Jump to content

Talk:Japan

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Featured articleJapan 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.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on May 15, 2007.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
January 14, 2004Featured article candidateNot promoted
November 18, 2004Featured article candidateNot promoted
August 10, 2006Featured article candidateNot promoted
August 28, 2006Peer reviewReviewed
January 9, 2007Featured article candidateNot promoted
March 26, 2007Featured article candidateNot promoted
April 12, 2007Featured article candidatePromoted
April 14, 2011Featured article reviewKept
Current status: Featured article


Did you know nomination

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

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

(
)

Created by Letizia Ferhati (talk). Self-nominated at 21:48, 25 May 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template 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]

Semi-protected edit request on 24 June 2024

[edit]
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]

Citation style

[edit]

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.,
with
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]

I want to right thing Japan's nominal GDP per capita rank

[edit]

Japan's rank is mistake. 240B:13:8AE1:6A00:415F:2793:AFDB:21C7 (talk) 22:09, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Car exports

[edit]

@Nikkimaria: Please explain why you think that one sentence about Japan's leading position as one of the world's largest car exporters (ranking 2nd worldwide by number of cars exported after having been the top dog for a very long time) is "overdetail". Germany, which is a featured article as well, has a sentence about its car exports too, although it ranks below Japan in that regard. So please explain why that should be overly detailed, since it is anything but obvious. Maxeto0910 (talk) 15:26, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The article already includes a statement about the country's current automobile production; it does not need to include additional historical data on the topic. Nikkimaria (talk) 17:51, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
1) I'm talking about car exports, not production, which even is the discipline in which Japan performs better (it is 3rd by car production, and 2nd by exports), making it even more notable.
2) This isn't historical data. The added text also stated that Japan is now the world's second-largest car exporter by number, having been overtaken by China in early 2023.
3) The featured Germany article also has information about both car production and exports, although Germany is behind Japan in both metrics. Maxeto0910 (talk) 17:59, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I was looking at updating to current numbers for exports, but it appears that the claim is actually disputed - see this source. Nikkimaria (talk) 18:13, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Then why not state that and explain why it's disputed whether Japan is 1st or 2nd in car exports by number? Maxeto0910 (talk) 18:14, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Because this is not the appropriate article to get into a discussion about the various means of calculating. We could simply say it's top-five for both? Nikkimaria (talk) 18:15, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'd say that depends on how many sentences it would take to explain it. If it becomes too long, we could also add an explanatory note. If it becomes too long even for that, saying that it's in the top 5 (or rather top 3), like you suggested, would be an option as well. Maxeto0910 (talk) 18:18, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've amended the article to say top-three for both metrics. Nikkimaria (talk) 18:22, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Good. But we should still either clarify that this rank is based on the number of cars exported (as this isn't clear out of the context) or state that Japan ranks in the top 3 in car exports by both number and value, for example:
"Japan is in the top three globally for automobile production and export, the latter both by number and value [...]"
A reference for the value of car exports would be this statistics page by The Observatory of Economic Complexity. Maxeto0910 (talk) 19:15, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Why? It's top three in exports no matter how you count that. Nikkimaria (talk) 19:52, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but that's not clear from the reader's perspective, who at most only knows that Japan ranks 3rd by number, and even that only when the reader reads the source because this isn't stated in the article. How should the reader know that it's not only 3rd by number but also by value when we don't write it and give a source for both? When we don't explicitly write that Japan ranks 3rd by car exports by both number and value, it may be fair to assume that it ranks 3rd by both metrics, but then we should as well give sources for both. Maxeto0910 (talk) 20:34, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No objection to adding sources. Nikkimaria (talk) 20:41, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Japan&oldid=1237038007"