| Revision as of 12:09, 23 March 2015 editSilkTork (talk | contribs)Administrators104,122 edits archive← Previous edit |
Latest revision as of 15:50, 17 July 2024 edit undoQwerfjkl (bot) (talk | contribs)Bots, Mass message senders4,012,123 editsm Removed deprecated parameters in {{Talk header}} that are now handled automatically (Task 30)Tag: paws [2.2] |
| (339 intermediate revisions by 32 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
|
{{talkheader}} |
|
{{talkheader}} |
|
{{WikiProjectBannerShell|collapsed=yes|1= |
|
{{WikiProject banner shell|collapsed=yes|class=B|living=no|listas=Miyazawa, Kenji|1= |
|
{{WikiProject Biography |
|
{{WikiProject Biography|a&e-work-group=yes}} |
|
|living=no |
|
|
|class=B |
|
|
|listas=Miyazawa, Kenji |
|
|
}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Children's literature|class=C|importance=Mid}} |
|
{{WikiProject Children's literature|class=C|importance=Mid}} |
|
{{WikiProject Japan|class=B|importance=high}} |
|
{{WikiProject Japan|importance=mid|bio=y}} |
|
{{WikiProject Constructed languages|class=C|importance=Low|Esperanto=yes}} |
|
{{WikiProject Constructed languages|class=C|importance=Low|Esperanto=yes}} |
|
}} |
|
}} |
|
|
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
|
{{findnotice}} |
|
|
|
|archiveheader = {{Talkarchivenav}} |
|
|
|
|
|
|maxarchivesize = 150K |
|
|
|
|
|
|counter = 3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|minthreadsleft = 5 |
|
== Kokuchūkai == |
|
|
|
|minthreadstoarchive = 1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|algo = old(180d) |
|
Sorry to say that, but to say that he was a ‚devout‘ Buddhist might sound fluffy and cuddly in a Western perspective, but he was a member of Kokuchūkai which should be mentioned. He was no registered member of any traditional Buddhist temple, even within Nichiren Buddhism. Him being a member of Kokuchūkai is part of his biography to call him therefore a devout Buddhist is itself farfetched. --] (]) 22:00, 23 December 2014 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|archive = Talk:Kenji Miyazawa/Archive %(counter)d |
|
:I'm not sure what fluffiness has to do with it. His connections to Kokuchūkai are dealt with after the lede; unless you are going to explain in the lede what Kokuchūkai is, that would make the lede opaque to most readers. , , , , . This is from a few minutes on just English-language sites. ]<small>]</small> 06:16, 24 December 2014 (UTC) |
|
|
|
}} |
|
::The term ‘Kokuchūkai’ has an interwiki link. The average reader should be allowed the intelligence to press that link and find out what Kokuchūkai is all about. Traditionally in Japan one would be expected to be registered with a temple when called a Buddhist. Kokuchūkai is a lay organisation, not affiliated to any Buddhist school and with a dubious nationalist agenda - why is that a problem to mention?--] (]) 17:18, 29 December 2014 (UTC) |
|
|
@ ] Why should it be poking to mention in the introduction a fact that the main text elaborates on? I find your edit itself to be POV as it seems you do not like that fact to be mentioned. He is no more mentioned as a Nationalist but member of Kokuchūkai. Seems like whitewashing his biography.--] (]) 10:50, 26 February 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
:<EDIT CONFLICT> Because the sources that merely summarize the facts briefly (as our lead should) and even many that go into further detail don't even mention the organization. They simply refer to him as a devout follower of Nichiren Buddhism. You removed all reference in the Kokuchūkai article to the balance problems in that article, then wikilinked to it in the lead of this article. Your comments immediately above this one make it clear that that was your intent, and they also make clear why. You want this article to come as close as possible to saying "he was a nationalist" as it can. You have been engaged in a slow motion edit war on this topic for , and you have come up against ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] (possibly more including ] who commented on the inappropriateness of your behaviour without remark on the content and ] whose view on the content was ambivalent).<!-- Sorry to anyone who didn't want to be pinged. You can just ignore it if you like. --> This type of disruptive, ] behaviour has gotten other users TBANned/blocked. You clearly are not interested in the topic of Miyazawa Kenji -- if you were, you would have read one of the hundreds of sources that refer to him as a devout Buddhist without any reference to nationalism, sometimes without even naming the Kokuchūkai -- so why not just move on to something else? ] (<small>]]</small>) 12:33, 26 February 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
Even in the foreword to „The dragon and the Poet“ his Kokuchūkai membership is mentioned. Its not my fault that Kokuchūkai is what it is.--] (]) 12:16, 26 February 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
:Which translation? And why not read a biography of the man, or his entry in one of the histories of Japanese literature, or some such? Anyway, don't close a comment addressed to another user with a question and then some time later tag more commentary on to it. I was already done answering your question (beginning with "Because") before you wrote the above. ] (<small>]]</small>) 12:33, 26 February 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
