Revision as of 03:22, 20 January 2013 editHijiri88 (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users37,389 edits →Suggested move← Previous edit | Revision as of 04:11, 20 January 2013 edit undoJoshuSasori (talk | contribs)7,580 edits →SurveyNext edit → | ||
Line 30: | Line 30: | ||
::::'''My GBooks searches were limited to English results, and "Gohatto" got 5 times as many results.''' - oh, five times as many results? I am wondering why you do not provide links to such wonderous results. Why no links? This may well be ]. I am very angry about it. I am going to report you on the reliable sources noticeboard for not providing links. '''Additionally, a precedent has been set at ], ] and ] that articles don't even need to use the "commonest English title" either way.''' - I am astonished to find that you do not provide links. Failure to provide links in this way clearly constitutes a ]. My immediate reaction is to report you on the "Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Knitting" noticeboard. ] (]) 03:07, 20 January 2013 (UTC) | ::::'''My GBooks searches were limited to English results, and "Gohatto" got 5 times as many results.''' - oh, five times as many results? I am wondering why you do not provide links to such wonderous results. Why no links? This may well be ]. I am very angry about it. I am going to report you on the reliable sources noticeboard for not providing links. '''Additionally, a precedent has been set at ], ] and ] that articles don't even need to use the "commonest English title" either way.''' - I am astonished to find that you do not provide links. Failure to provide links in this way clearly constitutes a ]. My immediate reaction is to report you on the "Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Knitting" noticeboard. ] (]) 03:07, 20 January 2013 (UTC) | ||
:::::The links for 4 times as many results are above, and the links for 5 times as many are below. You know this, since you are the one that prompted me to provide them already. I will post them here now again, though.> And please stop making ad hominem arguments (I'm not sure if they qualify as personal attacks, but they make it very difficult to edit). I have noted this on ANI, where '''I should warn you''', you ''still'' haven't provided a reason why you shouldn't be '''blocked indefinitely''' as two other users suggested. (Note also that the threat they are referring to was an empty one to begin with, since my employers ''already know'' I edit Misplaced Pages during downtime, which is what Friday was. Also, even if you somehow found out who/where they were, if you tried to contact them I would be the one picking up the phone. :P ) ] (]) 03:22, 20 January 2013 (UTC) | :::::The links for 4 times as many results are above, and the links for 5 times as many are below. You know this, since you are the one that prompted me to provide them already. I will post them here now again, though.> And please stop making ad hominem arguments (I'm not sure if they qualify as personal attacks, but they make it very difficult to edit). I have noted this on ANI, where '''I should warn you''', you ''still'' haven't provided a reason why you shouldn't be '''blocked indefinitely''' as two other users suggested. (Note also that the threat they are referring to was an empty one to begin with, since my employers ''already know'' I edit Misplaced Pages during downtime, which is what Friday was. Also, even if you somehow found out who/where they were, if you tried to contact them I would be the one picking up the phone. :P ) ] (]) 03:22, 20 January 2013 (UTC) | ||
::::::Why are you putting these comments here? Why don't you add them to the administrator's noticeboard? ] (]) 04:11, 20 January 2013 (UTC) | |||
*'''Weak support''' - the move is not really necessary, but the arguments for moving it are reasonable. ] (]) 02:41, 20 January 2013 (UTC) | *'''Weak support''' - the move is not really necessary, but the arguments for moving it are reasonable. ] (]) 02:41, 20 January 2013 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 04:11, 20 January 2013
Japan: Cinema Stub‑class Low‑importance | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
Film: Japanese Stub‑class | ||||||||||
|
LGBTQ+ studies Stub‑class | |||||||
|
Fair use rationale for Image:Gohatto Poster.jpg
Image:Gohatto Poster.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Misplaced Pages article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Misplaced Pages:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Misplaced Pages policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 18:25, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Suggested move
The request to rename this article to Gohatto has been carried out.
If the page title has consensus, be sure to close this discussion using {{subst:RM top|'''page moved'''.}} and {{subst:RM bottom}} and remove the {{Requested move/dated|…}} tag, or replace it with the {{subst:Requested move/end|…}} tag. |
Taboo (1999 film) → Gohatto – {{{2}}} elvenscout742 (talk) 13:29, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
The film's official title in Japan is Gohatto in roman letters, and this is also the title under which it was released in the United Kingdom and Ireland. And .. China .. apparently. There is also a huge number of GBooks hits for "Gohatto" that do not even mention the "Taboo" as the English title. Corresponding results for "Taboo" are far fewer. (You have to mention the year, since most of the results at seem to be about how Oshima's more famous earlier films violated taboos, or give Gohatto as the primary title and mention "taboo" as a gloss.)
elvenscout742 (talk) 13:29, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
Survey
- Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with
*'''Support'''
or*'''Oppose'''
, then sign your comment with~~~~
. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Misplaced Pages's policy on article titles.
