Talk:Nagasaki

message: "According to statistics given at the Nagasaki Peace Park, the dead totalled 73,884, injured 74,909 and diseased 120,820." 
I don't think it was written by an English speaker - it doesn't make sense. Does anyone know what it should say?
--- Radiation poisoning perhaps, the sentence reads fine as is.
Furthermore, below that sentence, there's one that says the Japanese deserved it for the atrocities at Nanking, which is hardly relevant.  I suggest it either be removed or clarified to show the whole scope of the second world war, and its impact.
Not sure if a revision was made prior, but currently the end of this sentence reads, "and another several hundred thousand diseased and dying due to fallout and other illness caused by radiation."  
Several points:  
1)  Fallout is not an illness but rather leads to an illness if contracted with its accompanying radiation, contrary to the statement as written.
2)  Does the term "diseased and dying" mean these people ultimately died?  I believe if one is declared "dying," it implies an inevitable outcome unless a curative intervention takes place.  According to the "Database of Radiological Incidents and Related Events--Johnston's Archive," as well as multiple citation sources, as a high estimate roughly 75,000-80,000 died in the bombing and during the immediate following months with about the same number injured (although that latter figure varied significantly).  If we are to assume the statement stands as written, several hundred thousand were at one point dying above and beyond the current casualty estimates.  This gives us a total of 150,000 immediate casualties dead and injured and a additional 300,000 sick from radiation poisoning (that being somehow different from injured) with a suggestive inevitable fatal outcome.  No source that I have encountered has ever stated a figure anywhere near 375,000 dead.
And this additional 300,000 figure makes no sense at all--whether these people lived or died--seeing as the estimated population of Nagasaki at the time of the bombing was 263,000.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Caracoid (talk • contribs) 01:41, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: someone should fix this sentence in the article

message: * Talk:Nagasaki, Nagasaki ? Nagasaki, Nagasaki → Nagasaki ? Because it is a very significant city, since an atomic bomb was dropped on it. 132.205.45.148 17:50, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: WP:RM

message: This is an archive of the discussion about the proposed move of the article from Nagasaki, Nagasaki to Nagasaki. This is no longer live. The proposal was withdrew by proposer. KTC 02:30, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Requested Move

message: An anon IP changed the density from 1321 to 1322. I do not know which one is incorrect; however, I've decided to rv to the original revision (1321). Flcelloguy | A  note? | Desk  22:35, 31 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Density

message: *I just spent over two and a half hours eliminating a 'horrible' esthetic appearance wherein large verticle blocks of whitespace migrated to different and awkward places in the article depending on the brower font size selected.  The resultant effort displays nicely regardless of which of the five browser font size settings a user may view.  
The key auto-formatting problem here is the outsized Japan City template Box, and persons on the Japan Cities project might take it under advisement to break this into smaller boxes, or many Japan Cities articles are going to be UGLY (With a capital 'UG'), IMHO. 
*The chain of breaks and divs and the placement and sizing of the initial picture are integral to the success of that effort, so move them or alter them only if you can guarantee a similarly nicely displayed output! Without significant textual additions, these should stand up pretty well to small edits and sentence-sized changes where they are. 
*Otherwise, only eliminating one pic or another could ease the Wiki-autoformating to give a more evenly dispersed textual output, IMHO. 
FrankB 15:25, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Whitespace Elimination 

message: Nagazaki is the only place where Mesotardigrada have been spotted in history. Doesn't that warrant inclusion in the article?--SidiLemine 10:50, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, why not? Perhaps add a wildlife or fauna section. cyclosarin 01:31, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Mesotardigrada]]