:: I can not see what you are doing at the same time as I do. Here you go |
|
|
::https://books.google.de/books?id=4JUBAwAAQBAJ&pg=PP3&lpg=PP3&dq=Kokuch%C5%ABkai%E2%80%8E&source=bl&ots=0hBZQnOqLS&sig=DKHL5IQrEkGmUxPCyOekxtC0PNA&hl=de&sa=X&ei=rgHvVMq2IJDhaMzZgOgI&ved=0CFEQ6AEwCjgK#v=onepage&q=Kokuch%C5%ABkai%E2%80%8E&f=false |
|
|
::--] (]) 12:50, 26 February 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
:::I can't see the reference to Kokuchūkai, but it's a translation of a children's book and from the cover/title it appears to be itself aimed at children. Is it in a biography of the man? Anyway, even the best single source is still just a single source. You were met with comprehensive analyses of how Kenji is discussed in hundreds of sources in his own language -- the language of 99% of Kenji scholarship -- and failed to respond. You waited for me to drift away to other concerns and then dropped in to reinsert the same questionable material you were already told numerous times not to. ] (<small>]]</small>) 13:10, 26 February 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
:::My is another piece worth noting, but here's some more: |
|
|
:::#When we search the websites of Japanese universities for the name "Miyazawa Kenji" (in its most common orthography for simplicity) we get . |
|
|
:::#When we take away all references to "Kokuchū" (by any orthography; ''-kai'' can also be spelled a few ways, but isn't important) we get . |
|
|
:::#Okay, fine. Maybe the majority of those are merely library listings of book titles, so of course they don't connect the man with the group. So how about this. When we change "Miyazawa Kenji" to "Miyazawa Kenji wa" (which tends to appear at the start of sentences, so likely not too many library listings of book titles) and add the names of two of his most well-known works, "Ginga Tetsudō no Yoru" and "Haru to Shura" so as to guarantee no library listings of any one of his works, we get . |
|
|
:::#When we take away any any reference to "Kokuchū" (see above for rationale) we get . |
|
|
:::So yes, clearly a decent proportion of sources ''do'' mention the Kokuchūkai in relation to him -- but not enough to justify the emphasis you are trying to give it. |
|
|
:::] (<small>]]</small>) 13:46, 26 February 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
::::Sorry I have no idea what you are on about. In the source, a forward to one of his works a short bio is included. Months ago somebody argued the nationalistic case – point taken. He was a member of Kokuchokai end of story, that’s what his faith was built on and Kokuchokai was what it then was. Since you go on about it in two articles you seem to have a problem with Kokuchokai. --] (]) 13:50, 26 February 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::Great. And once someone rewrites the Kokuchūkai article to put less ] on the group's nationalism -- a nationalism no one except a lone Misplaced Pages editor seems to think Kenji shared -- then maybe wikilinking the group's article in the lead will be appropriate. You don't know what I'm on about for the same reason you appear to now think it's spelled "Kokuchokai"<!-- misspelling it the same way three times in a row --> -- you don't read Japanese and you are (at best) clumsy with sources in languages you ''do'' speak. You clearly have no interest in this topic and have no intention of improving this article. You are here solely to push a fringe POV. You have been violating consensus and behaving disruptively on this article for over a year now. If you try to violate consensus by pushing this POV in the article again, I will request for you to be TBANned. ] (<small>]]</small>) 14:03, 26 February 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::The article on Kokuchūkai is written based on sources available and if you call me clumsy call all authors on the issue clumsy too. As far as I know “Kai” means society. It is not my fault that the guy was in this organisation. I think you may be pushing things rewriting articles in order to fit your view of the world thereby ignoring what sources have to say about the issue. --] (]) 14:38, 26 February 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::::Yes, and you know nothing else about the man, it seems. In your brief examinations of a limited number of sources of Nichiren groups you came across the name Miyazawa Kenji, and so you came on Misplaced Pages, looked up the name and rewrote the article to include every few paragraphs the unattested claim that he was a nationalist. You have been fighting for the last year to keep the article this way, against unanimous opposition. Your claims that "his faith was based on the Kokuchūkai" are wrong -- says his faith was based on his reading of the Lotus Sutra. '''''STOP TRYING TO REWRITE THIS ARTICLE'S LEAD TO FIT YOUR OWN POV NOW OR YOU WILL BE TAKEN TO ANI.''''' ] (<small>]]</small>) 15:12, 26 February 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::::By the way, wasn't me. Nor was ] (<small>]]</small>) 15:16, 26 February 