held a Cabinet post. Might have been Chief Cabinet Secretary. Before he became Prime Minister.

Contributors to Modern Japan (Article merged; Some merged with [[ Post-Occupation Japan]] as well)

  • 20:16 4 Jul 2003 . . Emperorbma (Redirect Heisei)
  • M 20:10 4 Jul 2003 . . Emperorbma
  • 20:10 4 Jul 2003 . . Emperorbma (Moved some information to Post-Occupation Japan)
  • 19:48 4 Jul 2003 . . Emperorbma (Modify Nav)
  • M 04:39 2 Jul 2003 . . Emperorbma (Move Treaty to Occupation of Japan.)
  • M 22:06 1 Jul 2003 . . Emperorbma (From 1952...)
  • 22:00 1 Jul 2003 . . Emperorbma (I think this will work more nicely.)
  • M 11:36 27 Jun 2003 . . GCarty
  • M 11:30 27 Jun 2003 . . GCarty (wikify)
  • M 11:27 27 Jun 2003 . . Youssefsan (Kobe)
  • 11:26 27 Jun 2003 . . Youssefsan (Hirohito)
  • 11:24 27 Jun 2003 . . Youssefsan (Kobe and Sarin)
  • M 11:13 27 Jun 2003 . . Youssefsan
  • 11:12 27 Jun 2003 . . Youssefsan (some facts... my English is broken, any help welcome)
  • M 00:25 19 Jun 2003 . . Emperorbma
  • 16:41 18 Jun 2003 . . Emperorbma (Create a stub.)


From on 22:40, 2 Jun 2004: If anyone knows a good English translation of Heisei, then please post it on this site by clicking on "Edit."

I wrote where it is taken from but I don't believe "Heisei" could or should be translated. It's a name of era and it must be read and used as is. Adding a translation is like writing what "George W. Bush" would mean in other languages, clearly unnecessary and confusing.Revth 01:47, 24 Jun 2004 (UTC)
I don't know if it's appropriate to translate-- but it's true that the character(kanji)s for "Heisei" may EVOKE a meaning when a Japanese sees them. That is, something like "peace completed". -- 5 July 2005 16:54 (UTC)
Era names certainly have meanings, and therefore they certainly can be translated (as an etymological note, not to replace the transliteration), and the fact that they have meanings are precisely the reason why eras are given names. This name is not even strictly Japanese (by which I mean something that is meaningless in other CJK languages), though it is not a common compound. For example, when I lived in Hong Kong, I lived on a street with this name; unfortunately I never bothered to figure out what the name means :-(
I can only guess about the intended meaning. However, I think the proposed meaning of "peace completed" is quite unlikely. If I were to guess, I would say "peace and prosperity", "stability and prosperity", or the like would be more likely.
Perhaps asking some old people might be a fruitful way to find this out…—Wing 06:00, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
The article has an explanation of the term. It doesn't quite qualify as a translation, but it might be as close as possible. Fg2 07:13, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
Yeah, I noticed it after I posted my comment. The ja version also has an explanation (with less info but otherwise almost identical, though apparently slightly different). I do think it qualifies as a translation.—Wing 08:09, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

Future Japanese dates[edit]

The native Japanese calendar is dated by the ruling emperor, and formally we don't know who will be a ruler in, say, 2001, therefore the Japanese (name of the) date is formally unknown.

The question is: how japanese handle future dates, e.g., year 3127, which is very unlikely to be in heisei era?

The question arose because an anon editor user: edits the year artilces (2024, etc.) and changes "Japanese calendar" date from "Heisei NN" to "unknown" and othere editors revert him. `'mikka (t) 15:17, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

The Japanese use the western system of counting years about as often as they do the system based on emperors. If Japanese had to refer to a future year, they would simply use the western year. There is no system of referring to future years using the traditional calendar.-Jefu 15:31, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
Can you refer to the reputable source that says this? the idea is to resolve the issue once an for all. `'mikka (t) 15:45, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
I just checked the page you are referring to. I think including the Japanese calendar for future years is rather silly and would be in favor of just deleting it altogether. If people insist on including it I agree that it should say "unknown" or preferrably "undetermined". What a silly thing to fight about though.-Jefu 15:37, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

