User talk:Tadakuni/Talk page from 1 Jan. to 23 Sept. 2008

Kutsuki Masatsuna

I wonder if I'm correct in remembering that you are interested in Kutsuki Masatsuna, fudai daimyo of Oki and Ōmi with holdings in Tamba and Fukuchiyama.<.ref>Titsingh, Issac. (1834). Annales des empereurs du japon, p. 420.<./ref> If so, good. I've created a stub which you can likely improve. Best wishes for the new year --Ooperhoofd (talk) 14:03, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXII (December 2007)

The December 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:44, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

The Kukishin Page

Hi! Please make sure that you read all the information about the name of the Kuki family before changing it! The name itself *does not* mean Nine Demons. It states as such on the page if you scroll down a bit. Additonally, the lineage that you keep puttig back up is not for *Kukishin Ryu*, but for a branch called *Hontai Yoshin Ryu*. Thanks! Mekugi (talk) 14:25, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

I thought I was reverting vandalism by restoring that section. My mistake. As for the name, I'm sure even you will note that the "ki" of "Kuki" only has one minor difference with the "ki" of "demon," hence my assumption. I'm sorry for being incorrect. I'll leave said article alone from now on. Thank you. -Tadakuni (talk) 17:31, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

No worries. I probably didn't log in when I did the changes before. :) Yes, the name thing is slight...hence the confusion. It's unusual! Most native readers of the language don't know about it either. Mekugi (talk) 07:18, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Order of the Sacred Treasure

You may recall that last year, I said that I planned to move Order of Sacred Treasures (plural) to Order of the Sacred Treasure (singular). Happily, this is one of those instances where I was unnecessarily worried about the complexity of the task. Despite my risk-averse misgivings, it turned out to present no problems. Thanks anyway for your encouraging response to that tentative call for help. --Ooperhoofd (talk) 13:41, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know, Ooperhoofd. Good to hear that this got resolved without much complexity. Looking forward to more progress in the days and weeks to come. -Tadakuni (talk) 17:52, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Daijō-kan and Kugyō

I continue to be very grateful for you help with Daijō-kan; and in that context, I suppose it's possible that you'd be interested in scanning User talk:Amake#Daijō-kan and Kugyō. As you can discover for yourself, the issues at hand flow from User:Bueller 007's critical observations concerning:

• Daijō-kan -- see Talk:Daijō-kan#Simplification.
• Kugyō -- see Talk:Kugyō#The list.

In addition, these threads would seem to have relevance in the following contexts:

• Talk:Daijō Daijin#Proposed deletion of Eight Ministries
• Talk:Sadaijin#Proposed deletion of Eight Ministries
• Talk:Udaijin#Proposed deletion of Eight Ministries
• Talk:Naidaijin#Proposed deletion of Eight Ministries
• Talk:Dainagon#Proposed deletion of Eight Ministries
• Talk:Chūnagon#Proposed deletion of Eight Ministries

You understand that most articles evolve independently; but, in my view, these would seem to be inextricably inter-related. --Ooperhoofd (talk) 01:17, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Conflict of interest?

Now wait, User:Tadakuni creates article Makino Tadakuni. Is that a conflict of interest? (Just joking.) Fg2 (talk) 21:28, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Ha ha ha. Good one. :) Guilty as charged, I guess. Both for that and for Mizuno Tadakuni (though I edited and didn't create that one). -Tadakuni (talk) 05:55, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXIII (January 2008)

The January 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 01:18, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Changing user name

I've begun a process of changing my user name. I flatter myself that you'd likely recognize my "voice" under any circumstances. Perhaps this becomes a mere formality, but nothing convinces me that you think that way. FYI -- An alternative name I considered for a time would have been a bit like someone else's, a nod to "Bendono" in the contrived user name "Jōō-dono" .... I also considered a nod to "Fg2" in a name like "Jōō-dono2" .... Instead, my user name choice was bland, almost trite, obvious, plain. I didn't feel BOLD enough -- not yet. Maybe in the future?

User:Ooperhoofd → User:Tenmei?

