Talk:Kōhaku Uta Gassen

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Kōhaku Uta Gassen is part of WikiProject Japan, a project to improve all Japan-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other Japan-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome.

Contents

[edit] Unappreciative "appreciation"

I'm confused as to how the "Appreciation" section provides sufficient information on Kouhaku. It sounds rather biased against the show, as does some other wording throughout the article. Kamezuki 09:15, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)

It certainly doesn't provide enough info on how to appreciate Kōhaku; anyone's welcome to add more. The wording? Well yes, I think the program is dreck, and I speak as one who's repeatedly had to watch it. It strikes me as a kitschfest in the form of a tarento love-in. Now, this may not be a fair summary (though the majority of people watching the boob tube at this time of year choose some other channel); you are (and anyone else is) very welcome to add an alternative and more positive spin. Incidentally, I do have the experience of half-watching it while knocking back some beers and half-listening to unrelated music and talking (I'm not just imagining it) -- and very amusing it was. (Particularly Sawada Kenji aka Juri, of course.) -- Hoary 09:31, 2004 Dec 23 (UTC)

[edit] More info that could be added

Also, another thing I'd like to add--the PDF file with all the Kouhaku info for anyone who wants to help fill out the table is here: http://www3.nhk.or.jp/kouhaku/rekidai.pdf Kamezuki 09:24, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Romanization

Romanization of Japanese is of course a real mess. (The typical Japanese person is rather clueless about it.) It seems that Wikipedia uses Hepburn, which subjects Japanese to the idiosyncrasies of English spelling. Hepburn would romanize the first half as kōhaku, which I think is not allowable as an article title. On the other hand there are traditions of following both kana orthography ("kouhaku") and duplication for chōon ("koohaku"). Which would be better here? -- Hoary 09:36, 2004 Dec 23 (UTC)

I believe that since the official website address spells it as "kouhaku" that that is probably the best way to go. That also seems to be the most common romanization of the word. Kamezuki 09:43, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)
That sounds reasonable to me. I've therefore standardized it accordingly, while leaving in the one "authentic" form at the very start -- which seems to be standard practice in Wikipedia. -- Hoary 10:13, 2004 Dec 23 (UTC)

[edit] "a strictly Japanese affair"

We read that Although Kouhaku is a strictly Japanese affair, foreign artists, particularly from neighboring countries, who have hits popular in Japan can also take part. What then does "a strictly Japanese affair" mean? -- Hoary 03:44, August 5, 2005 (UTC)

Actually, now it is Kouhaku is supposed to be a strictly Japanese affair, but I originally wrote that because we all know BoA is not Japanese, Lee-Jung-hyn is not Japanese, even Alfredo Casero is not Japanese. Just as long as a foreign act has a hit in Japan and has the capacity to go, that act is in.-Nanami Kamimura 10:44, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Yuna Ito

Why was Yuna Ito moved to the JPOP section? She IS in fact a foreign-born and raised artist, from Hawaii USA (I personally know her and her family.) Therefore, she should be listed as such, just like BoA. Groink 03:27, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Yuna Ito may be a foreign-born artist; but she's still has Japanese blood. Those under foreign acts are actual acts from outside Japan and does not include those with Japanese heritage. - 上村七美 03:34, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] More indepth?

For some reason, the Japanese Wikipedia has alot more Kohaku related stuff (including a breakdown of results and stuff for EVERY YEAR!!). Think maybe we could take the English pages in relation to this event to that level? ViperSnake151 00:34, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

One nice thing about kana: A lot of information can be jam packed into a single article without becoming really huge. English writing doesn't have that same luxury. I think the article is fine as-is. What I would do instead is translate the individual articles for each of the 57 editions and link to them, rather than trying to jam all the editions into one page. Earlier, I added links to the Japanese Wikipedia articles hoping someone would do this. Organizing it like this is more web-friendly. Groink 07:27, 6 December 2006 (UTC)