Talk:Imperial Regalia of Japan

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is part of the Mythology taskforce of WikiProject Japan, which aims to improve and expand Wikipedia's coverage of Japanese mythology. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the taskforce page, where you can join the taskforce and see a list of open tasks.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the Project's quality scale.
This article has been marked as needing immediate attention.

Contents

[edit] reason

the regalia articles in the crown jewels template are always capitalised, for example Danish Crown Regalia or Imperial Regalia of the Holy Roman Empire. so in order for this article to be consistent, proposing the move. thanks.. Antares911 16:03, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

  • Sounds reasonable to me. If there's a standard naming convention, we should stick to it, though perhaps a better name would be Imperial Regalia of Japan to keep in consistency with the Holy Roman usage.--Mitsukai 19:54, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Sounds good too. I´m waiting what the rest thinks...? Antares911 21:54, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Oppose. I don't see how this is a proper noun. CDThieme 03:30, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
    • why, what´s the problem? Crown Jewels of the United Kingdom is written in capital letters as well. but since Japan does not have crown jewels but regalia, it should be capitalised. see above discussion Antares911 21:13, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Support "Imperial Regalia of Japan" violet/riga (t) 18:07, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

This article has been renamed as the result of a move request. violet/riga (t) 18:07, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Gamers, anime fans fagging up wikipedia

Am I the only person who thinks this rounding up of every reference to every god, object, historical figure or whathaveyou in every anime and game ever made is getting a little old?

-No, you aren't. I don't know that I completely agree with your terminology, but it definitely doesn't help the credibility of this project to have little cites like this on every page. It seems like it would make a lot more sense to get the encyclopedia closer to 'done' before people start adding in little tidbits that are completely useless to 99.9% of any viewers on a particular page.

--It doesn't seem like it should be on this page. Also, these items appear in several games and anime that are already released. This makes it looks like there is just one game that makes a reference to them. Wouldn't it be better if the page about the game/anime/whatever cited the reference instead?

-- the way you said it was a bit over the top, but I agree. It appeared we had a consensus on that one (at least an unformal one), so I moved the whole section (did not erase anything though) to the game. Tensaibuta 13:54, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Seriously incomplete?

Is it just me, or is this article missing a lot of information? For example, I was tweaking The Tale of the Heike and I came to see which two treasures didn't go to the bottom of the sea at Dannoura, and... there seems to be nothing. I know the mirror was melted in a fire in the Imperial palace, so they survived Dannoura, but that either the sword or beads was lost with Antoku. Anyone know which? --maru (talk) contribs

Yes, I think this is a gaping hole in the article. There has been a lot of speculation as to just how each artifact has come to be at its supposed present location (or lost), including professional work that would be encyclopedic. -BRPXQZME (talk) 18:15, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Other interpretation

I read an interpretation of sword as thunderbolt, mirror as sun and jewel as moon. --Error 01:25, 18 February 2007 (UTC)