Jump to content

Talk:Aozora Bunko

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled

[edit]

Is it necessary to include a list (let alone a LINK!) to every single text being saved on the site? Why can't we just get a link to a table of contents, if the site has one? -- Zoe

Because the list in the site is in Japanese. Anyway also it is a good list for providing links to make each article Taku 03:54 Jan 5, 2003 (UTC)

The list being in Japanese is irrelevant. As it is now, this page is far too long for most people to want to sit and wait for loading, even if their broswer allows it. -- Zoe

Yes then why don't we make a list that is relevant? And I know the page became too long. So we need to break it up. -- Taku 07:06 Jan 5, 2003 (UTC)

I think the born and death date info with each author is redundant. but please leave it alone. After we completed each article of author with born and death date info, we can delete it. But now there is not such info in wikipedia, so don't delete them. Thanks -- Taku 00:13 Jan 6, 2003 (UTC)

The subpages don't make sense --Hemanshu 12:17, 6 Feb 2004 (UTC)

I know this is rather trivial...but anyway, regarding the English translation of Auzora Bunko, is "open air" an official one? If not, why not simply call it "azure", it fits so well.

Votes for Deletion

[edit]
  • all subpages of Aozora Bunko (e.g.Aozora Bunko: A) -- index of another site. they don't make sense. TY 08:44, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete these index pages. A maintenance nightmare anyway. Users are better off visiting the Aozora Bunko website directly. Lupo 13:22, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • On the contrary, this is a useful index for stimulating articles in English on classic works of Japanese literature. Keep. -- The Anome 13:28, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete subpages, keep Aozora Bunko. "Maintenance nightmare" is right! Let people be stimulated by visiting the Aozora Bunko website. Wile E. Heresiarch 02:44, 17 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Del. I am the guy who created the index. Well, I guess I must admit that was mistake. Having a list of Japanese literature or so is useful but not this one. This index contains any work avaliable in Aozora Bunko, not necessalily prominent Japanese literatures. This should not have existed in the first place. -- Taku 08:59, Feb 17, 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. Not material for an encyclopedia. Link to Aozora Bunko's own list (if they have it) instead. Andre Engels 16:16, 17 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep in some form. A lot of pages linked from there already exist, and we have no other List of Japanese literature to index them. I agree this is probably not the best list (too much non-famous stuff, and no recent famous stuff), but at the very least the works we already have articles on should be salvaged from the list before deleting. --Delirium 05:57, Feb 21, 2004 (UTC)
      • (1) There aren't "a lot" of linked-to pages; I count 7 in A-H (didn't check the rest), out of maybe 200 or so. (2) Of those 7, 6 have nothing to do with literature, and the literary content of the 7th is this: "Aomori is also the novel Aomori by Osamu Dazai". (3) It's only proposed to delete the index pages under Aozora Bunko, not any linked-to pages. (4) I agree, there should be a list of Japanese literature. This isn't it. FWIW, Wile E. Heresiarch 17:16, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. Hopefully the red links will get some Japanese literature expert to write them. BL 07:53, Feb 22, 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. It's comparable to List of books by title. -- User:Docu
    • Delete. No need for Wikipedia to serve as an index for another website's content. NTK 07:24, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
[edit]

The last external link listed has mostly non-working links. Can somebody get in touch with the owner and say so. 4.249.198.206 (talk) 01:12, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about Aozora Bunko

[edit]

