User talk:TakuyaMurata

See the page history for retrieving old talks.

Open Source and Capitalism

I read your sub-article User:TakuyaMurata/Capitalist_view_of_Open_Source and have posted a response User_talk:Chevan/Open_Source_and_Capitalism. Would be curious to hear your thoughts. Chevan 15:26, Apr 8, 2004 (UTC)

I will give my thoughs later, so I can say exactly when.

MediaWiki:Japan

The Japanese flag wasn't there for partisan purposes. I put in flags for the respective countries for practically all "subdivisions of X country" MediaWikis. WhisperToMe 01:55, 2 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

I think the flag commonly used to present Japan, or Hinomaru is a complicated matter. Do you know that a number of teachers protest to put a flag in school? A number of people complained because a spokesman of the government bring the flag into the conference room? I think we should stay away from controversial topics. -- Taku 02:00, May 2, 2004 (UTC)

What about that flag is stirring up controversy in Japan? And is there a way to graphically "represent" Japan on the MediaWiki without using a flag? WhisperToMe 19:08, 2 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

File:Nishioka.jpg

Great photo!

Your orphan images

I noticed you have some superb photos in your orphan images page. Perhaps if you add any information to the Image: page we can find an article to host them? =) —John | Talk 04:48, 14 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, they are nice ones. I have found them over the Internet and I put them to orphan images page because I also didn't know the details of those images. Legality is fine I think. They are put under GFDL or copyright free (there is no such a thing as public domain in Japan by the way). Now that I am in Japan for vacation now, I will shot some my own photos. I will have much knowledge about them then :) -- Taku 09:33, May 14, 2004 (UTC)

Discussion in Manual of Style Japan

WTM has some strange ideas about you in Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style for Japan-related articles, please correct him. Jpatokal 03:30, 23 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Relating to "Shonen Jump" spellings e.g. Tenka'ichi Budôkai

Another thing of note is that many articles on people who have French and Spanish names include the diatritical marks (e.g. accents, circumflexes, umlauts) - I've seen some that didn't have redirects from non-marked titles! WhisperToMe 00:57, 28 Jun 2004 (UTC)

redirect

See Wikipedia talk:Committee of Wikipedians. Cheers, Sam [Spade] 22:46, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

re: Interwiki

IIRC, aren't the interwiki links supposed to be on the bottom to avoid that "2 blank lines floating above the article" thing? -- EmperorBMA|話す 09:00, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I didn't know that. Anyway, I will put the interwiki at the bottom of an article. Thanks. -- Taku 09:02, Jul 27, 2004 (UTC)

Cool, glad to help. ^_^ -- EmperorBMA|話す 09:09, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Action at a distance (physics)

Hello. I reverted your last edit to Action at a distance (Physics), because the template was broken due to a typo (it was {[delete}} instead of {{delete}}). I've also removed the double redirect from Action at a distance; with that gone, this is now an orphan page. - RedWordSmith 04:42, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Also - I noticed that you removed the computer science information from the new Action at distance (physics) article. At least two computer science articles link to that page now, even though the computer science information is no longer there. I've posted a note on the talk page, but as I said there, I'm not sure what to make of this. - RedWordSmith 05:06, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Okay, I found the "Action at distance" disambiguation page and the separate computer science article that was created, and I've updated the computer science articles that I've found that incorrectly link to the physics concept, so I think the struck out message above is no longer applicable. - RedWordSmith 23:14, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I am sorry about confusion. I think this is due to that I didn't notice a difference in name between action at a distance and action at distance. Google shows action at a distance is more popular name in both cs and physics. Thank you for cleaning up mess I made; I will also look at them and rename articles to action at a distance. -- Taku 23:53, Aug 2, 2004 (UTC)

re: Girl

just in case you don't have this on watchlist, I'll echo here since I am already doing the redirect...

