Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 01:01, 12 August 2012

Japan: Geography & environment / Prefectures C‑class Top‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Japan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Japan-related articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project, participate in relevant discussions, and see lists of open tasks. Current time in Japan: 04:00, December 26, 2024 (JST, Reiwa 6) (Refresh)JapanWikipedia:WikiProject JapanTemplate:WikiProject JapanJapan-related C This article has been rated as C-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the Geography and environment task force. This article is supported by the Prefectures task force. WikiProject Japan to do list: edit history watch purge Peer review: None A-class review: None Featured content candidates –  Articles: None Pictures: None Lists: None Good article nominations: Vinland Saga (TV series), Godzilla Minus One Add requested images to articles that need them. Pages for Deletion: Participate in Japan-related deletion discussions. Improve and expand Japan-related stubs. Create some requested articles. Help translate an article from the Japanese Misplaced Pages into English. Assess unassessed articles

Islands C‑class

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Islands, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of islands on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IslandsWikipedia:WikiProject IslandsTemplate:WikiProject IslandsIslands C This article has been rated as C-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.

Archives

1, 2

Why has the macron been removed?

• Why has the macron just been removed from the article title? This doesn't match the usage in the article. Wouldn't it have been better just to handle this via the redirect? --Kleinzach 23:59, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
• No idea, but I have reverted the move, since it was not something that should have been done without any discussion. --DAJF (talk) 00:27, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
• I found and obeyed this request in the uncontroversials part of Misplaced Pages:Requested moves:

  Hokkaidō → Hokkaido – Per WP:COMMONNAME and WP:EN, Hokkaido is more commonly used in reliable sources in English than Hokkaidō. Jfgslo (talk) 14:49, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

  Anthony Appleyard (talk) 06:33, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

I doubt that'd be uncontroversial. Chipmunkdavis (talk) 06:39, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

• The request is uncontroversial because it is done according to WP:COMMONNAME, WP:EN and WP:MJ. I will point you out to the section "Body text" of the manual of Style (Japan-related articles) where it says: "Take care with these points regarding usage in article body text (anything that is not the title of the article)." Article titles do not need match usage within the article. Article titles are determined by common usage in reliable source in the English-speaking world, per WP:AT, where "Hokkaido" is overwhelmingly more commonly used over the macroned form, even by other encyclopedias like Britannica and even the Hokkaido government. This has been recently discussed because it was thought that WP:MJ required macroned forms, which is not true. Article titles of Japanese related topics are determined like any other topic, with common usage in reliable sources in English and they also follow WP:COMMONNAME and WP:EN, as it is clearly stated in the "Article names" section of WP:MJ: "Please note that the Misplaced Pages:Naming conventions policy and the Misplaced Pages:Naming conventions (use English) guideline are applicable here." Jfgslo (talk) 20:31, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Without taking a stand on which name is "correct", this issue has been discussed before and a move without prior discussion is not appropriate. Jpatokal (talk) 21:29, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

According to the previous discussion, the move towards the macroned form was done against consensus. Jfgslo (talk) 21:48, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Proposal to move Hokkaidō to Hokkaido

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 21:30, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Hokkaidō → Hokkaido — Per WP:AT, WP:EN and WP:MJ, "Hokkaido" is the most commonly used form in reliable sources in the English-speaking world, therefore it should be used in the article title. Jfgslo (talk) 00:45, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

The current consensus is that the macron-less form, Hokkaido, should be used. The consensus can be verified here and here. However, the article is currently located at the macroned form Hokkaidō. I do not know for what reason that move was done since it went against consensus. Per WP:AT, WP:EN, WP:MJ and the last consensus discussion, the article should be located at Hokkaido. But it's been pointed out to me that the former consensus is 4 years old, so a new consensus may be preferable.

Sorry, but that's incorrect. The current Manual of Style clearly states that all places should be macroned except a shortlist of exceptions, and Hokkaidō is not on that shortlist. Jpatokal (talk) 11:19, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Exactly which part of the that MOS section do you think says that all place names should be macroned except...? Andrewa (talk) 11:59, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Oops, wrong anchor. Body text point 10, emphasis mine: "Location names (municipalities, prefectures, islands, etc.) should include macrons in all cases with the following exceptions.... Jpatokal (talk) 22:54, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Within the body text section it also says "Take care with these points regarding usage in article body text (anything that is not the title of the article.)" Article titles, which is emphasized in the proper section of WP:MJ, follow the Misplaced Pages:Naming conventions policy and the Misplaced Pages:Naming conventions (use English) guideline. Jfgslo (talk) 00:27, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

I requested the move because I believed it was uncontroversial since it was done in accordance to WP:COMMONNAME, WP:EN and WP:MJ and also followed the previous consensus. This is still my rationale for this proposal. Per the previous guidelines and as I pointed out within this talk page in the previous section, "Hokkaido" is the most commonly used form in reliable sources in the English-speaking world, therefore the article title should be without the macron.

