Talk:Yonaguni

message: Help! The caped crusadertranslator hurts himself. Need help with the translation.--Jondel 07:02, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Need translation help

message: "However, the viability of these theories is undetermined when one considers that there are no piles of rocks at the foot of the structures, as would be expected if the near-perfect right angles that define these structures were formed by cleavage of the rocks that make them up."
According to the dive-site diagram here : http://www.city.ishigaki.okinawa.jp/en/engnews/ishigakitimes/tourism.htm#Yonaguni-Island
There seems to be a good collection of rock at the bottom of the outcrop, where one would expect to find it considering its position in the tidal zone, and the drop-off.
Thenerdgod 21:42, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV 

message: On the map a few names are written in katakana. What is the reason for this unusual style of writing?
: The names are in Okinawan, not Japanese. Jpatokal 08:18, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Go ahead and fix it! Jpatokal 08:18, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Katakana names 

message: Yonaguni is Destination of the Month on Wikitravel for March 2006.  Pitch in and help improve it! Jpatokal 08:18, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Wikitravel Destination of the Month

message: Now I'm confused - when was the site really discovered for the first time? In 1985 or in 1995? I've just written 1985 in the swedish edition, that's why I wonder...--81.224.186.135 13:10, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Discovery?

message: Most geologists familiar with the area also maintain that the structures are mere geologic processes of natural origin and consistent with other known geological formations. They point to the fact that local rocks above the surface have right angle cleavages, and that aquatic flora and fauna have simply smoothed out much of the surface of the rocks. Furthermore, no tools have been found at the site, which could positively identify human settlement.
It seems certain geologists never went there to see for themselves. Also, they seem to forget that if the water has caused the rocks to smooth out, then they can forget about finding any tools or little things left from any previous civilization. Not even the debris from Titanic which sunk less than 100 years ago have survived intact to this day. Pottery and organic materials could never have withstood all those years under water. The tide could also pick up the remains and spread them all across the seabed, making discoveries difficult. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.209.7.250 (talk) 07:47, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If you want to see some fancy natural geological formations : Giant's Causeway. The Yonaguni Monuments look quite common... Kromsson 20:28, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

text: I have edited the lousy argument of "nature does not make angular stones". Maybe we should discuss it here, if the current version doesn't seem fair enought. Kromsson 22:04, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where else in the world can we find such angular rocks? 

message: After reading the page, it seems biased towards the structures being natural rock formations. Though I am unsure as to whether they are or not, I think the article needs to have some facts written differently (not taken out). IronCrow (talk) 22:44, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Needs more work 

message: The citation to http://www.robertschoch.net/Enigmatic%20Yonaguni%20Underwater%20RMS%20CT.htm seems to be saying that he believes that the structures are completely natural, which was not the conclusion that the article actually made.
Schoch states:
"Most recently Dr. Kimura has been referring to the Yonaguni Monument and related structures as being "terraformed," that is natural geological features that have been manipulated or modified by human hands. This is essentially the position that I have come to, so perhaps Dr. Kimura and I are converging in our opinions of the Yonaguni Monument."
and
"I am not yet absolutely convinced that it is an artificial structure - - but in my opinion, even if it is primarily natural, it may have been modified by human actions in ancient times."
I'm not sure how to modify the article to remove the inaccuracy, but keep in the reference to the very informative article on the subject. Mimir (talk) 15:15, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think I've sorted that and a couple of other things, but it remains a pretty poor article without enough references and quite a bit of OR/speculation.--Doug Weller (talk) 15:36, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citation misinterprets article 

message: What is the population of the island? Chris (クリス • フィッチ) (talk) 01:16, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  population 

message: The jury is still out on the site.  The lack of real archeological scrutiny makes it hard to tell.  This article is way to dismissive of the possibility that the megaliths were constructed or shaped by humans.  See the last external link, the History Channel documentary, for a more NPOV. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Binarystar1984  (talk • contribs) 17:35, 16 September 2008 
: You'll have to find better sources than a History Channel docu-promo piece. --Ronz (talk) 18:19, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Article lacks NPOV

message: "i have seen videos of this discovery, not by any mean they can be similiar to sharp structures made by natural powers. By all means it is a human carved structure. Please see this video,
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=XMMBLNJqw1M&feature=related
and also pictures 
http://www.pbase.com/the_underwater_world/yonaguni
in some where i did come across pictures/video of a big statue that's an unltimate proof that Yonaguni is a human made strucure and it will change in our understanding the human civilization."  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Diamondheart76 (talk • contribs) 00:34, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why Doubt 

message: Yonaguni never was part of the continent. It's more than 100 km from Taiwan and the ocean is more than 1000 m deep.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.229.228.22 (talk) 11:40, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  part of the continent 

message: Whoever originally did the infobox apparently copied and pasted it from the article about Lord Howe Island, and didn't bother to fix hardly anything. It's now been corrected, with info taken from Yonaguni, Okinawa as well as the Japanese Wikipedia article on Yonaguni Island --Limetom 22:04, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Yonaguni. 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/20070416125743/http://english.aljazeera.net/English/archive/archive?ArchiveId=3779 to http://english.aljazeera.net/
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) 16:45, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Should this page be merged with the Yonaguni, Okinawa page? Kenting1 (talk) 05:52, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: @Kenting1 No, there are many other examples of differentiating administrative and geological divisions on WP. Sushi725 (talk) 03:16, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge with Yonaguni town?

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 14:59, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion