This article is within the scope of WikiProject Japan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Japan-related articles on Wikipedia. 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: 17:47, July 11, 2024 (JST, Reiwa6) (Refresh)JapanWikipedia:WikiProject JapanTemplate:WikiProject JapanJapan-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Islands, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of islands 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.IslandsWikipedia:WikiProject IslandsTemplate:WikiProject IslandsIslands articles
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
Are the outlying islands of the Japanese state, such as Okinawa and the Ryukus (not to mention the contested Kuriles) considered Home Islands? And if so, is this usage consistent? --MacRusgail16:28, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
As far as I am aware, the Ryukyus, Kuriles, etc. are not considered Home Islands in the World War II historical sense of the term. That is, the term "Home Islands" is largely used almost exclusively in contexts related to World War II, and in such contexts one can make statements such as "Ground fighting occurred on Okinawa, but never in the Home Islands" or "Had we not dropped the bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, we would have had to invade the Home Islands."
On the other hand, putting the term "Home Islands" aside, I actually came to this Talk Page just now in order to pose the very similar question of whether or not the Ryukyus are included in the "Japanese archipelago". Politically speaking, I suppose they would be, but as a geographic term - just because Japan controls Okinawa doesn't make it any more a Japanese island than the Falklands are part of the British Isles - are the Ryukyus generally considered to be included in the Japanese archipelago? LordAmeth (talk) 03:45, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Stop adding this unsourced tag everywhere. Specify the sentence, tag the sentence, add the tag from that position. Not all of these sentences are unsourced. 75.70.142.23 (talk) 08:51, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Though they're politically part of Russia, are either Sakhalin or the Kuril Islands or both considered part of the Japanese archipelago in a geographic sense?108.207.39.63 (talk) 09:42, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
@TerraCyprus: I think Japanese archipelago actually happens to be a unique case among our archipelago articles, since it is the only one (?) constructed as [adjective + archipelago] instead of [name + archipelago]. A Google search indicates that "Japanese archipelago" is the common usage, which I think stems from this semantic difference (though there is a mix of styles, maybe this requires a discussion?) — Goszei (talk) 08:04, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I had a look through our perennial reliable sources — all of the ones that I checked overwhelmingly use "Japanese archipelago":
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
As for the reliable sources, they are considered reliable because they come from reputable media, which means their information is likely to be genuine and correct, but that doesn't mean every word they have written is perfect. Some of the authors or editors from these media are not even native English speakers themselves. If you collect 200 articles from these sources, there could be 50% of them use Japanese archipelago and 50% of them use Japanese Archipelago. 120.16.92.71 (talk) 01:06, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I think that the map used at the beginning of the article (the one labeled "Japanese archipelago shown in dark green") should be changed. The article talks about how Sakhalin and the undisputed Kuril Islands are also considered to be a part of the Japanese archipelago, despite being a part of the Russian Federation. However, the map used only shows the Japanese islands under Japanese control, as well as Japan's disputed claim over the southern Kuril Islands. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fernsong (talk • contribs) 23:22, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