• Current name: Ooperhoofd (talk · contribs · logs · block log)
• Requested name: Tenmei (other projects?) (rename user)
• Reason: During the past year, my primary focus has had to do with Japanese era names (nengō). These time-period names were changed periodically, but not regularly -- some lasting only months, and others lasting for decades. I want to adopt one of these Japanese era names as my user name. As it happens, my initial user name, "Ooperhoofd," was a deliberate mis-spelling of the Dutch word for the chief trader on the island of Dejima in Nagasaki harbor. In Japan, the title Opperhoofd had significance during the 300 years in which all but the VOC merchants were excluded from Japan as part of a deliberate, "country-in-chains" policy (sakoku). Now that I'm beginning to feel more comfortable in the Wikipedia environment, I think I can cast aside a user name which serves me less well than it did some months ago. A new vista of perceived opportunities is beginning to open up for me, and I want to mirror something of a nengō-informed approach to a what I'm doing as a Wikipedia editor. In that context, the nengō which means "dawn" seems an attractive alternative, a good step in a constructive direction. "Tenmei" is short ... and, yes, I know that I need to learn to write in shorter sentences. The other users whose opinions I most value will have no difficulty in adapting to this name change -- and, in fact, I flatter myself that they would likely recognize my contributions even if I were identified by an unfamiliar IP-address. My prose has been charitably called "a dense, overly-academic" writing style -- as you can see for yourself here. I wonder if a user name change will help me "find my own voice" -- assuming, of course, that I still have it in me to grow a little bit. --Ooperhoofd (talk) 03:27, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Who knows how this will unfold? --Ooperhoofd (talk) 19:26, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Ooperhoofd- As always, thanks for apprising me of these sorts of things. "Tenmei" would certainly be an interesting name change, and considering the word's meaning, I can see its attraction. Regardless of your course of action, I hope I can keep working with you here. Best regards. -Tadakuni (talk) 21:44, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Military history coordinator selection

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are aiming to elect nine coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by February 14! Woody (talk) 10:38, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Templates as alternative to categories?

You see Wikipedia's "categories" as a plausible tool; and, of course, you are correct. I see your point; but I also wonder if templates might be helpful

• in the context of articles about Fudai hatamoto of the Tokugawa shogunate?
• in the context of articles about the flexible bureaucracy (the bugyō system) of the Heian through Edo periods of pre-modern Japan?

This seems worth pondering. Maybe templates could be developed into a useful tool for parsing the sometimes obscure nature of pre-Meiji Japan. If so, perhaps you'll want to give some passing thought to the trivial exchange here? The process of categorization involves making decisions about what to include and what not to include; but if you're like me, you'd bee likely to overlook the "non-include" aspect of any sorting process. -- Tenmei (talk) 16:45, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Tenmei- an interesting interchange indeed! The thought hadn't crossed my mind, actually...a template, say, on each of the 3 Bakufu, with all the major offices and vassal types listed therein! Since I'm most familiar with the Tokugawa bakufu, I'd have to focus on that, but I can see a format similar to the dajō-kan one you posted on your talk page, with an aoi crest of course, instead of the chrysanthemum. Actually, making a list of the key offices of the Tokugawa Shogunate would be a good exercise in and of itself...

At any rate, thanks again for keeping me posted! -Tadakuni (talk) 16:56, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Harold Bolitho

I started Harold Bolitho ....

• Bolitho's identifies his current research interests as including Tokugawa institutions, the Bakumatsu and the Meiji Restoration period with emphasis on regionalism. In his 1969 doctoral dissertation at Yale University, "The Fudai Daimyo and the Tokogawa Settlement," in which he developed his point-of-view about the fudai daimyo in the bakufu. On the basis of his research, he argued that it was their collective power and competing interests which prevented the accumulation of unfettered power in the central government. He argued that "historians, believing too readily that the fudai were more bureaucrats than barons, have ... assumed that they were the model servants of centralized feudalism" and that "an examination of their roles supports no such belief."