- Support, per WP:PRECISION. "Taboo" is ambiguous, so must be qualified, "Gohatto" (a name used in English sources as well) does not require artificial qualification. "If it exists, choose an alternative name that the subject is also commonly called in English, albeit not as commonly as the preferred-but-ambiguous title." So even if Taboo is more commonly used (the possible outcome of the initial discussion below), Gohatto is preferred on Misplaced Pages. -- JHunterJ (talk) 18:33, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
- That seems to come from WP:NATURAL not WP:PRECISION. Do you have some other examples of where a film article has been moved from the commonest English title to its foreign language equivalent just to get rid of something like "(1999 film)" from the title? JoshuSasori (talk) 01:52, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
- "Taboo" is not the commonest English title. My GBooks searches were limited to English results, and "Gohatto" got 5 times as many results. Additionally, a precedent has been set at WP:FA, WP:GA and WP:FILM that articles don't even need to use the "commonest English title" either way. elvenscout742 (talk) 02:57, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
- My GBooks searches were limited to English results, and "Gohatto" got 5 times as many results. - oh, five times as many results? I am wondering why you do not provide links to such wonderous results. Why no links? This may well be a personal attack on me. I am very angry about it. I am going to report you on the reliable sources noticeboard for not providing links. Additionally, a precedent has been set at WP:FA, WP:GA and WP:FILM that articles don't even need to use the "commonest English title" either way. - I am astonished to find that you do not provide links. Failure to provide links in this way clearly constitutes a personal attack. My immediate reaction is to report you on the "Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Knitting" noticeboard. JoshuSasori (talk) 03:07, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
- The links for 4 times as many results are above, and the links for 5 times as many are below. You know this, since you are the one that prompted me to provide them already. I will post them here now again, though.516>107 And please stop making ad hominem arguments (I'm not sure if they qualify as personal attacks, but they make it very difficult to edit). I have noted this on ANI, where I should warn you, you still haven't provided a reason why you shouldn't be blocked indefinitely as two other users suggested. (Note also that the threat they are referring to was an empty one to begin with, since my employers already know I edit Misplaced Pages during downtime, which is what Friday was. Also, even if you somehow found out who/where they were, if you tried to contact them I would be the one picking up the phone. :P ) elvenscout742 (talk) 03:22, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
- Why are you putting these comments here? Why don't you add them to the administrator's noticeboard? JoshuSasori (talk) 04:11, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
- The links for 4 times as many results are above, and the links for 5 times as many are below. You know this, since you are the one that prompted me to provide them already. I will post them here now again, though.516>107 And please stop making ad hominem arguments (I'm not sure if they qualify as personal attacks, but they make it very difficult to edit). I have noted this on ANI, where I should warn you, you still haven't provided a reason why you shouldn't be blocked indefinitely as two other users suggested. (Note also that the threat they are referring to was an empty one to begin with, since my employers already know I edit Misplaced Pages during downtime, which is what Friday was. Also, even if you somehow found out who/where they were, if you tried to contact them I would be the one picking up the phone. :P ) elvenscout742 (talk) 03:22, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
- My GBooks searches were limited to English results, and "Gohatto" got 5 times as many results. - oh, five times as many results? I am wondering why you do not provide links to such wonderous results. Why no links? This may well be a personal attack on me. I am very angry about it. I am going to report you on the reliable sources noticeboard for not providing links. Additionally, a precedent has been set at WP:FA, WP:GA and WP:FILM that articles don't even need to use the "commonest English title" either way. - I am astonished to find that you do not provide links. Failure to provide links in this way clearly constitutes a personal attack. My immediate reaction is to report you on the "Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Knitting" noticeboard. JoshuSasori (talk) 03:07, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
- "Taboo" is not the commonest English title. My GBooks searches were limited to English results, and "Gohatto" got 5 times as many results. Additionally, a precedent has been set at WP:FA, WP:GA and WP:FILM that articles don't even need to use the "commonest English title" either way. elvenscout742 (talk) 02:57, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
- Weak support - the move is not really necessary, but the arguments for moving it are reasonable. JoshuSasori (talk) 02:41, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
Discussion
- Any additional comments:
