This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.

Dear Bendono, remiss, vagrant, unresponsive and unhelpful to colleagues, I call on them (一切知らんぷりの鉄面皮 etc). Perhaps I need analysis. But to the point, before my permaban is extended for a recent lapse, I'd like to finish an extensive article on the Barasana people, including some brief remarks on their language. I have phonological data but don't know what template to use or how to use them. I've put the data on the talk page there. If you can refer me to the appropriate template, I'd been deeply obliged. Best, as always Nishidani (talk) 10:09, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, after reading one of your articles at newpage patrol, I was surprised to see that an editor who has contributed as many new articles as you have hadn't already been approved as an wp:Autoreviewer. So I've taken the liberty of rectifying that. ϢereSpielChequers 15:18, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your support. Regards, Bendono (talk) 15:38, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know. The National Treasure lists that I created are indeed limited to new (post 1950) National Treasures, so it does not fit in there. However I would like to add it to the history section of National Treasures of Japan as an example of a National Treasure destroyed during the war. Does "Yoshida (2001:31, 135)" reference the fact that it was destroyed in the war or only the last sentence of that paragraph (Only reproductions remain)? Also, do you by any chance know the number of National Treasures of Japan that were destroyed during WW2? bamse (talk) 15:21, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yoshida (2001), page 135 mentions: 1) designated as national treasure in 1938, 2) facsimile reproduction in 1939, 3) removed in 1945 due to destruction in war fires, and 4) only remains as reproductions.

As for the other question, I regret to say that I do not have the resources to answer. While I do have a general interest in the topic, my primary interests and research lies more in historical linguistics, which often results in creation of related articles. In this case there is some overlap.

Regards, Bendono (talk) 15:34, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the fast reply. I will add it to the article in a moment.bamse (talk) 16:20, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bendono! I'd like to improve List of National Treasures of Japan (ancient documents) to the same quality as some of the other National Treasure lists (sculptures, paintings, castles, shrines, residences). One thing that needs to be done is a proper introduction. I don't know much about the subject, but am eager to read a little about it. The list is mainly about documents such as chronicles, diaries, records or letters from the Nara to Kamakura period. I was wondering if you could recommend any sources that deal with this subject (=old Japanese documents) on a basic level. I'd prefer online sources, but might have access to some journal articles as well. Unfortunately I don't have access to a library. Regards bamse (talk) 20:59, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bamse. Akeome & kotoyoro. Sorry for the delayed response. Been quite busy lately and have had little spare time. As for your request, the standard reference for Japanese literature is the six volume 日本古典文学大辞典 (ISBN 4000800612, 4000800620, 4000800639, 4000800647, 4000800655, 4000800663). Please note that this is literature and will not contain entries for most non-literature historical documents. A cursory check confirms that a few of the entries are there, but the majority are not. There is also a more convenient condensed single volume edition (ISBN 4-00-080067-1), but it has much few entries and will be of little help to you. I've previously been to a few 国宝展示会s; unfortunately I no longer have any of those books or resources. When I get some more free time I'll try to find some decent resources at a library.

Several of the entries in your list I have an interest in and plan on creating entries for sometime in the future.　Regards Bendono (talk) 12:12, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for your reply. Very happy to hear that you are planning to write about some of the entries. Six volumes is maybe a bit heavy for just an intro to a list. The problem is, that honestly I don't know what to write about in the intro, since the items are of quite different types. Probably I would want to mention (shortly) some of the following points:

1. History of writing in Japan: How and when did the Japanese written language develop? What are the oldest extant written texts (in stone, on swords, on paper,...)?
2. Language: I suppose some of the documents are written in Chinese and some in Japanese (kana). When and how did this change happen? Are certain types of documents more likely to be written in traditional Chinese than others?
3. Styles: Are there different styles of calligraphy used in these documents? Some texts look rather rough (sorry, don't know the proper word) and others neatly written. Can the different styles be connected with the age of the document or its type (diary, registry, imperial letter)?
4. Importance: Why were these documents designated national treasure? Probably because they are valuable for their historic value. But what (in general) do they tell about Japanese history? Also, what other historical sources exist (for instance these: List_of_National_Treasures_of_Japan_(writings)#History_books_.28.E5.8F.B2.E6.9B.B8.29.2C_historical_tales_.28.E6.AD.B4.E5.8F.B2.E7.89.A9.E8.AA.9E.29)?
5. Other stuff: I am open for any suggestions.

It would be great if you could point me to sources that discuss some or all of these aspects. In the meantime I started to work on the intro for the temple national treasure list, but will be back with the ancient documents when that is done. bamse (talk) 12:57, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I can give you a few good references from my bookshelves:

1. A History of Writing in Japan, Christopher Seeley ISBN 0-8248-2217-X.
2. It's similar to writing in the western history. The learned would write in (often bad) Latin. This is particularly true with official documents. As literacy improved, commoners were not particular good with Latin, so they would write in their own language. Japan is fairly similar. Remember that 仮名 means temporary, vulgar characters in place of 真名 (=kanji), the true, official characters.
3. 『書誌学入門』, 川瀬一馬 ISBN 4-8419-0290-2 and 『新日本書道史』, 平山観月.
4. [Second half] Take a look at ja:Category:時代別の日本の歴史書.
5. If I think of anything else I will let you know.

Regards, Bendono (talk) 14:35, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks you! bamse (talk) 08:15, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, will be commencing a two-month trial at approximately 23:00, 2010 June 15 (UTC).