I dunno -- thought you'd be interested? --Tenmei (talk) 21:31, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Tenmei-- thanks for letting me know about this new article. Indeed I am interested in Harold Bolitho-- his works (especially Treasures among Men: The Fudai Daimyo in Tokugawa Japan) have been an inspiration to me, as well as an impetus to learn even more on the topic. It's going to be difficult for me to be 100% into this right now, as I'm having computer problems, but with any luck, I'll return my full attention to this, sometime next week. Best Regards. -Tadakuni (talk) 21:39, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Kyoto shoshidai

Re: Kyoto shoshidai -- I'm not entirely happy with what I'm doing with the list in this article. I'm thinking that my work here is a bit too sloppy, perhaps. I'm having second thoughts .... For now, I was hoping that you'd consider it something like a small step forward, but not yet entirely satisfactory to either one of us .... More later. Just wanted to give you a quick heads up in case you were wondering. --Tenmei (talk) 18:01, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Tenmei- thanks for the heads-up. I think the list is fine for now; however, I think that ultimately, perhaps a table would be best- would make it look more neat. Is there anywhere on Wikipedia that has a tutorial for lists? I'd certainly like to learn how to do it myself. Putting the List of Han into table form might be good too. At any rate, thanks again. -Tadakuni (talk) 20:41, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Tadakuni -- I'm still not entirely comfortable with all the dates I've been posting. As long as I've transcribed them accurately from a clearly cited source, it's close enough for a start and better than nothing at all; but any minor discrepancies between the online Papinot and the dates you've previously posted at Kyoto Shoshidai are leaving me a little puzzled.

I trust your work, of course. And I'm inclined to trust Meyers' work in print, but we have to accept the possibility of something as simple as a typo is less likely to be captured and corrected in an online source like the ones from Tübingen.

I'm thinking about developing a list of questionable discrepancies at Talk:Kyoto Shoshidai -- probably should have done this before now. These are questions to which I don't need answers, but I'm pretty sure that I want to make a distinction between "facts" that are merely good enough for now and that entirely different set of "facts" about which I am sure, confident, content. Caveat lector works as a general rule, but since you and I will probably be the only ones delving into this backwater on a regular basis, I reckon I need to be a little be more precise about what I'm intending -- see Talk:Sakai clan#The father of Sakai Hōitsu?. Frankly, I don't care about the answer to any questions having to do with this specific artist -- not really; but I do want to note any discrepancies I encounter between your sources and mine -- or between the sources I'm currently exploring and others I've yet to investigate. I'm still thinking this through. For example, what about the following:

• Sakai Tadaaki (酒井忠義) (August 4, 1813-December 5, 1873), also known as Sakai Tadayoshi,<:ref name="gk1">Meyer, Eva-Maria."Gouverneure von Kyôto in der Edo-Zeit." Universität Tübingen (in German).</ref> was a Japanese daimyo of the Edo period, and he was a prominent shogunal official.<:ref>Keene, Donald. (2002). Emperor of Japan: Meiji and His World, 1852-1912, p. 43.</ref> He would become Obama's last daimyō, holding this position until the feudal domains were abolished in 1871.

Should I have held back from posting anything at all until I'd nailed down any and all name variation questions? I reckon it's probably better to have posted this because it's now open for anybody to correct or amplify or whatever ... and maybe this is just the way the collaborative Wikipedia process is supposed to unfold.

The Ashikaga shoguns once confused me terribly. Eventually I learned that Ashikaga Yoshitane was first called Ashikaga Yoshiki (and sometimes called Ashikaga Yoshimura), then Ashikaga Yoshitada ... and Ashikaga Yoshiteru was first called Ashikaga Yoshifuji. Yeah, right. Now that I think about it, this phase is probably inevitable. No worries. If anything to do with the Tokugawa weltanschauung seems difficult, I can always vacation by revisiting "the more manageable chaos of the Muromachi bakufu."

More later. --Tenmei (talk) 21:43, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Tenmei- the discrepancies between your source and the one I used (the Japanese Wikipedia entry on the Kyoto shoshidai) are indeed fascinating; it makes me wonder who had what resources when compiling each of those two lists. I can probably dig up a list of the shoshidai in print, but it'd take a little while for me to get down to the institution that has the books I'd need. Perhaps with a print list of the shoshidai we'd be able to make some kind of sense of the strengths and weaknesses of our two web resources. As a matter of fact, in the interim I believe I have a couple of Japanese print resources in my personal possession that would, I think, greatly improve the main Shoshidai article; I'll peruse them presently and see about uploading some content today. -Tadakuni (talk) 18:01, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Oops...on closer inspection, the books in question are in English, not Japanese, and the one Japanese source that I thought would have relevant information instead deals exclusively with the machi bugyō throughout the country. Well, even so, the bugyō article could probably use some more citation, too, to expand on the good foundation you made for it. -Tadakuni (talk) 18:05, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Tadakuni -- As far as I'm concerned, there is no reason for us to feel any need to rush. What this exercise has done is to help me appreciate the kind of work you did in beginning to open up this subject. Even with the small discrepancies, these articles represent a valuable step forward. Kudos to you.