To show that the macronless form is much more commonly used, here are some examples using some search engine tests:

• Google
  • Hokkaidō 99,200 results
  • Hokkaido 9,900,000 results
• Google scholar
  • Hokkaidō 2,610 results
  • Hokkaido 436,000 results
• Google books
  • Hokkaidō 10,200 results
  • Hokkaido 564,000 results
• Yahoo
  • Hokkaidō 26,400 results
  • Hokkaido 486,000 results

Also, as I pointed out before, other encyclopedias, like Britannica and The Columbia Encyclopedia, use the macronless form. Additionally, the sources used to reference the article do not use the macron. Hokkaido's government also uses the macronless form. I could also point out to some mainstream media publications but I think I have already shown that "Hokkaido" without the macron is the most commonly used form in reliable English sources.

Therefore, in accordance with the applicable guidelines WP:EN and WP:MJ and the policy WP:AT, I propose to move the article from Hokkaidō to Hokkaido. Please share your comments and thoughts in order to reach a new consensus. Jfgslo (talk) 23:56, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

• Oppose, because: 1. Misplaced Pages is an encyclopedia not a newspaper. Accuracy should come first. Accuracy is more important than search engine 'beauty contest' popularity. 2. The macron is necessary for indicating pronunciation, as well as part of the romanization system. 3. European accents are used in Misplaced Pages article titles (see, for example, French place names here and German place names here), so non-European ones should be given as well. Standards should be maintained evenly throughout Misplaced Pages. Japan should not be singled out for dumbing down. 4. The non-macron spelling can be handled simply and elegantly by a redirect. --Kleinzach 02:23, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
• Support obvious English common usage. 184.144.165.37 (talk) 03:54, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
• Support per WP:MOS-JA, WP:COMMONNAME, and WP:EN. The macronless form is by far the most common usage. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WikiProject Japan! 05:28, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Are you against the use of macrons for all Japanese names and terms? Clearly spelling without macrons will in every case be 'commoner' (as measured by the English Google) than spelling with them. --Kleinzach 05:34, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

No, not necessarily. It really depends on the name or term. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WikiProject Japan! 05:53, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

• Support. This is an extremely well-known term in English, comparable for example to Tokyo, and almost never spelled with the macron. Andrewa (talk) 07:20, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
• Support The macronless form is a common English.

The followings are Encyclopedia/Dictionary results:

• Britannica Hokkaido
• The Columbia Encyclopedia Hokkaido
• Merriam-Webster Dictionary Hokkaido
• Random House Dictionary Hokkaido
• Collins English Dictionary Hokkaido
• Oxford Dictionaries Hokkaido
• The American Heritage Dictionary Hokkaido

―― Phoenix7777 (talk) 08:56, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

• Support. The commonly used English spelling (without macron) should be used for the title, as per WP:ENGLISH and WP:MOS-JA. Note that even the Hokkaido Government website uses "Hokkaido" without macrons on its English pages. The romanized Japanese form (with macron) can be included in the lead sentence as part of the "Nihongo" template, so there is no issue of "dumbing down". --DAJF (talk) 09:10, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
• Support: "Hokkaido" has clearly entered the English lexicon along with "Tokyo", "Osaka", and "Kobe". I have also initiated similar move requests at Talk:Kyūshū#Requested move and Talk:Honshū#Requested move.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 10:12, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
• Comment: I'm not opposed to this move per se, but according to MOS-JA, this is clearly supposed to be at Hokkaidō. (To be more specific, MOS-JA states that all Japanese places with a very few exceptions should use macrons, and Hokkaido is not one of the listed exceptions.) Assuming a new consensus can be formed, I would like to see the MOS-JA amended before this move takes place, and especially before any other moves along the same lines. Jpatokal (talk) 11:19, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Comment: WP:MOS-JA#Place names does not deal explicitly with this issue. One of the examples given is Hokkaidō, but this is given as an exception to another rule, not as an example of macron usage. Suggest we see how the several related moves get on before rushing to change the MOS. Andrewa (talk) 11:52, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
    • Comment : Misplaced Pages:MOS-JA#Article_names does deals with this: "Article titles should use macrons as specified for body text except in cases where the macronless spelling is in common usage in reliable sources in English-speaking countries (e.g., Tokyo, Sumo and Shinto, instead of Tōkyō, Sumō and Shintō)." The operative words are 'reliable sources'. That means reference works, not newspapers and websites etc. --Kleinzach 12:21, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
      • Comment WP:MJ also says "Reliable sources should be used in all cases when determining the most common English-language usage for within body text or in article titles. Scholarly reliable sources and mainstream media reliable sources are equally acceptable, and neither should be considered more valid than the other." Also, as I pointed out, the references used within the article do not use the macron and neither the vast majority of scholarly sources. And other reference works like Britannica also do not use the macron. Jfgslo (talk) 15:08, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
      • Two problems here. Firstly, note that the list is preceded by e.g., so the list is explicitly not exhaustive. Secondly, Misplaced Pages:Identifying reliable sources#News organizations reads in part Mainstream news sources are generally considered to be reliable. Andrewa (talk) 01:32, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
• Support: Hokkaido has become an English word, and not just a transliteration of the Japanese. WP:ENGLISH requires the macronless form. Quigley (talk) 03:40, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
• Comment: The followings are English news site results:

