User talk:Michitaro

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

New Page Patrol survey[edit]

NPPbarnstar.jpg

New page patrol – Survey Invitation


Hello Michitaro! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you.

  • If this invitation also appears on other accounts you may have, please complete the survey once only.
  • If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it.

Please click HERE to take part.
Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback.


You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey

Infobox Korean Film Template[edit]

There is a debate on Template Talk on the topic of merging Infobox Korean Film into the generic Infobox Film category. While it is specifically about Korean cinema, debate on the Japanese and Chinese templates have been brought in as well but currently there are no Japanese or Chinese film editors in the debate. As you are someone from the Japanese cinema task force I would appreciate it if you would take it a look and contribute your thoughts. Thank you.

David Sneddon[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Michitaro. You have new messages at De728631's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Disambiguation link notification for April 21[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of Japanese films of the 1920s, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Shōzō Makino (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:20, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

Name order[edit]

You think this is going anywhere? I take it Nihonjoe is the guy with the supervote. I don't really care that much about name order issue itself. But I do wish we could get the 1868 sillyness out of the guideline somehow. We could start by proposing a few clear cut cases like this one. Fernando Danger (talk) 12:39, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

I'm not sure if it is going anywhere, but it may be worth trying to make a proposal. I come from a world where everyone uses surname first for Japanese names, so my ideal would be to have all names like that on Wikipedia. But that would likely run into WP:COMMONNAME, so a modified proposal would be to make surname first the default option, with surname last only if supported by WP:COMMONNAME. One could argue that the majority of Japanese names have not even been featured in English language materials enough to make an argument for surname last being more common. It was really interesting the evidence you found for Miyazawa Kenji--even someone that famous seems to appear more with surname first. Someone could, however, argue that such a result is only due to the fact that is an analysis of books, not journalism or the internet (compare [1] with [2]). As I said in the Japan talk page discussion, that is one reason COMMONNAME can be a pain: how do you judge what's common and how do you evaluate different media? Personally, I think that's the reason we should not allow exceptions under COMMONNAME except in rare cases. But I doubt few would agree with that. It would be interesting, though, to test the waters and see what the reaction would be to the proposal: "Surname first, with exceptions only when supported by WP:COMMONNAME." I do feel, however, that getting rid of the 1868 divide would probably be more likely to pass. Presuming that people still feel the modern/premodern divide should stay, redefining that would be an option. Michitaro (talk) 21:02, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
Check out this RM, which just opened. It's is the opposite end of the spectrum as Kenji, but I suppose we have to start somewhere. The web hit numbers reflect how much computing time Google allocates for the search. I don't know why they why they would allocate more time for one variant than for the other, but it doesn't tell you anything about which one is more common. All the same, the academic books have to be balanced against the media stories, which do it surname last. (Compare here and here.) WP:WIAN is my model of how a style guideline should be written. It lists various authoritative sources for editors to consult and doesn't issue arbitrary edicts. Fernando Danger (talk) 19:16, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
I don't have a supervote. I just told you how to get things changed. If a consensus is reached to change MOSJA, I'm fine with that. My main point in the discussion was that you were trying to do something the MOSJA said not to do. You know how to initiate a change discussion, so please do it if you would like. I prefer the Surname Givenname order myself, but (as Michitaro pointed out), that doesn't always work. As for the 1868 divide, at the time it was discussed, I seem to remember that (in addition to many academic sources using it), it was a simple way to make the MOSJA simple for that. That's when Japan moved from more traditional into the modern world, and everyone was in agreement that would be the easiest place to make the division for simplicity's sake. Regardless of any of that, again, the decisions are made by consensus, so start up a discussion and let's see what consensus is now. Be sure to publicize it well so we can get a lot of participation. ···日本穣? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 19:35, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
Fernando: As I noted on the RM for Asako Toki, there is a precedent with Otomo Yoshihide, where I used COMMONNAME (and an apparent request from Otomo himself) to argue for a move. I would hate to have to make this argument all the time. Nihonjoe: It's good to hear of your personal preference and I agree that everything should be decided by consensus. Perhaps it is time for a discussion. Michitaro (talk) 01:07, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for making up the proposal (and sorry for the delay in responding). It looks quite good. The main question is whether to add another option that keeps the modern/premodern divide, but changes the definition of that divide:
  • Change the language "For a modern figure—a person born after the beginning of the Meiji period" to "For a modern figure—a person primarily active after the beginning of the Meiji period"
That might be too many options for proposal, though if the point is in part just to get a sense of where consensus is going, it may be good to lay all the options on the table. Michitaro (talk) 22:24, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
Adding another option would not necessarily create too many, but this option might strike the reader as going in a different direction than the other ones on the list. For a while, I considered making the cutoff date a round number, like 1900 or 1950. That would clarify that the exact date is arbitrary. But from recent comments, my sense is that most editors do not support the entire cutoff date concept. Living pop culture figures are generally given family name last in the RS, although CMOS suggests their names should also be put in the Japanese order. Up to this point, the Japanese have passively accepted foreign copy editors writing their names any which way. But that may be less and less true as time goes on. One day the prime minister may announce, "Hi! My name is Abe Shinzō, and please stop calling me Shinzō Abe!" I guess can we can burn that bridge after we cross it. I suppose my point here is that no one proposal can resolve all the complications in this area. Fernando Danger (talk) 02:37, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • The proposal has been moved here. I count four votes for family name first (including myself), three for given name first. Fernando Danger (talk) 00:28, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

Re: barnstar[edit]

Hi Michitaro, thank you for The Original Barnstar. Cutebassa (talk) 12:37, 12 May 2015 (UTC)