The notes in Ackroyd's book on Tokushi Yoron mentioned a French text that she couldn't locate; but there is a copy at NYPL. Maybe when I go to the library, I'll try to take a second look at a 1906 Papinot. A constructive step in a plausible, at least .... --Tenmei (talk) 19:53, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXIV (February 2008)

The February 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 08:12, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you so much for fixing the vandalism. Ill get the rest. But thanks for the attempt. By the way I know who did it so im going to get them banned. --Destructo^{Talk to me} 03:11, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome; glad to be of help.-Tadakuni (talk) 05:06, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Hidden Page

		Destructo 087's Hidden Page
		Well done finding Destructo's Hidden Page--DestructoTalk to me 02:40, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Masamune

Thanks. If you're sure about this, shouldn't the file be uploaded again with the correct name? :) The mislabeled one could then be deleted. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 21:38, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Took care of it; glad to help. -Tadakuni (talk) 01:58, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Possibly useful

I vaguely recall you asked me something about lists -- don't quite remember anything about context? I thought of you when I stumbled across this: Wikipedia:WikiProject Lists ...? --Tenmei (talk) 14:51, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

I've been looking for something like these templates for some time; and today I finally discovered part of what I've been looking for -- Category:Family trees. What do you think of the following:

• Template:Allen family ... format reading down -- limited number?
• Template:Birley family ... format reading down -- larger number?
• Lanier family tree ... non-template format reading across?
• Qing Dynasty family tree ... non-template format reading down?

Graph using color to explain inter-marriage relationships

Another possibility worth mentioning in this context -- also beyond the scope of my modest ambitions for the foreseeable future -- is the multi-colored graph which illustrates the effects of intermarriage in the Udall family. In my imagination, I do recall using something like colors as I tried to grasp the complex family relationships of Taira no Tokuko; but that was only a passing fancy. In this context, maybe it helps to mention that I don't much like this graph ja:平徳子; but I do like ja:高倉天皇 and ja:画像:Emperor family tree38-50.png which is included in ja:元明天皇.

I'm not even going to try to think about what it would take to reproduce anything like the Julio-Claudian family tree, but I recognize that the grand result is elegant. For today, my interest in this is reasonably restrained. What do you think? --Tenmei (talk) 16:58, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

My tentative first steps in creating a family tree are probably good enough. I tried to think of something not too difficult, and the first thing that came to mind was the Imperial line which came to an end with Emperor Buretsu. I used the template option, but I'm not wedded to it in any sense; but in the narrow cohort of Emperor Nintoku's progeny, this became a plausible strategy. The same template is posted at the bottom of ten pages -- from the 15th emperor through the 25th. What are your thoughts? --Tenmei (talk) 20:10, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

There is a tentative template posted on Bugyō at the bottom of the page. This organizational chart for the Tokugawa bureaucracy reads across rather than down. This format is much more difficult to create, but I think it works better because it allows more characters within a single info-box or cell -- as for example, in "Wakadoshiyori". In my view, this "reading-across" format suggests that meaning is to be construed in a slightly different manner than the "reading-down" construct .... I wondered if you'd form a similar impression?

The basic format is copied from a book. The published chart attracted my attention precisely because it was a little bit different that the way I'd imagined it in my mind's eye. For example, my own personal idea of the organization chart would not have included the daimyō -- and I think that my perception of the shogunate was demonstrably too flat without that additional info-box. Perhaps more importantly, I found myself confronted with a graphic which showed plainly that I hadn't quite put 2+2 together; and I now feel that I was missing the point a little bit in terms of grasping the fundamental organizational flaw in a starkly skewed flow-chart. I just didn't appreciate the extent of the bottleneck which was created between the rōjū and the rubber-to-the-road bugyō.

• See -- Template talk:Tokugawa Organization Chart#First draft.

