This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Asia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Asia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AsiaWikipedia:WikiProject AsiaTemplate:WikiProject AsiaAsia articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Countries, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of countries on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CountriesWikipedia:WikiProject CountriesTemplate:WikiProject Countriescountry articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject East Asia, a project which is currently considered to be defunct.East AsiaWikipedia:WikiProject East AsiaTemplate:WikiProject East AsiaEast Asia articles
This article has been viewed enough times to make it onto the all-time Top 100 list. It has had 88 million views since December 2007.
This article has been viewed enough times in a single year to make it into the Top 50 Report annual list. This happened in 2010, when it received 10,063,050 views.
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
Question - @Letizia Ferhati: Are you sure you nominated the correct article? Japan does not appear eligible for DYK; it was not created by you but by User:Alan D in 2001, and has neither been 5x expanded nor made into a GA recently, and indeed has been a Featured Article since 2007. Japan does not meet the "New" criteria of WP:DYKCRIT, did you mean to nominate a different article? - Aoidh (talk) 22:28, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Closing. As noted in the above comment by Aoidh this doesn't meet requirements, although it is understandable that the DYK process name causes confusion in this regard. CMD (talk) 00:49, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nikkimaria, why did you revert here? You have undone several citation improvements for no reason. What are you objecting to here? Headbomb {t · c · p · b}15:34, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I do not agree that the changes were improvements - most were just adding clutter, and some were misinterpreting what was being cited. For example, the citation for this site was edited to add a publication date of 1891 - that's the creation date of the artwork, but what's actually being cited there is the description provided by the website. Nikkimaria (talk) 17:15, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Likewise the link to "A History of Japan: From Stone Age to Superpower" should be on the chapter, not the book, because the link is for the chapter, not the book.
Likewise Proceedings of the International Conference on Social Modeling and Simulation, Plus Econophysics Colloquium is not a journal, and should not be cited through cite journal.
Likewise proper title case is "China Overtakes Japan as the World's Biggest Exporter of Passenger Cars", not "China Overtakes Japan As The World's Biggest Exporter Of Passenger Cars"
The first of these has no impact on the reader. In the second, the link does not go to that chapter so to call it a chapter URL is nonsense. The third change adds an unnecessary extra date and removes a link display, neither of which seems of benefit. The fourth was incorrect both before and after the edit - it should be sentence case, although that is inconsistent throughout at the moment. Etc etc etc. And none of these warrant restoring the disputed changes. Nikkimaria (talk) 19:03, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The link was pointing to PT24 when it should have been PT40 because the reference was clearly to the 2nd chapter covering the Nara period. I've fixed that. I don't see what extra date you're talking about, nor what link you think is removed. Headbomb {t · c · p · b}19:08, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
level-3 vital article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale..svg){kind=small}
.svg){kind=small}
Closing. As noted in the above comment by Aoidh this doesn't meet requirements, although it is understandable that the DYK process name causes confusion in this regard. CMD (talk) 00:49, 26 May 2023 (UTC)
