Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film/Japanese cinema task force/Archive 1

This 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.

Current there is Death Note (film) which is a reference to the live action adaptation of the series, which is abridged considering the length of both the manga and anime. It actually covers three films. There is also a "Death Note Rewrite: The Visualizing God'" which aired as a TV special. Due to that, it is not technically a film and not listed as such I guess, but considering how it also attempts to summarize the series and has the length most movies do, I think it might be useful to compare it to these live films in that regard. It only gets a short mention under the Death Note article though, it is very easy to miss it. Does anyone know how TVG could get more prominent exposure? Tyciol (talk) 00:42, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

It appears to be a part of the anime series and is mentioned at the end of that section of the Death Note article and the list of episodes. So there's two things you could do, either start an article for the anime series, or one specifically for the special at Death Note Rewrite: The Visualizing God. I'm not sure exactly what you mean in "comparing" it to the live action films but make sure everything is referenced as Wikipedia has a policy against original research. Good luck. Doctor Sunshine talk 19:58, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

I would really like the attention/help of some other editors with regard to the early films of Akira Kurosawa. Most of these pages are terrible. I've been editing small things out of the Stray Dog and The Most Beautiful pages for a week or so, but I haven't touched too much of it because the original author is not around. Could someone please have a look at these pages, specifically Sanshiro Sugata -> Stray Dog, they're in an awful state. Kinketsu (talk) 12:03, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

I hope to find some time for the Kurosawa articles at some point, I'm focused elsewhere at the moment. However, be bold, as they say. Authors come and go so don't worry about the original authors, if something doesn't belong feel free to remove it. If you can improve them or add references, that's great too. Doctor Sunshine talk 19:58, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

As you may have heard, we at the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial Team recently made some changes to the assessment scale, including the addition of a new level. The new description is available at WP:ASSESS.

• The new C-Class represents articles that are beyond the basic Start-Class, but which need additional references or cleanup to meet the standards for B-Class.
• The criteria for B-Class have been tightened up with the addition of a rubric, and are now more in line with the stricter standards already used at some projects.
• A-Class article reviews will now need more than one person, as described here.

Each WikiProject should already have a new C-Class category at Category:C-Class_articles. If your project elects not to use the new level, you can simply delete your WikiProject's C-Class category and clarify any amendments on your project's assessment/discussion pages. The bot is already finding and listing C-Class articles.

Please leave a message with us if you have any queries regarding the introduction of the revised scheme. This scheme should allow the team to start producing offline selections for your project and the wider community within the next year. Thanks for using the Wikipedia 1.0 scheme! For the 1.0 Editorial Team, §hepBot (Disable) 21:53, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

The peer review for Fires on the Plain (film) is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 04:15, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

The peer review for Kiki's Delivery Service is now open; all editors are invited to participate, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 23:34, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia 0.7 is a collection of English Wikipedia articles due to be released on DVD, and available for free download, later this year. The Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team has made an automated selection of articles for Version 0.7.

We would like to ask you to review the articles selected from this project. These were chosen from the articles with this project's talk page tag, based on the rated importance and quality. If there are any specific articles that should be removed, please let us know at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.7. You can also nominate additional articles for release, following the procedure at Wikipedia:Release Version Nominations.

A list of selected articles with cleanup tags, sorted by project, is available. The list is automatically updated each hour when it is loaded. Please try to fix any urgent problems in the selected articles. A team of copyeditors has agreed to help with copyediting requests, although you should try to fix simple issues on your own if possible.