I wonder what your first impression will be? I wonder if you'll be persuaded that this graphic is ready for metastasis, or does the gestalt still need a little bit more tweaking? --Tenmei (talk) 01:48, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Tenmei- sorry I haven't been able to get back to you, it's been something of a tough week. As far as the general layout goes it's good, but in terms of technicality I think it could use some tweaking, especially with regard to the chain of command...all stuff I'll go into greater detail soon. Thanks for letting me know, and thanks for taking the initiative in making this first diagram. -Tadakuni (talk) 20:25, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

No rush -- not to worry. When you get around to it .... This is certainly not an urgent matter, not really all that important when you think about it. Just a small step in a constructive direction .... --Tenmei (talk) 14:56, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Tōyama Kagemoto

Hi Tadakuni, You placed Kagemoto in Category:Samurai, but the article was already in that category. Did you mean something different, e.g. Category:Hatamoto? Fg2 (talk) 07:12, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Oops. My mistake. Yes, I did indeed mean Category:Hatamoto. Thanks for catching that. -Tadakuni (talk) 12:52, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXV (March 2008)

The March 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 02:48, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Date Muneyoshi or Tamura Muneyoshi

I have an difficult-to-resolve question about one minor part of the Date clan article. I wonder if a less specific, vaguer word would be better in the "Adopted members" section? Unfortunately, I have no suggestions to offer; and worse, this aspect of Japanese clan practices is inevitably difficult to parse. For whatever it's worth, I've put 2+2 together in this way -- and, as you can see, the sum is a bit foggy:

• "This senior branch of the Date produced a non-standard offshoot. Date Tadamune (1599-1658), a son of Masamune, produced more than one son. Tadamune's second son, Muneyoshi, revived the name of Tamura, an ancient Mutsu family name which had been relinquished by Masamune. Date Muneyoshi or Tamura Muneyoshi (1637-1678) settled himself at Ichinoseki domain (30,000 koku) in Mutsu province, where his descendants resided up through 1868. The head of this clan line was ennobled as an hereditary 'Viscount' in the Meiji period."

On the other hand, there may be no better term than the word "adopted"; and in that case, the short paragraph I've written needs to be modified. What I've added is verifiable, but this first draft text could still be a bit off.

What about incorporating the term "side branch"? This term is used in reference to Ichinoseki in Goodman's Japan and the Dutch. What do you think? -- Tenmei (talk) 15:34, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Tenmei-- I think that it might just belong in the "clan members" section, since Muneyoshi was born into the Date clan and adopted out (as opposed to vice-versa). Also, I think Tamura Muneyoshi is more suitable, since the Tamura of Ichinoseki were independent daimyo-- even though they adopted in and out from the Sendai-Date over the course of the Edo period. Also, I've heard "collateral branch" or "cadet branch" frequently used to describe relations like that of the Tamura to the main Date-- kind of like, say, the Aizu-Matsudaira to the Tokugawa, or the Sadowara-Shimazu to the Satsuma-Shimazu. -Tadakuni (talk) 15:38, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Oh wait, unless I'm misunderstanding the connotation of "adopted"...sorry. -Tadakuni (talk) 15:38, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

What about incorporating the term "side branch"? This term is used in reference to Ichinoseki in Goodman's Japan and the Dutch; and Goodman may have seen that John Whitney Hall used this term in a 1952 paper. --Tenmei (talk) 15:43, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Good point, certainly would sound better than "collateral," which in an age of cluster bombs may sound too awkward. Yeah, I'll go with "side branch." -Tadakuni (talk) 15:47, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

When Taira no Tokuko was adopted by Emperor Go-Shirakawa, she became the daughter of the Imperial family and she would have been, in theory, no longer the daughter of a very powerful subject of the emperor. In this case, wasn't Muneyoshi preserving a name from extinction or disuse? No ties with the Date senior branch of the clan were severed, as in the legal-fiction by which the one-time second daughter of Taira no Kiyomori was considered to have a quite different lineage as Kenreimon-in, daughter of an emperor, wife of an emperor and mother of an emperor?