message: I've corrcted a sentence that said that tempura was imported by the Portuguese.  Boy, was it embarrassing when my supervisor pointed out this error to me when I wrote it in an essay.
More importantly, it says here that the Portuguese were confined to a prison in Deshima.  I have two problems with this: first, it was the Dutch who were confined here; second, the word, 'Prison,' takes the perspective of those confined - we're not talking Guantanamo Bay here, it was a mere restriction on the movement of foreigners.  Seems like it will be more difficult to change this inaccuracy as it's pretty tangled into its paragraph.  For this reason, and also because I'm sure people will disagree with my second reservation on the matter, I've not changed it myself but thought I should put it on the table.
Much love, Rupa zero 19:27, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I also removed a factual error about the death toll; there was an unsourced wildly off figure for radiation illnesses. Gtadoc 17:08, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Factual errors 

message: Added a photo of a good Kameyama Yaki jar with trading scenery of the city. Iwanafish
:Thanks, it's a nice photo. Do you know about Wikimedia Commons? If you upload your photos there, they can be used on all Wikimedia projects, including Wikipedia articles in all languages. It's fun to find your photos in articles in Japanese, French, Russian, Hungarian, and various other languages. Simply get a user name on Commons and upload your photo, with a free license. It's recommended to add it to a category or gallery too, such as Nagasaki or Category:Nagasaki. Thanks! Fg2 09:11, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Kameyama yaki photo

message: It would be great if there was a second (or just a better) map in the article to help readers have an idea of where Nagasaki is globally.  I have no idea how to do it otherwise I would. 138.16.52.11 (talk) 07:24, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I had a similar reaction.  Any ideas as to where to turn for help?  Liam Patrick (talk) 03:57, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Map

message: Is there really a need to put the city's name twice in the title? Anywikiuser (talk) 15:08, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: See the Nagasaki vs. Nagasaki City section above. Oda Mari (talk) 15:43, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

text: No, there's not. The article should be at Nagasaki. In situations requiring clarity, English should call the larger area Nagasaki Prefecture. — LlywelynII 04:29, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nagasaki, Nagasaki 

message: This article has too many photos which are messing up the layout. We need to trim 3-5 from the article, and then just point people to Commons. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 03:55, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Too many photos 

message: How can the city have been founded by Portuguese before 1500 if the Portuguese first arrived in Japan in the 1540? Either the town was founded by the Portuguese after that, or the town was founded before 1500 but not by the Portuguese, or none of the above. One thing is for sure: you cannot have both. Gazilion (talk) 15:54, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dates do not make sense 

message: The link labeled "Listen" goes to a player that claims "Nagasaki" is pronounced "Halifax."  I don't think so.  And I don't know how to fix it, so could somebody do that fixing?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sonyack (talk • contribs) 21:01, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Not Halifax

message: The article currently states "the death toll from the atomic bombing totaled 73,884, as well as another 74,909 injured, and another several hundred thousand diseased and dying due to fallout and other illness caused by radiation."
That last statement has to be wildly wrong on many levels. Firstly and most importantly the Fatman bomb was exploded as an airburst, so there was no fallout (fallout only being produced by a groundburst or near groundburst). Close to 60% of deaths were caused by the intense heat and percussive effects of the explosion and only around 20% due to the exposure to very short-lived 'initial' flash radiation at the time of burst. Additionally the bomb, by modern standards, was simply not that big and its effects, due to the valley terrain, were localised; many British and American POWs only 4 miles away from ground zero survived the blast (and lived into normal old age) despite being out in the open and only wearing shorts and shoes.
The Japanese survivors of both the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs have been closely monitored by several medical teams throughout the years since 1945 and deaths attributed to radiation effects since December 1945 are numbered in the hundreds, not thousands and certainly not hundreds of thousands. That statement above is POV, innaccurate and cannot possibly be supported by its stated reference. All reputable sources indicate a final death toll from the Nagasaki bomb to be close to 78,000. 21st CENTURY  GREENSTUFF 13:48, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not saying you're wrong, but do you have documentation to support those assertions?  Liam Patrick (talk) 03:59, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Innaccurate death toll figures in this article

message: Nagasaki Gaigotandai is no longer a Junior college.  I don't have the date at hand, but if it is necessary, let me know.  Here is their web-site: http://www.nagasaki-gaigo.ac.jp/english/index.htmlPizzamancer (talk) 01:01, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Updated Universities

