User talk:Fg2/Archive06

This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Hi! I found a terrible section. It's too terrible for me to edit. So will you please correct here when you are not too busy? Thank you. Oda Mari (talk) 07:29, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Hello Fg2. Thank you for your contributions to the article Yozo Matsushima. Regards, Masterpiece2000 (talk) 12:10, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

In Hyūga class helicopter destroyer, one and only one sentence is accompanied by an in-line citation:

The JDS Hyūga is the first aircraft carrier to be specifically constructed for Japanese marine forces since the end of the Pacific War.<:ref>PBS/WNET, NYC: "Japan's About-Face: The military's shifting role in post-war society." July 8, 2008.</ref>

As you may know, this sentence may be construed as controversial in the context of an otherwise carefully-crafted article. --Tenmei (talk) 22:17, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for that information. I was unaware of that article. Fg2 (talk) 23:47, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your helpful edits to Hawayo Takata. You made some different choices than I did, but that's what Wikipedia is about! Consider placing it on your watchlist. Thanks. - House of Scandal (talk) 04:24, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading Image:Dash.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 23:17, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi Fg2,
On July 4, Stormbay prodded this article, and you contested the prod a day later. I think it probably fails WP:N because I can't seem to find any substantial secondary sources, so I've listed it at WP:AFD. Just thought I'd give you a heads-up if you want to comment. Reyk _YO! 09:02, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll watch the discussion, and possibly chime in. Often, though, I just want to seek the opinion of the community. Fg2 (talk) 09:10, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for uploading Image:NonomiyaEma0298.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:53, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:CensusSide1.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:54, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:CensusSide2.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:55, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

You said in a recent edit summary "If the title is wrong, rename the article". Unfortunately when I did, someone changed it to Soviet invasion of Manchuria, and this is now up for discussion--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 06:35, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

No problem. Sorry if I sounded curt, but the edit summary has limited space, making it difficult to sound kind. Fg2 (talk) 07:58, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

No need to apologise since I agree with you. Mostly this renaming, aside from removing a fictitious name, is trying to get more eyes on the issues with the article--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 08:46, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for your help with the peer review on Tsugaru clan; could you perhaps review it again? I nominated it for Good Article status, and it has yet to be reviewed. If not yourself, might there be someone else you know of who'd be willing to do so? At any rate, thanks. -Tadakuni (talk) 00:50, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi Tadakuni, and thanks for all your valuable contributions to articles on Japan. I've learned a great deal from reading them.

Good Article Reviews are a bit complicated for me. There's a page on criteria, and a page on procedures. I've taken a stab at a review and posted it temporarily at User:Fg2/sandbox. I can move it to an appropriate place. Please take a look and see if you think it addresses the major points while giving some specific directions in which the article can be improved. Also, if you regularly participate in GAR, you might know something about pitfalls, and the pet peeves of the editors who work there. I'm interested in hearing about what lies ahead. I'd also suggest contacting LordAmeth, who has contributed extensively to articles on the Edo period, and is currently active. Likewise the other editors who have made changes to the article since its creation. Best wishes for success in bringing this article to Good Article status. Fg2 (talk) 12:21, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Fg2- thanks for taking the time to review it (again). I've made the appropriate corrections; I think the review can go [[1]] here without much change. I've also spoken to LordAmeth about this. Again, many thanks! -Tadakuni (talk) 15:29, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

I've moved the review there following the comments by LordAmeth and Nihon Joe. Best regards, Fg2 (talk) 12:02, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Hey Fg1-

My edit of the reading at Tsubaki Grand Shrine was a bit hasty, I think. I edited it today with the intention of going back later and fully fleshing out the article, and I did not expect an article with 6 edits over the course of its ~2 year history to be watched by anyone. I under estimated you! Anyways, I poked around the official site and I could not find a definitive reading either, but the site does link to this site, which gives the reading Tsubaki Ōkami Yashiro. Therefore, I reverted my edit, as つばきおおかみやしろ looks like it is the correct reading. I will be working on the article further, however and will keep my eyes open for any better sources for the reading. --Torsodog^Talk 21:08, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Looks like an interesting shrine! It'll be fun to watch the article develop. Thanks as always Fg2 (talk) 21:14, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Hey Fg2, I just wanted to let you know that a derivative image I cropped a bit from one of your original Kyoto Tower images just made it to the main page via DYK. Great picture! --Torsodog^Talk 15:41, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

This images is flagged as havign a deprecated tag, PLEASE update it so the image can be moved to commons. :) Sfan00 IMG (talk) 00:37, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm confused. Fg2 (talk) 01:08, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

