Talk:Japanese diaspora

message: In the source for the # Japanese people in the Philippines on the sidebar, the 220k figure is given for the number of *Filipinos* in Japan, not the number of *Japanese in Phillipines.
I'll quote it here:
"In his opening remarks, Charge d'Affaires and Consul General Sulpicio Confiado said the forum was part of the embassy's efforts to reach out to the 221,817 Filipinos living and working in Japan."  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.236.65.206 (talk) 06:59, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Figures quoted in the side are wrong 

message: :Add  # Support  or  # Oppose  on a new line in the appropriate section followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion using ~~~~.  Please remember that this survey is not a vote, and please provide an explanation for your recommendation.
====Survey - in support of the move====
#Support. I'll restate that I will support any precise and correct title for this page over the current title. The problem in a nutshell is that until Shinzo Abe, Junichiro Koizumi, and every other Japanese person in Japan isn't "ethnic Japanese", this is an unacceptably ambiguous title. The current title fails WP:PRECISION and I believe the proposed title passes muster for WP:UE. Dekimasu 14:58, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey

message: #Support. I'll restate that I will support any precise and correct title for this page over the current title. The problem in a nutshell is that until Shinzo Abe, Junichiro Koizumi, and every other Japanese person in Japan isn't "ethnic Japanese", this is an unacceptably ambiguous title. The current title fails WP:PRECISION and I believe the proposed title passes muster for WP:UE. Dekimasu 14:58, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey - in support of the move

message: # oppose per the arguments made in the last move request that was only a few weeks ago.  205.157.110.11 03:59, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey - in opposition to the move

message: :Add any additional comments:
Again, what about "Nikkeijin" rather than Nikkei people? The former gets tens of thousands of Ghits, the latter a few hundred. "Nikkeis" is also a possibility (it gets tens of thousands of Ghits as well, but 98% in Spanish or Portuguese; that pluralisation doesn't seem to be common in English). cab 04:12, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Mainly because there's a lot of usage with Nikkei = Nikkeijin in English, as seen in the over hundred thousand sites associating Nikkei with Nikkeijin (top of page). Many associations (clubs and organizations) use the term Nikkei in this manner. It also follows the definition of my primary cite  and . The "people" part is more of a disambiguation as with Japanese people (who are more often referred to as Japanese). Using Nikkei won't happen, since the Nikkei economic market is obviously more known than the people.falsedef 07:50, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

text: Why couldn't those be in separate articles? There's a large difference between emigrants and descendants and temporary residents with citizenship in a different country. There might be kinship with Japanese nationals, but I don't think they're in a similar category to Nikkei. This applies in most cases of nationals abroad. For example, do you feel German Americans (i.e. most whites in America) to be the same as German foreign exchange students and business men visiting America? falsedef 06:46, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

text: I am comfortable with that idea as well. Dekimasuが... 04:12, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Then a separate article would needed for descendants, since that population and community over time is much larger than solely emigrants. Within America, the Nisei are just as well known as Issei. At the moment, the article is starting class and would need to be filled out anyways. If it's changed to emigrants only, instead of 2 separate topics (temporaries and permanent residents), you'd be looking at four topics: emigrants, descendants, dekasegi (reverse immigrants), and temporary residents. At the moment, we have a fairly well defined term that encompasses issei, later generations, and return emigrants (from Latin America to Japan) -- nikkei. falsedef 08:51, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: In actuality, though, we already have articles for each group of descendants. They are at titles like Japanese American, Japanese Brazilian, and Japanese Peruvian. Jecowa was right in pointing out that this article focuses more on the actual act of emigration than on the communities as they are constituted. I think it is an important point. Dekimasuが... 09:40, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Jecowa, where were you five weeks ago? Dekimasu, why didn't we think of that? I can get on board with that. Doctor Sunshine 00:07, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion

message: I'll be nice and explain what constraints are for. The AND boolean operator is inherent in the search. However, there's only one constraint (decrease in sample space) we want to set up, the article word (e.g. nikkei) and the relationship to the definition (e.g. Japanese Americans are nikkei, Japanese immigrants are nikkei). To set up this relation, you need one AND operator (automatically included) and as many OR operators as their are contexts relevant (together, they form one larger constraint). It doesn't matter if you're talking about "Japanese Americans" or "Japanese Brazilians", because they both are Nikkei, therefore the search should be a merge operator (in this case the sample space constraints are merged with the OR operator).
The search is basically two components, the word we are trying to define, and the context it is in:
:word AND context
In google, word AND context can be represented by "word" "context". However, since there are many contexts to which the word is applicable, we want to include the applicable contexts:
:word AND context OR context2 OR context3
Within google parsing, this is equivalent to:
:word AND (context OR context2 OR context3)
Which is equivalent to:
:word context OR context2 OR context3
This is also equivalent to:
:(word AND context) OR (word AND context2) OR (word AND context3)
The above shows a how logic and reasoning is defined for the searches. In one instance, people might be talking about Japanese Americans, and they use the word nikkei to refer to them. However, in another case, they might be talking about Japanese Brazilians, and still use the word nikkei to describe them. Both contexts are accurate depictions of the meaning of nikkei and therefore those two searches can be unioned together (add total number of websites, and eliminate duplicates).
An example of the above "word/term" AND ("context"):
:nikkei AND "Japanese Americans"
Which is equivalent to:
:nikkei "Japanese Americans"
Or another example with two correct contexts:
:nikkei AND ("Japanese Americans" OR "Japanese Brazilians")
This is a good context, since both Japanese americans and Japanese Brazilians are Japanese emigrants and their descendants (the sample space is what the article speaks about).
Which is equivalent to:
:nikkei "Japanese Americans" OR "Japanese Brazilians"
By adding context to a term, we can make sure that it has little chance of meaning something else. In this case, we wish to make sure "ethnic Japanese" DOES NOT mean Japanese nationals (Japanese nationals are not Japanese Americans, and therefore have a smaller chance of being within the sample space of "ethnic Japanese" AND "Japanese Americans"). However, since "ethnic Japanese" has such a loose meaning, even with the constraints above, the numbers of ethnic Japanese hits are inflated more than the other terms. This is because when talking about the nikkei AND "Japanese Americans" there is almost no chance you'd be talking about the stock market (since nikkei has very precise meanings which rarely collide).
Even when constrained equally to multiple contexts, Nikkei has more hits. The more and better constraints you add, Nikkei will continue to dominate "ethnic Japanese", despite "ethnic Japanese" still having a more ambiguous sample space after each constraint.
"ethnic Japanese" and "nikkei" are unrestrained sample spaces. When a constraint is added, the sample space SHRINKS, but even after shrinking the sample space of nikkei into our proper context, it still has more hits than the unrestrained "ethnic Japanese".
"ethnic Japanese"
:62,900
nikkei -> nikkei AND "Japanese Americans"
:19,500,000 -> 68,900
nikkei AND "Japanese Americans" 68,900 > 62,900 "ethnic Japanese"
After constraining to a very good context on Nikkei (it is now unambiguous), it still beats the unbound (ambiguous) "ethnic Japanese". This is already enough proof that Nikkei has greater common usage than MULITPLE meanings of "Ethnic Japanese", i.e. more people identify Nikkei to mean Japanese emigrants and descendants (Japanese Americans) than people identify "ethnic Japanese" to mean Japanese nationals or Japanese abroad.
Please take the time to understand what the above means before you comment to this, as ambiguity is important to the discussion. falsedef 09:53, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't condescend to me. As I demonstrated, you cannot guaranty that because they use one term they're going to use another, nor can you guaranty in which context any of the terms are used. One could be discussing nikkei in the financial context and then mention Japanese Americans, or one could be discussing nikkei in the context of people and mention no related terms, and vice versa. Everybody makes mistakes, I won't hold this over you head. Just fix it or strike it. And, again: you've opted for "nikkei people", not "nikkei" alone. If you wanted to disambiguate you should have used "nikkei (people)". Doctor Sunshine 21:43, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The chances of a Japanese stock market having anything to do with Japanese Americans is slim. The percentage of sample space collision of Japanese peoples (ethnic Japanese) being included in an article about Japanese Americans is greater. What are you trying to argue here? I've put the SAME constraints upon the sample space, and have even given ethnic Japanese a unbounded sample space, yet it still loses. If you would take the time to look at other articles, you'll see why Nikkei people is used. Ainu people (who are known as Ainu), Japanese people (who are commonly known as Japanese), Altay people (who are more commonly known as Altay), Chechen people (Chechens), Taz people (Taz), etc. You are wrong here, and you keep proving your ignorance of the subject at hand. If you'd like to prove me wrong, please provide some evidence. How many times will you ignore the call for evidence? falsedef 22:16, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: So you've perfected the art of the Google search have you? I'll inform the academy. How many times will you ignore my evidence?  [[Gimme a Break! |[33][34][35][36][37][38][39][40]]]. This is farce now. If you can't understand my points, you're on your own. Doctor Sunshine 22:34, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Google search