• Guardian: Hokkaido 226 results; Hokkaidō 0 results
• Independent: Hokkaido 64 results; Hokkaidō 0 results
• Daily Telegraph: Hokkaido 144 results; Hokkaidō 0 results
• Financial Times: Hokkaido 258 results; Hokkaidō 0 results
• The Times: Hokkaido 119 results ( Hokkaidō 119 results)
• New York Times: Hokkaido 2100 results; Hokkaidō 4 results
• Washington Post (1987-Current): Hokkaido 214 results; Hokkaidō 0 results
• Wall Street Journal (2 years): Hokkaido 63 results (Hokkaidō 63 results)
• Los Angeles Times: Hokkaido 20 results; Hokkaidō 0 results
• Associated Press: Hokkaido 590 results; Hokkaidō 0 results
• Reuters: Hokkaido 418 results; Hokkaidō 0 results
• Google News: Hokkaido 2261 results; Hokkaidō 3 results

―― --Krtek2125 (talk) 23:23, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

• Oppose. The common omission of the macron of "Hokkaido" 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 08:21, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Comment: Reliable mass media sources should be given the same weight as reliable academic sources, regardless of personal opinion about how "sloppy" they may be. "Hokkaido" is—by far— the most common way for this location to be written in reliable English-language sources. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WikiProject Japan! 16:57, 22 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.

Proposal to merge Ezo into Hokkaido

I'm opposed to the merger. Ezo has usage beyond the purely geographical. --Kleinzach 10:38, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

As there has been no response I'm now removing the merge tags. --Kleinzach 09:27, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Aynu Mosir

User:Nanshu is pointing to a discussion that no one else bothered to take part in. The name of this island in the language of its original native people (who are determined to be so by the Japanese government) is Aynu Mosir. It may translate to "Ainu Land" but there is no consensus not to use this name on this article.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 20:41, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

You are too bold to edit Misplaced Pages. Now that your claim is questioned, you need to cite reliable sources to confirm that aynu mosir is the established alias of Hokkaido. Otherwise we have no choice but to dismiss your claim. As I said three years ago, I suspect Ainu has no exact word for Hokkaido. And, personally, I oppose any attempt to confine the sphere of the Ainu to Hokkaido. Do not forget Karafuto and Chishima. Anyway, the burden of proof is on you. --Nanshu (talk) 01:27, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

I've put a fact tag on 'Aynu Mosir'. This needs a reference. --Kleinzach 06:28, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

There is a map of 'Aynu Mosir' here published by the National Museum of Ethnology. This confirms that the term refers to all the Ainu lands, not just Hokkaido. --Kleinzach 09:39, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

FYI, the Ainu Association of Hokkaido shows a nearly identical map on its site. We should note that these are (1) rare examples and (2) ahistorical. It is not something widely used by the Ainu or researchers. For example, a leaflet on Ainu place names published by the Hokkaido Ainu Culture Research Center never mentions aynu mosir. --Nanshu (talk) 12:44, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Ryulong (talk · contribs) added a piece of text on aynu mosir again. It is much better than earlier revisions but is still problematic. The source he cited gives:

It was incorrectly expanded by Ryulong as follows:

Ryulong must prove that the term was traditionally applied and that it referred to all of the lands the Ainu inhabited.