For me, "adoption" is a difficult term to grasp in the pre-modern Japanese sense of the word.--Tenmei (talk) 15:58, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm going to copy this exchange to Talk:Date clan#Side branches. Maybe it will serve as a kind of "heads-up" for some other editor who knows something which will improve this small section of the Date clan article. --Tenmei (talk) 16:33, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXVI (April 2008)

The April 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 02:24, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

RfD nomination of Heisei 18

I have nominated Heisei 18 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) for discussion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. RichardΩ612 Ɣ |ɸ 15:46, May 11, 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXVII (May 2008)

The May 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 02:12, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXVIII (June 2008)

The June 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 20:27, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Hyūga class helicopter destroyer

In Hyūga class helicopter destroyer, one and only one sentence is accompanied by an in-line citation:

The JDS Hyūga is the first aircraft carrier to be specifically constructed for Japanese marine forces since the end of the Pacific War.<:ref>PBS/WNET, NYC: "Japan's About-Face: The military's shifting role in post-war society." July 8, 2008.</ref>

As you may know, this sentence may be construed as controversial in the context of an otherwise carefully-crafted article. --Tenmei (talk) 22:22, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Tenmei- good to hear from you again. Sorry I've been absent all this time; I needed a break from Wikipedia. I've never seen that article before, nor have I worked on it, but you've got a definite point regarding how it may be construed as controversial. (I'm kind of surprised, actually, that the Japanese military is building something so big)

At any rate, I'm sorry I don't have much else to contribute on the topic; it's a bit far from my usual realm of Tokugawa Bakufu issues. Sometimes I do contribute to articles about modern US Navy destroyers, but that's only because I have an existing interest in them. However, now that you've shown this to me, perhaps I may get involved with JMSDF-related articles after all. Thanks, and best regards. -Tadakuni (talk) 23:13, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

EA again

In this pair of edits, you invite EA to edit some other page. But he can't, because he's blocked. -- Hoary (talk) 23:36, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

...oops. True-- and thanks for reminding me-- but I was just following the instructions on the Wikipedia:Copyright_problems page. So for blocked users, that last step is optional?-Tadakuni (talk) 00:43, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Please see this. -- Hoary (talk) 03:43, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Another Exiled Ambition article

I cleaned up the article on Kamei Korenori today, and added a bit from Kerr's Okinawa, which I'm reading right now. Exiled Ambition's phrasing is so poor, it's often difficult, if not impossible, to understand what the original meaning was meant to be. If you could take a look at this, see that I haven't created any factual errors or misrepresentations in my clean-up efforts, I'd appreciate it. Also, as you seem quite experienced in organizing the proper titles and such within the succession boxes, if any change needs to be made there... Thanks. LordAmeth (talk) 23:29, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXIX (July 2008)

The July 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 03:02, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

A long overdue honor

		The WikiChevrons
		I present the WikiChevrons to Tadakuni for his incredible contributions to articles related to samurai history, and for repairing the extensive damage caused by Exiled Ambition. LordAmeth (talk) 15:45, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

I don't know if it might be inaccurate or overly self-indulgent to say that I was for a time the chief contributor in the field of pre-modern and early modern Japanese history, but in any case I believe the torch has absolutely been passed. 頑張って下さいね。 LordAmeth (talk) 15:45, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

I am humbled by this honor, LordAmeth; I will do my utmost to continue striving for excellence in whatever I contribute here. ありがたき幸せにぞんじまする！ -Tadakuni (talk) 20:39, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Tohoku focus?

Nice work on the Nanbu clan article. Just out of curiosity, do you have a particular interest in Tohoku (the Nanbu, the Tsugaru, etc)? Or is it just sort of somewhere to start, and you plan on moving on to doing any/all clans eventually?

I plan on continuing to work primarily on Okinawan topics for a while.. I also have some material on the Kanto-based Toshima clan and their Shakujii castle which I plan to work on at some point soon. Also, just picked up a book entitled 対馬藩江戸家老 which looks like it could be interesting. Don't know when I'll get around to working on that stuff though. LordAmeth (talk) 04:39, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

LordAmeth- thanks for the message and the kind words. Indeed I do have a particular interest in the Tohoku and its history, partly for personal reasons and partly because I feel that it is very understudied and underappreciated. However, I do think that once I move through all the major clans of the Tohoku, I'll probably continue with other clans elsewhere in Japan. It's just that for the time being, I have the greatest amount of resources pertaining to Tohoku-related topics.