The result of this discussion must be posted in Template talk:Year in other calendars as a "micropolicy" about this template. And also explained in articles "Japanese calendar" and "Heisei". `'mikka (t) 15:49, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

I think it's fine to refer to fairly near future years as "Heisei XX" as it's safe to assume the current emperor would still be alive then. If we get too far into the future, though, I think it should be left blank. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 15:53, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

  • I apopogize but I would like to emphasize that it is unimportant what you or me think. I am repeatinig the question: who knows (and can provide a reference) how the issue has been handled by Japanese? How did they handle it 600 years ago (or whenever) when they didn't yse European calendar? `'mikka (t) 15:58, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
    • The Japanese use Western dates for referring to the future. It would be really difficult to find a reference about that, though. Just going by what I've seen used in Japanese newspapers and magazines. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 02:44, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
      • I can guarantee you that if I walk less than 30 seconds from my office, I will find something referring to "heisei 19" or "heisei 20", usually about completion dates for construction projects, etc. You can't just say "The Japanese use western dates for referring to the future" as a correct blanket statement. --awh (Talk) 03:17, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
        • Actually, you are right, I can google a small number of this usage even in Latin alphabet: like, "Wagakuni Setaisu no Shorai Suikei, Heisei 2-nen - Heisei 22-nen". Still, the question remains, are there any particular rules, especially, like I said, can one write "Heisei 247" with straight face? `'mikka (t) 04:09, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
I think it is irrelevant to place Japanese years for future years. I am in favor of deleting them alltogether.--Kungfu Adam (talk) 17:08, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
I don't think anyone will object since the "traditional" way of counting years based on the reigning emperor is impossible to extrapolate out into the future. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 02:44, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
Actually a very good question, and although everyone here admits far future dates in traditional Japanese style are rediculous, it's pretty hard to find a rule or even a guideline to stop stubborn editors from making rediculous edits. I've used google to get some somewhat useful information:
  • 平成17年 - 15,100,000 hits
  • 平成18年 - 17,100,000
  • 平成19年 - 2,170,000
  • 平成20年 - 733,000
  • 平成21年 - 442,000
  • 平成22年 - 496,000
  • 平成30年 - 76,100
And the same search using Westernized dates:
  • 2005年 - 200,000,000 hits
  • 2006年 - 293,000,000
  • 2007年 - 12,700,000
  • 2008年 - 9,970,000
  • 2009年 - 3,920,000
  • 2010年 - 9,770,000
  • 2018年 - 810,000
I think those are good enough figures to disallow using the traditional system for future dates in Japanese. I would also like to point out that all dates are in Western form on the Japanese wiki, excepting discussions directly related to the emperors and the traditional system.  freshofftheufoΓΛĿЌ  10:43, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
I think that your figure-finding actually disproved your point -- the ratio (Heisei:Western) is actually *higher* for future dates. --awh (Talk) 09:15, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
Uhm.. 2018 for western results in 810,000 hits, heisei30 results in 76,100 the ratio is significatnly in favour of westernized dates all the way along. How does that disprove his point? His point was there wasn't much support for using traditional names in the future. --Crossmr 06:13, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
Hmmm... No, you have to compare the 2005 ratio (15,100,000:200,000,000) with the 2018 ratio (76,100:810,000). You can see that it's actually *more* common to refer to 2018 (a future date) by the traditional style than it is to refer to 2005 (a past date). --awh (Talk) 03:42, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
I think you have used a biased estimator, awh, when you argue that "it's actually *more* common to refer to 2018 (a future date) by the traditional style." Although I understand your argument for looking at the ratios, becuase 平成30年 is a multiple of 5, making it relatively more likely than 2018年 to be a rough estimate of when a future even might occur. For example, the ratio of 2017年:平成29年 is 225,000:6,850, or 33:1.

Alright, I think that I have figured it out:

  • Use Western dates for future years, not the traditional system!

