Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

Talk:World of Warcraft

2008-12-14T12:44:04Z

Funnny: /* Too many minutiae? */

I think we are too dignified to have such lengthy articles about video games. I propose that we do not have any articles on video games at all. What say you? ---[[User:Be not dismayed|Be not dismayed]] XXI June 2007

:It's a pretty significant cultural phenomenon. I am about to apply my personal test. I am about to see whether it's been mentioned in ''The New York Times.'' If so, I think it's important. And if it's "fit to print," it's probably fit for an encyclopedia. Here goes. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 18:46, 21 June 2007 (EDT)

:A search on the exact phrase "World of Warcraft" ''plus'' "Blizzard" in ''The New York Times'' since 2000 turns up 26 hits. On a quick eyeballing, virtually all appear to be relevant and many of which are clear ''news'' articles ''about'' the game. Here are a few:

:*December 9, 2004: "Thousands of Opponents Await In a New Virtual Fantasy World"
:*February 10, 2005: "The Game Is a Hit, But the Work Isn't Done"
:*August 6, 2005: "Social Significance in Playing Online? You Betcha!" "Yet outside my romantic and family life, nothing this year has given me more satisfaction than helping my guild in World of Warcraft defeat Ragnaros for the first time early Tuesday morning. World of Warcraft has been the video game world's breakout phenomenon since its introduction last November, signing up more than 3.5 million paying subscribers worldwide...."
:*December 9, 2005:" Ogre to Slay? Outsource It To Chinese," about the "gold farming" phenomenon
:*May 11, 2006: "A Major Online Game Galaxy Gets a New Race of Characters"
:*September 5, 2006: "An Online Game, Made in America, Seizes the Globe"
:*January 17, 2007 "World of Warcraft Expands"

:Speaking as someone who has never played World of Warcraft or any other MMORPG, nor Dungeons & Dragons before it, the evidence would seem to suggest that "World of Warcraft" is a significant cultural phenomenon. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 18:56, 21 June 2007 (EDT)

:P. S. The Britannica does not have an article about World of Warcraft in the encyclopedia proper, but it does have an article in the 2007 Book of the Year on [http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9435326/The-Virtual-World-of-Online-Gaming The Virtual World of Online Gaming], and it opens "Virtual worlds generated billions of real dollars in 2006 as millions of players around the world fought, bought, crafted, and sold in a variety of online environments. The most populous, Blizzard Entertainment's World of Warcraft, drew seven million subscribers (with more than five million in China alone)." [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 18:59, 21 June 2007 (EDT)

::As a mom, I think it is useful to have such articles, so that parents may get a Conservapedia view on things in which their kids may express interest. In addition, video games are a real business, creating real jobs - you can even major in game development in college. The article can be positive or negative, as the facts dictate - either way, it is useful information. --[[User:Hsmom|Hsmom]] 23:21, 22 June 2007 (EDT)

If you want junior high and highschool kids to use Conservapedia, you better make it fun for them for where they are at in their lives. This is HUGE at their ages. What I don't understand is, why does the editing keep changing so much with adding information then deleting it? Is it being copied from wiki or something? No explanation is given. [[User:Learn together|Learn together]] 18:52, 2 July 2007 (EDT)

: It looks like the last major revert before it was locked was probably because the article read like an advertisement. The problem with this article is that it has no direction. For example, I don't think we need to explain the factions, races, classes, etc. If people want to read about that they can just got to Blizzard's website or a fan site. I think if we're trying to be encyclopedic here, we need to just stick to what it is, and it's cultural impact. I've played the game since it was released, and I'd be glad to work on it if it were unlocked. --[[User:Colest|Colest]] 23:30, 2 July 2007 (EDT)
::Article overboard! '''Way''' overboard. This game is worth mentioning, just for its cultural importance, but... this is more of a condensed stratagy guide. Needs a good trim-down. - BornAgainBrit
:::It may be a bit overboard, but it has a huge following, especially among age groups that Andy is most gearing the use of Conservapedia for. It makes sense to give them the type of information that they want that will get them interested if it gets them to spend time looking at Conservapedia and using it as a resource. In other words in this one we may want to go beyond a dry encyclopedia article. [[User:Learn together|Learn together]] 10:54, 12 July 2007 (EDT)
:::: Right now it looks like we've removed most of the random terminology that one could easily gain off of the official website. It gives a concise description of what the basic premise of the game is, notes it's popularity, and brings up some criticisms of the game. What type of information beyond this do you think would be relevant? I'm happy to make whatever changes might be needed, but like I said before, we just need a good direction as to what type of information we're trying to relate here. --[[User:Colest|Colest]] 11:02, 12 July 2007 (EDT)
::::: I agree we need a general understanding, but looking at the edit history, the recent direction is not one that has been agreed upon and was not the reason the article was unlocked. It appears this game is being cut some slack in giving more information than is usually desired, but then it is in a unique position of having an immense following of dedicated players and curious onlookers and may be a way to attract more attention to Conservapedia from groups that otherwise wouldn't be drawn to using our website. [[User:Learn together|Learn together]] 11:29, 12 July 2007 (EDT)

== Article locked ==

I'd also be glad to share my WoW knoledge with the kind folk of Conservapedia... if this weren't locked. --[[User:Funnny|Funnny]] 21:48, 9 July 2007 (EDT)
:It was locked by [[user:Elamdri|Elamdri]], so you could ask him about unlocking it if you like. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 22:10, 9 July 2007 (EDT)
::I've unlocked it for now. If it stays relatively good, I see no reason to leave it locked.--[[User:Elamdri|Elamdri]] 17:25, 11 July 2007 (EDT)

== Recent Changes ==

I think it may be wise to engage in concensus discussion before making major changes. While I'm sure all changes are being made in good faith, it's going against the reasons the Sysop stated he unprotected the article. Thanks. [[User:Learn together|Learn together]] 11:10, 12 July 2007 (EDT)

: Well, first off, he hasn't stated any reasons that I can see why he unprotected it, only because it was requested. "If it stays relatively good, I see no reason it should be protected" doesn't really offer any insight as to 1) what was wrong in the first place and 2) what he'd like to see out of the article. Furthermore, I would argue that while this is a popular video game, CP is not a website that is going to attract your curious video game enthusiast. They are more than likely going to seek out official video game websites, or perhaps a wiki specifically focused on the game (ie www.wowwiki.com). I believe providing a more concise explination of the game and cultural issues surrounding it is more appropriate for this encyclopedia. --[[User:Colest|Colest]] 11:48, 12 July 2007 (EDT)

:: Yes, but Elamdri himself put in many of the additions that were removed, and it is unlikely that's what he wanted. ;-) I'm not saying either that we're going to suddenly get 8.5 million game players, but the first rule of selling is to get them in, and the second is to sell your product -- give them something they want. We did a fine job on the Longbow article, but chances are more people passing through here are going to be curious to see what is said about World of WarCraft than that ancient weapon. (Although actually, in this case, there may be some overlap.) Personally, I've never played the game, but having played other role playing games in the past, I was curious when I read about it. If I'm a new person, that makes me more inclined to think favorably about Conservapedia and use it more, or at least think about it. Peace to you my friend. [[User:Learn together|Learn together]] 12:13, 12 July 2007 (EDT)

