Talk:Hierarchical structure of Feudal Japan

This is the talk page of a redirect that targets the page:
• Edo society
Because this page is not frequently watched, present and future discussions, edit requests and requested moves should take place at:
• Talk:Edo society

Untitled[edit]

This article reads like a middle-schooler's paper. Is there a template to indicate that fact? 82.61.181.10 (talk) 15:00, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merge[edit]

This article needs some major revision to make it both up to standards and historically accurate. Once it is corrected it will be very similar to the article Four divisions of society. I think they should be merged together. I will go ahead and do this, but if there are any objections or other thoughts I would like to hear them first. Orange43 (talk) 00:28, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For what it's worth, I think it's a great idea. I like the Four Divisions article, I really think someone did a nice job in organizing the four classes, as well as providing background information. So, my for my part, I say we merge this into that article. --Ph0kin (talk) 22:42, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

After making this suggestion I ended up creating and writing a new article, Edo society, to cover more than just the theoretical divisions of society. Most of the information in this (Feudal Japan hierarchy) article is actually more relevant to the Edo period, which could be either be considered late feudal or early early modern and therefore the article may be misnamed. The Four divisions of society article is essentially a third article with much the same information as well. Personally, I think the Four divisions article should be either expanded as being specific to the theoretical model, if the amount of information warrants it, or eliminated and this article should be rewritten to cover society during the distinctly different high medieval period. I would also then support renaming this article to Feudal Japan Society, or something similar, to show it's broader scope. I'd like a second opinion, however, to make sure I'm not too biased because I wrote one of the articles. Orange43 (talk) 17:11, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your Edo society article is far superior to this. This has virtually no redeeming value, so unless there are objections, I'll just redirect this one there outright. Jpatokal (talk) 15:29, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]