Contents

Talk:Japan

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Japan article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21Auto-archiving period: 90 days

This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

	Japan is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
	This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on May 15, 2007.
Article milestones Date Process Result January 14, 2004 Featured article candidate Not promoted November 18, 2004 Featured article candidate Not promoted August 10, 2006 Featured article candidate Not promoted August 28, 2006 Peer review Reviewed January 9, 2007 Featured article candidate Not promoted March 26, 2007 Featured article candidate Not promoted April 12, 2007 Featured article candidate Promoted April 14, 2011 Featured article review Kept Current status: Featured article

This  level-3 vital article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Asia: Japan Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Asia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Asia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AsiaWikipedia:WikiProject AsiaTemplate:WikiProject AsiaAsia articles Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Japan (assessed as Top-importance). Countries This article is within the scope of WikiProject Countries, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of countries on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CountriesWikipedia:WikiProject CountriesTemplate:WikiProject Countriescountry articles WikiProject Countries to-do list: edit history watch purge Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Article requests : Check out the article alerts; see if anything catches your fancy. Cleanup : clean-up listing for Countries Stubs : de-stub articles in Category:Stubs by region. Other : add {{WPCountries}}totalk pages of related articles, and assess. East Asia (defunct) This article is within the scope of WikiProject East Asia, a project which is currently considered to be defunct.East AsiaWikipedia:WikiProject East AsiaTemplate:WikiProject East AsiaEast Asia articles

This article has been mentioned by a media organization: The Daily Telegraph (August 17, 2009). "The 50 most-viewed Wikipedia articles in 2009 and 2008". The Daily Telegraph.

Other talk page banners

This article has been viewed enough times to make it onto the all-time Top 100 list. It has had 88 million views since December 2007. This article has been viewed enough times in a single year to make it into the Top 50 Report annual list. This happened in 2010, when it received 10,063,050 views. Daily pageviews of this article A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org

The result was: rejectedbyBorgQueen (talk) 08:43, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• ... that Japan has the oldest continuous monarchy in the world? Source: https://www.nationalgeographic.com/culture/article/japanese-monarchy
  • Reviewed:

Created by Letizia Ferhati (talk). Self-nominated at 21:48, 25 May 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be loggedatTemplate talk:Did you know nominations/Japan; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.[reply]

• Question - @Letizia Ferhati: Are you sure you nominated the correct article? Japan does not appear eligible for DYK; it was not created by you but by User:Alan D in 2001, and has neither been 5x expanded nor made into a GA recently, and indeed has been a Featured Article since 2007. Japan does not meet the "New" criteria of WP:DYKCRIT, did you mean to nominate a different article? - Aoidh (talk) 22:28, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Closing. As noted in the above comment by Aoidh this doesn't meet requirements, although it is understandable that the DYK process name causes confusion in this regard. CMD (talk) 00:49, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered=or|ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

103.3.220.150 (talk) 09:26, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Formation = February 11 660 BC/539 AD

Not done, please provide reliable sources mentioning the sovereignty event. CMD (talk) 10:05, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nikkimaria, why did you revert here? You have undone several citation improvements for no reason. What are you objecting to here? Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 15:34, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I do not agree that the changes were improvements - most were just adding clutter, and some were misinterpreting what was being cited. For example, the citation for this site was edited to add a publication date of 1891 - that's the creation date of the artwork, but what's actually being cited there is the description provided by the website. Nikkimaria (talk) 17:15, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Anything else? Because that's easily addressed. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 18:30, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, everything else - I kept the changes that I agreed were improvements. Nikkimaria (talk) 18:34, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's clearly nonsense. Removing "url=https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/radiocarbon/article/radiocaron-dates-and-archaeology-of-the-late-pleistocene-in-the-japanese-islands/580E3E8E6F7C0E9E65D9FA8EC7FB6553" for example, removes clutter from citations, and maintains the link provided by |doi-access=free, which brings to you the exact same link. Compare e.g.,

• Ono, Akira; Sato, Hiroyuki; Tsutsumi, Takashi; Kudo, Yuichiro (2002). "Radiocarbon Dates and Archaeology of the Late Pleistocene in the Japanese Islands". Radiocarbon. 44 (2): 477–494. doi:10.1017/S0033822200031854.

with

• Ono, Akira; Sato, Hiroyuki; Tsutsumi, Takashi; Kudo, Yuichiro (2002). "Radiocarbon Dates and Archaeology of the Late Pleistocene in the Japanese Islands". Radiocarbon. 44 (2): 477–494. doi:10.1017/S0033822200031854.

Likewise the link to "A History of Japan: From Stone Age to Superpower" should be on the chapter, not the book, because the link is for the chapter, not the book.

Likewise Proceedings of the International Conference on Social Modeling and Simulation, Plus Econophysics Colloquium is not a journal, and should not be cited through cite journal.

Likewise proper title case is "China Overtakes Japan as the World's Biggest Exporter of Passenger Cars", not "China Overtakes Japan As The World's Biggest Exporter Of Passenger Cars"

etc. etc. etc. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 18:53, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The first of these has no impact on the reader. In the second, the link does not go to that chapter so to call it a chapter URL is nonsense. The third change adds an unnecessary extra date and removes a link display, neither of which seems of benefit. The fourth was incorrect both before and after the edit - it should be sentence case, although that is inconsistent throughout at the moment. Etc etc etc. And none of these warrant restoring the disputed changes. Nikkimaria (talk) 19:03, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The link was pointing to PT24 when it should have been PT40 because the reference was clearly to the 2nd chapter covering the Nara period. I've fixed that. I don't see what extra date you're talking about, nor what link you think is removed. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 19:08, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And I don't any justification for the botspam - please don't add that again without getting consensus for it. Otherwise I've fixed up the referencing. Nikkimaria (talk) 23:55, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]