The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Please supply full citations when adding information, and consider tagging or removing unciteable information.
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: 16:54, August 31, 2015 (JST, Heisei 27) (Refresh)
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Taiwan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Taiwan 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.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject China, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of China related articles 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.
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.
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.
Editing of this article is under discretionary sanctions following this decision by the arbitration committee. Any user who disrupts this article or the discussions on this talk page may be subject to discretionary sanctions which can be imposed by any uninvolved Administrator after one initial warning. To avoid running into trouble, you are requested to observe the following rules of engagement at all times as they have been shown to be effective in other similar disputes.
The following rules should be followed to avoid any issues due to the controversial nature of this topic:
All uncooperative editing is strictly forbidden. "Uncooperative" means: any edit that significantly shifts the POV balance in such a way that a reasonable outside observer must know in advance it will be unacceptable to the other side. If you have reasons to expect your edit will not be acceptable, don't make it. See Wikipedia:Etiquette for more details.
Slow it down. If uncooperative or otherwise contentious substantial edits are made, they must nevertheless not be immediately reverted. Instead, they should be pointed out and discussed on the talk page. Leave them up for discussion for at least 24 hours before reverting them (if you must). This page may be useful in this area.
No Edit Warring will be accepted under any circumstances and all editors are expected to observe a strict 1RR. This means that if another editor disagrees with your edit the edit may be reverted (see note above) and may not be reinserted unless there is a clear consensus on this talk page to allow the edit. (This does not apply to obvious vandalism).
Blatant POV. Edits (like those sometimes made by hit-and-run IPs) which blatantly violate NPOV by simply declaring either side of the dispute right and the other wrong, may be treated like vandalism and reverted.
Edit summaries. All edits must be accompanied by precise, informative, non-combative edit summaries. These must clearly indicate if an edit contains something potentially contentious. In particular, all reverts (complete or partial) must be clearly marked as such.
Tendentious, overlong or nonconstructive repetitive arguing on the talk page is not permitted. Disruptive edits of this kind may be removed by an administrator and persistent offenders are liable to being banned from further contribution to the article.
If you wish to discuss these conditions you should leave a message below or contact an administrator familiar with the history of this article. Currently this includes Nihonjoe.
Text has been copied to or from this article; see the list below. The source pages now serve to provide attribution for the content in the destination pages and must not be deleted so long as the copies exist. For attribution and to access older versions of the copied text, please see the history links below.
It seems to me that there is a bias if the islands are called "Senkaku Islands" in the title instead of something like "Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 16:48, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
Better yet -- since this is an English page why not use the English name? The English language name for the islands is Pinnacle Islands. This is the measure taken for the Liancourt Rocks and avoids getting caught up in naming disputes based in nationalistic claims. It appears that this suggestion has ben debated in the past to no avail. However, a precedent has been set with the Liancourt Rocks and it offers a simple, even elegant, solution to this problem. Why not use Pinnacle Islands? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 22.214.171.124 (talk) 02:47, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
On both points above please see the previous move discussion, which returned no consensus on changing the title of the article. Pinnacle Islands is a decent idea in some respects, but it's a name that's almost never used in English-speaking media today. —Nizolan(talk) 18:37, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
Even though I speak 2 1/2 languages I looked for Senkaku because I can never remember the Chinese name. It's just a silly superficial thing with me.126.96.36.199 (talk) 06:13, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
Would it be possible in the sovereignty section to add a link to the country of Japan, not just the governing body/country of China and Taiwan? There are very CLEAR links to Wikipedia articles on "The Peoples Republic of China" and "Taiwan" followed abruptly by "Japan" with no hyperlink to the article on Japan. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Submarinevet (talk • contribs) 22:54, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
Hi Submarinevet, I agree that it seems incongruous to have only two of the countries wikilinked. The issue that we run into is that WP:OVERLINK says that we should only link each once, when it first appears in the article; by this standard, we should remove all 3 links from this section. I am not sure that that is the most helpful to the reader, and would like to gauge editor support for linking all 3 at the "sovereignty section". If there are no responses, I will standardise to either 3 wikilinks or no wikilinks in the next day or so. Hope this helps - Ryk72'c.s.n.s.' 23:08, 5 June 2015 (UTC)