- Comment - can the proposer please explain what evidence there is that the film was not released under the title "Taboo" or that "Taboo" is not a common English name of the film? The same search applied to the title in reverse, "Taboo" Oshima -gohatto, gives us more hits than the above search which the proposer uses as evidence. Also the film posters that the proposer says indicate that the film's official title is "Gohatto" in roman letters all also have the kanji name 御法度 on them. The Japanese wikipedia claims the title is 御法度 too, and it also gives the English title as "Taboo". There is no mention of the title being romanized. And note that sometimes Japanese films are released with a romanized title or English title, e.g. Love Letter, which was released in cinemas in Japan with the title "Love Letter", so there is no reason "gohatto" is not possible. Even more, the link that is supposed to be about China seems to link to an episode of "Friends" (I didn't actually view the video to confirm this, but it says Chandler & Joey play some foosball for some cash but Chandler on purposely trys to lose.). Can the proposer clarify? I feel this is unconvincing, but I will give the proposer a chance to explain what I am misunderstanding before definitely voting here. JoshuSasori (talk) 13:46, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
- The film was released as Taboo in the United States, but as Gohatto in the United Kingdom. The Google Books searches indicate that Gohatto is the more prominent title for the film in reliable English sources. The search you cite above, as I have already pointed out in move request, is flawed in that a significant number of the sources are not about this film, but merely use the word "taboo" in relation to one or more of Oshima's more famous films (this is why they also don't use the word "Gohatto". Additionally, Japanese Misplaced Pages is not a reliable source -- anyone can add any information they like to it, and an ISP account mentioning that a Japanese film is known by such-and-such a name in the United States is equivalent to me adding "Japanese title: 声をかくす人 Koe o kakusu hito" to the article on The Conspirator. The Japanese article in its original form gave the name "Gohatto" in roman letters. It is entirely possible that the anon who added "Taboo" to the Japanese article was under the mistaken belief that "Taboo" was some kind of official English title and "Gohatto" wasn't, and wanted to balance the article. This is why we shouldn't trust Japanese Misplaced Pages. The video I linked to as a joke entirely separate from the move request. The search for poster images brought up a Chinese poster that seemed like a fun aside, and I thought "The film is also known as Gohatto in .. China .. apparently" which brought a line from Friends to my mind and a smile to my lips. I lucked out that the clip was on YouTube. The link to the actual poster image, like all my other actual sources, is at the end of the sentence. elvenscout742 (talk) 16:05, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
- To clarify, only 4 of the first 10 hits for
- I don't think it is related to the use of the word "Taboo" about other films. Changing the search to "Taboo Ryuhei Matsuda Oshima" and "Gohatto Ryuhei Matsuda Oshima" doesn't change the ratio, the "Taboo" version comes out at about the same ratio of hits. Realistically, "Taboo" is the more common name on Google searches. JoshuSasori (talk) 01:55, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
- "Taboo Ryuhei Matsuda Oshima" brings up about 80% fewer results than "Gohatto Oshima -Taboo". "Gohatto Ryuhei Matsuda Oshima" still brings up at least as many results. And your search still includes books about Japanese cinema and/or Oshima's work in general that just happen to use the word "taboo" at some point in the text. I am beginning to notice why you never provide links to diffs, etc., since the actual evidence never supports your conclusions. I would also like to see your evidence that Taboo is "the more common name on Google searches" -- Misplaced Pages doesn't use general Google searches (do you mean GBooks searches?) and it also doesn't use Misplaced Pages mirrors as sources, so you always need to block Misplaced Pages from your search. elvenscout742 (talk) 02:34, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
- Oh my gosh, that's a personal attack, I shall immediately report you on the administrator's noticeboard. JoshuSasori (talk) 02:43, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
- Wait, what personal attack? I just pointed out, as an admin and several others before me, that your failure to actually cite evidence is kind of frustrating. Of course, it is possible that you are referring to the fact that I reported you on ANI because you made a veiled threat and have been calling me names for a month now. If you are sarcastically referring to that, then rather you are the one relying on ad hominem arguments than objective evidence. elvenscout742 (talk) 02:52, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
- Oh my gosh, that's a personal attack, I shall immediately report you on the administrator's noticeboard. JoshuSasori (talk) 02:43, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
- "Taboo Ryuhei Matsuda Oshima" brings up about 80% fewer results than "Gohatto Oshima -Taboo". "Gohatto Ryuhei Matsuda Oshima" still brings up at least as many results. And your search still includes books about Japanese cinema and/or Oshima's work in general that just happen to use the word "taboo" at some point in the text. I am beginning to notice why you never provide links to diffs, etc., since the actual evidence never supports your conclusions. I would also like to see your evidence that Taboo is "the more common name on Google searches" -- Misplaced Pages doesn't use general Google searches (do you mean GBooks searches?) and it also doesn't use Misplaced Pages mirrors as sources, so you always need to block Misplaced Pages from your search. elvenscout742 (talk) 02:34, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
- I don't think it is related to the use of the word "Taboo" about other films. Changing the search to "Taboo Ryuhei Matsuda Oshima" and "Gohatto Ryuhei Matsuda Oshima" doesn't change the ratio, the "Taboo" version comes out at about the same ratio of hits. Realistically, "Taboo" is the more common name on Google searches. JoshuSasori (talk) 01:55, 20 January 2013 (UTC)