Talk:Kimigayo

message: *Access date in refs 1, 3 need to be wlinked
*"and is also one of the world's shortest national anthems in current use. [1]" - Don't need a space between the full stop and ref
*"Kimi ga Yo was considered to be a symbol of the imperialism and the militarism in wartime. [1]" - And again....
*The "Lyrics" section should use a table which includes (as headers) the language that you're writing in
*"The change of the lyrics occurred during the Kamakura period. [3]" - Ref placement
*"In 1869, around the start of the Meiji Era," - 1989 doesn't need to be wlinked here
*"Not only this is where Fenton was based as a military band leader, the Myoukoji Shrine serves as a memorial to Fenton." - Perhaps reword to "As this is where Fenton was based as a military band leader, the Myoukoji Shrine serves as a memorial to him."
*"In 1880, the Imperial Household Agency" - Don't wlink 1880
*"there has been criticism of the anthem for its association with militarism and the virtual worship of the emperor as a deity" - Need a source for this criticism
*"and fined 200,000 yen (about 2,000 dollars)," - wlink the respective currencies here
*"English lyrics as they can allude to comfort women.[11][12][13][14][15][16]" - 6 refs...can't these be spread throughout the paragraph or something?
*"towards Kimi ga yo when it is being" - Shouldn't it be Kimi ga Yo? (also at "are required to sing Kimi ga yo while facing the Hinomaru", "Kimi ga yo, however, is commonly played")
*How about placing the recordings inline throughout the article?
*"(modified to resemble the Kimi ga Yo)" - name should be in italics right?
— Dihydrogen Monoxide (Review) 02:50, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: GA nom on hold

message: The fifth line of the lyrics should run as いはほとなりて in the time-honoured traditional script which could be transcribed as "i`a`oto narite". Here the grave accent stands for medial 'h'. Both the medial 'h' and the letter 'w' are separators which are realized as a bilabial semi-vowel only when immediately followed by the 'a' sound. Particles used not to be separated from the preceding word. "いわおとなりて" is a result of prepocessing applied to the original script to make it conform to the romanization system synchronically conceived in the Meiji period. Talk:Romanization of Japanese#An Extended-Hepburn System is a panchronic system and does not need preprocessing. It is a transliteration system of the full set of Kana syllabary including ヂジ and ヅズ. Hepburn did not think it necessary to differentiat this affricate/fricative pair and provided only for affricates. So instead of ジ and ズ, ヂ and ヅ should have been given priority in Present-Day Kana Usage.
You can see other examples of this system at [懐かしい唄の数々]--Kmns tsw (talk) 15:33, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kana script 

message: This article seems a bit NPOV. Granted, I feel criticism should be included, but it seems like it was written with the sole purpose to weasel-word in piles of criticism. It's like writing five sections on the imperialism of "God save the Queen,"  or the Star Spangled Banner, which has had controversy over baseball fans being arrested for going to the bathroom during the song.  Each of those much larger articles has no controversy section, so the large and pretty irrelevant criticism sections seem disproportionate. Nvgton (talk) 04:32, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV 

message: I suggest we change the title to "Kimigayo" as it is spelled in Japan, An Illustrated Encyclopedia, Kodansha Ltd., 1993, p. 780 or in most Japanese English-language newspapers, f. ex.  or . --Mycomp (talk) 07:58, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I am not certain why this title was used, unless it had something to deal with the kanji used in the title. I'm not particular bent on what title is used; I just want to be sure we get it right. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 20:54, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

text: It's at this title because it's three words, not one. "Kimi" is a pronoun, "ga" is a particle, and "Yo" is a noun. Kimigayo already redirects here, too. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 21:47, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, that explains it. Then, keep it at this title please. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 00:51, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, but the "kimi" in Kimigayo is not a pronoun, it is a 名詞 (noun), meaning "ruler", "sovereign". And why do you think the sources I mentioned above write it in one word? Because Kimigayo is simply the romanization of 君が代 not of 君　が　代. In Japanese, unlike in English, words are not separated, and Kimigayo is not English it is just the romanized version of the Japanese title. Japan, An Illustrated Encyclopedia uses "Kimigayo", The Japan Times does, Donald Keene does, Reischauer does, The Daily Yomiuri does, The Japan Times does, Asahi.com. does, etc. Google (I know, it is not always the best source) has 65.800 for "Kimigayo", and 23.500 for "Kimi ga yo". Which authoritative sources, if I may ask, do you have for "Kimi ga Yo" being the correct romanized spelling? (Why capital Y, by the way?)--Mycomp (talk) 04:32, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: My bad, that's what I meant. Noun. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 04:54, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

text: There are a lot of places that use all sorts of romanizations which we don't here (such as "syo" instead of "sho"). We have a manual of Style on purpose, to cover instances such as this. It specifically says to romanize a word using capitalization rules used in English. "Yo" is a noun, and therefore it is capitalized in the title. If you have an issue with how romanization is done on Wikipedia, then you need to take the discussion to WT:MOS-JA. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 07:04, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

text:  I give/gave you several reliable sources where the spelling is "Kimigayo", like the 12.000-article Japan, An Illustrated Encyclopedia (with advisors such as Donald Keene, Edwin Reischauer, Eleanor Jorden etc.), the Japanese Foreign Ministry , The Japan Times , the BBC , The Daily Yomiuri , Asahi.com  The Japan Policy Research Institute  etc. What are your reliable sources for the "Kimi ga Yo" spelling, except for the Manual of style? Why is it then not "Hi no Maru" but Hinomaru? --Mycomp (talk) 00:44, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Still waiting for an answer to why it is Hinomaru but Kimi ga Yo. And BTW, I couldn't find where in the  manual of Style it says that Kimi ga Yo would be the correct way to write 君が代. --Mycomp (talk) 06:35, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Since nothing happened, I just moved the page. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 07:34, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Changing the article's title

