User talk:TakuyaMurata/old talk 3
Could you please briefly explain why you are moving the Japanese emperors to "(name) Emperor"? That is very counterintuitive to English speakers. - Montréalais
It seems a common convention when you refer to the name of emperor in English writing. -- Taku 01:35 Mar 12, 2003 (UTC)
- Not at all. A Google search turns up 405 instances of "Hirohito Emperor" (that includes lines like "Hirohito, Emperor of Japan") and 10,500 instances of "Emperor Hirohito". - Montréalais
Except some recent emperors, of course. Remeber Hirohito is the name of emperor and Taisho is an era name, not the name of emperor. -- Taku 15:50 Mar 12, 2003 (UTC)
Hi Taku, I've a suggested solution. Since you think writing 'Emperor of Japan' is a problem, why not identify who the empire after the name of the emperor with the name (Japan) in brackets. So there is no claim to be 'emperor of Japan' but people recognise where on the planet the emperor was. STÓD/ÉÍRE 20:39 Mar 12, 2003 (UTC)
Again, the titile in wikipedia is not used for purpose to describe things. While I like people know more about Japanese emperors, the title of an article is merely a label to disambiguate. Only question when you name an article is that what name is common. Harakiriwa is ridiculosly misusage to Japanese but it is common anyway so it is a legitimate article title. The debate we should is not what title is better but what is common. It is different than titles are usually used in encyclopedias, dictionaries or other stuff. -- Taku 21:42 Mar 12, 2003 (UTC)
Besides, why only Japanese emperor need to be known their natioanlity by the title while a Japanese novelist natsume soseki has no "of Japan". -- Taku 21:55 Mar 12, 2003 (UTC)
You misunderstand the reason for including the name of a state. It is not simply to disambigulate. There is only one reigning Queen Anne on wiki. So we don't need to disambigulate her. But we still call her Anne of Great Britain. It is also used to help the reader understand the relationship between a monarch and where they ruled. Monarchs don't simply reign or rule, they reign and rule over somewhere and knowing where they reigned or ruled is crucial to being able to contextualise them. Japanese emperors had their throne directly impacted upon by the nature of contemporary Japanese culture and society. They did not exist as themselves but in a context. And it is common to state where they reigned or ruled so that you can contextualise them. A Japanese emperor was fundamentally different to a Chinese emperor not because of who they were but the political context in which they reigned, which was directly shaped by where they reigned. A name of an article that doesn't contextualise them doesn't give the context with which people can understand them. That is why you need to state their state. It isn't about stating their nationality. I simply do not see any logic for not having some form of definition. It is a basic requirement, specificially in an era of nation states, when a monarch is specifically associated with a nation state. And modern emperors are constitutional monarchs with a specific role in a constitutional system of a constitutional state known the world over as Japan. I think it is elementary common sense to include some name. It also a basic courtesy we owe to readers, to give them a clue when they look at a title, to be told that the person was emperor, king, queen, empress, grand duke or prince of a specific, internationally recognised state. Not giving some designation makes no sense to readers outside Japan and is how many japanese people, including the emperor himself in english texts, do so. He himself issues thinks like New Year Messages in english as Emperor of Japan. If he does it, why is it so wrong for wiki to do it? STÓD/ÉÍRE 22:53 Mar 12, 2003 (UTC)
You may be right may be wrong. Anyway I came to agree with that putting "of Japan" is a good idea to reference for general audience. Sure history book narrows the scope of audience probably only to academic. When we want any one in the world to use wikipedia for any purpose, it is important not limit the audience. No one disagrees with it. The problem is that we also keep articles in wikipedia consistent with other articles in wikipedia and other existing resources too. While Jyunichiro Koizumi is referred to as "Japanese Prime Minister of Japan", his article is not named "Jyunichiro Koizumi". Even though Hirohito is called "Emperor of Japan", it doesn't imply his article should be named "Hirohito, Emperor of Japan" (Note comma is necessary). "Emperor of Japan" is actually specific term. Even though a Japanese word ten'nou or mikado is translated into an English word emperor, it is little inaccurate. An English word emperor is translated into a Japanese, teiou, which means totally different than ten'nou. You have a good point about this. Hirohito is a Emperor of Japan, not simply Emperor. In fact, Hirohito is often noted in English text like, "Hirohito, Emperor of Japan is a bahabaha....".