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::::You are contradicting yourself. In the lede the Nationalist issues was gone since June 2014. I inserted the fact that he was a member of Kokuchokai, a fact nobody denies. Now you say he was a Nichiren Buddhist. Nichiren Buddhism is not a sect or school. So in effect you do not want to see that a reference is made to the fact that the guy was a member of Kokuchokai – right? As this would specify to which branch of Nichiren Buddhism he belonged – and by all means a controversial branch. So to sum this issue up you want referenced information not be on display – right? --] (]) 16:08, 26 February 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::::::If "he was a member of Kokuchukai" is not related to "he was a nationalist", then why did ? You are trying to unbalance this article in favour of your own POV, as you have been stubbornly doing for over a year. Your latest attempt to sneak "Kokuchukai" into the article via an otherwise unnecessary link to a Google Books search for the word is yet another example of this disruptive behaviour. It has already been explained to you by a dozen other users why your edits here are inappropriate, but you appear either ] or ] to listen. This is beginning to drain on my patience. If you waste any more of my time on this petty bickering, I will request that you be topic-banned or blocked. ] (<small>]]</small>) 03:31, 27 February 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
{{outdent}}{{uninvolved}} I removed this from the ] (as well as ) because each are disputes between more than two editors. I personally have no opinion on the subject, but I would advise all parties to read ]. '''<span style="color:red;">Erpert</span>''' <small><sup><span style="color:green;">]</span></sup></small> 04:32, 27 February 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
::@ ] You seem to get the line of events confused. I did indeed insert the nationalist issue which some found to be disputed. I then inserted that he was a member of Kokuchokai, which since inserted nobody objected to – as he was a member of that group (quite devoted actually) – which you deleted. And now you are trying to warn me!?--] (]) 17:55, 27 February 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
:::The best description of his religious affiliation is "he was a devout follower of Nichiren Buddhism, which had a significant influence on several of his literary works, and had a special affection for the Lotus Sutra". Very few sources even mention the Kokuchukai, and those that do ''never'' draw the same conclusions you have, which you explicitly stated are the conclusions you also want this article's readers to draw. Your specific desire to name the ''organization'' with which he was affiliated, and to overlink your own poorly-written article on that group so as to encourage our readers to draw the same conclusion you have, is disruptive. Three users -- ], the and myself -- have all independently opposed you on this point, and no one has taken your side. ] (<small>]]</small>) 01:36, 28 February 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
:::I know you probably think, again in violation of ], that the IP was me, but please consider that the IP reverted you on January 13, you reverted back immediately, I was actively making logged-in edits at the time, and it took me over a month to notice what had been going on on this page. ] (<small>]]</small>) 01:47, 28 February 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
@ ] The term “devout” seems a rather peacock term please note ]. You keep changing the subject. First of all I changed the wording in June 2014 to the effect that he was a nationalist, this was challenged and discussed. I accepted that. I then entered the fact that he was a member Kokuchukai, This remained to be in the article until you deleted it. A fact that is mentioned in the main body of the article. You then carried on and deleted a reference I added dealing with the issue in the foreword to one of his own translations. You said you found it not suitable which is a POV, you insert “devout Nichiren Buddhist” you like the wording better. In effect you delete a reference that deals with the fact discussed and deleted factual information with a vague statement.--] (]) 07:54, 28 February 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
I have now added a RfC, as it becomes increasingly harder to follow your intention about the outcome of this discussion. Additionally you have added comments on both talk pages that I find to come close to a personal attack/insult.--] (]) 08:29, 28 February 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
==RfC: Membership in Kokuchūkai and reference to it== |
|
|
{{rfc|bio|reli|rfcid=F4C051D}} |
|
|
|
|
|
Membership to Kokuchūkai deleted in lede, reference dealing with it also deleted.--] (]) 08:08, 28 February 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
The above is a gross misrepresentation of the dispute, and this RFC was made in bad faith by someone being opposed by all three other involved users, in violation of ] and ]. ] (<small>]]</small>) 12:20, 28 February 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