message: How about Ethnic Japanese outside of Japan or Expatriot Japanese? Either one would be very clear on what the article covered. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 04:55, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think "expatriot" implies nationality rather than ethnicity, and wouldn't apply to Japanese Americans born and raised in the USA, for example. However, the reasoning behind Ethnic Japanese outside of Japan is the same as that of Overseas Japanese and I would support it. Dekimasu 05:01, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

text: Common usage for Nikkei is more than for either of those. Restating my arguments above, Nikkei people are researched and are a subject by themselves. Ethnic Japanese outside of Japan (or expatriates) would include temporary residents, students, and even tourists/travelers. Though similar to Nikkei, their intentions and culture diverge greatly.falsedef 05:11, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: At the risk of getting myself embroiled in yet another wikidebate, and at risk of you all saying "who invited him to the party", here's my two cents: if this is an article about people of Japanese ethnicity in Japan and abroad, then Ethnic Japanese seems a fine name. If, on the other hand, this is meant to be an article about people of Japanese descent living outside Japan, then we should use Nikkei, a term which is used and acknowledged by just about any scholar of Japanese studies, and which has a fairly specific meaning not adequately covered by English-language terms like "overseas Japanese", which as Falsedef points out conflates Japanese nationals on holiday (or living abroad temporarily) with Japanese-Americans or others who are not Japanese nationals. So, ultimately, this isn't really a question of what the article should be called, but what the content is meant to focus on. That determined, the choice of title should become obvious. LordAmeth 10:33, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think anyone has proposed that we should add residents of Japan to this article yet (although forsooth that'll come forth forthwith to further foil efforts at specification). I invite you to vote, verily. Dekimasu 10:52, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There's so much discussion, the voting got kind of lost in there - didn't see it. Thanks for pointing it out. LordAmeth 12:02, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the one thing we can all agree on is that this is a great, big clusterfuck. However, pretty much everything that's been suggested here, and all of the redirects, are pointing at a very similar subject. The logical thing to do would be to allow the article to address all of the suggestions (note: in it's own time (and I do not mean that every term needs to be listed right off the bat in the lead, but introduced naturally and as necessary)) and explain the differences. If nikkeijin don't identify with vacationers and temporary residents: explain that in the article but don't exclude them. It's not likely anything about vacationers or temporary residents is going to ruin or overrun the article. They're all valid, related terms. As for which term gets the distinguished honour of being the title? Well, consensus can change, or in this case, develop. Give it 2 to 6 months, and if it's still bothering you, try another move request. Reasonable? Doctor Sunshine 21:55, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Um. I think the content of this article is not even the major problem. The problem is that there is one article named Japanese people and one article named Ethnic Japanese and both of those article names mean the same thing. Is it ok to put all of the stuff from Japanese people at the top of this article? If it's not ok then there is a title problem, whatever "no consensus" means. 210.189.164.103 03:17, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It can also mean a smaller ethnic group within a larger group. That's the primary meaning especially in multicultural countries like the US and Canada. The definition is what all the squabbling here has been about, really. Consensus is one of the founding principles of Wikipedia, or so I'm told. By the way, I don't think the vacationer bit is necessary myself but I mention that because it seemed to be a bit of a sticking point with Dekimasu and falsedef. Doctor Sunshine 09:44, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with Doctor Sunshine. Ethnic Japanese only refers to Japanese that don't live in Japan. Oxford says, "Ethnic - of or relating to a population subgroup (within a larger or dominant national or cultural group) with a common national or cultural tradition." The only mention of Nikkei in Oxford is Nikkei index - a figure indicating the relative price of representative shares on the Tokyo Stock Exchange. Jecowa 15:11, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you understand that ethnic Japanese means Japanese in Japan when cultural context is used? When heritage is used, nikkei are included with Japanese nationals. And you're wrong about oxford, OED has both nikkei and nikkeijin: http://www.oed.com/help/updates/necial-nipissing.html, as already cited above. falsedef 00:48, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think the Japanese living in Japan would be considered a subgroup of Japan's dominant cultural group. Do you have access to the definitions for these words? In the Heritage dictionary, the Nikkei entry only defines the stock exchange.  