Interesting stuff you've mentioned, by the way...I'd like to keep helping in little ways on the Okinawan stuff, however I can. Also, I'm glad you've got a book about Tsushima-han, I feel like that's another domain that no one pays attention to. By the way, a random question-- who ruled the Oki islands? I read (and wrote in the article on Matsue han) that it was Matsue, but was that always the case? -Tadakuni (talk) 04:43, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

P.S., I'm currently hard at work on Satake clan. -Tadakuni (talk) 04:44, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm afraid I don't see anything about the Oki Islands in my sources, and I don't know anything about it. Sorry.

I'm starting my article on the Toshima clan; if you have a chance, can you take a look at the list of clan heads? There are a few names for which I'm unsure of the reading (and therefore romanization). Also, in the final generation, it seems that Yasuaki and his brother Yasutsune were both heads of the clan (see my article on Shakujii castle - following the fall of Shakujii, Yasutsune led his forces in reinforcement of Yasuaki at Hiratsuka). How do you think we should list them? Thanks. LordAmeth (talk) 01:09, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

A preliminary look at the ja-wiki article gives the following list of succession for the Miyashiro line of the Toshima, starting with Munetomo-- Munetomo->Yasumune->Noriyasu->Yasumori->Yasukage->(a daughter)->Yasutsugu->Tsuneyasu->Nobuyasu, from here it branches into two, Yasutsune (who succeeded Nobuyasu) and his brother Yasuaki. Yasuaki was adopted as Yasutsune's heir. Yasuaki's heir founded the Miyashiro clan of hatamoto. These adoption issues are tricky, indeed...I wish I had a good source to help you with here...-Tadakuni (talk) 01:41, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Ah nuts, I just realized there's two different family trees...interesting...-Tadakuni (talk) 01:43, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Redirect of O-ie sodo

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on O-ie sodo, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because O-ie sodo is a redirect to a non-existent page (CSD R1).

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting O-ie sodo, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 16:20, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Table vs Prose

Can I bother you for your thoughts on something? I've just expanded a table on the article Ryūkyū mission to Edo (which could probably use a better name. Any suggestions?), to add in the names of the contemporary shogun and king, and the lead envoy in the mission. As the table thus grew too big to keep on the top of the article, where an infobox might otherwise be, I moved it down.

What do you think of this table? Should I keep it? Or should I perhaps simply incorporate all that info into the prose descriptions of each mission?

I don't think the table looks particularly attractive as it stands, and the content (and organization thereof) is risking being a copyright violation of the table in Ronald Toby's "State and Diplomacy in Early Modern Japan", from which I took the information. If I change it to prose, that'll solve the problem of where to put the table, and it seeming a bit redundant perhaps, as well as the format/organization copyvio issue. It would also allow me to spell out the "congratulation" and "gratitude" mission types, which right now seem perhaps like a code; in full prose sentences, I can write things like "The 1752 mission, composed of 94 envoys led by Prince Nakijin, was sent in gratitude for the investiture of King Shō Boku", thereby explaining out what "gratitude" means in the table's mission type listing. I guess the main downside to converting everything to prose is that the individual mission descriptions will start to look overly formulated, as each listing will say "The XXXX mission, composed of YY envoys led by Prince so-and-so, was sent in gratitude/congratulation for the investiture/succession of King/Shogun so-and-so," a writing style which could make readers think "Why isn't this in a table?"

Your thoughts on the matter, and suggestions, would be most appreciated. よろしく。 LordAmeth (talk) 15:06, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

LordAmeth- Thanks for all the help lately, I really appreciate it. As far as what you're saying here goes...I like the idea of a table because it's so systematic, but I must say that if you could turn it into prose, that may be better. Thing is, though, if you go beyond just stating "The XXXX mission, composed of YY envoys led by Prince so-and-so, was sent in gratitude/congratulation for the investiture/succession of King/Shogun so-and-so," and actually go into just a little bit of detail about something-- anything-- that sets that mission apart, then you'd solve the problem of it looking overly formulated. Just add a little bit of extra detail so that it sets each mission apart from the other. I mean, for example, if I were to (somehow) come into possession of a record of ALL the times that Date Yoshikuni of Sendai paid his respects to the shogun, I could say "The shogunal audience, on XX date, was held in congratulation for YY thing the Sendai fief did," and then have "The shogunal audience on XX date, was held in congratulation for ZZ other thing Sendai did," but if I go into detail and say something like "The roju Lord YY was at" the first one, and that Katakura Kojuro, the Sendai-han karo, was at the other one, it sets each of them apart. Of course, personally, I would want to put in interesting anecdotes too, but that, I'm afraid, may go beyond the purview of what Wikipedia is. Anyway, I hope that helps. -Tadakuni (talk) 15:50, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Nanbu clan passes GA

Congrats! I've passed the Nanbu clan article for Good Article status. Keep up the good work!! LordAmeth (talk) 13:12, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Terminology: 継妃

Maybe you can help me out with this terminology question. I'm working on a list of those entombed at Tamaudun, the Ryukyuan royal mausoleum. This site duplicates the list posted on a plaque at the site itself, of which I have a photo.. some of the kingdom's queens are listed as, for example, 尚豊王妃 （しょうほうおうひ, Queen of King Shou Hou）, but others are listed as, for example, 尚豊王継妃。 What do you suppose this means? Something like "the queen who succeeded him (the king)"? Or "the queen who came after the other queen"? How should I translate it? Thanks. LordAmeth (talk) 04:37, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

LordAmeth- sorry I haven't gotten back to you yet on this one. My guess is that the "others" might be either a second wife/queen (taken after the death of the first), or a "secondary queen," if that makes any sense. The only thing I can compare it to in my head is the idea of a daimyo's/noble's wife-- the main/"legal" wife is seishitsu 正室 ("main room") and concubines are sokushitsu 側室 ("side room(s)"). Sorry I can't be of any more help than this...I'll give it some more thought/poke around a bit more, though, and let you know if I find anything. Cheers, Tadakuni (talk) 04:10, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Television series with Matsudaira protagonists

Don't know how you feel about listing television shows in articles about real people... but if it's helpful, the protagonist (Ken Watanabe) of Gokenin Zankurō was a fictional Ogyū Matsudaira. Another jidaigeki with a Matsudaira as its protagonist was 源九郎旅日記 葵の暴れん坊. Genkuro used the fictional surname Hiramatsu, reversing the kanji of his Matsudaira surname. Fg2 (talk) 07:26, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

One of the most recognizable present-day real Matsudaira is Sadatomo, formerly prime-time anchor for NHK News. 「徳川家康の異父弟・松平定勝を祖とする伊予松山藩久松松平家の分家（旗本）の子孫。外交評論家磯村尚徳はいとこ。」　Fg2 (talk) 21:38, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Ah...descendant of a hatamoto-level Hisamatsu-Matsudaira (Iyo-Matsuyama branch), I see...also, the fictional stuff is important, but I'll add that later, once I'm further along with the history stuff. This could easily become the longest Wikipedia article I've ever written...-Tadakuni (talk) 21:46, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

No hurry, and no pressure to include them. These thoughts are running through my mind, and I don't want to cause edit conflicts while you're so busy working on the article (at a level well above anything I could add) so I thought this would be a convenient place to jot down a couple of notes. The article is awesome! Fg2 (talk) 02:04, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Nominations for the Military history WikiProject coordinator election

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are aiming to elect nine coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 (UTC) on September 14!
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:48, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXX (August 2008)

The August 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:28, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Military history WikiProject coordinator election

The September 2008 Military history WikiProject coordinator election has begun. We will be selecting nine coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of fourteen candidates. Please vote here by September 30!
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:37, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Sakai clan

File:Theo van Doesburg Arithmetic Composition (1930).jpg

Theo van Doesburg, Arithmetic Composition (1930).

Study for Arithmetic Composition (1930).

What you've done with Sakai clan "Family heads" is such an improvement over my best efforts -- congratulations. At first blush, I don't like it because the formatting isn't perfect yet ... but that trivial feeling, that insignificant artistic observation is so overwhelmed with surprise and delight.

For me, the true measure of your success is to be found in that reflexive moment when I said to myself, "Aha, yes. Why didn't I think to parse this data set with columnar formatting?"

I need to think about this some more. I'm wondering where else this simple formatting tool/device will help parse a complex array?

What you've achieved is as simple as one-two-three-four. In a sense, I'm almost persuaded that this is a small step forward from the complexity of family trees at ja:酒井氏. --Tenmei (talk) 14:01, 17 September 2008 (UTC)