message: I made some changes to this p[age a month or so ago and I note that they have now been removed. I have a photo copy of the original notation for Kimigayo as it was written by Akimori Hayashi. It is   part of a large collection  of songs written by the court musicians (Gagaku) and predates Fenton's et als  version.  I included a copy of the original notation but I see now that this has been removed. I don't understand why. I spent several years in Japan studying Gagaku and this where I first learned of this history. I would like to know on what basis my entry was removed.
72.219.187.95 (talk) 12:42, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The edit and link was removed at http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kimigayo&diff=next&oldid=385390358, which was the next edit. As for why, I have no clue. I am looking at the link and see what I can pull from that. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 06:21, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comment 

message: Is it a coincidence that there are no Sino-Japanese words in the anthem, or was that the intention for the country's anthem?  All the words are 和語 instead of 漢語, which seems atypical for Japanese: was that a hallmark of writing during the Heian period, even though "Chinese influences were at their height"?Ulmanor (talk) 23:37, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I honestly have no clue (and I agree with your edit). User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 00:32, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

text: In 古今和歌集, it's common. Kimigayo is not an exception.61.213.84.139 (talk) 15:33, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Readings 

message: The Richard Boyd/Tak-Wing Ngo footnote says that the anthem was adopted in 1888, but the text often says that the anthem was adopted for the first time in 1999.  I'm wondering where the discrepancy lies, was it adopted in 1888 and formally abolished after WWII, only to be readopted in 1999?  Was it only adopted as an imperial anthem (the anthem of the emperor) in 1888?  Or did nothing at all happen in 1888 to the status of the anthem and Boyd/Ngo are mistaken?  What exactly transpired in 1888?--Canuckguy (talk) 19:10, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Give me some time and I will get you what I know and what I wrote. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 22:26, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: The song was adopted for use as the national anthem when it comes to diplomatic ceremonies in 1888, so that is where one of the official adoption dates go. In the 1890's, the song was used in school ceremonies as the anthem but there was no official anthem until the passage of the 1999 law. There were times that other songs that were treated as anthems, but were not the anthems of a state until later. This was the case for the Star Spangled Banner. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 02:45, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adopted in 1888? 

message: Good day,
would it be possible if the parody section could be removed?
The Wikipedia page is about a national anthem, and with a national anthem you also link a bit of respect. When you have in an international encyclopedia the description of the national anthem of Japan that includes an unimportant parody section, then it takes a bit the integrity and seriosity of the meaning away.
Thank you.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.23.103.20 (talk) 20:16, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of parody section 

message: The reference to the key supposedly being C major said no such thing, and the sheet music doesn't indicate this in any way either.  The melody is on the Dorian mode, but without a (minor or major) third.  If anyone has a more accurate edit to make, feel free to make the necessary corrections.  72.93.173.72 (talk) 23:34, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Key 

message: The Japanese national anthem “Kimigayo” (君が代) is well-known that it caused controversy not only among Chinese and Koreans but also inside Japan. If you would like to talk about this, please head to my talk page and let’s discuss about it.HanSangYoon (talk) 19:35, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  I just had to add a Controversy Section. It’s just too related to the Kimigayo. 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Kimigayo. 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 https://web.archive.org/20110728091749/http://www.dpj.or.jp/news/?num=11044 to http://www.dpj.or.jp/news/?num=11044
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110728091823/http://www.dpj.or.jp/news/?num=8506 to http://www.dpj.or.jp/news/?num=8506
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 22:38, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Kimigayo. 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/20090211083829/http://wwwsoc.nii.ac.jp/tog/ to http://wwwsoc.nii.ac.jp/tog/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110323180056/http://www.shugiin.go.jp/itdb_gian.nsf/html/gian/keika/1CE3AB6.htm to http://www.shugiin.go.jp/itdb_gian.nsf/html/gian/keika/1CE3AB6.htm
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.okinawa.usmc.mil/public%20affairs%20info/Archive%20News%20Pages/2005/050218-heart.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110722112237/http://www.pref.hiroshima.lg.jp/kyouiku/hotline/02zesei/sankou/kokkikokka.htm to http://www.pref.hiroshima.lg.jp/kyouiku/hotline/02zesei/sankou/kokkikokka.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060319210723/http://cebc.jp/data/education/gov/jp/tsuuchi/19990917hatauta/data-02.htm to http://cebc.jp/data/education/gov/jp/tsuuchi/19990917hatauta/data-02.htm
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) 03:35, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Kimigayo. 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/20100428014321/http://www.yu.emb-japan.go.jp/Srpski/UpoznajteJapan-PolitikaEkonomija.htm to http://www.yu.emb-japan.go.jp/Srpski/UpoznajteJapan-PolitikaEkonomija.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060618201400/http://home.kyodo.co.jp/modules/fstStory/index.php?storyid=248658 to http://home.kyodo.co.jp/modules/fstStory/index.php?storyid=248658
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) 15:24, 10 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: "Hashimoto Toru, the mayor of Osaka, slated [sic] the teachers as "It was good that criminals [teachers] who are intent on breaking the rules [of not singing the state anthem] have risen to the surface [public]"? Please clarify. Autodidact1 (talk) 00:20, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is "slated" supposed to mean in this sentence? 

message: The second line, "千代に八千代に" should be more accurately translated as "For ever and ever" or "for eternity". Is it correct? Pichnat Thong (talk) 11:45, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: No. "千代に八千代に" literally means ("For 1,000 years to 8,000 years"). 115.84.95.19 (talk) 02:12, 3 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Need confirmation of translation