So why is the title of Meisho Empress not Meisho Empress of Japan? Because the title is merely a label, it is a simply technical thing. If we started to produce paper-based wikipedia, I strongly advocate each entriy of Japanse emperor is like
Meisho, Empress of Japan was a bahabaha.
I think your problem is that you confuse an entriy name used in paper dictionaries with the title of wikipedia, which is not the same as the entry name.
-- Taku 23:15 Mar 12, 2003 (UTC)
Taku, bad news. It looks like you have a series of double and multiple directs thanks to all the renaming of the Emperors. A lot of them don't work correctly. I've gone to one, that directed me to another, that directed me to another, that put me back again. I ended up going around in circles before I finally found the text. You are going to have to go into each page you changed and change all the links to remove multiple directs. So you are talking about maybe five, six or ten links per each page that will each have to be individually changed. STÓD/ÉÍRE 05:26 Mar 13, 2003 (UTC)
I don't understand. What are you talking about? Redirects are not a problem. Am I missing a point? Anyway please focus on the discussion of the name of emperors. Or you mean you agree with me? -- Taku 05:31 Mar 13, 2003 (UTC)
I am not talking about the naming, I am talking about the redirects you set up during the redirects. Every file should really have only one redirect, a -> b. But some of the redirects you made are multiple so a version with the words 'of Japan' redirects to a version without 'of Japan', which redirects to a version with the names inverted, which redirects to one with a small e in emperor. You cannot have that many directs because they get stuck or confused. I went into one and it had me going around in circles between one version with a small e emperor and another with a large E but showing me no text until I hit the edit button when finally it showed text. So you are going to have to go back to every page you renamed, hit what links there, go into every link there and change every link. One redirect is OK. A chain of redirects to one page is one of the things you are told not to do on wiki. So at a minumum you are going to have to go in to maybe four of five links to each page you named, possibly go into links attached to all those pages, and rename the whole lot to remove multiple links. You made the mess through so many renamings whose links had been sorted by whomever did the original renaming, so you are going to have a lot of work sorting out the mess all the link pages are in. STÓD/ÉÍRE 06:48 Mar 13, 2003 (UTC)
And what do you want from me? -- Taku 23:33 Mar 13, 2003 (UTC)
Go in to all the links and fix them, like everyone does when the move pages. STÓD/ÉÍRE 23:40 Mar 13, 2003 (UTC)
Why the heck do I need to conform your order? -- Taku 01:25 Mar 14, 2003 (UTC)
For crying out loud, Taku, I'm not giving an order. I'm trying to get to through to you that when you do multiple directs, links become messy and sometimes break. When ANYONE does redirects, they are SUPPOSED to go into the list of links and change them to ensure that links don't get broken. You didn't do that, and until it is done, a lot of links won't work. You are the one who decided to rename everything, and in a lot of cases did rename after rename after rename. Don't expect someone else to clean the messy links that all your renaming has caused. The rest of wiki isn't there to fix links broken by Taku. Hit the 'what links here' button on each page to renamed. Look at the list of links and if there are more than one set of redirects linking, you are supposed to go into EVERYONE and change it. So if a pages says [Emperor x of Japan|x'] you change it to [x emperor|x]. Otherwise when people go to a page and hit a link, they will end up getting stuck in a link. I have already had one experience, where I went into one link to an emperor of Japan, which redirected me to [{name} Emperor] which then threw me back to {name] Emperor of Japan, which redirected me to [{name} Emperor]. You had moved the page to [{name} emperor] (ie, small 'e') but the link wasn't working because there was a redirect to a redirect to a redirect. So all the links to all the pages will have to be double checked. It took me ten minutes to remove redirects and merge links to get ONE link working. I'm not going to spend hours ondoing your mess and you should not expect anyone to do it. I know at least one person has contacted me to accuse you of vandalism over the complete mess some links are in, and your refusal to do what everyone else does and check links to make sure they are still working. Otherwise that person said they will complain about you on the wiki list and accuse you of vandalism. STÓD/ÉÍRE 01:45 Mar 14, 2003 (UTC)