Here are my reasons, which summarizes and backs up with some hard data many arguments already made:

  1.  freshofftheufo says that all dates are in Western form on the Japanese wiki, excepting discussions directly related to the emperors and the traditional system. Why should we do any differently? There is no reason.
  2. The ratio of Google hits for 2006年 : 平成18年 is 293,000,000:17,100,000 (around 17:1, meaning that for the year 2006, there is only about one use of the traditional system for every 17 uses of Western dates). This means that, in absolute terms, the western date system is more common by a large margin(at least in the Google database). But what about relative frequency? (which I view as nearly irrelevant), ask awh and others...
  3. Relatively speaking, the western system becomes MUCH more common as we move further and further into the future. Here are some Google results:
  • 2017年:平成29年 = 225,000:6,85 = 33:1.
  • 2068年:平成80年 = 10,300:16 = 644:1
  • 2114年:平成126年 = 3,030:0 = infinity:0 (I am not sure if this is really and technically mathematically true.)
  • 2203年:平成215年 = 2,750:0 = infinity:0 (I am not sure if this is really and technically mathematically true.)
Note: The dates I chose are kind of random because using dates which are multiples of 5 (i.e. 2100, 2250年, 平成100年, 平成200年 etc.) tends to give biased results because these dates are used more commonly as long-term estimates than dates which are not multiples of 5. Because the systems are 1988 units off, a date which is a multiple of 5 in the western system produces a date which is not a multiple of 5 in the traditional system, and vice versa. This fact invalidates awh's argument above, in which he uses 平成30年 as an example. I even gave the traditional system the benefit of the doubt by using 平成215 as a datum point, but it was not able to muster any hits.

To summarize my summary, then:

  1. The Japanese wiki supposedly uses Western dates. So should we.
  2. Western dates are far more common in absolute terms (for past, present, near-future, and far-future dates).
  3. Western dates are far more common in relative terms, especially for far-future dates.

I am not even sure how relevant this debate is to the English Wikipedia, and I have some SERIOUS doubts about its importance but I just spent a lot of time and thought trying (successfully, I think) to find an objective solution. I don't know much about Japanese culture nor the language and have no vested interest in the outcome of this question; although my lack of knowledge made my search for a solution more difficult, I don't think my argument is any less valid.

--Dave Runger(t)(c) 04:55, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Haha, I'd like to see the current emperor live for another 200 years!  freshofftheufoΓΛĿЌ  09:59, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

平成 vs 平成時代[edit]

I have removed the 時代 from the Japanese at the beginning of the article. 平成時代 is more properly the equivalent of "Heisei era" or "Heisei period". --RJCraig 05:13, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Table of Years[edit]

Hello, can somebody please change the page that the infobox on the right side is not rendered over the last few entries in the table at the bottom of the page anymore? Thanks (talk) 18:45, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Negative and pessimistic.[edit]

This page doesn't depict the innovations and inventions created during the Heisei period, like the QR-code, DVD & Blu-Ray (with foreigh coorperation), Gemini (the Android) and many others. There are meny well-sourced places for this information this article only looks at the economic faillures and make the entire Heisei period look like one long epic FAIL!!! while the Japanese have made many innovations wothy of mention. -- (talk) 19:09, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

I agree with this comment! I've never submitted a comment to a Talk page before, usually I just add or subtract commas and fix typos when I see then, but I was/am bothered by the complete absence of even one positive event in this "history". I really wish I could contribute more than a complaint here, but my usual resource for that kind of information is (you saw this coming, didn't you?) Wikipedia, of course. Didn't the Emperor win some recognition for contributions to science in the field of Marine Biology or Oceanography? Maybe some information about his heir, since this is partly about succession? I'll see what I can find, but I'm just a kimono aficionado and not much of a resource for this article. Kkved (talk) 22:16, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

Posthumously renamed?[edit]

In the opening para it says "Hirohito was posthumously renamed "Emperor Shōwa" on 31 January." That's surely incorrect because Hirohito was always referred to during his life as Showa Tenno" when he wasn't being referred to simply as "tenno heika" and was never referred to as "Hirohito" by anyone other than gaijin. Unless I can find some evidence for this posthumous stuff, I'm going to delete it. --gilgongo (talk) 18:28, 19 October 2014 (UTC)