:::I protected the World of Warcraft article because we had a rash of vandal attacks against it a while back. Rather than revert it every time, unofficial CP policy is to revert the vandalism and protect until the vandal gets bored/blocked. Then if we find the article to be a high profile target, we keep the article locked, unless a reasonable request comes along, which Funnny provided. As for the terminology and game content that was cut and re-added, I'm not particularly attached to it so much as to get upset about someone removing it, although asking would be nice ;). Personally, I feel wiki's that aren't confined to one one area, like wowwiki, are going to end up growing out of their britches so to speak. Our articles might start out small and concise, but I see no problems with them developing to be all inclusive.--[[User:Elamdri|Elamdri]] 18:58, 13 July 2007 (EDT)

== Deleted Incorrect Info ==

I've deleted the claim about 'levelling to 70 taking weeks', as, to put it simply, it's wrong. The evidence presented backing it up is a single reference in passing on a website discussing World of Warcraft in general, claiming that getting to 70 would take 960 hours of playing. On my own character, I have 21 days measured by the game's own playing meter, which would be only 504 hours, yet I am level 70, so this is obviously incorrect. Not only that, there is a well-known guide, Joana's Levelling Guide, which gives a video of a character getting from level 1 to level 60 in 4 days 20 hours of playing (116 hours), and this was before a recent patch which actually reduced the amount of experience you need to get from level 1 to 60. [[User:Zmidponk|Zmidponk]] 17:56, 27 December 2007 (EST)

== Hearsay ==

In reference to the controversy section of your article: All information present is hearsay. You even say that in the article. You claim to be "the trustworthy encyclopedia" and yet you include open hearsay in you articles. This does not make sense. Expect change. {{unsigned|IslamWarrior}}

== Trim-down ==

While above editors suggest keeping the information because it is relevant to Conservapedias target age group, it should be understood that all of this information would most likely already be known by the reader (due to experience in the game, reading the official website, or being told by their friends). Instead of having a section with several sentences for each race, class, and profession, I think it would be beneficial to congeal these sections into a few paragraphs each. I could draft an alternate version if instructed how, or just edit this article directly. Regardless of these specific issues, the article itself needs work. Is it acceptable if I rework these sections into more coherent prose? --[[User:JamzJohnson|JamzJohnson]] 23:15, 3 July 2008 (EDT)

Disagree, someone reading this article may not know anything about the game, and as such it would be helpful to keep information about race, class, and profession, if anything it is prefered that the article be expanded not shortened -- [[Image:50 star flag.png|12px]] [[User:Deborah|Deborah]] [[Special:Contributions/Deborah|(contributions)]] [[User_talk:Deborah|(talk)]] 20:10, 4 July 2008 (EDT)
:Respectfully, I believe you may have misinterpreted my proposal (though it may be my fault for phrasing my suggestion poorly). I do not wish to erase relevant information - I merely wish to "clean it up" in a fashion that would make it both more informative and shorter. There is plenty of superfluous information, and even the relevant information flows through the article in a hard-to-follow pattern. I merely wish to make it more understandable, not less informative. [[User:JamzJohnson|JamzJohnson]] 21:02, 6 July 2008 (EDT)

::If you feel you can make positive improvements then do so, but please keep in mind the discussion that occurred above. Personally in skimming it right now I didn't see anything jump out at me that told me the article had difficulty, but it remains to be seen how your version would look. Of course, if your changes are not kept don't take it personally. [[User:Learn together|Learn together]] 01:52, 15 July 2008 (EDT)

== Too many minutiae?==
I don't deny their usefulness in describing the game, but should maybe the "classes" and "professions" be cut down somewhat? In this article the definitions of alchemy, blacksmithing, etc, are pretty close to their everyday English definitions, and don't need to take up 50% of the article space. This article should say something like "so-and-so professions exist" rather than "this is how to play as so-and-so professions". Could we maybe edit it down to a bulleted list? (In the meantime, I will try to find some more sources to beef up the "criticisms" section.) --[[User:WPalmer|WPalmer]] 17:11, 17 July 2008 (EDT)

Criticism would be hard to research, since the game's mechanics are so widely liked. Adding to the controversy couldn't hurt, though. [[User:Funnny|Funnny]] 07:44, 14 December 2008 (EST)

Japan

2008-05-30T22:07:30Z

Funnny:

{| border="1" align="right" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0" width="300" style="margin-left:5px"
|align="center" colspan="2"|[[Image:Japan rel96.jpg|300px]]
|-
!colspan="2" align="center" style="color: black; height: 30px; background: white no-repeat scroll top left;"|''Nippon-koku''(日本国)
|-
!align ="center" style="color: black; height: 30px; background: white no-repeat scroll top left;"|Flag
!align ="center" style="color: black; height: 30px; background: white no-repeat scroll top left;"|[[Image:Flag of Japan.png|50px|]]
|-
!align ="center" style="color: black; height: 30px; background: white no-repeat scroll top left;"|Arms
!align ="center" style="color: black; height: 30px; background: white no-repeat scroll top left;"|[[Image:Imperial Seal of Japan.jpg|48px|]]
|-
|-
|Capital
|[[Tokyo|Tokyo(東京)]]
|-
|Government
|Parliamentary democracy/Federal Constitutional Monarchy
|-
|Official Language
|[[Japanese]](日本語)
|-
|Head of State
|Emperor Akihito
|-
|Prime Minister
|Yasuo Fukuda
|-
|Area
|377,832 sq km 145,822 sq mi
|-
|Population (2007 estimate)
|127,433,494
|-
|GDP (2006 estimate)
|$4.2 trillion
|-
|GDP per capita (2006 estimate)
|$33,100
|-
|}

'''Japan''' is a nation that consists of a group of islands off the eastern coast of [[Asia]]. The principal islands are [[Hokkaido]], [[Honshu]], [[Kyushu]] and [[Shikoku]], for a total land area slightly smaller than [[California]]. The islands of Japan are scattered between 24ºN and 45ºN latitude (roughly 1,800 miles, or [[Florida]] to [[Maine]]). As a result, the climate varies greatly. Its capital, [[Tokyo]], is the largest metropolitan area in the world. Japan is divided into a total of 47 [[prefecture]]s.
<ref>Demographia - 50 Largest World Metropolitan Areas Ranked:
2000 Estimates,[http://www.demographia.com/db-world-metro2000.htm] </ref>
== History ==
=== Origins ===
Dating of pottery artifacts found in Japan indicates that humans were present in the Japanese archipelago since at least c.10000 BC (see Discover Journal, volume 19, number 6). The wild Japanese [[Bison]] was an early target of wild game, hunted to extinction within 500 years.

According to tradition, Japan was unified by [[Emperor]] [[Jimmu]], the grandson of the [[goddess]] [[Amaterasu]], in the year 660 B. C. He conquered Honshu, the largest island, in a series of expeditions starting from his home base of [[Setsuma]] in Kyushu.

=== The Feudal Era ===

Japan was closed off from the rest of the world for a long period of time under the rule of a series of military leaders known as [[Shoguns]] (see [[Tokugawa Shogunate]]), with the sole exception of [[Nagasaki]], where [[Dutch]] merchants maintained a permanent trading post. While the Japanese Emperor continued to reign in the old capital of [[Kyoto]], he was more of a figurehead with little more power than he possesses today.