message: "New temples were built, as well as new churches due to an increase in the presence of Christianity"
Is simply untrue.  Temples are Buddhist.  Shinto Shrines were built in Nagasaki to combat Christianity, but that was 400 years ago, for example Suwa Jinja and the Nagasaki Kunchi festival.
It also is not a port town.  It is built around a port, but shipping is virtually non-existent.  The economy is based on Mitsubishi Heavy industries and tourism.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pizzamancer (talk • contribs) 01:25, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Can we get some definitive information on this?  After all this time, the article still says, "The little harbor village quickly grew into a diverse port city..."  According to Pizzamancer, this is false information.  Liam Patrick (talk) 21:32, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Modern Nagasaki needs an update

message: There is a great deal of interesting information in this article, but I'm surprised by the lack of citations/supporting documentation.  This article is very different from the documentation found at the article on Hiroshima:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hiroshima  Liam Patrick (talk) 03:59, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Lack of Citations

message: What is missing from the recently created city timeline article? Please add relevant content! Contributions welcome. Thank you. -- M2545 (talk) 08:04, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Timeline of Nagasaki]] 

message: 12/30/2015 on TV was a program about Sadako Sasaki.  Then I read the survivor accounts of those who lived through Hiroshima A-bomb.  I realized no one mentioned Nagasaki.  So I called up Nagasaki.  On the Wikipedia page at section 1.3 is a photo of the mushroom cloud.  If you look at it, zoom it bigger, you see two adults holding several babies.  Under them in the darker area are what looks like the heads of other children and people.  What a sad surprise that probably nobody has ever noticed before.  Retiredand2busy (talk) 08:22, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Mushroom Cloud 

message: I have added info about the attack time to the introduction so that people don't have to read the entire article to get an idea of when during the day it happened.  Hopefully this will not be too contentious.
ASavantDude (talk) 16:56, 9 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: 1102 am Timing of event

message: 173.70.125.42 (talk) 21:16, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. DannyS712 (talk) 21:31, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 28 December 2018 

message: In the history section is stated that Nagasaki was occupied by the portuguese, first paragraph, yes they were there but did not occupied the city. 
Saw some earlier request about if Nagasaki had been founded or occupied by the Portuguese, both are wrong. It’s not exactly change x to y but to remove the occupation...
First time I send a request. Thanks, João 25.04.2019 Jrnclondon1976 17:25, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: – Þjarkur (talk) 17:37, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 25 April 2019 

message: WP:NOTDICTIONARY: Aside from being unsourced and wrong, the Japanese IPA is trivia for the English Wikipedia and shouldn't be cluttering up the lede. (Shunting it into a Name section, infobox, or footnote would be fine if it were helpful, which it mostly isn't. Japanese romanization is already fairly phonetic.) 
The English IPA might be useful if it could be sourced authoritatively, given that people might pronounce it like a nag horse instead of the more proper ... but, given that it's an anglicized name in the first place, the horse-people aren't really any more wrong than people who leave the  off Rome's real name. That is, any likely attempted pronunciation is fine, making the IPA overprecise and unnecessary for an encyclopedia article. The curious/hypercorrect can click over to the Wiktionary entry, which of course should've been linked through the kanji. (Also fixed.) — LlywelynII 05:31, 13 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: IPA

message: Breathe air 66.52.70.192 (talk) 22:55, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Andrew Tate 

message: The sentence "Less than a second after the detonation, the north of the city was destroyed and more than 10% of the city's population were killed" uses Robert Hull (October 11, 2011). Welcome To Planet Earth – 2050 – Population Zero. as its source. Every seller gives the following description of this book: "Biblical Prophecy, the predictions of The Hopi Indians, Sir Isaac Newton's calculations for Armageddon, The final War described in The Dead Sea Scrolls, the current unrest on Planet Earth and nuclear proliferation point to W.W.lll unless Jesus Christ returns."
So, uh, that deserves a [better source needed] at the very least, right? PenCatWire (talk) 02:02, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bad source