This article is about Aozora Bunko. Go find someplace else to put your text that's not about Aozora Bunko. There is simply no justification for making more than half of Aozora Bunko about Japanese copyright law.--Prosfilaes (talk) 21:49, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Prosfilaes -- It appears that your perception of the gravamen of this article may be ignoring the citation added in 2007 by User:Jusjih:
  • Revision as of 17:41, 15 February 2007 User:Jusjih -- Edit summary: petition against extending the copyright protection for 20 years in Japan
"Aozora Bunko is seeking signatures to petition against extending the copyright protection for 20 years in Japan despite American governmental request to make the extension. (Information in Japanese)"
In the context this link reveals, you can see for yourself that the information you would appear to dispute becomes appropriate, necessary, useful.
If you haven't yet, please examine this link. Conveniently, you'll find that there is an easily accessible English version. In the context this link clarifies, perhaps you can more readily appreciate the relevance of the material which you've too casually deleted.
I admit frankly that I don't understand your position. How could I? You haven't really articulated a view beyond what appears as a kind of blanket rejection? I'm at a loss, of course.
I wonder if it would seem reasonable for me to invite you to proffer an explanation -- with perhaps a few citations -- which will help make clear why the text you've deleted is mistakenly posted. As you consider how to respond, perhaps I might suggest that you review another one of those citations which remain -- Tamura, Aya. "Novelists, others want copyright protection extended," Japan Times Online. September 30, 2006.
The following citations have been deleted, and yet it could be arguable that they have relevance in the context created by the citations which remain:
In good faith, I wonder if it might be reasonable to hope that you'll be persuaded to re-think your most recent edit? --Tenmei (talk) 02:26, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I would like to suggest moving the recently removed section "Copyright term dispute" to Japanese copyright law that would be much more relevant.--Jusjih (talk) 03:11, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Jusjih -- Yes, of course, I do understand your reasoning ... but the "problem" created by your 2007 edit remains. If Aozora Bunko has effectively become an advocate for a controversial position -- for a point-of-view which is arguably related to the central function which Aozora Bunko seeks to perform, then the article needs the brief text which is now questioned. The modest, non-POV text becomes a reasonable and necessary element of this article; and it becomes important to note that the article from Japan Times validates your 2007 edit. In my view, you weren't wrong to add what you did, nor was there anything wrong in developing the article further.
Despite the conciliatory tone of my note above, I'm not really content to overlook what User:Prosfilaes seems to have sought to achieve. In my view, this becomes an edit which does not enhance the value of the article nor of Wikipedia -- rather, it diminishes the value both. Frankly, I'm guessing that User:Prosfilaes has not checked out the in-line citations because he has eliminated the sentences which explain the substance of those reference sources.
The article you edited in 2007 had no in-line citations, no references, no links to other articles. Now that those deficits have been addressed, I would have thought that there needs to be some clearly articulated set of reasons for such blanking out text which has verifying in-line citations and bibliographic reference sources. --Tenmei (talk) 04:06, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
What part of WP:COATRACK don't you understand? It's not appropriate to have more than half the text on stuff that that's not about Aozora Bunko. The sentence currently in the article is fine; it's WP:NPOV in that it states the facts of what Aozora Bunko is doing. All these other cites don't say a thing about what Aozora Bunko is doing. 2008 Atlantic hurricane season does not need to explain where the Atlantic is, and where it came from; it does not need to explain what the year 2008 is; it does not need to explain what hurricanes are. Aozora Bunko might be improved by pointing out some of the major works they have, like those of Natsume Soseki; it won't be improved by making most of the text about who Natsume Soseki is.--Prosfilaes (talk) 12:19, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Aha. Your POV is somewhat clarified, but your argument is unpersuasive because it is unsupported. In contrast, you seek to eliminate the results of research backed up by in-line citations, listed reference sources, links to other Wikipedia articles and external links.
{{Essay}}
In this context, another more strategy might be more effective; but without something more, this approach is not compelling. --Tenmei (talk) 12:43, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Prosfilaes -- I can only guess at what what intended by asserting: "Aozora Bunko includes several works of crime fiction...." The full-text of that addition is preserved here. Perhaps in the context of a verifying source, the helpfulness of this edit can be more clearly recognized. 

   Crime fiction is the genre of fiction that deals with crimes, their detection, criminals and their motives. It is usually distinguished from mainstream fiction and other genres such as science fiction or historical fiction, but boundaries can be, and indeed are, blurred. It has several sub-genres, including detective fiction (including the whodunnit), legal thriller, courtroom drama, and hard-boiled fiction.
   Crime fiction began to be considered as a serious genre only around 1900. The earliest known crime novel is "The murder of machine operator Rolfsen" by Norwegian Mauritz Hansen, published in 1839. Yet more known are the earlier dark works of Edgar Allan Poe (e.g., "The Murders in the Rue Morgue" (1841), "The Mystery of Marie Roget" (1842), and "The Purloined Letter" (1844). The evolution of locked room mysteries was one of the landmarks in the history of crime fiction. The Sherlock Holmes mysteries, probably based upon C. Auguste Dupin and Émile Gaboriau's Monsieur Lecoq, are said to have been singularly responsible for the huge popularity in this genre. A precursor was Paul Féval, whose series Les Habits Noirs (1862-67) feature Scotland Yard detectives and criminal conspiracies.
   The evolution of the print mass media in the United Kingdom and the United States in the latter half of the 19th century was crucial in popularising crime fiction and related genres. Literary 'variety' magazines like Strand, McClure's, and Harper's quickly became central to the overall structure and function of popular fiction in society, providing a mass-produced medium that offered cheap, illustrated publications that were essentially disposable.
   Like the works of many other important fiction writers of his day — e.g. Wilkie Collins and Charles Dickens — Arthur Conan Doyle's Sherlock Holmes stories first appeared in serial form in the monthly Strand magazine in the United Kingdom. The series quickly attracted a wide and passionate following on both sides of the Atlantic, and when Doyle killed off Holmes in The Final Problem, the public outcry was so great, and the publishing offers for more stories so attractive, that he was reluctantly forced to resurrect him.
   Later a set of stereotypic formulae began to appear to cater to various tastes.

This edit is not intended to exacerbate any rationale for further dispute. I believe it will likely cause a raft of problems if this material were to remain as part of a page which will be replicated throughout the realm of Wikipedia mirror sites. --Tenmei (talk) 17:14, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The ACLU is an organization that's dedicated to freedom of speech in the United States. That doesn't mean that the article ACLU starts talking about freedom of speech in the United States; it talks about what the battles the ACLU has fought over the issue. All the cites in the world, no matter what Aozora Bunko has done, do not make this article the right place to talk about copyright law in Japan; that should go to copyright law in Japan or some such article. This article is solely about stuff that Aozora Bunko has done. That Aozora Bunko has dedicated itself to the preservation of the current copyright law is appropriate for the article. If there's a reliable source that says that Aozora Bunko should stay a digital library, or that Aozora Bunko has crossed the line in their protests, that's appropriate for this article. But if Sony is pushing the changes without specific mention to Aozora Bunko by them or the journalists, it's completely irrelevant to this article.

All the cites and research in the world don't change the simple fact that this article is not about digital libraries, copyright law, Japan, or any combination of those. It's about Aozora Bunko. Anything about the first three subjects need to go to articles on those subjects and be deleted from this article.--Prosfilaes (talk) 01:18, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Aozora Bunko. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:40, 16 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Aozora Bunko. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:36, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Aozora_Bunko&oldid=1204904511"