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: 18:25, September 28, 2016 (JST, Heisei 28) (Refresh)
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Islands, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of islands 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.
It is considered the birthplace of Japanese civilization. - isn't the Nara area?
That is one of very famous controversies in Japanese history. We should have an article about this topic. -- Taku 02:57, Mar 22, 2005 (UTC)
Interesting. What arguments are there for considering Kyushu the birthplace of Japanese civilization? I was under the impression that it was historically rather isolated, and that all the archeological remains are around Kansai and Nara specifically Nik42 07:35, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)
The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the move request was: page moved per discussion below. - GTBacchus(talk) 21:23, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
Kyūshū → Kyushu — Arguably, the macron-less form of this island is more common. It is featured in the name of a university on the island and identifying the long vowel is not necessary for the article title.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 05:50, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
Support clearly the macronless form is more common. 126.96.36.199 (talk) 10:40, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. MOS-JA clearly states that this place name should use a macron. There is a discussion about changing this rule on said manual's talk page, but until that discussion reaches a conclusion, this move is premature. Jpatokal (talk) 11:14, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
The consensus in the discussion is bending towards changing the rule and adding new exceptions.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 19:43, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
Support The macronless form is more commonly used in reliable sources in the English-speaking world. It is much more commonly used in both mainstream media and scholarly sources. Britannica, The Columbia Encyclopedia, Oxford Dictionaries and several other reference works also use the macronless form. Jfgslo (talk) 15:25, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
Support per nomination. Flamarande (talk) 15:13, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. The common omission of the macrons is purely the result of the difficulty in typing diacritics on an English keyboard. It is not an Anglicisation or an "English name", but a slight misspelling of a kind which English-speakers happen to be blind to. There is no reason whatever for an encyclopedia to mimic the sloppiness of the mass media. Xanthoxyl< 08:23, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
Support. The form without macrons seems to be more widely used in English language text. And the fact that Britannica deliberately writes "Kyushu, Japanese Kyūshū" would seem to negate the argument of simple "sloppiness" put forward above, especially since it uses macrons for less universally-known Japanese place names. The Collins English Dictionary on my bookshelf also uses macrons for some words, but chooses not to for "Kyushu", which suggests that this has indeed become a widely recognized anglicized form. --DAJF (talk) 08:58, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
Support per above comments. Reliable mass media sources should be given the same weight as reliable academic sources, regardless of personal opinion about how "sloppy" they may be. ···日本穣? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WikiProject Japan! 16:55, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
Support per nominator and examples brought by User:Jfgslo.Aldux (talk) 11:41, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
Support: Kyushu has become an English word, and not just a transliteration of the Japanese. WP:ENGLISH requires the macronless form. Quigley (talk) 21:43, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
Is this article about the island or the administrative region (which includes many other islands)? Reading through the article and looking at the included images, there seems to be a good deal of inconsistency regarding whether or not Okinawa is included, for instance. When land mass and population figures are presented, do these refer to the whole region, or only Kyushu Island? Perhaps we should spin off the island to its own article at Kyushu Island. Wilhelm Meis (☎ Diskuss | ✍ Beiträge) 18:15, 3 June 2012 (UTC)