We would also appreciate your help in identifying the version of each article that you think we should use, to help avoid vandalism or POV issues. These versions can be recorded at this project's subpage of User:SelectionBot/0.7. We are planning to release the selection for the holiday season, so we ask you to select the revisions before October 20. At that time, we will use an automatic process to identify which version of each article to release, if no version has been manually selected. Thanks! For the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial team, SelectionBot 23:06, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Is is appropriate to tag manga based movies with the project banner? I was reverted as spam (WP Banners are spam??) on Talk:Sukeban Deka (article covers live-action movies, TV series, manga, and anime) 76.66.193.90 (talk) 13:40, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm working on the article for this manga, which has a film adaptation (Yūnagi no machi, Sakura no kuni) that won a few awards. Since the article's a bit thin on movie info and you guys are bannered on the talk page, I thought I'd request a little help filling that part out, if anyone's up for it. There's a couple sources on the talk page and in the references, which could data-mined by someone who knows Japanese. —Quasirandom (talk) 21:57, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Just letting this project know that I'm putting Ran under review. It's a great film and a decent article, but it's missing some information to be a true FA. Andrzejbanas (talk) 00:15, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Members of this task force may be interested in this discussion concerning the proper article title for a Japanese film. (It hinges on the film's release date.) Ed Fitzgerald _{t / c} 05:31, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Takeo Kimura filmography is currently a featured list candidate here. The filmography is primarily based on Japanese language sources which limits and number of editors capable of verifying them. Even reviews of a single section will be appreciated. Thanks, Doctor Sunshine (talk) 22:03, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi, Doc. (It's Me in a raincoat). What sort of checking should we do? Pick a section and compare it to JMDB, or JCDB? Just check for accuracy? Otis Criblecoblis (talk) 22:48, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Hey there. Good disguise. :) Yes, basically just checking that he actually worked on those films and that I didn't make any mistakes with the romanizations, etc. And if you wouldn't mind posting a note at the FLC page to let them know what you found/think/did regarding the list. I owe ya one. Doctor Sunshine (talk) 00:08, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

I find "unreliable" references to this list here:

• http://www.theauteurs.com/topics/3491/comments
• http://www.listology.com/thisisgis/list/kinema-junpos-top-100-japanese-films-20th-century

Can anyone find an official, or at least more reliable listing? Perhaps we should mark the films on this list as priority for article-creation? Otis Criblecoblis (talk) 23:31, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Sounds like a good idea. I'll look around and then we'll see what we can set up. Doctor Sunshine (talk) 03:44, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, it's an interesting list... leaves out some obvious choices, like Sansho Dayu, but includes a lot that I've never heard of... but lists like this are always targets for argument. Has more Oshima on it than I'm comfortable with, but I'm glad that Imamura's Akai Satsui rated so high-- one of my favorites. All Imamura films should be on the list as far as I'm concerned... Anyway, if a film is important to make a list like this, we should have articles on them, at least, and target them for improvement if we have them started already. Also, a certain editor I know very well is going to be happy that a few of Kumashiro's Roman pornos made the list :) Otis Criblecoblis (talk) 04:23, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

In those comment sections, people were really getting indignant that their favourites weren't included. I think Kinema Junpo does it similarly to the BFI Sight and Sound top ten list, only with Japanese critics only and they make separate domestic and international lists. And if they do it like BFI, most critics tend to limit themselves to one film per director, so there'll be weird aberrations where directors with one masterpiece are a natch whereas consistently good directors get a wider spread of votes, meaning their films will rank lower or be knocked off the list altogether. It's only slightly more arbitrary than lists made by a single person but that's not to say that it's not useful or interesting. It's still cool to see Fighting Elegy so high up.

Anyway, back on topic. I didn't find any reliable sources either. It was also posted here with a link to an actual Japanese site; although, the Japanese site looks to be a blog. The list was published in 1999, so it's possible Kinema Junpo never put it online. A you've-gotta-buy-the-magazine type deal. However, if we're just using it for the task force I don't think it matters. WikiProject Film's core article list is based on the IMDb and They Shoot Pictures websites—the latter seems to compile their list from sources which include the YMDb (another user generated site). Incidentally, They Shoot Pictures also names three Kinema Junpo lists amongst their greatest films tally.[1] So, what I'm thinking, we could list the Japanese core articles on this page, plus the Kinema Junpo list and maybe even the rest of the Japanese films from They Shoot Pictures. Maybe the latter two could be "key" articles just so that nobody gets confused and starts marking them as core articles by mistake. If the lists get too big they could be split off onto a subpage. Doctor Sunshine (talk) 19:43, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, we can always use it ourselves as a "to-do" list. Sure would be nice to have a good reference to it though, so we can make a note in the film's article that it's on the list. Seven Samurai doesn't need the boost, but some of these lesser-known films would certainly profit from that evidence of "notability"... Otis Criblecoblis (talk) 21:37, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