An article that you have been involved in editing, Unwrapped steel, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Unwrapped steel. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? User A1 (talk) 02:28, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

hi there,

are you familiar with this topic Matsu no Ōrōka? I thought the Shiroshoin was part of the Honmaru Goten, which in itself was divided up into three parts? Could you also take a look and add information to Edo Castle when you have the chance? Thanks alot. Gryffindor 17:22, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Regarding the Anomebot's erroneous tagging of Tokyo City: although the bot is programmed to ignore dissolved municipalities, since the article hadn't been categorized as having been dissolved, the bot didn't spot it as such. The approriate categories look like this; Category:Dissolved municipalities of Ehime Prefecture: the bot simply looks for the word "dissolved" in a category name. Can you supply a list of dissolved municipalities, which I could add to the bot's placename blacklist, or suggest another heuristic which might detect these cases without explicit categorization? -- The Anome (talk) 02:47, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi The Anome, and thanks for the explanation. Let me copy this to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Japan. I don't have a list, but perhaps someone does; it'll also serve as a call to categorize dissolved municipalities according to this scheme. I've placed Tokyo City in the appropriate category. Best regards, Fg2 (talk) 03:45, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

The answer is NO. According to ja:東京市, the address of the city hall was 東京府東京市麹町区有楽町2丁目. It was the place where the former 都庁 building stood, near the 中央郵便局. ja:東京府 says so too. ...東京府の府庁舎は、1868年（慶応4年、明治元年）の設置時には江戸城幸橋門内（現在の千代田区内幸町）の大和郡山藩上屋敷を接収して使用した。1894年（明治27年）に麹町区（千代田区）有楽町に新庁舎が完成したため移転した。ここが後の東京都庁本庁舎（丸の内庁舎。1991年（平成3年）に新宿へ移転）の所在地である... ja:東京都庁 says ...# 1957年 - 先代の都庁舎が千代田区丸の内三丁目に完成（現在の東京国際フォーラム、豊田通商東京本社ビルの場所である... Zoom in these old map. It is easier to find the place on the one on the right. 東京府廳 and 市役所 are written from right to left. I added the map to the article. Best regards. Oda Mari (talk) 02:24, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

On 13 September, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Tachikawa Airfield, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Thank you for your contributions! -- RyRy (talk) 22:23, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your cleanup here. It's been on my to-do forever, thanks for taking it off mine :) TravellingCari 20:37, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your helpful comment. I'm new to this, so I hope I got the reference formatting correct. Is it in the right format? Feel free to correct it. 76.183.49.157 (talk) 20:15, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, that's the kind of reference that Wikipedia values. I've been unable to locate any further information on the Hikarino Shrine. Do you know anything more about it? Fg2 (talk) 12:04, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Will you please take a look at the Nihongo-template in the introductory paragraph of National Institute for Materials Science? I'm not entirely confident that I've handled this well enough.--Tenmei (talk) 14:08, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Hi Tenmei, The kanji looked fine. Normally we indicate pronunciation in romaji rather than kana, under the assumption that for readers of English one Japanese script is more than enough, so I've replaced the kana with romaji. There is, of course, a link to the Japanese Wikipedia, which has the kana in the opening sentence, so it's the romaji that's information not available elsewhere on the Wikipedia project. Is that the sort of assistance you were looking for? Fg2 (talk) 21:56, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

I was confused in the attempt to put too much into the first sentence: English + (acronym) + kanji + kana + romaji .... Something had to be left out, but what?

Conventionally, the Nihongo-template pulls together English + kanji + romaji ... and I was uncertain about whether to eliminate or retain the acronym? to eliminate or retain the kana? to add romaji?

Based on your feedback,

• A. I'll never choose to add kana in an English Wikipedia context ....
• B. I'll never choose to omit romaji in an English Wikipedia context ....
• C. I'll never choose to add an acronym when romaji is presented ....

While these are all relevant, in combination it just becomes too much to expect anyone to process simultaneously; ergo, I will now be able to exhibit better informed judgment in future.

Thanks. In one sense this was an embarrassingly petty issue; but the fact-of-the-matter was that I didn't know what to do with too many vectors, each of which were plausibly relevant. One or more elements needed to be subordinated, but I didn't know how to evaluate them in relationship to each other.

So -- in this instance, the acronym NIMS is probably best introduced in the earliest opportunity AFTER the introductory sentence ... and kana is probably best not presented at all.

In due course, an unforeseen alternative may present itself

For now, what I saw as an awkward dilemma can be construed as temporarily in hand. Thanks. --Tenmei (talk) 03:12, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

I have nominated ``high school musical`` (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) for discussion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. Anshuk (talk) 01:40, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

From what I understand there is more priority to remove unsourced contentious material, but as per WP:V and BLP unsourced material about any living person is in general a no no. In particular please see Jimbo Wales's "Zero information is preferred to misleading or false information" post here - http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2006-May/046440.html WhisperToMe (talk) 13:58, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

I believe I have addressed your comments on the FAC. Could you review my changes and replies?

Thanks for commenting,

--Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 02:38, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply, which I read with interest some days ago. I disagree on the need for inclusion of the topics I mentioned, but didn't want to push my opinion. I agree with other people who point out that the article is clear and well written. Fg2 (talk) 22:25, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

I like what you did with my recent additions to the Todaiji article, linking to Ritsuryo, enforcing consistent spelling and such. Much appreciated. Perhaps we can collaborate on other Japanese Buddhist articles sometime?

Cheers! --Ph0kin (talk) 11:48, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Sounds good to me! Fg2 (talk) 12:53, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Hello, Fg2 ... You recently contested the PROD of

Army correspondence course program (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

with the edit summary

Removed deletion proposal. Objecting to deletion. Detailed references are in the article.