I agree. That sounds like a good idea and would probably be more efficient than stubs for the children, but there's also a Boy (album) disam that seems to throw a wrench at it. I think that should be relatively easy to resolve, however, by creating a boy (disambiguation) page. Allright then, I will start folding girl back into woman (with the child header at the summary section) and do the same for boy into man. -- EmperorBMA|話す 06:05, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Featured article candidates

Taku, just to tell you that your new entries weren't deleted on Wikipedia:Featured article candidates, they were only moved to the top. Convention is that new nominations should appear at the top, not the bottom. --Shibboleth 03:15, 7 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Dogen

Hey, a long time ago, you moved Dogen to Dogen Zenji. Is that advisable? I always had the idea that it was preferable to minimize use of titles. Even Jesus Christ redirects to Jesus. - Nat Kraus e 18:33, 14 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Well, what I thought is that Dogen is a family name while Zenji is a given name. So just like other million people, the article should be named a full name. Did I miss something? -- Taku 00:45, Aug 15, 2004 (UTC)

I have the impression that you did. Zenji ("zen master") is a religious title applied infrequently to various people other than Dogen. Dogen is almost certainly his monk name. I think that his full religious name was "Eihei Dogen" and that his family name was Kigen, but I'm not sure I have those facts straight, and they seem fairly obscure, so I think just "Dogen" will suffice. - Nat Kraus e 02:24, 15 Aug 2004 (UTC)

If what you said is true, I think the article should named just Dogen. The convention we have is the article name does not include titles like master. I will make a move. -- Taku 03:12, Aug 17, 2004 (UTC)

Japan Demography

In your edit on 10 Aug 2004 to the Japan page you asked "revert again; why revert?". I had already added my reasoning to the discussion page so wasn't sure if you had read that or not. Please inlude your resoning on the discussion page if you think the section about religion should be left as it is after reading the discussion. Also in the same section, why did you change "chose not to marry" to "refused to get marry". I think the former statement is less POV. --Sekizaru 08:54, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I made the edit after reading those comments. Since asked, I also added my reasoning. Regarding, "chose not to marry" issue, I have no idea. I must have made some mistake in reverting that part. I will fix it. -- Taku 03:13, Aug 19, 2004 (UTC)

ALGOL programming language

'ALGOL programming language' WAS the original title. Watch out, or you'll again end up doing that thing you hate: messing up with article's titles.

That was wrongly named. The article should be named just ALGOL since the name is unambigous. -- Taku 12:04, Aug 19, 2004 (UTC)

IT IS NOT FOR YOU TO DECIDE WHAT TO NAME THE ARTICLE, and this is AGAINST ALL what you just said before: that you had no preference in naming. Look, it is ok if you revert, but PLEASE STOP removing the classifiers from those articles that, fortunately (thanks to a judicious writer), already have the right title to begin with.

Sorry, I didn't make myself clear. I don't have preference so I want to stick to the naming convention we have had. -- Taku 12:10, Aug 19, 2004 (UTC)

The naming convention that there is, does not say that you can change an article's title to remove the classifier if it has it. PLEASE STOP CHANGING the name of the 'ALGOL programming language' article to 'ALGOL' or I'll have to take this matter up to an administrator. Revert all the ones I changed, but PLEASE BE KIND ENOUGH TO leave alone the ones I didn't.

The convention [1] says

Convention: Languages which share their names with some other thing should be suffixed with "programming language" in the case of programming languages, or "language" in the case of natural languages. If the language's name is unique, there is no need for any suffix. For example, Python programming language and English language, but VBScript and Sanskrit.

So I think I am allowed to make a move if I read this correctly. Since the language name ALGOL is unique, there is no need to add the suffix. -- Taku 12:19, Aug 19, 2004 (UTC)

No, you're not. BUT please, can you stop for a minute and consider THERE'S a debate going on RIGHT NOW about precisely that point so, EVEN IF YOU WERE (which you aren't) allowed to make the change, the REASONABLE, COURTEOUS, JUDICIOUS thing to do is to LEAVE THE NAME AS IT IS, and await for resolution. —danakil 12:23, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Why am I not to allow to make a change in the name? Do you think ALGOL is not unique? And since we have a concrete convention cited above, I don't think I have any reason to ignore the convention. -- Taku 12:28, Aug 19, 2004 (UTC)