If anyone is still interested in this, I see Kinejun has a "200 Best" Japanese film list here: http://www.kinejun.jp/special/90alltimebest/index.html Otis Criblecoblis (talk) 00:34, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Hello - 2 years ago AsianMediaWiki was placed on wikipedia's blacklist due to errors on my part for not being up with wiki etiquette. In that time I believe the site has grown to be a compelling source for Asian movie information - including Japanese films. I have enquired about the removal of our website from the blacklist and several persons (Beetstra and Mife_Lifeguard specifically) are supportive of it but request an editor from a related wiki project to make the request here MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist. If you are not familiar with our site some pages that might provided supplemental information to wikipedia are

http://asianmediawiki.com/Category:Japanese_films <-- easy to nail down movies by year of release / genre / or alphabetically
http://asianmediawiki.com/The_Abashiri_Family_The_Movie <-- this page was used by film distributor Klockworx in their press release to promote their film to English journalists
http://asianmediawiki.com/Haruma_Miura
http://asianmediawiki.com/Satoshi_Tsumabuki
http://asianmediawiki.com/Aoi_Miyazaki
http://asianmediawiki.com/Tajomaru

I would really like to get the stigma of the blacklist off of our site if possible. I would be more than happy to contribute edits on wikipedia if advised on which articles would need help. I'm also usually on #mediawiki in the irc channel and would be happy to discuss further or chat about movies in general if interested. thanks -- --RamenLover (talk) 12:16, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

An AfD about the above actor has been opened. I have been unable to find reliable sources of information about him (even under his Japanese name of 濱田岳) - see the AfD for my analysis.

Now, I am not a Japanese-speaker, and so perhaps cannot find sources to verify his notability.

If anyone wants to comment (either in favour of keeping the article, and providing reliable sources of information, or in favour of deleting the article), please feel free to do so at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hamada Gaku.

Regards, -- PhantomSteve (Contact Me, My Contribs) 20:46, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

This message is being sent to each WikiProject that participates in the WP 1.0 assessment system. On Saturday, January 23, 2010, the WP 1.0 bot will be upgraded. Your project does not need to take any action, but the appearance of your project's summary table will change. The upgrade will make many new, optional features available to all WikiProjects. Additional information is available at the WP 1.0 project homepage. — Carl (CBM · talk) 03:28, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

User:DASHBot/Wikiprojects provides a list, updated daily, of unreferenced living people articles (BLPs) related to your project. There has been a lot of discussion recently about deleting these unreferenced articles, so it is important that these articles are referenced.

The unreferenced articles related to your project can be found at >>>Wikipedia:WikiProject Film/Japanese cinema task force/Archive 1/Unreferenced BLPs<<<

If you do not want this wikiproject to participate, please add your project name to this list.

Thank you. Okip 02:48, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

The Agency for Cultural Affairs's Japanese Cinema Database has recently changed its urls, dead-linking dozens of sources in our Japanese film articles. What used to be, for example, "http://www.japanese-cinema-db.jp/searchDetails.php?id=11402" is now "http://www.japanese-cinema-db.jp/details/11402" If anyone has a bot that can fix these, it would be appreciated. Otherwise, I'll try to do it manually, later. Dekkappai (talk) 18:00, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Nevermind-- a bot-owner has volunteered to do the task. Dekkappai (talk) 02:14, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

If the Delete rationales prevail at this, this, this, and this AfD, then all film articles which use the presence of awards and notable personnel to justify their existence here, rather than WP:GNG, are subject to deletion. In Japanese and Korean cinema, this would include many articles listed at such awards as:

• Blue Dragon Film Awards
• Chunsa Film Art Awards
• Grand Bell Awards
• Korean Film Awards
• PaekSang Arts Awards
• Pusan Film Critics Awards

and many of the Japanese films listed at:

