Category talk:Imperial House of Japan

This category is within the scope of WikiProject Royalty and Nobility, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of royalty and nobility 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.Royalty and NobilityWikipedia:WikiProject Royalty and NobilityTemplate:WikiProject Royalty and NobilityRoyalty and Nobility articles

Japan: Royalty & nobility

This category is within the scope of WikiProject Japan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Japan-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project, participate in relevant discussions, and see lists of open tasks. Current time in Japan: 20:57, October 24, 2024 (JST, Reiwa 6) (Refresh)JapanWikipedia:WikiProject JapanTemplate:WikiProject JapanJapan-related articles

This category is supported by the Royalty and nobility task force.

WikiProject Japan to do list:

Peer review: None
A-class review: None

Featured content candidates –

Articles: None
Pictures: None
Lists: None

Good article nominations: Vinland Saga (TV series), Godzilla Minus One
Add requested images to articles that need them.
Pages for Deletion: Participate in Japan-related deletion discussions.
Improve and expand Japan-related stubs.
Create some requested articles.
Help translate an article from the Japanese Wikipedia into English.
Assess unassessed articles

Untitled

The general idea would be that the "Yamato line" category could include members of the line that didn't become emperors, such as daughters or sons who didn't ascend to the throne. The distinction is common in all the subcategories of "royal families," and since Japan has one of the oldest monarchies in the world. Even if it were redundant, there is always a distinction, in principle, between the genealogy and succession. --Leifern 10:42, 2005 Apr 21 (UTC)

Ah. So, how about "Japanese Imperial Family"? Yamato Line sounds like it would be specifically the line of Emperors. I would also make "Emperors of Japan" a subcategory of that. - Nik42 01:33, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)

By making Emperors of Japan a subcategory of Japanese Imperial Family, you don't have to add every Emperor to the category. - Nik42 01:35, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)

To the extent that we want to treat the Japanese royal family in a way that is consistent with royal families elsewhere, it is customary to give them the name of the house or dynasty they belong to. This is where we get the Houses of Bourbon, Oldenburg, Hanover, etc. The term "line" is relevant here, because such dynasties have ended from time to time, so genealogists who study royal families refer to them that way. --Leifern 02:15, 2005 Apr 22 (UTC)

But looking at the category Category:Royal families, most don't contain the word "line". For example, we have House of Lancaster, Saudi royal family, etc. In fact, *none* of them contain the word "line", most have "House" or "Dynasty". "Japanese Imperial House" would be a good name, I think. - Nik42 02:19, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I just noticed that there's already a category Category:Japanese monarchy

I used the term Yamato line because this seems to be the common term used elsewhere. I am not comfortable calling it "Japanese Imperial House," because that doesn't make it clear that we're discussing one lineage - people who see the category might assume that it might be comprised of several lineages until they read the relevant articles. "House of Yamato" would be the equivalent term, but I want to use the most commonly used term elsewhere. --Leifern 12:00, 2005 Apr 22 (UTC)

This term seems to be based on a sort of "original research" in my impression. I have never heard it and first supposed it would have been a misspelling of Yamatoji line, a nickname of western part of Kansai Main Line. Japanese Imperial House is much clear and understandable. I worked on a Japanese history based RPG designing for two years and talked with a lots of westerners who devoted to this are, but as far as I remember no one used this term.

If you know however credible sources in which this term is used, please let us know. We are better to deal with categories, based on acceptable wisdom rather than feelings of individuals. --Aphaia 18:53, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]