The quarterly update you pointed to is described officially as a draft, but I've applied for the trial subscription to the Oxford English Dictionary Online to see what these two definitions say. Approval will take at most two business days according to the advertisement. Jecowa 06:45, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The definition of "ethnic" you are using is not the only one we have been talking about; for example, see this, particularly the AHED entry that lists the two relevant meanings as 1a (the culture as a whole, see Japanese people) and 1b (the contents of this article). Japanese people are an ethnic group (as per the lead of that article); a member of that group, including a resident of Japan, is "ethnic Japanese". There are really two different problems at work here: whether to approve the proposed name, and whether to change the current name. The answer to the first one is not clear, but I think the answer to the second one is clear. Dekimasu 07:02, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: For examples of reliable sources that use ethnic Japanese to mean those in Japan (nonexclusive): Enc. Britannica, NCBI, Nature, UChicago professor, Time. For example, Britannica states, The population of Japan is very homogeneous, consisting almost entirely of ethnic Japanese. Anyways, even if OED lacks Nikkei, there's still many other scholarly sources that use it and define it. I don't know why'd you pay just to check for OED, when that's just one source? falsedef 08:11, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I think I'm fine with using "Nikkei people" as an article title. I really liked those Google searches above. I would recomend using advanced searches so that you can exclude the word "wikipedia" and search only in English pages, though. Jecowa 20:02, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I should mention that falsedef's Google searches are under dispute and he's searching for nikkei instead of "nikkei people" which is a very uncommon term and improper usage. Doctor Sunshine 21:46, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If you would take the time to look at other articles, you'll see why Nikkei people is used. Ainu people (who are known as Ainu), Japanese people (who are commonly known as Japanese), Altay people (who are more commonly known as Altay), Chechen people (Chechens), Taz people (Taz), etc. You are wrong here, and you keep proving your ignorance of the subject at hand. If you'd like to prove me wrong, please provide some evidence. How many times will you ignore the call for evidence? -requoted, since you still don't understand what disambiguation is for. LEARN ABOUT DISAMBIGUATION. It's been quite awhile, yet you still haven't picked up on it. "ethnic Japanese" is ambiguous, "nikkei" is ambiguous. Nikkei however, is correct usage, therefore standard procedure is to add "people", and is typical when talking about groups, like the examples above. Did you want more examples?  You gonna keep ignoring every example I bring up, and dismiss it all out of ignorance? Are you gonna troll those articles too ("Hey guys, why are you using Chechen peoples instead of Chechens? Hey, why are you using Ainu people instead of Ainu?", etc., etc.). You gonna keep pressing your opinions, yet with no proof? My opinions have been validated over and over on this talk page. Your opinions have only been reinterpretations of previous meanings. You can't keep redefining what ethnic Japanese means without proof, and dismiss scholarly definitions with none of your own. falsedef 01:05, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

text: The -"wikipedia" in the searches already excludes wikipedia from its searching, however I failed to remove non-English pages. I noticed this awhile ago, but when I re-did the searches, the ratio still remained the same (Nikkei > "ethnic Japanese" in all forms by an order of magnitude) by a factor of around ~+5%, so I didn't bother redoing all the numbers. Anyone may verify this themselves (but be careful because wikipedia's advanced search incorrectly parses booleans from its normal search). falsedef 01:17, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  An idea 