• Blue Ribbon Awards
• Hochi Film Award
• Japan Academy Prize
• Yokohama Film Festival

I suggest editors back up their work and move it to a project actually interested in an unbiased, uncensored coverage of world cinema, as it is likely to be deleted here. Regards. Dekkappai (talk) 16:58, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

This might be useful: Box Office Mojo: Japan. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WikiProject Japan! 06:16, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Hey everyone! I really love this movie, Warning from Space, and I tried to research it as thoroughly as possible. I want to know what I need to do to make it a good article. Please see the request here. Thanks!--Architeuthidae (Talk | Contributions) 22:06, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Is the Karate-Robo Zaborgar based on a live action tv show or an amine show. Dwanyewest (talk) 00:19, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

I was tinkering with the article to see what more i could do, but what i mainly wanted to do was try to find enough information on the live-action film of Parasite Eve to split the article. I given a few references, but it's not enough. I'm not an expert at making these type of articles. So if anyone is interested in helping, it would be greatly appreciated.Bread Ninja (talk) 11:26, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

A new user has been trying to update the article on Kadokawa Pictures. I just had to re-edit some of their edits because the user had a hard time dealing with what in fact is a major problem with this article: that Daiei and Kadokawa, which merged only recently, have very different and separate long histories and it is hard, if not impossible, to compose an article combining the two. As it stands, the article is overwhelmingly weighted towards recent history and thus slights Daiei, so that needs to be corrected. But even if you expand that part, filling in the 60 years of history before the Daiei name disappeared, you run into problems such as the fact that Daiei and Kadokawa Pictures were separate companies for nearly 30 years and engaged in very different activities. With Daiei after 1974 even being owned by a rival publishing company, you'd end up with a confusing article where you talk about one company doing something at one time and then say "meanwhile at a separate company..." I proposed this on the talk page to Kadokawa Pictures some time ago, and got no response, but I want to re-propose here splitting the article on Daiei Film from the article on Kadokawa Pictures (Daiei now redirects to Kadokawa Pictures). The articles are separate on the Japanese Wikipedia (though even there it is confusing because there are actually even more companies involved), and you can find many similar examples on the English Wikipedia of treating companies that ultimately merged as separate entries (an example is MGM and United Artists). If you insist on putting all the studios that ended up becoming Kadokawa Pictures in one article, you'd have to include all these companies in the same article: Shinko Kinema, Daito Eiga, Nikkatsu (since the production division became part of Daiei in 1942), Nippon Herald, etc. It's just too unwieldy. I propose treating significantly different corporate entities as separate until the time they really merged (after that, the dominant entity--in this case Kadokawa--would be the focus of subsequent history). Any objections? Michitaro (talk) 14:35, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

It seems, probably due to my complaints, that the same new user has already split the articles, creating a new one: Daiei Film. (It seems that re-directs and a lot of other things still need to be cleaned up, however.) Any objections? Michitaro (talk) 15:04, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

The article Tora! Tora! Tora! doesn't make any sense as currently written. JoshuSasori (talk) 04:50, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Could you clarify what you mean by "not make any sense"? My impression is that it is not written by someone interested in the film as a film, but by someone who cares most about whether the film is accurate to history. That might not be the best perspective for a film article, though it can occupy a particular section in that article. Michitaro (talk) 05:08, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

I find the Historical Accuracy to be original research. Unless ources are found. Then maybe it can stay. The cast im not so sure of because its hard to tell which are the relevant characters.Lucia Black (talk) 05:37, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

I've added requests for citations to the statements in the historical accuracy section. JoshuSasori (talk) 08:32, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

The sentences in the article do not express one idea clearly, and succeeding paragraphs seem to be about unrelated things. For example, take the first sentence: "Tora! Tora! Tora! is a 1970 American-Japanese war film that dramatizes the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, to the extent these facts were known at the time of production." It starts off by describing what the article is about but then suddenly goes off at a tangent about historical accuracy. Similarly the second paragraph of the first section, "The commanders in Hawaii, General Short and Admiral Kimmel, though scapegoated for decades..." is not actually about the film at all, and it seems to be more or less completely disconnected from the first paragraph. Then the third paragraph of the article, "The title is made up of the code-words that were used by the Japanese to indicate that complete surprise was achieved and is translated in the Japanese as "tiger", hence making the code for achieved surprise "Tiger, tiger, tiger"." is again completely disjointed from the second paragraph and is written in a very convoluted way, where the film itself no longer seems to be the topic of the discussion.