Taku, an example: Meiji goes to Emperor Taisho of Japan which you redirected to Taisho Emperor which you then redirected to Taisho emperor. But the system won't just straight from Emperor Taisho of Japan to Taisho emperor; it stops at Taisho Emperor. So you will have to go back to the meiji page, find the Taisho link and change it in that page to Taisho. And go into all multiple links on all pages and do that, because multiple links often don't work. Please, this has to be done by someone. It cannot be left undone, or do you expect someone else to spend hours and hours changing all the links and removing the double and triple directs that now exist all over the place. BTW, why are some emperors in as Emperor, others as emperor? They should all be one or the other. It is already going to be hard enough trying to find Japanese emperors now, without people getting stuck in broken redirects as well. STÓD/ÉÍRE 02:08 Mar 14, 2003 (UTC)
- "Don't expect someone else to clean the messy links that all your renaming has caused." Unfortunately your idea has a conflict with norms here. In wikipedia, every one is responsible for what every one has done. I love to clean up messes that someone else made and I expect anyone else to do the same thing. If you disagree with it, fine. But you can't expect me to agree with your norm either. Your norm is not mine.
Not when it involves maybe a hundred or more links all caused by one person doing multiple redirects. That is simply not fair on everyone else. Yes we all correct mistakes, but if you decided to do quadruple renames, it is treating everyone with gross disrespect and rudeness to refuse to sort out at least 'some' of the many many pages that will need correcting because of your actions. Do you expect Camembert, Deb, Mav, Roadrunner and everyone else to spend hours cleaning up a mess YOU created by not moving directly to a new format, but by creating an name with a capital E in emperor, then another redirect with a small e. Not to mention, Emperor to emperor to empress. Are you deliberately trying to ensure that nobody can get to the pages on Japanese emperors? STÓD/ÉÍRE 02:37 Mar 14, 2003 (UTC)
And what is your point? Do you want to keep me from contributing to Wikipedia? because I don't conform your norm? -- Taku 02:41 Mar 14, 2003 (UTC)
Don't be so ridiculous. I simply want you to FIX THE LINKS you broke the way everyone else does. No wonder some people talked about reporting you as a vandal on the wiki list if that is your attitude.
I said I won't. -- Taku 02:52 Mar 14, 2003 (UTC)
Wikipedia is a community. You are turning into a pariah in this community and may find your uncooperative attitude coming back to bite you. You really should try to get along instead of being a jerk. -- Zoe
Yeah, I understand. It is partly due to that I don't think this conversation is constructive. I really don't want to partcipate in the debate about conventions and norms here. Anyway, I am not going to fix problems that I don't think big deal. People's expectations vary. While I think misspelling and gramatical errors are not a big deal, some care much about it. -- Taku 04:10 Mar 14, 2003 (UTC)
- Just what do you think the purpose of Wikipedia is? Do we really want to present an illiterate, ungrammatical encyclopedia to the world? -- Zoe
Ok, this is a quite interesting point. This is exactly what I hate to debate about it. Your expectation about wikipedia may differ from mine. Some people contribute to the wikipedia for the reason they want to talk part in some kind of historical event, including me. But some people may simply want to kill their spare time, including me. The nice thing about wiki-style collaborative system is that we don't have to agree with the reason why we are contributing. We each other only take advantage of others. -- Taku 04:27 Mar 14, 2003 (UTC)
- You've just ended any chance that I will attempt to discuss anything with you again. -- Zoe
I welcome constructive debates. But do you really believe conviencing someone to agree with you norms is productive? -- Taku 04:34 Mar 14, 2003 (UTC)
Don't worry Taku, Ill still talk to you. Susan Mason
(Will that be as Lir, Vera Cruz or Susan Mason? Or are there more multiple personalities lurking in there?) STÓD/ÉÍRE
- You left out Bridget and Adam. -- Zoe
