Template talk:Monarchs of Japan

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search


The designation in this template of the Japanese emperor who reigned from 1926 to 1989 as "Hirohito/Shōwa" is a reflection of the consensus of the latest round of a long series of discussions on the appropriate name for this person in English Wikipedia usage (see "Requested move - Jan 2009" on the Hirohito talk page and the talk page archives). Please do not change the designation in this template until and unless there has been a documented change in the above consensus. -- Meyer (talk) 04:35, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

"Empire of Japan" historical period[edit]

I reversed revision 345411456 by at 12:38, 21 February 2010. The revision regrouped the monarchs previously listed under "Modern Japan" into "Empire of Japan" and "Current". I cannot find any source using the Empire of Japan as a basis for historical periodization. Sources either group Meiji through Heisei eras together as "Modern Japan", or consider each era since Meiji as its own historical period.

At the moment, "Modern Japan" redirects to Heisei period, which isn't accurate. I think "Modern Japan" needs it's own article, even if just links to the four modern eras. I won't have the time to put anything together for at least a few days, so anyone should feel free to jump in with something first. --Meyer (talk) 04:54, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

I have changed it to "Empire of Japan", since that is the term generally used for this period of Japanese history. "Imperialist Japan" does not even have a redirect on Wikipedia (unlike Imperial Japan, which might be acceptable). It is also historically questionable/POV, since the word "imperialist" is generally used with another meaning, and to describe Japan in the early-Meiji period this way is slightly offensive (unequal treaties, black ships and all). And the early-Meiji period was the only time when the Emperor was actually the supreme ruler -- the Meiji Constitution promulgated two decades into his reign bound him to the terms of the constitution (Article 4) and his decisions needed to be signed off by a minister (Article 55). elvenscout742 (talk) 08:01, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
Although if you or anyone else has a significant problem with my edit I am prepared to compromise with Imperial Japan? Another issue, though, is that the Showa Emperor now appears on the list twice. Anyone have a problem with removing the Empire of Japan reference to him? The majority of his reign, and the part of the Showa period most widely associated with the name, took place after the War. elvenscout742 (talk) 08:11, 16 October 2012 (UTC)


Based on the {{History of Japan}} infobox and List of Emperors of Japan:

  • Should the "Legendary" period be broken down into Jōmon (600–300 BC) and Yayoi (300 BC – 269 AD) periods, with Emperor Kōan ending the Jōmon list and beginning the Yayoi list?
  • Should Kofun show dates of 270–539 and Asuka, 539–710? —[AlanM1(talk)]— 11:29, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
    • I think the cause for these discrepancies is that different sources may have different dates for these periods. I do think we need to be consistent; I'll come back to this later, but pinging Hijiri88 in the meanwhile who might be interested also. Alex Shih (talk) 22:40, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
      • Thanks. I think I arrived at reasonable coherence with our articles. Not real happy about the way the note about Empress Jingū is rendered, nor what I had to do to get the flag to not suck up all that extra space above and below it, though. Someone who's good with navboxes can probably figure out a better way. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 06:49, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
    • I'd say no to 1, yes to 2. The legendary emperors are recorded in ancient chronicles but if some of them existed it was probably later than recorded (the lifespans were almost certainly lengthened artificially to put the founding of Japan back a millennium or so), so attempting to group them into a periodization system used by modern archaeologists is extremely awkward. As for the Kofun/Asuka dates, I don't think it really matters as long as they can be sourced at all. Hijiri 88 (やや) 07:40, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
    • BTW: Someone who has been soft-blocked for the last five years added the claim that Jingu was "traditionally listed, but left out since Meiji" to a bunch of places around the encyclopedia based on a questionable reading of single Edo-period source; I don't really see a problem with the current note here, except that it looks like a reaction to a controversy that doesn't exist outside Wikipedia. Hijiri 88 (やや) 08:09, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
      • My change was solely to reflect the presence of Jōmon and Yayoi periods in our own article timelines, making the navbox consistent with them. The "legendary" description, which remains, should make it clear that the dates are fuzzy. I tweaked the appearance a little again today, hopefully for the better. It could probably be done more simply using the {{Navbox with columns}} for the whole thing, but this might not produce an accessibility-friendly result (i.e. it would read in column order?) —[AlanM1(talk)]— 21:52, 15 August 2018 (UTC)