message: I took the ungrateful job to clear the WP:RM backlog and try to end these megabytes of discussion (by application of a sledgehammer if necessary). I've read all of the above (trust me...). Here's a brief summary of my conclusions:
# Current title (Ethnic Japanese) is ambiguous and misleading. Its prevalence in common usage is normal, as it is usually only necessary to stress that someone is an ethnic Japanese when he/she is not from Japan. This article, however, is devoted only to Nikkeis and it requires an unambiguous title.
# Since this article is about only Japanese not living in Japan, the choice comes down to a clear, unambiguous, and simple title. IMO only two candidates come into play:
##Nikkei people as suggested. Straightforward, precise, but, judging on the opposition, not clear to an Average Joe and bordering on WP:UE.
##Japanese diaspora/Overseas Japanese. Less common than above, but clear enough. Several posters indicated that they could agree with such or, similar title, clearly expressing what the article is about. It is obviously not a Google favorite; but it's descriptive and commonsense. (Btw, I don't think that word diaspora has the connotations of people being expelled. See the definition.)
Actually, no Google search or even scholar/book search IMO can prove anything conclusive; it has proven that "Nikkei" has certain usage in English and among scholars, but it was inconclusive whether this certain is prevalent enough (for suitable definition of enough). I was at loss how to proceed myself, and I admit that it was more or less a coin toss. In the end, I decided to go after "Japanese diaspora" as a (rotten) compromise. No prejudice against "Nikkei people" as well, but please wait for the next RM for a couple of months if anyone insists.
Duja► 10:00, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have created an archive of the discussion prior to the second move debate because the page was at around 130 kilobytes, and I've also added a  tag to the top of the page. I know there isn't anyone who will be very happy with the results of the close, but at least it was a considered decision by a disinterested third party. My personal suggestion is for any editor who has strong feelings here to write a small (one or two paragraph) summary of his/her opinion on the naming dispute here, with no rebuttal or references other editors. I suspect that one or more of the unhappy parties is going to call for mediation at some point, so getting organized in that way would do us some good. Dekimasuが... 11:00, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm willing to leave it as is, as long as the intro still includes the proper definition of Nikkei. I was going to leave the issue as is after the first move to Japanese Diaspora -- it's the move back to ethnic Japanese that I feel very strongly against. If the issue went to arbitration, the issue would be clearly in favor of Nikkei due to verification. I'm still disappointed that UE is still being called into question. Average Joe doesn't know much about Nikkei in general, so the common man wouldn't know the people nor the name. There are hundreds of ethnic groups which "Average Joe" can't name or know about -- seems like forced ignorance to prevent this article to be named properly. falsedef 11:45, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure 3 stubborn people arguing over an article title qualifies this as a controversial issue. I don't envy you, Duja. Good luck. Doctor Sunshine talk 20:15, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Closing comments