=== The Imperial Era ===
[[Image:Perry.jpg|frame|left|Commodore Matthew Perry, Japanese painting c. 1853]]
The rule of the Shoguns came to an end in the middle of the 19th century during a brief but bloody period of conflict known as the [[Meiji Restoration]], which was triggered in part by [[US]] Commodore Matthew Perry's naval expedition to Japan. During the Restoration a large number of young [[samurai]] from minor families, tired of the government's mishandling of the country and feeling that if action was not taken Japan would be dominated by western countries, initiated an armed revolt to restore imperial rule. Most samurai from the more powerful families sided with the Shogun, fearing that the minor families would replace them if the revolt was successful. Nonetheless, the shogunate was done away with in 1867 and the imperial period began. The capital was moved to [[Edo]], which was renamed [[Tokyo]]; by the early twenty-first century, it had become the center of the world's largest urban conglomeration.

The phrase "imperial period" is not meant to imply that the emperor ruled absolutely in the style of [[Louis XIV]] or a [[Russian]] [[tsar]]; indeed, the emperors relied on [[prime ministers]] throughout this period. Rather, it refers to Japan competing with [[European]] powers and the [[United States]] for colonies and influence during the late 19th and early 20th centuries. The high point of Japanese prestige was the [[Russo-Japanese War]] of 1904-5, in which Japan became the principal power in [[Manchuria]] and consolidated its control of [[Korea]].

Japan's success at this great game would ultimately prove its undoing. By 1936, during the reign of Emperor [[Hirohito]], the Japanese Empire would adopt the [[Orwellian]] title "Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere." The increasingly powerful [[Japanese armed forces]], partly inspired by European [[fascists]], came to dominate Japanese politics, assassinating politicians whom they deemed insufficiently devoted to the Emperor and nation. For the next nine years, the military leadership installed its own members (such as [[Hideki Tojo]], chief Japanese strategist of [[World War II]]) or, occasionally, civilians who were completely identified with their agenda, as prime minister.

=== The Modern Era ===

After the [[war]] ended in 1945, Japan was occupied by American forces under the command of General [[Douglas MacArthur]]. As Supreme Commander of Allied Forces in the Southwest Pacific, MacArthur became the head of the occupation forces in Japan from August 1945 to 1951. One of the first things he did was for the emperor, Hirohito, to announce that he was not a god. MacArthur did a great deal to rebuild a nation severely damaged by the war. Japan was given a democratic constitution that prevented future military ventures, and internal reforms that charted a course for Japan which led it to become an economic and industrial colossus by the 1970's.

== Current Status ==
[[Image:Tomoko.jpg|300px|right|thumb|A Japanese in USA]]
Japan is currently the world's most populous [[constitutional monarchy]], third largest [[economy]] (counting the [[European Union]] as one economy), and has the world's third largest [[defense budget]] (counting the constituents of the EU as separate states).

Japan's modern economy has many world leading industries and companies, being driven by exports and a mastery of high technology. However, in the 1990s, the economy underwent a major slowdown in part because of overinvestment and an asset price bubble during the late 1980s. Japan has a huge government debt, which exceeds the Gross Domestic product (176% of GDP) and also faces the challenge of a low birth rate, low immigration and an aging of the population which will further increase the debts. [[China]] also is becoming a larger economy and a bigger international trading partner than Japan.

The current [[Emperor]] is [[Akihito]]; he will be succeeded upon his death or abdication by [[Crown Prince]] [[Naruhito]]. The current [[Prime Minister]] is Yasuo, of the [[Liberal Democratic Party]]. This party is not to be confused with America's [[liberal]] [[Democrats]]; the corresponding party in Japan is the [[Socialists]]. The Liberal Democratic Party has formed all but two of Japan's post-World War II governments, which as in any [[parliamentary]] system rise and fall with somewhat less predictability than United States administrations.

Among constitutional monarchies, Japan is likely to be supplanted as most populous by [[Thailand]] sometime during the twenty-first century. This is as a result of Japan's low [[birth rate]] (in part a result of the nation's early legalization of [[abortion]]) and lack of desire to expand [[immigration]] (Japan is the most ethnically [[homogeneous]] of the world's wealthy countries). Ironically, the relative prosperity of Thailand is in large part due to heavy aid and investment by Japan.
[[Image:Cherry Blossom Japan.jpg|thumb|Cherry Blossoms and Fuji ''san'']]
Historically Japanese government has shifted between no official religion, [[Shinto|Shintō]], and [[Buddhism]].<ref name="WebJapanFactSheet">[http://web-japan.org/factsheet/ Web Japan Fact Sheet], sponsored by the [http://www.mofa.go.jp/ Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan]</ref> Modern Japan has no state religion.<ref>Article 20 of the [[Current Constitution of Japan (Full Text)|Japanese Constitution]] erects a legal barrier between political and religious entities.</ref> An extreme interpretation of [[Shinto]] helped drive Japan's participation in [[World War II]]. As in other constitutional monarchies, political involvement of the emperor is limited by the constitution to ceremonial roles under the exclusive direction of the parliament, although symbolic gestures such as the annual wreath-laying ceremony at [[Yasukuni Shrine]] have occasionally antagonized Japan's neighbors. Most imported religions are practiced in Japan without interference, and [[Buddhism]] has been accepted by a large portion of the population. The percentage of Japanese who are Christian stands around 1%. <ref name="WebJapanFactSheet"/> <ref>Central Intelligence Agency, ''The World Fact Book'', [https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ja.html Japan]</ref> <ref>Encyclopædia Britannica, ''2006 World Fact Sheet'', Japan</ref> Japan has also spawned its share of [[cults]], including the exceptionally lethal but fortunately short-lived [[Aum Shinrikyo]] movement of the early 1990's, which in 1994 became the first non-state organization to kill people with [[nerve gas]].

The cherry blossom (Sakura) is Japan's unofficial national flower. It has been celebrated for many centuries and takes a very prominent position in Japanese culture. <ref>[http://www.japan-guide.com/e/e2011.html Cherry Blossom]</ref>

== Art ==
[[Image:Birds Japanese painting.jpg|right|100px|Birds, Japanese painting]]
Japanese art comes from prehistoric times. It has been influenced by [[Chinese]] art and Zen Buddhism, as well as by Western art. Painting (絵画) is one of the oldest Japanese art, and the most popular one. Main Painting Schools are: Suibokuga, Kanō, Rimpa, Tosa-ha, Nanga and Shijo.

Japanese interpretations and painters may be studied in the following periods:

* Ancient Japan
* [[Nara]] period
* Heian and [[Kamakura]] periods
* Muromachi period
: Josetsu (如拙) (1405 – 1423), the father of Japanese ink painting.
* Azuchi-Momoyama period
: Kanō Eitoku (狩野永徳) (1543 - 1590), prominent patriarch of the Kanō School.
* Edo period
: Tawaraya Sōtatsu (俵屋宗達) (c. 1600s), co-founder of the Rimpa School.
: [[Katsushika Hokusai]] (葛飾北斎) (1760 — 1849), Ukiyo-e (浮世絵) genre painter and printmaker. "Behind the Great Wave at Kanagawa" (c.1829) is one of the most renowned Japanese paintings.
[[Image:Hokusai Sea Wave Kanagawa.jpg|right|180px|Behind the Great Wave off Kanagawa]]
* Meiji period
* Taisho period
* Showa period
: Ogura Yuki (小倉遊亀) (1895 - 2000), traditional female painter.
* Contemporary period
: Shinoda Toko (篠田桃紅) (b. 1913), female painter, sumi (ink) paintings and prints.