:So much for gross misinterpretation. |
|
|
: #1: |
|
|
: #2: --] (]) 15:07, 28 February 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
::What about the fact that this RFC is just forum-shopping, after three other users have already opposed this specific edit, and about a dozen more opposed your earlier characterization of Kenji as a "nationalist", and at the time ? This RFC is simply ], in which numerous users opposed your additions and ''no one'' agreed with you, and your failure to admit to these facts in your opening summary is ]. ] (<small>]]</small>) 15:38, 28 February 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
@ ] The edit you refer to was overturned in June 2014. You now however oppose the fact him being mentioned as a member of that organisation in the lede. Calling him a devout Buddhist is one thing (even though quite misleading) – why is it such a problem to state exactly which Buddhist organisation he was a member of? Again you accuse me of stuff as all I did was inserting documented facts. --] (]) 16:49, 28 February 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
:It's a violation of ] to refer to the organization in the lede. All our sources indicate that he was interested in the faith in the Lotus Sutra, not, as you put it in your discussion of your ''current'' proposed wording, . You've been about as clear as you can be that emphasizing Kenji's supposed nationalism is your goal here, so mentioning the fact that consensus was already against you on this fact and the current RFC is a violation of ] is entirely relevant. Also, regarding Kenji's mostly non-denominational devotion to the Lotus Sutra, I would draw potential commenters to the ] quote . ] (<small>]]</small>) 17:39, 28 February 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
Well what about he was devout Buddhist and member of Kokuchūkai? Saying in the lede that he was devout Buddhist makes him look to the reader as a guy may be sitting in mediation in a zen monastery drinking tea and writing poetry. He was not. He was a member of a Buddhist organisation on the fringe of Nichiren Buddhism. A form of Buddhism that some say to be on the fringe of Buddhism full stop. Further … when you speak of „Plan“. Yes there was indeed a plan. I work mainly on Nichiren related matters. If you look up some dictionaries Nichiren Buddhism is often connected to fierce nationalism and many issue become mixed up. I therefore researched the issue and came across the term “Nichirenshugi” which scholars translate as ] in this conext one comes across Kokuchūkai and ], ] and ]. I guess they all had the plan to discredit Miyazawa. Certainly any author out there mentioning Miyazawa’s membership with Kokuchūkai are also part of a great big “plan”.--] (]) 20:46, 28 February 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
:Again, find a 6-sentence summary of an encyclopedia article (hell, find an encyclopedia article!) on him that '''mentions''' Kokuchukai, and then we can talk. The one source you have cited over the past few days is the introduction to a children's book that is so poorly-written that ]. He was completely devoted to the Lotus Sutra (like Nichiren Buddhists tend to be) and lived his life according to it, his dying wish being to have a thousand copies of the Sutra in Japanese translation distributed to friends and associates. He infused Buddhist terminology into his poetry and children's stories. There is not a scrap of evidence except in ] sources trying to claim a nationalistic agenda for Kenji that he held any affection for the politics of the religious group that he worked within for a brief period long after converting to Nichiren Buddhism. The second half of your above comment is an extended admission that you are '''still''' on this "he was a nationalist" rant that was soundly resolved last summer. |
|
|
:{{Ping|Factchecker25}} {{Ping|Prasangika37}} {{Ping|Teply}} {{Ping|The Gnome}} {{Ping|NickCT}} {{Ping|Solarra}} {{Ping|Iamozy}} {{Ping|Dekimasu}} How do you folks all feel about Catflap08 trying to get around the previous consensus and starting a whole new RFD on the same exact topic in a different colour T-shirt? |
|
|
:] (<small>]]</small>) 02:48, 1 March 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
'''Remove''' – summoned by botomatron. From what I can understand of this dispute, there should not be any reference to him being in Kokuchūkai unless it is impeccably sourced, as it seems to go against all other known data about his life. If Kokuchūkai was the man's belief and religion and philosophy, then surely he would himself have mentioned it many times. There should be no reference to him being a nationalist either. If a historic figure is a true nationalist, that information tends to be easy to find. ]<sup>]</sup> 😜 00:53, 7 March 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
:@]: Strictly speaking he was a member of the group -- for about eight months, mostly because of geographical convenience. The problem arises from one user being personally convinced that the subject was "not a devout Buddhist, but a nationalist", and wants this article's readers to click the link to his own poorly-sourced article on the group so they can draw the same (almost certainly incorrect) conclusions. The standard scholarly view is that the subject had a brief flirtation with the group and, if as Catflap08 claims the group had a "dubious nationalist agenda", our subject was unaware of that fact. ] (<small>]]</small>) 06:26, 7 March 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