We should keep in mind that the phrase is vague. And accordingly Minpaku gives a vague explanation to it. I suspect Ryulong misinterpreted the map on Minpaku's page. It depicts "the all of the lands the Ainu inhabited." This is a very product of modern researchers, who have full knowledge of geography and ethnography. It is not something shared by the Ainu in the past. I doubt the Ainu ever thought of all of the lands the Ainu inhabited when using the phrase. Were the Ainu in Ishikari aware of their brothers and sisters in Shumshu? And did they manage to develop the concept that they all belonged to the same nation despite lack of a unified polity? Did the phrase have a territorial connotation at all?

The following sentence is unsourced.

Ryulong seems to have taken this from ja:アイヌモシリ.

Leaving aside the fact that the Japanese article is also unsourced, Ryulong over-interpreted the source again. The Japanese article does not claim that aynu mosir was contrasted with sisam mosir. It explains sisam mosir only as a related phrase of aynu mosir while kamuy mosir is an antonym of aynu mosir. Are there any attested examples? --Nanshu (talk) 16:22, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Ryulong (talk · contribs) pushed the nonsense again. He was aware that his unsourced claim was questioned and rejected here, but he did not follow one of Misplaced Pages's most important policies CITE. He carried out his purpose simply by editting the article more often than users. He looks more like a revert warrior.

Once again, you must cite reliable sources to confirm that aynu mosir is the established alias of Hokkaido. This term belongs to folklore or cosmology but not to geography or politics.

Ryulong (talk · contribs) is not just rude and dishonest but ignorant. It is astonishing that every time he edits, he inserts errors. This time he stupidly misunderstood John Batchelor's century-old dictionary.

Another name is ''Isho Mosir'' ({{lang|ain|イショ・モシ<small>リ</small>}}) which ] recorded as the Ainu word for the Japanese place name of "Ezo".<ref>{{cite book |title=An Ainu--English--Japanese Dictionary |last=Batchelor |first=John |authorlink=John Batchelor (missionary) |coauthors= |year=1905 |publisher=Methodist Publishing House |location=], ], ] |isbn=9784000800556 |page=39 |pages= |url=http://www.archive.org/stream/ainuenglishjapan00batcuoft |accessdate=January 25, 2012}}</ref>

Batchelor did NOT "record" Isho Mosir as the Ainu word for the Japanese place name of "Ezo." Quite the opposite. Batchelor attempted to interpret the Japanese word "Ezo" as Ainu and found isho (iso) as a supposedly good candidate. If Ryulong had spent 10 seconds more to read this page, he would have found that this folk etymology was followed by another folk etymology for Mount Fuji. I think this mistake alone shows that this topic is outside his capability. --Nanshu (talk) 01:01, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Some comments

This article has some problems but I do not have enough time to correct them. Maybe I will work on them but for now I only list most serious problems here.

• Archeologists theorize that Hokkaido was settled by Ainu, Gilyak, and Orok 20,000 years ago.

• I can hardly believe that archaeologists make such a sloppy remark. They are usually cautious about identifying archaeological findings with modern ethnic groups. Japan Handbook should be replaced by scholarly work. And we definitely need to explain archaeological achievements: the Epi-Jomon, Satsumon, Okhotsk, Tobinitai and Ainu (in an archaeological sense) cultures.

  Shortly after the Boshin War in 1868, a group of Tokugawa loyalists led by Enomoto Takeaki proclaimed the island's independence as the Republic of Ezo, but the rebellion was crushed in May 1869.

• This is completely wrong. Enomoto Takeaki did NOT proclaimed independence. The article on Japanese Misplaced Pages ja:蝦夷共和国 discusses common misunderstanding about the the polity but unfortunately it is unsourced. The main article Republic of Ezo must also be revised.
• The episode of William S. Clark is too long for this general article and should be summarized.

  Subprefectures

• In 2010, the subprefectures of Hokkaido were replaced with General Subprefectural Bureaus (総合振興局) and Subprefectural Bureau (振興局)(I consulted for translation). The main article Subprefectures in Hokkaidō should also be updated.

--Nanshu (talk) 12:44, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

On the first point, I imagine this is a misleading summary of a (possibly not very authoritative) source. Certainly there's no way anyone can identify 20,000 BP settlers with recent ethnic groups. --Kleinzach 15:29, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Bilk?

Could someone please explain why Bilk redirects here? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leegee23 (talk • contribs) 20:10, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

See Talk:Hokkaido/Archive 2#Abashiri Brewery. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 16:58, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Note: The useless redirect has been fixed. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 16:19, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

File:ClarkBoysBeAmbitious.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:ClarkBoysBeAmbitious.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests January 2012 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Misplaced Pages (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 21:21, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

• C-Class Japan-related articles
• Top-importance Japan-related articles
• WikiProject Japan articles
• C-Class Islands articles
• WikiProject Islands articles