Talk:Isoroku Yamamoto's sleeping giant quote

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope 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.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

MILHIST This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.

Contents

[edit] change of title

Can we change the title of this article from "Isoroku Yamamoto's sleeping giant quote" to "Isoroku Yamamoto's alleged sleeping giant quotation?" Why should we expect the word "quote" to do the work of both a noun and a verb when we have "quotation" ready to use as the former? 165.91.64.199 (talk) 00:52, 28 March 2008 (UTC)RKH

replaced all uses of the word quote with the word quotation in the actual text and i also correcte the grammar of the quotation itself. 76.68.204.52 (talk) 15:00, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] From Votes for deletion

  • Isoroku Yamamoto's sleeping giant quote - somewhat unverifiable analysis, this is interesting research into the veracity of the quote, but it seems to be more appropriate as the beginning of a snopes.com piece rather than a Wikipedia article. Daniel Quinlan 09:47, Aug 3, 2003 (UTC)
    • It's at least as valid as the Bill Gates "Open letter to hobbyists" article. Keep. -- Cimon Avaro on a pogo-stick 16:37, Aug 9, 2003 (UTC)
    • Well, I agree that the subject matter is on the borderline - at best - for an encyclopaedia. It turns out it's not suitable for snopes.com, because it falls outside their definition of an urban legend (which includes multiple variants). If we can find a site which will take the content, and which is not likely to disappear (so much web content is *not* permanent - Snopes itself might easily go away if the maintainers - a couple - can't continue, and nobody is around to pick up from them) then yeah, we can lose it. Until then, it has real content (some of which would be very hard for the average person to find out on their own), people use it (I did!), and it's "mostly harmless". -- Noel 15:13, 10 Aug 2003 (UTC)
      • I needed it — Please keep, TORA! TORA! TORA!'s directors need Wikipedia entries also. - Sparky 12:01, 23 Jan 2004 (UTC)
      • Found this article useful. Citing some sources would be great, but this is far from the sort of thing Wikipedia needs to worry about cleaning out - just cleaning up.


I think it's time to quit using Wikipedia to forward the idea of REVISIONIST HISTORY. Translating JAPANESE is an INEXACT SCIENCE at best. People work on expressing the MEANING, not the exact words in a statement. The only language that comes close to exact meaning in words is GERMAN, and you STILL have to work on the EXACT meaning of what the author has to say. ( For example, Does MIEN KAMPF mean " My STRUGGLE " or " MY BATTLE ( or WAR ) "?

Aeb1barfo 16:23, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Napoleon

If Yamamoto did indeed say it, he might have been paraphrasing Napoleon, who said something very similar about China. I typed napoleon china sleeping giant into Google and got over 5000 hits.

Are you serious? I typed alien napoleon INSTANT DEATH RAY into google and got 311,000 results. Hardly a reliable source to find out if anyone said something. Liquidtenmillion 23:42, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
It seems like he had a point though; just taking the first quote, it seems Napoleon said "China is a sleeping giant. Let her lie and sleep, for when she awakens she will astonish the world." Similar enough, eh?
I disagree, I only got 161,000. Aaрон Кинни (t) 09:23, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Original research

Is this article not original research? It certainly has an air of it. Ben Finn (talk) 17:19, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] References

Is that 1864 date right on the Lawrence Suid reference? It seems strange, especially since the Naval Institute article says that that agency was established in 1871. MarkHB (talk) 16:48, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Giant, or tiger?

Is this the correct translation? (Some) Swedish history books says that he talked about a sleeping tiger, not giant. Are the books incorrect? 81.16.160.34 (talk) 08:54, 21 April 2008 (UTC)