In the plot section it is not clear if the article is talking about the plot of the film or the historical events. There is a subsection on "historical accuracy" plugged in to the "production" section, where it doesn't appear to belong, and this historical accuracy subsection starts off with a sentence "The use of real aircraft carriers in Tora! Tora! Tora! was the right choice rather than just relying on scale models." which seems to be the writer's opinion, and is not related to historical accuracy. Going down to the reviews section here is another example: "Despite the initial negative reviews, the film was critically acclaimed for its vivid action scenes, and found favor with aviation and history aficionados, but even the team of Jack Hardwick and Ed Schnepf who have been involved in research on aviation films, had relegated Tora! Tora! Tora! to the "also-ran" status, due to its slow-moving plotline. [17]" which seems to be a sentence which has been deliberately twisted to try to mean several different things.

I hope this makes it clearer what I mean by "not make any sense". There are many more examples in the article. JoshuSasori (talk) 05:50, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

I have also brought this up on the relevant talk page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Tora!_Tora!_Tora!#Badly_written_article JoshuSasori (talk) 06:10, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

I was reading a web page [2] which complained about the reviews in midnighteye.com as they are often quite inaccurate. I also noticed lots of mistakes in these reviews. Should this website be regarded as reliable? It seems a bit dodgy to me. JoshuSasori (talk) 10:37, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

First, the article you cite does not say that "the reviews" in midnighteye are "often" inaccurate. It only cites one as inaccurate according to the person who wrote that (are we sure this person is correct?). One mistaken review does not make a whole site unreliable, especially given how there are many authors who contribute to this site, some of whom are well-known academics. We would need a lot more testimony from multiple people over time to condemn an entire site. Also, if one were to declare this site as unreliable, then one would have to cast suspicions on the many books this site and its primary editors have produced (such as this, this, this, this, or this). We should all remember that while it helps to note that sites like IMDb are unreliable because of how they get their content, our task oftentimes is not to determine whether sites that are reliable or not, but whether individual bits of information are accurate. And even when the author or the site is usually reliable, "even monkeys fall from trees"--even the best scholar makes mistakes and each piece of information has to be evaluated and confirmed. I think you are overreacting here. Michitaro (talk) 13:44, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Excuse me for phrasing myself badly, but what that person says is correct, they are not bikers. It is only one of very many mistakes. I have tried to use the midnight eye pages for reference, and I have noticed a lot of errors. It looks like they discuss films they haven't actually seen as if they have seen them, and they make statements about people they don't know much about in a way that makes it sound like they are more expert than they really are. The assumption perhaps being that Japanese films are obscure foreign language works, so if they make something up about a film, nobody will spot them. Also, when they are trying to review a film they will throw in a few details which might be just made up or guesswork. Thus, my feeling is that the site has a bit of a casual relationship with the facts, and if one uses this web site as a factual reference, it's likely to lead to some trouble. Whatever is published there should be double-checked. After finding so many mistakes in their articles I don't feel comfortable using that site as a reference in the Wikipedia. JoshuSasori (talk) 14:27, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

I still think you are overreacting. I have used the site for years and, while I too notice mistakes, have mostly found it reliable. A number of the authors I trust, such as Roland Domenig, who is a professor at the University of Vienna. There are problems, but as a whole, it is one of the better film magazines on the web. Given that there are authors who have published many books on Japanese cinema from reputable publishers that are full of mistakes, we do have to be diligent, but let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater. Remember that even Kinema Junpo, the main source for information on film in Japan, makes mistakes too. Michitaro (talk) 15:14, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