== Cities ==
[[Image:Nara.jpg|thumb|Great Buddha at Nara]]
Important Japanese cities are: Tokyo, [[Yokohama]], [[Osaka]], [[Nagoya]], [[Sapporo]], [[Kobe]], [[Kyoto]], Kawasaki, Saitama, [[Okinawa]], [[Kamakura]], [[Nara]], [[Nagasaki]] and [[Hiroshima]].

== See also ==

*[[Matthew Perry]]
*[[Nikko]]
*[[Ainu]]
*[[Aomori]]
*[[Geisha]]
*[[Japanese painting]]
*[[Gallery of Japanese Painting]]

== External links ==

*[http://www.japan-guide.com/ Traveling and living.] Japan - Guide.

==References==
<references/>

[[Image:Arbol japon.jpg|right|Japanese landscape]]

[[Category:Japan]]

Japan

2008-05-30T22:04:19Z

Funnny:

{| border="1" align="right" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0" width="300" style="margin-left:5px"
|align="center" colspan="2"|[[Image:Japan rel96.jpg|300px]]
|-
!colspan="2" align="center" style="color: black; height: 30px; background: white no-repeat scroll top left;"|''Nippon-koku''
|-
!align ="center" style="color: black; height: 30px; background: white no-repeat scroll top left;"|Flag
!align ="center" style="color: black; height: 30px; background: white no-repeat scroll top left;"|[[Image:Flag of Japan.png|50px|]]
|-
!align ="center" style="color: black; height: 30px; background: white no-repeat scroll top left;"|Arms
!align ="center" style="color: black; height: 30px; background: white no-repeat scroll top left;"|[[Image:Imperial Seal of Japan.jpg|48px|]]
|-
|-
|Capital
|[[Tokyo|Tokyo(東京)]]
|-
|Government
|Parliamentary democracy/Federal Constitutional Monarchy
|-
|Official Language
|[[Japanese]]
|-
|Head of State
|Emperor Akihito
|-
|Prime Minister
|Yasuo Fukuda
|-
|Area
|377,832 sq km 145,822 sq mi
|-
|Population (2007 estimate)
|127,433,494
|-
|GDP (2006 estimate)
|$4.2 trillion
|-
|GDP per capita (2006 estimate)
|$33,100
|-
|}

'''Japan''' is a nation that consists of a group of islands off the eastern coast of [[Asia]]. The principal islands are [[Hokkaido]], [[Honshu]], [[Kyushu]] and [[Shikoku]], for a total land area slightly smaller than [[California]]. The islands of Japan are scattered between 24ºN and 45ºN latitude (roughly 1,800 miles, or [[Florida]] to [[Maine]]). As a result, the climate varies greatly. Its capital, [[Tokyo]], is the largest metropolitan area in the world. Japan is divided into a total of 47 [[prefecture]]s.
<ref>Demographia - 50 Largest World Metropolitan Areas Ranked:
2000 Estimates,[http://www.demographia.com/db-world-metro2000.htm] </ref>
== History ==
=== Origins ===
Dating of pottery artifacts found in Japan indicates that humans were present in the Japanese archipelago since at least c.10000 BC (see Discover Journal, volume 19, number 6). The wild Japanese [[Bison]] was an early target of wild game, hunted to extinction within 500 years.

According to tradition, Japan was unified by [[Emperor]] [[Jimmu]], the grandson of the [[goddess]] [[Amaterasu]], in the year 660 B. C. He conquered Honshu, the largest island, in a series of expeditions starting from his home base of [[Setsuma]] in Kyushu.

=== The Feudal Era ===

Japan was closed off from the rest of the world for a long period of time under the rule of a series of military leaders known as [[Shoguns]] (see [[Tokugawa Shogunate]]), with the sole exception of [[Nagasaki]], where [[Dutch]] merchants maintained a permanent trading post. While the Japanese Emperor continued to reign in the old capital of [[Kyoto]], he was more of a figurehead with little more power than he possesses today.

=== The Imperial Era ===
[[Image:Perry.jpg|frame|left|Commodore Matthew Perry, Japanese painting c. 1853]]
The rule of the Shoguns came to an end in the middle of the 19th century during a brief but bloody period of conflict known as the [[Meiji Restoration]], which was triggered in part by [[US]] Commodore Matthew Perry's naval expedition to Japan. During the Restoration a large number of young [[samurai]] from minor families, tired of the government's mishandling of the country and feeling that if action was not taken Japan would be dominated by western countries, initiated an armed revolt to restore imperial rule. Most samurai from the more powerful families sided with the Shogun, fearing that the minor families would replace them if the revolt was successful. Nonetheless, the shogunate was done away with in 1867 and the imperial period began. The capital was moved to [[Edo]], which was renamed [[Tokyo]]; by the early twenty-first century, it had become the center of the world's largest urban conglomeration.

The phrase "imperial period" is not meant to imply that the emperor ruled absolutely in the style of [[Louis XIV]] or a [[Russian]] [[tsar]]; indeed, the emperors relied on [[prime ministers]] throughout this period. Rather, it refers to Japan competing with [[European]] powers and the [[United States]] for colonies and influence during the late 19th and early 20th centuries. The high point of Japanese prestige was the [[Russo-Japanese War]] of 1904-5, in which Japan became the principal power in [[Manchuria]] and consolidated its control of [[Korea]].

Japan's success at this great game would ultimately prove its undoing. By 1936, during the reign of Emperor [[Hirohito]], the Japanese Empire would adopt the [[Orwellian]] title "Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere." The increasingly powerful [[Japanese armed forces]], partly inspired by European [[fascists]], came to dominate Japanese politics, assassinating politicians whom they deemed insufficiently devoted to the Emperor and nation. For the next nine years, the military leadership installed its own members (such as [[Hideki Tojo]], chief Japanese strategist of [[World War II]]) or, occasionally, civilians who were completely identified with their agenda, as prime minister.

=== The Modern Era ===

After the [[war]] ended in 1945, Japan was occupied by American forces under the command of General [[Douglas MacArthur]]. As Supreme Commander of Allied Forces in the Southwest Pacific, MacArthur became the head of the occupation forces in Japan from August 1945 to 1951. One of the first things he did was for the emperor, Hirohito, to announce that he was not a god. MacArthur did a great deal to rebuild a nation severely damaged by the war. Japan was given a democratic constitution that prevented future military ventures, and internal reforms that charted a course for Japan which led it to become an economic and industrial colossus by the 1970's.

== Current Status ==
[[Image:Tomoko.jpg|300px|right|thumb|A Japanese in USA]]
Japan is currently the world's most populous [[constitutional monarchy]], third largest [[economy]] (counting the [[European Union]] as one economy), and has the world's third largest [[defense budget]] (counting the constituents of the EU as separate states).

Japan's modern economy has many world leading industries and companies, being driven by exports and a mastery of high technology. However, in the 1990s, the economy underwent a major slowdown in part because of overinvestment and an asset price bubble during the late 1980s. Japan has a huge government debt, which exceeds the Gross Domestic product (176% of GDP) and also faces the challenge of a low birth rate, low immigration and an aging of the population which will further increase the debts. [[China]] also is becoming a larger economy and a bigger international trading partner than Japan.