yeah, I forgot. Adam is the real person, if I remember what everybody said. Bridget/Lir/Vera/Susan are his multiple personalities. Weird. STÓD/ÉÍRE 20:30 Mar 14, 2003 (UTC)
- For clarification, what is wrong is that Zoe's and STÓD/ÉÍRE's request is not constructive proposal yet simply accusing me of what I have done. No one likes broken links but it really doesn't help to accuse someone of making them. Wikipedia is not the place where each person has an exclusive responsibility for each part. If you find the problem, you are the one who fixes that. That is my norm and I am unwilling to change that. I am never going to accuse someone who made a broken link, but I just fix it. Also remember you cannot let a person to do what you want by hostile attitude. You really should not say you are wrong then conform me. What we need is settle the naming convention as soon as possible and we not a particular individual will fix problems. I love to hear comments how to fix problems but hate to hear comments who is wrong or bahaha. I know some people more like to hang around than simply writing an article. But please remember there is a different kind of people too. -- Taku 01:17 Mar 15, 2003 (UTC)
- Something you should keep in mind is that everybody really is equal here. If you get a reputation for making messes and refusing to take any responsibility for them, and thereby making more unnecessary work for other people, then you're not going to get any positive consideration when somebody has to decide whether to improve on your additions or just discard them. Anger enough people, and you may find your changes disappearing faster than you can add them! Boldness is good, but one should be humble too. Stan 02:07 Mar 15, 2003 (UTC)
I have posted a proposal of Japanese romanization on Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(japanese) (not yet done). Comment please. -- Nanshu 06:36 Mar 13, 2003 (UTC)
My browser might have deleted some of your text. If so, I'm sorry. This should (if i've done my job right) restore any deleted info. Jeez. I hope so.
Hi taku!
Hey listen. you know I have supported your ideas on naming conventions. And you and I have very productively collaborated about Japanese food. I'm confused however, at the large deletion on Wikipedia:Naming conventions (japanese). I, at least, was helped by standards about name order, etc. I'm not Japanese, so information on these naming conventions helped me.
The article as it now is only about Romanization (Japanese). I need to know about naming conventions, though.
Would you consider re-instating that useful information? Arthur 21:37 Mar 14, 2003 (UTC)
I am sorry. I didn't notice that. As I put in my user page, my broser got time-out and deleted the rest of the page. That is not my intent at all. I reverted soon after I realized that. Sorry for confusing. -- Taku 01:17 Mar 15, 2003 (UTC)
- one of my browsers messes up things, too, so i understand. I'm very pleased with the reversion. Thank you. Arthur 01:25 Mar 15, 2003 (UTC)
Taku, never mind the rude critics, the ones that speak in short curt and absolutists sentences. I do want to know why are you changing what you agreed to do when I was around, dealing with Hirohito? We agreed Hirohito and Akihito wer fine for the "new" emperors but that the rest be left alone. You need to to heed the wise words of Sensei Go Seigen, and learn how to "win a won game" - dont go overboard if its not necessary. -豎眩sv
- I am sorry. I am not sure what you are talking about. Please clarify what change you are referring to. I don't mean to be sarcastic. I am really not sure.
p.s A page should be simple - easy to link to. Before moving a page, make sure that its feasible to change all the redirects... the mover of a page must be responsible for all redirects! click "what links here" and make sure that all redirects are one degree of separation only > [redirect]>[redirect]=error. -Sv
- Some believe in different norms. I disagree with this.
- SV is making good sense, Taku. Those of us who want to see a sensible naming scheme for the Japanese emperors (well, me anyway, I shouldn't presume to speak for SC or Mav or any others) are feeling a little concerned that in your enthusiasm you might go one step too far and lose more than you gain. Speak softly softly, tread one step at a time. Tannin
Actually the problem is my unenthusiasm. I thought my suggestion is agreed so I started to rename the title of Japanse emperor, but I was mistaken as we saw. I just wanted to rename the title of an article in the way I found good. But I don't strongly believe that. I really didn't think much. -- Taku 04:01 Mar 16, 2003 (UTC)