Talk:Tokugawa Hidetada

message: :Image:Oda.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 14:34, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Oda.jpg

message: An interested editor "tweaked" the succession boxes in articles about the 15 Tokugawa shoguns; and the change became a thread topic at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Japan#Tokugawa shoguns.  Although a corollary thread topic was posted at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Royalty#Japanese shoguns, no comments or suggestions were elicited.
Aumnamahashiva substituted "regnal" succession boxes; and an plausible  rationale for those edits was offered, focusing primarily on the functional sense in which the Tokugawas were hereditary autocrats.  In contrast was an argument that the regnal succession box is, by definition, misapplied.  Although the terms "reign" and "rule" are conventionally used by scholars, neither the Tokugawa, the Ashikaga, the Hōjō nor the Minamoto shoguns were "royalty" as that term is defined in Japanese history and culture.
Participation in this thread was limited, but I construed it as sufficient justification to restore the previous (non-regnal) succession box.  This explanation and the links to soon-to-be-archived threads may prove to be helpful in the  future? --Tenmei (talk) 14:31, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Succession box

message: Perhaps it is an English language problem by the contributor.  The first paragraph needs to be corrected in places to erase the confusion in its statements.  There is a statement later on about Ieyasu and Hidetada's relationship "never recovered" - according to?  That certainly is not supported by Sansom or Murdoch.  Ieyasu would not have kept this son as his heir if that was so . . . HammerFilmFan (talk) 03:33, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  article has mistakes, and some contradictions 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Tokugawa Hidetada. 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/20090711055235/http://www.nhk.or.jp/pr/keiei/otherpress/pdf/20090617.pdf to http://www.nhk.or.jp/pr/keiei/otherpress/pdf/20090617.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110506071339/http://www.j-dorama.de/ent-news-1885.html to http://www.j-dorama.de/ent-news-1885.html
*Added  tag to http://www.j-dorama.de/faq.php
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) 19:21, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The second paragraph under Shogun has a cite that doesn’t say anything in support of the first sentence, which says that Ieyasu was dismayed by the marriage of his granddaughter
In the subsequent paragraph there is zero source for the claim that “father and son disagreed” about how to approach the siege 2601:183:4882:6130:1D1E:88A8:7CF4:CE83 (talk) 21:56, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bad Citation