But I doubt Kinema Jumpo has ever said that Hiroko Yakushimaru is a boy: http://www.midnighteye.com/reviews/never-give-up.shtml JoshuSasori (talk) 15:38, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Yes, that is a doozy, but you should read some of KineJun's plot summaries from the 1950s and 1960s. They are riddled with mistakes. That doesn't make me throw out KineJun. Michitaro (talk) 16:12, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

There is a season of Kon Ichikawa films on the Nihon Eiga Senmon channel, & they are doing some mini-documentaries on his life, so I have had a bash at editing the Kon Ichikawa article, although I don't know much about him. The article currently contains quite a lot of uncited opinions about his films, which seem to have been added in 2006 by a user who has not edited Wikipedia since 2007. I wonder if I could get anyone here to help with adding citations about the critical opinions expressed in the article. If anyone is interested, let's discuss on the talk page of Kon Ichikawa. Thanks. JoshuSasori (talk) 02:06, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Director Kaneto Shindo's birthday is coming up on April 22 2012 (he is still alive). It would be nice if we could get the article promoted onto the front page of anniversaries for that day. Also, the article's filmography needs a bit of work (some of the names of the films are still in Japanese, and the article is missing credits for many of his scripts), so if anyone has any time to work on those kinds of things, it might make a good project to put the article into good order before April 22. JoshuSasori (talk) 04:41, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Wow, is anyone reading this talk page? JoshuSasori (talk) 05:16, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

I have some articles in progress. If anyone here is interested in doing anything with them, please feel free to edit them in my user space. JoshuSasori (talk) 07:59, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

There didn't seem to be a jmdb title template so here it is: Template:Jmdb title. I have only used it on Lady Snowblood (film) so far. JoshuSasori (talk) 01:55, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

This page I Am a Curious Gaijin seems to be about a non-existent film. I would nominate for deletion except I am not sure how to do that correctly. JoshuSasori (talk) 05:16, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Good thing you found this. It's one of those pages created mostly likely by the filmmaker as a way of advertising a film--which was never actually made. (I actually found a poor Japanese person who proudly announced in 2006 that he was going to appear in this film.) I have nominated it, the filmmaker's page, and the company's page all for deletion. By the way, a very useful tool for tagging articles (for deletion and other purposes) is Twinkle. Michitaro (talk) 12:27, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Yasuaki Matsuki seems like it should be delted. Sorry I tried to read the instructions for how to propose the article for deletion but it is too complicated for me. JoshuSasori (talk) 08:45, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for finding this. I have nominated it for deletion. Please do give Twinkle a try. It does get things done in the twinkle of an eye. Michitaro (talk) 21:21, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

I see that JoshuSasori added the "inactive" template to this WikiProject. I don't know what prompted him/her to do that, but I for one am still a member of this project actively editing Japanese film pages--as JoshuSasori is. But clearly there is not much activity on this talk page or the main page. Whether that constitutes "inactive" or not is a matter of interpretation. But if one other member responds to this post, I will remove the "inactive" tag. Michitaro (talk) 13:45, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

OK, but there are precise criteria for regarding a project as inactive which I did actually follow. The criteria I am applying is the second one, the main project page has not changed in four months except for robotic edits. If you want to remove the "inactive" status you can do, but this project does indeed meet the conditions described (there is also a "semi-active" status choice, but this project actually qualifies for "inactive"). The "inactive" status relates to the project rather than the actions of the editors. JoshuSasori (talk) 23:52, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for clarifying that. The second criterion does seem to fit here, and perhaps even the third. I am certainly willing to work on the main page a bit (there is a lot to be added to the "to-do" list), but it would be nice to know if anyone currently listed as a member is also interested in reviving this project. Michitaro (talk) 00:05, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Just to clarify my statement above, if you do remove this "inactive" template from the page, I won't put it back again. JoshuSasori (talk) 02:32, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for confirming that. I'm just wondering whether to just start editing the project page myself and make it "active" that way. I'm pretty busy now, but perhaps that will get something going. A note on talk pages of WikiProjects Film and Japan may be in order (I wonder how many people are actually watching this page--it at least does not exceed 30). Michitaro (talk) 02:55, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