The current [[Emperor]] is [[Akihito]]; he will be succeeded upon his death or abdication by [[Crown Prince]] [[Naruhito]]. The current [[Prime Minister]] is Yasuo, of the [[Liberal Democratic Party]]. This party is not to be confused with America's [[liberal]] [[Democrats]]; the corresponding party in Japan is the [[Socialists]]. The Liberal Democratic Party has formed all but two of Japan's post-World War II governments, which as in any [[parliamentary]] system rise and fall with somewhat less predictability than United States administrations.

Among constitutional monarchies, Japan is likely to be supplanted as most populous by [[Thailand]] sometime during the twenty-first century. This is as a result of Japan's low [[birth rate]] (in part a result of the nation's early legalization of [[abortion]]) and lack of desire to expand [[immigration]] (Japan is the most ethnically [[homogeneous]] of the world's wealthy countries). Ironically, the relative prosperity of Thailand is in large part due to heavy aid and investment by Japan.
[[Image:Cherry Blossom Japan.jpg|thumb|Cherry Blossoms and Fuji ''san'']]
Historically Japanese government has shifted between no official religion, [[Shinto|Shintō]], and [[Buddhism]].<ref name="WebJapanFactSheet">[http://web-japan.org/factsheet/ Web Japan Fact Sheet], sponsored by the [http://www.mofa.go.jp/ Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan]</ref> Modern Japan has no state religion.<ref>Article 20 of the [[Current Constitution of Japan (Full Text)|Japanese Constitution]] erects a legal barrier between political and religious entities.</ref> An extreme interpretation of [[Shinto]] helped drive Japan's participation in [[World War II]]. As in other constitutional monarchies, political involvement of the emperor is limited by the constitution to ceremonial roles under the exclusive direction of the parliament, although symbolic gestures such as the annual wreath-laying ceremony at [[Yasukuni Shrine]] have occasionally antagonized Japan's neighbors. Most imported religions are practiced in Japan without interference, and [[Buddhism]] has been accepted by a large portion of the population. The percentage of Japanese who are Christian stands around 1%. <ref name="WebJapanFactSheet"/> <ref>Central Intelligence Agency, ''The World Fact Book'', [https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ja.html Japan]</ref> <ref>Encyclopædia Britannica, ''2006 World Fact Sheet'', Japan</ref> Japan has also spawned its share of [[cults]], including the exceptionally lethal but fortunately short-lived [[Aum Shinrikyo]] movement of the early 1990's, which in 1994 became the first non-state organization to kill people with [[nerve gas]].

The cherry blossom (Sakura) is Japan's unofficial national flower. It has been celebrated for many centuries and takes a very prominent position in Japanese culture. <ref>[http://www.japan-guide.com/e/e2011.html Cherry Blossom]</ref>

== Art ==
[[Image:Birds Japanese painting.jpg|right|100px|Birds, Japanese painting]]
Japanese art comes from prehistoric times. It has been influenced by [[Chinese]] art and Zen Buddhism, as well as by Western art. Painting (絵画) is one of the oldest Japanese art, and the most popular one. Main Painting Schools are: Suibokuga, Kanō, Rimpa, Tosa-ha, Nanga and Shijo.

Japanese interpretations and painters may be studied in the following periods:

* Ancient Japan
* [[Nara]] period
* Heian and [[Kamakura]] periods
* Muromachi period
: Josetsu (如拙) (1405 – 1423), the father of Japanese ink painting.
* Azuchi-Momoyama period
: Kanō Eitoku (狩野永徳) (1543 - 1590), prominent patriarch of the Kanō School.
* Edo period
: Tawaraya Sōtatsu (俵屋宗達) (c. 1600s), co-founder of the Rimpa School.
: [[Katsushika Hokusai]] (葛飾北斎) (1760 — 1849), Ukiyo-e (浮世絵) genre painter and printmaker. "Behind the Great Wave at Kanagawa" (c.1829) is one of the most renowned Japanese paintings.
[[Image:Hokusai Sea Wave Kanagawa.jpg|right|180px|Behind the Great Wave off Kanagawa]]
* Meiji period
* Taisho period
* Showa period
: Ogura Yuki (小倉遊亀) (1895 - 2000), traditional female painter.
* Contemporary period
: Shinoda Toko (篠田桃紅) (b. 1913), female painter, sumi (ink) paintings and prints.

== Cities ==
[[Image:Nara.jpg|thumb|Great Buddha at Nara]]
Important Japanese cities are: Tokyo, [[Yokohama]], [[Osaka]], [[Nagoya]], [[Sapporo]], [[Kobe]], [[Kyoto]], Kawasaki, Saitama, [[Okinawa]], [[Kamakura]], [[Nara]], [[Nagasaki]] and [[Hiroshima]].

== See also ==

*[[Matthew Perry]]
*[[Nikko]]
*[[Ainu]]
*[[Aomori]]
*[[Geisha]]
*[[Japanese painting]]
*[[Gallery of Japanese Painting]]

== External links ==

*[http://www.japan-guide.com/ Traveling and living.] Japan - Guide.

==References==
<references/>

[[Image:Arbol japon.jpg|right|Japanese landscape]]

[[Category:Japan]]

Debate:Does the Theory of Evolution promote atheism?

2008-03-16T00:54:12Z

Funnny: /* Backwards */

{{debate}}

==YES==

The theory of "evolution through natural selection" is ''predicated'' upon an atheistic assumption. It is based on so-called [[methodological naturalism]], i.e., a refusal to consider supernatural causes. Right from the start it consciously and deliberately rules out God's creative and guiding power.

Legislation and especially court rulings in the United States enforce this atheistic doctrine. In public schools, during science class, teachers are authorized to ''squelch'' any challenge to this atheistic premise. Note that I do not mean that science classes simply say, let's ignore God. I mean that ''by choosing to ignore God'' they are supporting atheism and attacking religion.

The doctrine of [[unguided evolution]] is essential to atheism. No atheist can survive intellectually, without having a satisfactory answer to the question, "Where did human beings come from? How did life begin? Why is planet Earth so hospitable to life?" --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 06:48, 28 May 2007 (EDT)

:: I'll have to call you on that, Ed - it's true that unguided evolution would be essential to an atheist worldview, but evolution doesn't necessarily deny the existence of God. It merely explains a world without God's active involvement at a biological level. [[User:Underscoreb|Underscoreb]] 21:22, 11 November 2007 (EST)

:The Bible says that God created life in 6 days and rested on the 7th. Any belief other than this is anti-Christian, and therefore atheistic. [[User:BornAgain|BornAgain]] 17:37, 29 May 2007 (EDT)

::Ed, you are correct in saying that noone can survive intellectually without an answer to those questions. The thing is that us atheists do have satisfactory answers to those questions. And the planet Earth is so hospitable to life because ''life evolved to suit the Earth''. Regardless of what Earth actually turned out to be, life would have evolved to suit it.

::BornAgain, without meaning to be rude that is one of the most ridiculous statements I have ever heard. What about Hindus? They are definately not atheists however they have a different creation story to you. It involves gods, so how is that an atheistic belief? [[User:Bolly Ottihw|Bolly Ottihw]] 9:52, 27 June 2007

*'''Yes'''. Amen to that, bro. Atheism and [[homicide]]. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 22:49, 11 November 2007 (EST)

==NO==
Ed Poor's argument is based on the assumption that humans can fathom the manner in which God created life. This is a faulty premise. The majority of scientists support the theory of evolution and the vast majority of scientists believe in God. They are able to have both of these beliefs because they realize that we cannot possibly understand the works of God. On the other hand, we can seek understanding of the world we live in by creating theories based on our observations. The theory of evolution says nothing about the existence of God. It is simply a theory, based on certain observations, that creates certain predictions.

If evolution is undermining religion, it is doing so only because creationists posit that they know how God created life, and evolution is not how He created it. When evolution is supported, creationists feel like their beliefs are being undermined. Belief in evolution is an exercise in humility and perseverance - accepting the fact that we cannot understand God's works combined with an unceasing effort to understand what we can in our world.--[[User:Laches|Laches]] 14:42, 28 May 2007 (EDT)

:I feel I have to disillusion you over religious scientists. Out of the two academically highest fellowships of scientists in the USA and Great Britain only 7% are religious. Unfortunately as well, there is no way to really believe in god and science at the same time. Science proves that the bible is wrong on many counts, and to believe in science you must accept that the bible is wrong on so many things. How then can you accept that god exists considering that the only evidence for his existences is proven to be a mess of falsehoods and folklore? Simply, you cannot. The reason is because religion was created by humans as a way of explaining how they came to be and where they are going. Now science is better at explaining these things yet people insist that religion is true or that religion is more important then science. Until these people are disillusioned of religion then scientific progress will be hindered and humanity will stagnate. [[User:Bolly Ottihw|Bolly Ottihw]] 09:35, 8 June 2007

Bolly, you actually need to crack your Bible open, assuming have ever read it, and read what it says. For example, In Job, God mentions (or I think it was God) streams in the seas. Science did not even know that such things existed until recently. Evolution may be a way of explaining where you are going in this lifetime, but it is not a promising or comforting thought. Most of evolution is based on opinions, ideas, thoughts, etc. Look through any textbook. "We believe...", "perhaps", "scientists assume/think," etc. It is all hype. Watch any serious creation video, and they raise very interesting questions. For example (I am going to have to write something, this is getting exciting!)

1. The Big Bang can not have formed the universe, because mathematically it is impossible. If you add up the estimated masses of all planetary bodies, and compare it with earth's mass and gravity, the speed neccesary for particals to leave that small of a region would approach light-speed. Black holes are a example of this. How often do we see exploding black holes?

2. The chances that information can come from non-information to form life is astronomical. We all know and love the illustration about the airplane being assembled in a junkyard with the components therein. While I forget the exact the exact figure, one major scientist theorized that the chances that one E. Clori bacteria would form from soup was one chance in 10 with many BILLION zeros following it. That means that said bacteria would have to have several succesful mutations per year in order to evolve into a human.

I could keep on going here, but I will let others join in

In Christ
[[User:TheComputerWizard|TheComputerWizard]] 20:09, 7 June 2007 (EDT)

:In reply I have to say ComputerWizard, you need to study the theory of the Big Bang, assuming you have ever read that. The Big Bang theory does not say that the entire mass of the universe started at one point in space and has spread out ever since. It says that ''space itself'' has expanded from that point. The particles in it did not move however they did move away from each other due to the expansion of space. One reasonably good metaphor is a balloon with dots on it. When the balloon is blown up the dots move away from each other, although they do not have any of their own velocity.

:Yes the airplane in the junkyard. That is in fact an argument ''against'' your position, not for it. How do you explain how God came to be? Surely the chance of nothing forming into one obviously complex creature impossible? On the other hand, it is possible for the primordial soup to form into proteins and highly simple forms of proto-life. Of course soup cannot form into E. Clori bacteria, because that bacteria is quite complex in comparison to what it has evolved from.

:Watching a very serious creationist video does raise some very interesting questions. "How much research have these people actually done on this subject?" "Where is their proof?" "Do they honestly believe such absolute garbage?" I feel exaclty this way after any kind of creationist video/book/talk. Yes the words "scientists thinkg/assume..." appear in textbooks. Yet why do they believe it? Because the evidence is strongly in favour of their position. They don't accept the Bible or the Koran as a source of evidence. In fact if someone did quote the Koran as a source of evidence then the christian community would be in uproar! But when it's the Bible, it is all "Yes it is very accurate and believable" when really it is just as bad as the Koran.

:Admittedly the theory of evolution is not as comforting or promising as the religious ideology however that doesn't make it any less true than it is. There are far more unpleasant truths that may be confronted in life and they are no less true just because they are distasteful. Personally I find it quite refreshing and stimulating to think that we are the result of a complex series of reactions, mutations, nuclear collisions and so on, as it means that we are indeed very special and unique and that we are perfect for what we evolved to do, not what a creator designed us to do. Although I highly doubt that I will change your mind, I do hope that you consider these points fairly and maybe I will. [[User:Bolly Ottihw|Bolly Ottihw]] 21:04, 14 June 2007

::I've been watching show after show preaching that the Evolutionary Theory is based on scientific fact without proceeding to show any. I ask myself if anyone honestly believes such absolute garbage? Why? Because their Humanist religion requires it. Judeo-Christians have archaeological, geological, as well as scientific studies and research that back up the historic record of the Christian Old and New Testaments. As well as prophetic events that have come to pass or are happening now. Yet people will still reject facts as they are presented to them and attribute these things in conformance to their own world view. So what? The Neo-Cains will continue to do whatever pleases themselves. It is their place in history to continually repeat it again, and again.--[[User:Roopilots6|Roopilots6]] 12:00, 19 June 2007 (EDT)

Roo, your whole paragraph could be taken as completely for evolution if you switched some words around. Replace evolutionary theory with creationism, humanist with christian, Judeo-Christians with scientists, 'back up' with disprove and then it makes perfect sense and is an accurate reference to todays situation. There is plenty of scientific facts that support evolution. Try reading "The Origin of Species" by Charles Darwin. It isn't perfect but it is very convincing. Try all the books and scientific papers that have ever been published in support of the theory. How can such a theory be accepted by the vast majority of biologists if it was false or was not supported by evidence?

There are many many problems with the Old and New Testaments historical records. There are events described in there that either did not happen or happened at a different time altogether. The Sumerian civilisation invented the first writing and recording and that started at over 7000 years ago. How do you account for that in your young earth theory? As for the 'prophetic events', where are they? Please give me examples because I am yet to see any. People will reject facts because they don't conform to their world view, it happens all the time in the USA in creationist churches and homes and it saddens those of us who search for truth in these times. Please look at your facts before presenting the same tired old trojan horses. [[User:Bolly Ottihw|Bolly Ottihw]] 10:56, 20 June 2007

::Ditto for you. Thanks for making my point. This is why there is the argument to teach both points of view. Also, your problems understanding the historical records of the Old and New Testament isn't a valid one since it is politically biased along ideological lines. This also saddens those of us that seek the truth through His Word.--[[User:Roopilots6|Roopilots6]] 11:55, 22 October 2007 (EDT)

1Living things vary
2Ofspring resemble their parents
3Not all ofspring survive
4Some variations increase the chance or amount of ofspring

Therefore living things will change in such a way as to have more ofspring.
If noone has explained this to you then you need better teachers. It is also known as evolution. -Sam
P.S. fix my description if it is wrong. I'm doing what I remember from bio class.

My answer is also '''NO'''. The theory of evolution explains the origin of species, but does not answer the question about the meaning of life or answer if God exists (no scientific theory can). God could create living organisms through evolution (natural selection, genetic drift, etc.). It is true that some supporters of evolutionary theory use this as an argument against the existence of God, but from methodological point of view they are wrong. Among the evolutionists there can be both theists, deists and atheists. The official statement of the [[Catholic Church]] and many Protestant Churches allows evolutionary theory. [[User:Jasra|Jasra]] 19:01, 4 January 2008 (EST)

==Neither==
I don't think that the Theory of Evolution cares.[[User:Cthx]]
:Hahaha, good call. :D [[User:Underscoreb|Underscoreb]] 21:27, 11 November 2007 (EST)

The Theory of Evolution may or may not promote atheism.
One thing for Christians to consider though is that God could have started the evolutionary chain and used that to create rather than creating directly.
The important factor is that God put the first "spark", etc.
Look at the Wedding Feast at Cana...
He made 6 large 10 gallon pitchers of wine.
God is extravagant and awe-some in his creation. (Extravagant in the sense that he does things large and big; after all he did create a huge amount of galaxies and we're the only life discovered so far...)
He could easily use evolution, as a grandiose plan, which would be totally in his character.

-reporres
i definitely agree with you that god created the theory of evolution. i mean i believe in god i just don't think all of this appeared randomly i think he created us with the theory of evolution gradually

==Backwards==
Since atheism or non-theism existed long before the theory of evolution then it would have to be that atheism promotes the theory of evolution.--[[User:Roopilots6|Roopilots6]] 11:39, 22 October 2007 (EDT)

No, it is scientists (see is gravity liberal or conservative). It leads to atheism because it provides a non-theistic explanation for design.

:Incorrect! The Theory of Evolution only states that over time, members of a population will change over time to be more suited to their environments/reproduction. One great example are the Eskimo people. Because Eskimos live in cold climates, they have evolved to grow large noses, so that air has more time to warm before reaching the lungs, thus making breathing easier. Creationists disagree with the ''Evolutionary Model'', which is based on this Theory, in addition to the fossil record, radiocarbon dating and genetic studies. The theory of Evolution therefore is NEUTRAL on this point. Don't get angry. Your anger only leads to the inevitible HEAT DEATH of the Universe happening sooner. Stop. --[[User:Capercorn]] [[User Talk:Capercorn|Talk]] [[Special:Contributions/Capercorn|contribs]] 22:07, 8 February 2008 (EST)

When Darwin published Origin of Species, nobody had a problem with it. When he later published Descent of Man, which said humans are animals too an are not excluded, then people got upset..--[[User:funnny|funnny]] 8:53, 15 March 2008 (EST)

User:Funnny

2007-07-12T03:13:51Z

Funnny:

==Funnny==

Hi, I'm Grain.

...

* '''Name''' - Mmm... call me Grain. Its not my real name, but who cares really?

* '''Age''' - Mmm... guess!

* '''Interests''' - Hmm... [[Anime]], [[World of Warcraft]]. I'm sure there are lots of other things i can't remember at the moment... at least that I would share.

* '''Gender''' - Hmm... I suppose I'm Male

==World of Warcraft==

I'm currently working on the [[World of Warcraft]] article....

Big thanks to [[Elamdri]] for unlocking it!

User:Funnny

2007-07-12T03:12:05Z

Funnny:

==Funnny==

Hi, I'm Funnny.

...

* '''Name''' - Mmm... call me Grain. Its not my real name, btu who cares really?

* '''Age''' - Mmm... guess!

* '''Interests''' - Hmm... [[Anime]], [[World of Warcraft]]. I'm sure there are lots of other things i can't remember at the moment... at least that I would share

* '''Gender''' - Male

==World of Warcraft==

I'm currently working on the [[World of Warcraft]] article....

Big thanks to [[Elamdri]] for unlocking it!

User:Funnny

2007-07-12T03:05:31Z

Funnny: New page: ==Funnny== Hi, I'm Funnny. ... ==World of Warcraft== I'm currently working on the World of Warcraft article....

==Funnny==

Hi, I'm Funnny.

...

==World of Warcraft==

I'm currently working on the [[World of Warcraft]] article....

Talk:Japanese animation

2007-07-12T00:06:00Z

Funnny:

I'd like to make a glossary of Japanese terms, such as ''hentai'', used by Western ''anime'' fans. Wikipedia uses far too many of these loan words, and I feel it obscures understanding for those who are not immersed in field. Too much [[jargon]] is the enemy of understanding. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 08:47, 3 July 2007 (EDT)

:Ed, leave me a message on my talk when you get started on that glossary; I can probably help out a bit. [[User:Stryker|Stryker]] 09:23, 3 July 2007 (EDT)

== Might be misleading. ==

"Anime is divided into the same genres as manga, with a heavy emphasis on violence and romance which blends seamlessly into softcore porn (and beyond)."

This, in my opinion, gives the impression that if you look towards anime, you'll always find violence, romance, and porn. Although cetain anime types are just this, anime is much more broad than violence, romance,and porn!

This is like saying:

"Motion pictures have a heavy emphasis on violence and porn (and beyond)."
--[[User:Funnny|Funnny]] 21:54, 9 July 2007 (EDT)

:Not exactly: they do have a lot of violence and sex, though. ''Anime'' tends to have much more of this than Western animation, though.

:If you have access to studies which shed light on this, please reveal these!

:If you know anything about Japanese animation, please tell us how much of it is violent (or not), and how much is romantic, soft porn, or ''[[ecchi]]'' (i.e., porn). For example, how would you classify [[Sailor Moon]]? Have you seen even one episode without a romance or soft-porn aspect?

:The most popular ''anime'' in the US for children is all about training "pocket-sized monsters" ([[Pokemon]]) to fight each other. It looks pretty violent to me. What do you think? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 10:12, 10 July 2007 (EDT)

Okay, I've changed it to:

"Anime is divided into the same genres as manga, much with an emphasis on violence, romance, pornography, and beyond."

I thought it unfair to say "Anime is". I'm very aware that a large portion is devoted to just what the article says though. Hence, I've changed it to "Much is." --[[User:Funnny|Funnny]] 20:06, 11 July 2007 (EDT)

Japanese animation

2007-07-12T00:02:24Z

Funnny:

The '''Japanese animation''' industry has attracted much interest in the West, with English-speaking fans avidly adopting Japanese terminology such as ''anime'' (short for "animation").

The best known ''anime'' director in Japan is [[Hayao Miyazaki]], famous for "[[My Neighbor Totoro]]" and "[[Spirited Away]]".

As in the West, Japanese animation tends to follow Japanese comic book styles (called ''[[manga]]'').''Anime'' is divided into the same genres as ''manga'', much with an emphasis on violence, romance, pornography, and beyond.

[[category:culture]]

Japanese animation

2007-07-12T00:00:39Z

Funnny:

The '''Japanese animation''' industry has attracted much interest in the West, with English-speaking fans avidly adopting Japanese terminology such as ''anime'' (short for "animation").

The best known ''anime'' director in Japan is [[Hayao Miyazaki]], famous for "[[My Neighbor Totoro]]" and "[[Spirited Away]]".

As in the West, Japanese animation tends to follow Japanese comic book styles (called ''[[manga]]'').''Anime'' is divided into the same genres as ''manga'',much with an emphasis on violence, romance, or pornography (and beyond).

[[category:culture]]

Talk:Agnosticism

2007-07-10T12:53:33Z

Funnny:

''Agnostics differ from regular atheists in that they do not deny God's existence''

I hesitate to get involved in theological debate here; still less to make changes without agreement, but I should like to suggest that the word 'regular' be deleted from the above sentence. As written it suggests that Agnostics are not 'regular' atheists - ie, that they are some sort of (irregular) atheist. As an agnostic (type 2) myself I'd say that is not the case. The rest of the article makes it quite clear. Agnostics are not atheists, regular or otherwise. [[User:Alba|Alba]] 18:13, 23 May 2007 (EDT)

== "God's" ==

''"Agnosticism is the belief that '''God's''' existence or non existence is unknowable."''

Isn't agnosticism the belief that '''a''' God's existence is unknowable? This article, in my opinion, sounds like it's saying agnosticism is the belief that solely the existence of the Christian God is unknowable.

Could the "God's" be changed to ''"the existence of a diety"'' or something like that?
--[[User:Funnny|Funnny]] 21:49, 9 July 2007 (EDT)

2007-07-10T02:38:44Z

Funnny:

'''Pokémon''' is a highly successful Japanese franchise created by Satoshi Tajiri, that was introduced by [[Nintendo]] in the 1990s. The name is a [[portmanteau]] of the "Pocket Monsters", which serves as the Japanese title of the series. It spread to several other countries in a short time.

The video game was the basis for the popular children's television show, Pokémon and helped to spawn a large amount of merchandise and a successful trading card game.

To those unfamiliar with the video games, the world is explored from an aerial view, in a way similar to "[[The Legend of Zelda]]" games (also by [[Nintendo]]). The player captures wild animals called "Pokemon," using a device called a "Pokéball." Pokémon often have cutesy species names such as "Rattata", "Pidgey", "Pikachu" & "Nidoran." Pokémon are also collected in the same way some people collect [[Baseball]] cards or "[[Garbage Pail Kids]]" stickers, and cataloged in a "Pokédex." Once captured, you can battle Pokémon against wild Pokemon to either scare them away or weaken them enough to capture them with a Pokeball. Each species of Pokémon has one or two elemental "types," and during turn-based battles, certain types trump others, in a [[Rock-Paper-Scissors]] manner. The most commonly-known of these are probably the starter Pokémons' types from each version: Fire trumps Grass; Grass trumps Water; Water trumps Fire.

==Gameplay==
In every mainstream version of the handheld Pokemon games, there are eight gym leaders, as well as a group called the Elite Four that one must beat, in order to win the game. Also, every different version gives each character a rival that constantly attempts to best you in your progress throughout the game.
As you move along, stronger Pokemon and harder trainers become increasingly present, forcing the main character to quickly adapt and become stronger.

==Games==
So far, there have been fourteen mainstream Pokémon games: Red and Green first appeared in Japan, but when the franchise came to the United States, Green was replaced by Blue, due to several bugs in Green. This was known as Generation I of Pokemon. Generation I was capped off by Yellow Version, a special Pikachu edition, in which the main character receives a Pikachu as his first Pokemon. Generation II introduced many new Pokémon in Gold and Silver, which was followed up by Crystal Version. Generation III, which also introduced new Pokémon, included Ruby and Sapphire, which was capped off by Emerald, however remakes of Red and Green, called Fire Red and Leaf Green were also released during Generation III. Pokémon is currently in Generation IV, where Diamond and Pearl are the only games that have been released yet, along with a whole string of cute, collectible beasts.

There are also many spinoff games, such as Pokemon Colosseum for the [[Nintendo 64]], in which players could put their Pokémon cartridges into special adapters and battle Pokémon in 3D. Also for the Nintendo 64 is Pokemon Snap, in which the player is a Pokémon photographer, and travels around through Pokemon's habitats and snaps photos of them. Pokemon Pinball also came out for Game Boy Color, which was a pinball game in which Pokémon could also be caught in order to fill a Pokédex.

==Controversy==
In the past, some Christian groups believed Pokemon to be Satanic. In 2000, the Vatican released an official statement.

:''The Vatican has announced that the trading-card and computer-game versions of Pokémon are “full of inventive imagination,” have no “harmful moral side effects” and celebrate “ties of intense friendship.” Whether that extends to the TV show, His Holiness didn’t say. The New York Post, quoting a Thursday story in The Times of London, says The Vatican made its announcement on its satellite TV station, Sat2000, run by the Italian Bishops’ Conference.'' - from the New York Times

Arguments made against the game by some conservative Christians included that it used the word "evolution", that some creatures in the game could be considered to look like un-Christian creatures (snakes, dragons), that any fictional creatures not within the scope God's real-world creation must have been created by the Devil, that supernatural abilities used by creatures in the game amount to witchcraft, and that the game's Japanese origins preclude a strong Christian influence. After an episode of the Pokemon cartoon where bright flashing colours caused epileptic seizures in a number of viewers, some fundamentalist Christians blamed the seizures on evil spirits (Luke 13:11). {{fact}}

[[Category:Video games]]
[[Category:Broadcasting]]

Talk:Japanese animation

2007-07-10T01:54:18Z

Funnny:

Talk:Agnosticism

2007-07-10T01:49:57Z

Funnny:

''Agnostics differ from regular atheists in that they do not deny God's existence''

I hesitate to get involved in theological debate here; still less to make changes without agreement, but I should like to suggest that the word 'regular' be deleted from the above sentence. As written it suggests that Agnostics are not 'regular' atheists - ie, that they are some sort of (irregular) atheist. As an agnostic (type 2) myself I'd say that is not the case. The rest of the article makes it quite clear. Agnostics are not atheists, regular or otherwise. [[User:Alba|Alba]] 18:13, 23 May 2007 (EDT)

== "God's" ==

''"Agnosticism is the belief that '''God's''' existence or non existence is unknowable."''

Isn't agnosticism the belief that '''a''' God's existence is unknowable? This article, in my opinion, sounds like it's saying agnosticism is the belief that solely the existence of the Christian God is unknowable.

Could the "God's" be changed to ''"a diety's"'' or something like that?
--[[User:Funnny|Funnny]] 21:49, 9 July 2007 (EDT)

Talk:Agnosticism

2007-07-10T01:49:37Z

Funnny:

''Agnostics differ from regular atheists in that they do not deny God's existence''

I hesitate to get involved in theological debate here; still less to make changes without agreement, but I should like to suggest that the word 'regular' be deleted from the above sentence. As written it suggests that Agnostics are not 'regular' atheists - ie, that they are some sort of (irregular) atheist. As an agnostic (type 2) myself I'd say that is not the case. The rest of the article makes it quite clear. Agnostics are not atheists, regular or otherwise. [[User:Alba|Alba]] 18:13, 23 May 2007 (EDT)

== "God's" ==

''"Agnosticism is the belief that '''God's''' existence or non existence is unknowable."''

Isn't agnosticism the belief that '''a''' God's existence is unknowable? This article, in my opinion, sounds like it's saying agnosticism is the belief that solely the existence of the Christian God is unknowable.

Could the "God's" be changed to ''"a diety"'' or something like that?
--[[User:Funnny|Funnny]] 21:49, 9 July 2007 (EDT)

Talk:World of Warcraft

2007-07-10T01:48:26Z

Funnny:

Talk:Japanese animation

2007-07-10T01:41:06Z

Funnny: Might be misleading.

Talk:Agnosticism

2007-07-10T01:20:30Z

Funnny: "God's"