message: :The following thread segment has been copied from Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Japanese Guyanese; and the segment is also copied to Template talk:Japanese diaspora -- consensus clarification needed?
To put this thread in a context --  The AfD for Japanese Guyanese was based on the fact that the sole reference source from a Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs  website reported that there were only two Japanese expatriates in the country.  The following exchange suggests issues which may be more fully developed and resolved in this setting? --Tenmei (talk) 16:16, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Delete -- Unlike this article, the corollary articles focus on Issei, Nisei and Sansei whose citizenship has changed, e.g., Japanese Brazilians, Japanese Americans, Japanese Canadians, etc.  Even if the number of Japanese expatriates in Guyana were larger, I'd guess that the rationale for for deleting this article and deleting it from Template:Japanese diaspora would seem credible and persuasive? --Tenmei (talk) 15:51, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: *Not credible to me. Expatriates like Japanese people in Hong Kong or :de:Japaner in Düsseldorf are notable article topics, regardless if they don't fit Japanese American/Japanese Brazilian-centric conceptions of what defines "Japanese diaspora". (And of course, no one calls them by ridiculous names like "Japanese Chinese" or "Japanese Germans" even if they take up local citizenship --- except Wikipedia users going around inventing titles to fill up templates, without bothering to do any actual reading or research on them.) cab (talk) 11:13, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I had understood Nikkei as a cognate for Japanese diaspora; and I construed the differences found in Template:Japanese diaspora as mere anomalies.  CaliforniaAliBaba's comment causes me to think that this minor issue may need consensus clarification?  In WP:V terms, I note that this article' sole reference citation is a MOFA web page; and in that context, it becomes relevant that in the case of other countries, Nikkei are statistically described separately from Japanese citizens living and working abroad, e.g.,  Japanese and ethnic Japanese in Mexico.  My view is partly informed by the approach MOFA adopted in parsing the data; but, of course, I recognize this may be disregarded in our context.  The narrow issue at hand is Japanese Guyanese which may be re-introduced in future; but even in the fuzzy logic terms in which Japanese people in Hong Kong might be stretched to imply a future Japanese people in Guyana, the AfD consensus for today seems best. --Tenmei (talk) 16:34, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  I propose and suggest more articles on Japanese communities in other countries not listed in the Japanese diaspora template: Japanese in Ecuador, Japanese in Germany, ethnic Japanese in Macau and Japanese in Madagascar. The Japanese settled in these countries and formed neighborhoods or cultural centers over periods of time. + Mike D 26 (talk) 07:24, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Consensus clarification

message: A discussion is posted at Template talk:Japanese ethnicity#Regions with significant populations. Please participate in the discussion. ―― Phoenix7777 (talk) 01:11, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Populations in the Infobox

message: I drastically reworded the sentences there regarding the repatriation assistance payment. Debito or one of his minions really went over the top this time, stating that the Japan Times had denounced the policy, blah blah blah. The Japan Times did no such thing, and I think the editor who contributed this astounding pile of shit to this article should thank his lucky stars that the JT hasn't sued him for such a stupid comment. Debito writes a guest column -- he is not the editor of the paper and is in no way qualified to take such a stance. Simon-in-sagamihara (talk) 06:53, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edits to last section 

message: Hi
Can't we merge all these duplicating/ overlaping articles Issei, Nisei, Sansei and Yonsei into the Japanese diaspora (Nikkei) page? Besides the obvious repetition, just because these terms exist for the different generations, that is no justification for separate articles. We don't have separate articles on first, second, third generation French/ German/ Chinese/ Portuguese immigrants in WP content on immigrant communities. Rui Gabriel Correia (talk) 02:50, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: In support of Rui Gabriel Correia's idea, I would also note that we don't even have individual articles on the overall ideas of  first generation immigrant, 1.5 generation, second generation immigrant, etc.; instead all of these closely related concepts are covered at a single immigrant generations page. cab (call) 03:36, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  Very valid point, AliBaba. It is actually a very relevant topic - dealing with immigrant societies by generation, bringing into it acculturation, retention of old customs, integration etc. As an example, here in South Africa where I live, it has been only in the past 20 years that the Portuguese, Italian and Greek communities 'became South Africans' (though the majority still keeps their foreign passports). Rui Gabriel Correia (talk) 10:43, 20 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know what to make of the points you raise; but I do know this:  If our Wikipedia articles are following the lead established by reliable sources, good.  If our articles are somehow out in front, not good. --Tenmei (talk) 03:26, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Tenmei, I do hope those sources are actually treating "Issei", "Nisei", "Sansei" etc. as part of a whole.  Otherwise I think our articles are not accuratly refering what they are saying.  So the fact is that by merging these articles we are not going out in front of what reliable sources are saying.  To adress your earlier points, no one is arguing that these concepts are not seprate concepts.  We are arguing that the best way to present those concepts is in a combined article.  The relevant guideline is WP:Merge.  In particular it is beeing argued that these articles should be merged because there is a large overlap between them.  The fact that the concepts are different is not itself enough to state that these articles should not be merged.  Consider the example given at WP:Merge, which is flammable and non-flammable, two clearly distinct concepts but best treated in a single article.    — Preceding unsigned comment added by Taemyr (talk • contribs) 15:10, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