There is a dispute resolution request for the film "Onibaba" here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#Onibaba JoshuSasori (talk) 01:33, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

There is a discussion here about whether AllCinema.net is a reliable source for Wikipedia. JoshuSasori (talk) 04:15, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

I found this site: http://www.japanese-cinema-db.jp/details/6819 when I looked up the 映倫 number for "Tokyo Twilight". I don't think it's mentioned anywhere on the main pages here? It might be a useful source of information, especially since it is based on the eirin information. It seems to get very poor rankings on Google though. JoshuSasori (talk) 05:16, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

User:TheFarix is adding all films to categories like Category:1961 Japanese films and removing the "1961 films" and "Japanese film" categories, and now User:Lugnuts is adding back the categories removed. JoshuSasori (talk) 07:57, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

If anyone is looking for something to do, the filmography on article Kumiko Akiyoshi needs quite a lot of work cleaning up for multiple broken wikilinks, use of circumflexes, general misordering and other problems. JoshuSasori (talk) 02:06, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

I've created a new stub article Heat Wave Island on Kaneto Shindo's 1969 film. I have not seen the film yet so did not write a plot for it. JoshuSasori (talk) 08:10, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi everyone at WikiProject Japanese cinema!

Women's history month is around the corner, in March, and we're planning the second WikiWomen's History Month.

This event, which is organized by volunteers from the WikiWomen's Collaborative, supports improving coverage about women's history during the month of March. Events take place both offline and online. We are encouraging WikiProjects to focus on women's history related to their subject for the month of March. Ideas include:

• Improving coverage about Japanese women filmmakers, actors, directors, producers, and executives
• Developing content about women owned Japanese film businesses

We hope you'll participate! You can list your your project focus here, and also help improve our to-do list. Thank you for all you do for Wikipedia! SarahStierch (talk) 21:49, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

When determining whether English release names exist for Japanese films, please add sources to article before moves. See examples at Marai no Tora. Also a good idea, or courtesy, to notify intended moves on relevant Talk page at least 1 turn of the globe before implementing. A lot of wasted time at WP:RM can be avoided if courtesy is involved. I say this to myself as much as anyone. In ictu oculi (talk) 04:24, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Please come participate in the following move discussion:

• Talk:Kaguya-hime no Monogatari (film)#Requested move
• Talk:Kaze Tachinu#Requested move

Thanks for your participation. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 18:46, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

A vote on merging the Asian film infobox templates went through and a discussion on how to merge them is completed. Please refrain from using the old Japanese film template and use the default film template + Template:Film name to write the name in the original Japanese. Thanks. ₪RicknAsia₪ 00:42, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

After creating this article, I am concerned by the "Film name" template. I was told here to raise the issue on this page. What does anyone think? It seems horrible to me to have giant links to "Kanji" and "Hepburn" above even the film's director. Wistchars (talk) 00:52, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Are you more concerned with the placement of the film title in Japanese or the links to articles about Kanji and Hepburn? ₪RicknAsia₪ 02:30, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

I think I already explained this on the talk page above, but at the risk of repeating myself, I am concerned about the relative emphasis of the parts of the infobox. Out of the people who look at a page on a film, say Fune o Amu, I think quite a lot of people are interested in the director, probably even more people are interested in the actors, some people might be interested in what language the film is in, or when it was released, but relatively very few people will be mainly interested in finding out details of Japanese language, for example the name of a romanization system for Japanese. At the moment the word "Hepburn" and the link to a page which is almost unrelated to the main topic of the article is predominating at the top of the box, above the name of even the director of the film. I think the native name should be presented, but in a simpler form. Wistchars (talk) 02:43, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Concretely, I am suggesting that the name should be more like

The Great Passage
(舟を編む, Fune o Amu)

rather than having the separate "Hepburn" and "Japanese" fields. Wistchars (talk) 05:24, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