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under flagged protection. Flagged protection is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 18:57, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bendono,

I noticed an inconsistency in the naming of articles and categories:

• Early Middle Japanese (794–1185, Heian) vs. Category:Early Middle Japanese texts (1185–1333, Kamakura).

Could this be resolved, or at least commented on? It’s rather confusing…

For my reference and to clarify periods:

AFAICT, people tend to date eras as:

• pre-710
• 710–794 (Nara)
• 794–1185 (Heian)
• 1185–1333 (Kamakura)
• 1333–1573 (Muromachi)
• (and then 1603–1868 (Edo) etc.)

…but then the naming of these eras is a bit confused.

So one system, which appears to be used for the texts categories, is:

• pre-710 :: Proto-Japanese
• 710–794 :: Old Japanese
• 794–1185 :: Late Old Japanese
• 1185–1333 :: Early Middle Japanese
• 1333–1573 :: Late Middle Japanese
• (1603–1868) :: Early Modern Japanese

…but, as noted, the language spoken in 794–1185 is more often now called Early Middle Japanese (b/c more similar to Middle Japanese), hence we get:

• pre-710 :: Proto-Japanese
• 710–794 :: Old Japanese
• 794–1185 :: Early Middle Japanese
• 1185–1333 :: (early) Late Middle Japanese
• 1333–1573 :: (late) Late Middle Japanese
• (1603–1868) :: Early Modern Japanese

I suppose least ambiguous would simply be to call the categories by the era names, though that may be a bit opaque?

Thanks!

—Nils von Barth (nbarth) (talk) 22:31, 15 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Bendono! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot notifying you on behalf of the the unreferenced biographies team that 1 of the articles that you created is currently tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 13 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:

1. Hiroto Torihata - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 19:00, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I attended the Japanese Wikipedia 10th Anniversary get-together in Kyoto. There seem to be very few people actively editing English articles on Japan. There also seems to be little teamwork between Japanese and non-Japanese Wikipedia enthusiasts in Japan. I wonder if you think that organizing a belated Wikipedia 10th event in the greater Tokyo area would help? LittleBen (talk) 13:51, 23 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'd appreciate your input as an expert on this discussion. Basically the question is how to split the list of written materials (書跡・典籍の部) National Treasures and how to name the parts. All written material National Treasures are presently in two lists: List of National Treasures of Japan (writings: books) and List of National Treasures of Japan (writings: others). However I am not happy with the names ("others", "books") which I feel don't really represent the content. Maybe you know more appropriate words to refer to these lists or could suggest another split of the list? Thanks. bamse (talk) 16:25, 6 March 2011 (UTC) It has possibly been resolved. bamse (talk) 11:04, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Hiroto Torihata is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hiroto Torihata until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. J04n(talk page) 19:36, 9 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Quick question: Do you know whether the extant copy (national treasure at 大阪青山学園) of Fujiwara no Tameie's 1236 transcription of the Tosa Nikki is the "original" from 1236 or a later copy from 1600 as this book, page 94 claims? That info would go here. bamse (talk) 21:05, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have not had much time to log in recently, so you caught me at a good time. Your link is not working for me. According to entry for Tosa Nikki in Nihon Koten Bungaku Daijiten, it says "Fujiwara Tameie manuscripts: Have a colophon expressing a transcription of the Ki-clan original from Renge Ō-in by Tameie, the son of Teika, on the 29th day of 8th month of Katei 2 (1236). (The original was found by Sorimachi Shigeo in Shōwa 59.) The Seikei Shooku-bon (in the Ikeda Kikan collection at Tōkai University), an early-modern copy of this manuscript, has been studied by Ikeda Kikan and is known as a fine copy closest to the Ki no Tsurayuki original manuscript and has since been photocopied and published."

According to ja:土佐日記, 大阪青山学園 has 青谿書屋本 (Seikei Shooku-bon), so this is the above description. As such, this appears to be a c. 1600 copy of the Tameie 1236 copy. Regards, Bendono (talk) 07:09, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the quick reply.　Just found: "『土左日記』の写本は、従来、この為家本を忠実に臨模した青谿書屋本（大島雅太郎氏旧蔵、現東海大学所蔵）が、貫之自筆本の本文を最もよく伝えた最善本とされてきた。本書はその親本にあたり、昭和六十年に重要文化財、今回さらに国宝に指定された。" bamse (talk) 10:55, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I understand you've written a fair amount of articles on Japanese literature and I've just written a brief one on The Dog Pillow, which should be featuring on DYK before too long; User:Bamse was asking, and I would like to know too (plus it would be kind of relevant for the article), quite why there are so many 'Dog' parodies - is this something you know anything about? Thanks, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 02:00, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Is the Kuji Hongi listed in List of Japanese classic texts the same as Sendai Kuji Hongi? If yes, a redirect could be created. bamse (talk) 20:11, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Kanpei is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kanpei until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Clarityfiend (talk) 01:22, 15 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Bendono. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. Mdann52 (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Bendono. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

User:Bendono/Sandbox2, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Bendono/Sandbox2 and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Bendono/Sandbox2 during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. —Compassionate727 ^(T·C) 15:16, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:04, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The file File:Gaijin timeline.png has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unused free use image with no clear use on the Wiki.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. fuzzy510 (talk) 10:12, 16 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:17, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:26, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article Ryōko Morishita has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp/dated}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 06:23, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The article Shinji Nojima has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp/dated}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. jlwoodwa (talk) 22:16, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:21, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bendono. :) I'm looking for people to interview here. Feel free to pass if you're not interested. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 00:31, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I see you've contributed a lot to Setsuwa, would you be interested in a wikiproject on oral tradition? Kowal2701 (talk) 18:48, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:06, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]