::{{reply to|Hijiri88}} Thanks for the explanation. Definitely agree it doesn't belong in the intro at all. There's no significance in the scope of his life - it's not like he was with the ] for eight months. Looking at the previous RFC and discussions this is clearly someone's personal agenda that IMHO needs to be escalated because of its disruptive nature and likelihood it will continue past this RfC. ]<sup>]</sup> 😜 09:42, 7 March 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
:::Responded on your talk page. ] (<small>]]</small>) 03:21, 8 March 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
Well since it is said that Kenji was a “devout” Buddhist the only affiliation registered is the one with Kokuchukai. What I can gather is that his family followed Pure Land Buddhism which is not noted to be Lotus Sutra based. If Kenji was registered and affiliated with any other Nichiren based temple, lineage or oragnisation it should be noted. Please note that calling a source using “bad English” is a PVO, hence preselecting what the reader should be able read. Please also note that the nationalist issues has already been dealt with.--] (]) 18:43, 10 March 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
:@]: What about the temple he was buried in? The article cites this information and it's thoroughly sourced with absolutely no misrepresentation whatsoever of what the sources say. Unlike most of what you write on Misplaced Pages, which seems to be mostly your personal opinions and guesses, which sometimes happen to correspond with what you claim are your sources and sometimes don't. I don't know what a "PVO" is -- do you mean "POV"? And yes, if a source was originally published in English, and the quality of that English is extremely poor, then it is perfectly reasonable to assume the source had a lack of editorial oversight, meaning it could very easily be ], or even ]. But all of this is beside the point, since what the source says is irrelevant to the real problem here: that you are cherry-picking sources in order to promote your own ] POV. If I wanted to cite my own POV, I would say your going out of your way to attack a local hero of ], about whom you clearly know nothing, on the fourth anniversary of the ] <!-- Japanese time, if not German, Irish or American -->was offensive and wrong. But that's ''also'' pretty irrelevant to this dispute. ] (<small>]]</small>) 13:48, 11 March 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
::You should start making up your mind if it’s the so called poor English that you oppose or the information the “poor English” contains. Secondly if the Kenji man’s family belonged to Pure Land Buddhism it would be likely that he was buried in such an affiliated temple graveyard. Please note that his affiliation with Kokuchukai is not one with a traditional Buddhist sect or school, so given the time he died and the time the organisation was founded they had no graveyard(s) for their adherents. Since in literature it is underlined that he was affiliated with Nichiren Buddhsim the only Nichiren based organisation he was an adherent of is the one already mentioned. --] (]) 20:11, 11 March 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
:::Yes, because all families like to spit on the last wishes of their favourite son. You are making speculations with absolutely no reference to reliable sources. Your friend John Carter has said numerous times that users acquainted with Buddhism and Japan in general should be fixing these problems; you are ignoring all the reliable sources on this topic because they are all in Japanese. Actually no: you are ignoring them because they don't say what you want them to. Stop this madness now. ] (<small>]]</small>) 23:26, 11 March 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
'''Move to close''' Catflap08 was unanimously opposed in his earlier attempt to characterize Kenji as a nationalist, and he has now been unanimously opposed in his attempts to trick our readers into clicking a wikilink that, thanks entirely to him, would cause them to think we was a nationalist. I reported his abuses on ANI with a no-consensus result on how to deal with him. He posted a revenge ANI against me and, when it didn't go the way he wanted (and ]) he has apparently now . With no one left to argue in favour of his proposed change, I can't see anything good coming out of this RFC. ] (<small>]]</small>) 09:13, 14 March 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
*Why was the reference to membership of Kokuchūkai deleted from the lead? Kokuchūkai is mentioned six times in the main body, and his membership appears to be significant, given the impact it had on his relationship with his father, that it is argued it had an influence on his later writings, and that there is speculation (albeit minor) that it reveals some of his political affiliations. Per ], "The lead section should briefly summarize the most important points covered in an article in such a way that it can stand on its own as a concise version of the article." ''']''' ''']''' 12:06, 23 March 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Foreword == |