I beg to differ, but there do not appear to be any "references" in the article at all, "detailed" or otherwise ... Happy Editing! — 72.75.110.31 (talk · contribs) _{03:39, 2 December 2008 (UTC)}

Yea, where are the references, Fg2? --Matt57 ^{(talk•contribs)} 04:07, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

DA Pamphlet 351-20, The Army Correspondence Course Program Catalog, official publication of the US Army Fg2 (talk) 10:07, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Notability which says "If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to satisfy the inclusion criteria for a stand-alone article.". Once again, you cant just include anything on this site. It has to be globally "important" enough, in other words. --Matt57 ^{(talk•contribs)} 15:19, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Give them this:

• Audie G. Lewis (2003). "Army Correspondence Course Program". Career Progression Guide for Soldiers. Stackpole Books. pp. 49–50. ISBN 0811728234. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |isbn13= ignored (help)

Tip: When looking for sources, look for third parties who are likely to have written about the subject, rather than supporting it with material that is for the subject rather than about it. Uncle G (talk) 14:10, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi Fg2. I'm surprised people are opposed to this article so much. It clearly is a large, important education course from what is a very large and important organization. Anyway, if you look on Lexis Nexis you will find plenty of sources, including a NY Times story from just after World War 2 that describes the course as "unprecedented". Incidentally, there seems to be a possible COI problem here with the people that are going to write the article. I'm not sure if their goals and style of writing is aligned with the Wikipedia norm. --C S (talk) 19:14, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks to Uncle G and C S. I've posted the Stackpole Books guide by Lewis as a source. That's about all I have time for. The article and its subject aren't a particular interest of mine; I simply disagreed about the deletion proposal, as I do every now and then. It's common enough to get an inquiry about a removed deletion proposal, but two is unusual, and two people chiming in with more constructive suggestions than I would have come up with is a first for me! Fg2 (talk) 21:07, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

To be fair, this fist "stub" version was Pretty Sparse, and didn't look like it was fleshing out any time soon ... it contains beau coup "encyclopedic" information now, so I'll remove it from Category:Flagged articles. :-) — 72.75.110.31 (talk) 22:22, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

That first version was very sparse indeed! Fg2 (talk) 01:22, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

This article could do with attention similar to that given to the other film article. Uncle G (talk) 14:10, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for calling that to my attention. I patrol proposed deletion with an eye out for articles that look related to Japan, and normally call them to the attention of WikiProject:Deletion sorting/Japan; half or so get deleted. The other film article had "Japan" in the title, and I had a few minutes to look into it. This title didn't stand out as Japan-related so it didn't catch my eye. I'll list it on WP:DSJ and if I have time I'll try to find some sources. Thanks again for the alert. Fg2 (talk) 21:12, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Here's another: It's a Summer Vacation Everyday. Finding and citing sources is exactly the right approach to article rescue. Well done. Keep doing it! Uncle G (talk) 16:56, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks again. This one has been taking my time... Fg2 (talk) 18:00, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks much for your efforts in cleaning up and consolidating the plot summary. I am wondering whether to leave it as is (it seems a fine summary; brief and clear), or whether to expand it out to a rather lengthy scene-by-scene or act-by-act summary as I did for Yoshitsune Senbon Zakura. While I certainly could summarize and reword the plot summary given on Kabuki21.com, I have neither seen nor read this play; by contrast, I have read through Yoshitsune in translation and had at that time the full formally-published English-language text to cite.

I am curious as to your thoughts on the matter. Is it called for to write a lengthy act-by-act summary? Is it preferable, unpreferable? Yoroshiku. LordAmeth (talk) 20:13, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi LordAmeth, and thanks as always for your fine work. I have no emotional stake in the summary of the article; all I did was edit what was original author had posted, and check a bit on what's in the Japanese Wikipedia. If you have the inclination and ability to post a detailed summary, it'd be most welcome. There's no need to worry about losing what I've edited. A play of this importance deserves it. But it's a daunting task, so please don't feel you have to. Best regards, Fg2 (talk) 21:14, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Just to let you know, I've completed my scene-by-scene plot summary for the play. I found a summary in one of my books, and a translation of a significant part of two scenes in another book, so I was happy to be able to use those rather than just mooching off of the hard work of the fellow who runs Kabuki21.com. Thanks as always for your help and support. LordAmeth (talk) 21:31, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Hello, based on your excellent work on the Todaiji article, I was wondering if I could get your help on another article, the Kukai article. I've done some extensive revisions on the article to make it more concise, but still retain the hard work someone else did (and tried to intersperse citations and templates where appropriate). I could use your critical eye in making sure it's a quality article. Feel free to make edits, or just reply back to me with suggestions. Whatever works.

Thanks!

--Ph0kin (talk) 15:15, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

See if you like the edits I made. Fg2 (talk) 11:40, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

I like quite a bit. I needed a second eye to catch some of the awkward changes, especially the beginning where things were more of a mess between my edits and someone else's a while back. Can't thank you enough.  :) --Ph0kin (talk) 14:35, 12 January 2009 (UTC)