I agree. There is no need to explain in the infobox that the Japanese name is written in Japanese and that the text immediately following it is the transliteration of that name in latin characters, as it's pretty obvious. Most readers of the articles about Japanese films are not so interested in information about kanji/kana and which romanization system the Japanese title has been transliterated with, that they want blue links to them. And while many understand the principle of romanization, most of them have never heard of Hepburn - except as the last name for a very popular actress. All this is just confusing and over the top. I think two alternative solutions should be used:

1) To follow the principle used for all non-Asian films - that the local title only appears in a parenthesis after the English title in the beginning of the actual article, see Stray Bullet and Lemon Tree as examples.

2) To combine this with the established principle used by geographic templates, such as "Infobox country" (see the article for Japan). Some film articles use this solution, and The Traveller is a typical example.

I think that Japanese, Chinese and Korean film articles should follow principle 1. It's in line with all other film articles and fully sufficient. Thomas Blomberg (talk) 12:37, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

We've nominated Departures (film) as a Featured Article, and invite you to take part in the review here. Thanks, Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 08:02, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

I've nominated Katsudō Shashin as a Featured Article, and invite you to take part in the review here. Thanks, Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 08:02, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

Please come participate in the discussion on changing Romanization in the Japan-related manual of style. Thanks! ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 17:15, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

I was hoping that I could get some assistance from an editor that can read Japanese. I currently have a list up for Featured List candidacy at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Jacques Rivette filmography/archive1. I am having trouble finding a reliable source for one film award, the 1992 Kinema Junpo award for Best Foreign film. There are plenty of unreliable sources on the web, but I am having difficulty using google translator to find a good source and I was hoping someone who can read Japanese could help me. Here is the Kinema Junpo website [3], which I have tried searching to the best of my ability. Would really appreciate the help if anyone has the time to look into it.--Deoliveirafan (talk) 21:13, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

@Deoliveirafan: I added a better ref to the article. Hope that helps. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 00:20, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

Thank you so much. I was having a hard time with this and needed the help.--Deoliveirafan (talk) 00:38, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

This is a notice to let you know about Article alerts, a fully-automated subscription-based news delivery system designed to notify WikiProjects and Taskforces when articles are entering Articles for deletion, Requests for comment, Peer review and other workflows (full list). The reports are updated on a daily basis, and provide brief summaries of what happened, with relevant links to discussion or results when possible. A certain degree of customization is available; WikiProjects and Taskforces can choose which workflows to include, have individual reports generated for each workflow, have deletion discussion transcluded on the reports, and so on. An example of a customized report can be found here.

If you are already subscribed to Article Alerts, it is now easier to report bugs and request new features. We are also in the process of implementing a "news system", which would let projects know about ongoing discussions on a wikipedia-wide level, and other things of interest. The developers also note that some subscribing WikiProjects and Taskforces use the display=none parameter, but forget to give a link to their alert page. Your alert page should be located at "Wikipedia:PROJECT-OR-TASKFORCE-HOMEPAGE/Article alerts". Questions and feedback should be left at Wikipedia talk:Article alerts.

Message sent by User:Addbot to all active wiki projects per request, Comments on the message and bot are welcome here.

Thanks. — Headbomb {^ταλκ_{κοντριβς} – WP Physics} 09:18, 15 March, 2009 (UTC)

(timestamp may not be accurate) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Another Believer (talk • contribs) 15:13, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

Hello and greetings from the maintainers of the WP 1.0 Bot! As you may or may not know, we are currently involved in an overhaul of the bot, in order to make it more modern and maintainable. As part of this process, we will be rewriting the web tool that is part of the project. You might have noticed this tool if you click through the links on the project assessment summary tables.

We'd like to collect information on how the current tool is used by....you! How do you yourself and the other maintainers of your project use the web tool? Which of its features do you need? How frequently do you use these features? And what features is the tool missing that would be useful to you? We have collected all of these questions at this Google form where you can leave your response. Walkerma (talk) 04:24, 27 October 2019 (UTC)