|
|
|
|
|
I will yet include the reference made in a foreword to one of Miyazawa’s English language translations. A Foreword that makes reference of him being a Buddhist, Nichiren Buddhist and member of Kokuchūkai. Further more this is a reference for all to read via google books.--] (]) 21:36, 28 February 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
:The English in that foreword is ''terrible'', though ]. Worse, it doesn't actually say what you claim it does. It says the same thing as the ] quote : that his membership in the Kokuchukai was peripheral to his biography at best and all that really mattered to him was the Lotus Sutra itself. ] (<small>]]</small>) 01:26, 1 March 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Structure of biography == |
|
|
|
|
|
@]: I liked and I agree with your motivation, and like the timeline is going to be a bit screwy if we include a separate section on his religious views. |
|
|
|
|
|
The way I see it the main problem is that he went to Tokyo initially for religious reasons, and not discussing his conversion to Nichiren Buddhism and his desire to "spread the word" (for want of better terminology) ''before'' talking about what he did in Tokyo seems a little confusing. (It's not a criticism of your tweaking, since I'd be one to talk with my edit discussing his death right in the middle of the biography.) |
|
|
|
|
|
I think we should probably overhaul the section-titles in this article, since "early life" is a misnomer (he lived to be 37 and the section deals with his life up to the age of 24) and "literary career" is problematic (he was never a "professional" writer and ). The section titled "literary career" is actually about that portion of his biography (it's even told in roughly chronological order like a Misplaced Pages bio should be) in between when he moved to Tokyo and started actively writing (as a hobby, it would seem) and when the time came to discuss his death. There is literary stuff in that section, but it's mostly biographical. |
|
|
|
|
|
I think giving one brief outline (]) of his life and the key events of said life -- maybe about the length of the current "literary career" section -- should come first. This section would deal with his sister's sickness and death, his relationship to the other members of his family, and so on, in much greater detail than it does now. (Can you believe this article still doesn't give his sister's name!? Up until yesterday, the English Misplaced Pages article on Miyazawa Kenji name-checked Tanaka Chigaku but not Miyazawa Toshi!) There could be some literary stuff here, but it's mostly to provide background information necessary to understand the following sections. |
|
|
|
|
|
This would be followed by another section (no problem with keeping the] moniker, frankly) discussing his literary works in enough detail as is normal for literary biographies. The usual stuff (I haven't actually verified much of the present completely unsourced section, so I don't know about that content, but the biographical stuff can be completely cut out because it will be covered in the above section. |
|
|
|
|
|
Then there's the section I worked on yesterday (]). I wrote it myself and put a lot of work into it, but I don't think it's perfect. I included the material about how "some scholars" consider him to have been a nationalist as a form of compromise with ... ] ... but it feels like I was violating ] or something, and blanking that paragraph is probably still better because ]. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Move protection == |
|
What do you think? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
{{ping|MusikAnimal}} Would you mind removing the move protection from the page? The edit war in question ended 8 years ago (and didn't really relate to the article title to begin with). The article's current title accords with the 2015 version of ]. It was at that time technically in violation of ] as well as the current Japan MOS. Since the article hasn't seen much controversy since the original content dispute in 2015, I don't think there'd be any reason moving the page to ] would be controversial or require discussion. ] (<small>]]</small>) 11:26, 3 December 2023 (UTC) |
|
] (<small>]]</small>) 11:32, 2 March 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
:Hi Hijiri88, any page move that was previously controversial should be treated as a ]. The move protection can probably be lifted as you said, but I would be inclined to oppose moving this page (i.e. I do think "someone could reasonably disagree with the move"), so we may as well go through a normal RM discussion if necessary. ]<small>]</small> 02:15, 4 December 2023 (UTC) |
|
|
::I concur with the above. I will still remove the move protection, but ideally a proper ] discussion will still follow. <span style="font-family:sans-serif">— <span style="font-weight:bold">] <sup>]</sup></span></span> 18:41, 5 December 2023 (UTC) |