text: Hi, Tenmei. I don't know what you are opposing. It is not a vote, it is a discussion. Rui Gabriel Correia (talk) 13:10, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger of Nikkei, Issei, Nisei, Sansei, Yonsei, Gosei 

message: Why is there such a wide window (600,000–1.6 million) when it comes to the total Japanese population in Brazil? Given that, shouldn't it be placed below the US on the ranking?
only hawaii in us have much japanese people but in brazil have 3 states with this imigration (sao paulo/semi-southern, parana/southern and para in amazon/northern)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 187.64.32.15 (talk) 18:08, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Japanese-Brazilian ranking 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Japanese diaspora. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.redalyc.org/pdf/105/10503808.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100507124349/http://ph.pagenation.com:80/mnl/Paco_120.9997_14.5808.map to http://ph.pagenation.com/mnl/Paco_120.9997_14.5808.map
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 03:25, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Links checked - Ryk72 'c.s.n.s.' 07:48, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Japanese diaspora. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110109041812/http://mdn.mainichi.jp:80/mdnnews/national/archive/news/2009/04/30/20090430p2a00m0na002000c.html to http://mdn.mainichi.jp/mdnnews/national/archive/news/2009/04/30/20090430p2a00m0na002000c.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
 - Ryk72 'c.s.n.s.' 03:03, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Japanese diaspora. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.mofa.go.jp/region/latin/peru/index.html
*Added  tag to http://www.thailandsworld.com/en/ayutthaya/ayutthaya-museums/japanese-village-ayutthaya/index.cfmJapanese
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/19991013000846/http://www.usc.edu/dept/LAS/CMTS/MonoPaper3-13.html to http://www.usc.edu/dept/LAS/CMTS/MonoPaper3-13.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061001223621/http://www.faess.jcu.edu.au/saas/downloads/JimCoughlan/31-92jap.htm to http://www.faess.jcu.edu.au/saas/downloads/JimCoughlan/31-92jap.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:18, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Japanese diaspora. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090415092911/http://www.universia.edu.pe/noticias/principales/destacada.php?id=65889 to http://www.universia.edu.pe/noticias/principales/destacada.php?id=65889
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081015231826/http://www.discovernikkei.org/wiki/index.php/Japanese_Immigration_Statistics to http://www.discovernikkei.org/wiki/index.php/Japanese_Immigration_Statistics
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081223062821/http://www.japanfocus.org/products/details/1715 to http://www.japanfocus.org/products/details/1715
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081223080627/http://home.att.net/~sallyann2/saipan-battle.html to http://home.att.net/~sallyann2/saipan-battle.html
*Added  tag to http://www.mosnews.com/news/2005/04/01/japanesedied.shtml
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061104083616/http://www.perepis2002.ru/ct/doc/TOM_04_06.xls to http://www.perepis2002.ru/ct/doc/TOM_04_06.xls
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:35, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Japanese diaspora. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131201063237/http://www.jadesas.or.jp/en/aboutnikkei/index.html to http://www.jadesas.or.jp/EN/aboutnikkei/index.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160126012422/http://www.dmcnews.kr/xe/5189 to http://www.dmcnews.kr/xe/5189
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081014081506/http://www.newcaledonia.co.nz/downloads/newcal-weekly-08-08-22.pdf to http://www.newcaledonia.co.nz/downloads/newcal-weekly-08-08-22.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110716165044/http://www.kitsapsun.com/news/2006/jun/10/pacific-islands-president-bainbridge-lawmakers/?printer=1%2F to http://www.kitsapsun.com/news/2006/jun/10/pacific-islands-president-bainbridge-lawmakers/?printer=1%2F
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110722121419/http://www.fasid.or.jp/daigakuin/sien/kaisetsu/gaiyo17/data/02/Kimio_Fujita_Economic_Development_and_Policy_Issues.ppt to http://www.fasid.or.jp/daigakuin/sien/kaisetsu/gaiyo17/data/02/Kimio_Fujita_Economic_Development_and_Policy_Issues.ppt
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:39, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Japanese diaspora. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141221142214/http://bqdoha.com/2013/12/population-qatar to http://bqdoha.com/2013/12/population-qatar
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:54, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified