User talk:Urashimataro/Archive07

Kamakura

My concern was the use of the term 'independence from Kyoto was never complete.' What exactly is incomplete independence? As opposed to dependence or total independence? That was what I considered unclear. There was also incorrect use of parentheses. I thought it was simpler to say that the de jure capital was 'linked' to Kyoto. Maybe you would prefer to say it was 'poltically and adminitratively dependent on Kyoto?' Either way is fine with me. I just think its unclear to hint at degrees of independence in a lead paragraph. The line needs to be more specific.Mdw0 (talk) 04:34, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Done. Got the book out and expanded that section. I hope it's clear enough now. If not, I will fix it when I can because from tomorrow I won't be at home for a month.

NOTE

I AM NOT AT HOME. I MAY NOT BE ABLE TO REPLY QUICKLY, BUT I WILL. - Frank (Urashima Tarō) (talk) 02:09, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Cut and paste move.

Hi.

Welcome to Wikipedia.

It looks like you did what is called a 'cut and paste move' with these two edits. Pages should not be moved this ways. The problems of this kind of moves are explained here. If you think a page should be moved and you can't do it yourself (which is described here), plese check the page Wikipedia:Requested moves. Moving stone lantern to tōrō is, as it is not just fixing a spelling, a potentially controversial move. In cases like this the procedure described at Wikipedia:Requested moves#Requesting potentially controversial moves should be followed.

Have a nice day.--ospalh (talk) 09:26, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Hmm.

While the two edits i menntioned do look like a cut and paste move, the whole story seems to be a bit more complicated. I can't really figure out where the main part of the text at Tōrō (which seems to appear with this single edit) came from. If you did write it in one go than thanks for a nice article.--ospalh (talk) 09:42, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Sorry for being so late: the article is indeed mine. I just realized too late that Stone Lantern should have been a disambig.Frank (Urashima Tarō) (talk) 13:10, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Seeking a broadened perspective

May I invite you to watchlist Shinto Shrine?

Your comments or suggestions may be helpful at Talk:Shinto shrine#Revert. I am posting this as a kind of "heads up;" however, I do not anticipate you will need to intervene. If something does develop, I want to learn from your point-of-view.

The contributions history here + an old dispute thread at Talk:Iwashimizu Hachiman-gū#Top three shrines cause me to guess that this is precisely the kind of problem which calls for a bit of worry. For more background, see also here

In response to an early-2009 dispute, I created Hakozaki Shrine, Usa Shrine and Modern system of ranked Shinto Shrines. The research which went into developing these articles informs my reaction to an otherwise trivial edit here. The small change suggests that this may have something to do with pre-1947 State Shinto ranking.

From 1871 to 1947, the Kanpei-sha (官幣社) identified a hierarchy of government-supported shrines most closely associated with the Imperial family. Included in the highest ranks were these three:

• Usa Shrine, Usa, Ōita)—Kanpei-taisha (官幣大社)
• Iwashimizu Shrine, Yawata, Kyoto— Kanpei-taisha, 3rd among the most highly ranked Imperial shrines
• Hakozaki Shrine, Fukuoka— Kanpei-taisha

Before 1947, the mid-range of ranked, nationally significant shrines or Kokuhei Chūsha (国幣中社) included Tsurugaoka Hachiman-gū at Kamakura, Kanagawa.

Maybe nothing will come of this. We'll see. In any case, thank you for your investment of time and concern across the past few years. --Tenmei (talk) 17:59, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

You are now a Reviewer

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, will be commencing a two-month trial at approximately 23:00, 2010 June 15 (UTC).

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under flagged protection. Flagged protection is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 20:18, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Buddhist architecture

Congratulations for becoming a reviewer! The Buddhist architecture project sounds interesting. However, I am afraid that I won't be of much help due to a lack of time. If you can live with a low-output collaborator, I'd sign up. There are some (mainly historical) notes and references here which I used for the intro of List of National Treasures of Japan (temples). Maybe they are useful for the project?! bamse (talk) 07:38, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the invitation Urashimataro, but I'm afraid I don't have the time either. Either way I doubt I could match the amount of output and organization you and Bamse produce (I don't know how you guys do it). But in the future when I come across any material relevant to Japanese architecture, I will make sure to add it to the appropriate pages. ~ AMorozov ^〈talk〉 02:31, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Japanese Buddhist architecture

Hi, I think template is for links to articles that is specifically about Japanese Buddhist architecture, Template:Japanese Buddhist architecture. Pagoda is universal, as its found in various other countries/cultures, that is why I thought it might not be a good link for the template.--Balthazarduju (talk) 01:42, 2 July 2010 (UTC)