Talk:New Morning (Misia album)

Albums Stub‑class

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Albums, an attempt at building a useful resource on recordings from a variety of genres. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.AlbumsWikipedia:WikiProject AlbumsTemplate:WikiProject AlbumsAlbum
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Source needed

This edit New Morning (stylized as NEW MORNING)... needs a reliable WP:RS English language source.

However, I see this now reads

New Morning (stylized as NEW MORNING in Japan)...

But really that should say

New Morning (capitalized as NEW MORNING in Japanese text)...

Since that is what we are talking about here. The same is often true for American albums appearing in Japanese sources where they are not given in katana. For example ja:MICHAEL “マイケル・ジャクソン全世界待望のニューアルバム「MICHAEL」”. 2014年7月15日閲覧。 How is this Misia album any different? In ictu oculi (talk) 16:38, 1 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am tired of making the same answers on every page you did this to. What happens to American or British or French or whatever national origin albums in Japan is irrelevant on the English Wikipedia. You are asking for vast changes to how articles on Japanese albums are formatted because of a pointless technicality and unending pedantry. "In Japanese" and "in Japan" should be considered synonymous.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 16:52, 1 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

They are not synonymous. Japanese is a language which is also used albeit rarely outside Japan. Japan is a place where English books and newspapers are also printed. Now that we have established that "in Japanese text" and "in Japan" are not synonymous, what second/other objection do you have to the above. In ictu oculi (talk) 17:13, 1 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The KISS principle.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 17:16, 1 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No that's not going to fly either, it's not simpler to state "in Japan" when what is meant is "in Japanese text", so KISS doesn't apply. You have already agreed that this occurs in Japanese language texts, not English texts in Japan, so unless you're going back on that, there's no reason not to reflect what you have said in the edit (if the edit is required at all). In ictu oculi (talk) 17:19, 1 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

So you want to be extremely pedantic for the sake of being pedantic. "NEW MORNING" is English, but used exclusively within Japanese contexts. How do you describe that? And it's not something that should be omitted.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 17:24, 1 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I would describe that as "in Japanese text" since it is in Japanese text. In ictu oculi (talk) 17:35, 1 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

But why make the distinction? Why be pedantic?—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 17:36, 1 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Because Japanese and English are different languages, and use different writing systems. Since we are talking about "in Japanese text", and this it is in Japanese text, and not in English text then we should say "in Japanese text". In ictu oculi (talk) 17:41, 1 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

But it's still English text (effectively a trademark) in a Japanese language context. Calling it "in Japanese text" seems incorrect.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 17:50, 1 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

But is not "in English text", this is "in Japanese text":

若松正子 (2014-04-02). "MISIA『今だからこそ言える――15年間続けられた理由と歌声の秘密とは！？』". Oricon.co.jp. Retrieved 2014-04-02.

"ナタリー - MISIA、アルバム発売日にBunkamuraで15周年ツアー完結". Natalie.mu. 2014-03-17. Retrieved 2014-04-02.

That is clearly in Japanese text not in English text. In ictu oculi (talk) 17:54, 1 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

How is "NEW MORNING" in any way Japanese text?—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 17:58, 1 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You said "in", I said "in". The preposition wikt:in means inside, among. That is clearly "in Japanese text" not "in English text":

This is clearly "in Japanese text". Agreed? In ictu oculi (talk) 18:16, 1 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. It is in Japanese text. But we do not need to be pedantic on this page any further than you've made it to be. Trademark. End of this nonsense.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 18:37, 1 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I can't believe I have to visit this again. The name of this album is "NEW MORNING" within Japan rather than "New Morning" or even "new morning". And because MOS:CAPS forbids the use of "NEW MORNING" it's instead "New Morning" and there's a note saying that "NEW MORNING" is the stylization because that's how all of these articles are set up when the album's name doesn't have standard capitalization in Japan. Why do I constantly have to come back to this, In ictu oculi? Why won't you let this stupid technicality go?—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 01:59, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please find a reliable English print source (not a blog) which says "Misia's album NEW MORNING was released in 2014" In ictu oculi (talk) 03:41, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
There are no English language sources for this album. I told you that half a year ago. I've shown you multiple sources that feature this album's name as "NEW MORNING" inline with Japanese text which is all that there is. And that is not the point. The point is that MOS:CAPS forbids using "NEW MORNING" as the title of this page just like it forbids "ARTPOP" for being the title of Artpop. This album was trademarked as "NEW MORNING". It's on her official website for the album. Hell, the album even has a song on it that isn't all caps and it's formatted that way on her website. It's on HMV. It's on Sony's official website. Why do you demand something that does not exist and I've explained to you that it is just a pedantic thing required by the English Wikipedia's manual of style?—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 03:51, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I know there weren't. I was suggesting that you find some if you want to represent the album as if it is capitalized in English. Otherwise you need to adjust the lead to something like this:

New Morning (capitalized as MISIAのアルバム「NEW MORNING」in Romaji in Japanese text)...

This is en.wp not ja.wp. In ictu oculi (talk) 03:54, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

RfC: Should the (stylized as... ) parenthesis in lead make clear "in Japanese"

Please consider joining the feedback request service.

An editor has requested comments from other editors for this discussion. Within 24 hours, this page will be added to the following list:

Wikipedia style and naming

When discussion has ended, remove this tag and it will be removed from the list. If this page is on additional lists, they will be noted below.

Should [Option A] the (stylized as... ) parenthesis in lead be retained but make clear "in Japanese" only? There are no English print sources and English books do not normally capitalize Japanese album or song titles, while Japanese habitually displays Romaji and English words as CAPS within Japanese text. Or [Option B] should the (stylized as...) parenthesis be removed as irrelevant, since Japanese habitually displays Romaji and English words as CAPS within Japanese text in most cases, without any special stylization being required. In ictu oculi (talk) 04:00, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]