Japan is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
	This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on May 15, 2007.
Article milestones Date Process Result January 14, 2004 Featured article candidate Not promoted November 18, 2004 Featured article candidate Not promoted August 10, 2006 Featured article candidate Not promoted August 28, 2006 Peer review Reviewed January 9, 2007 Featured article candidate Not promoted March 26, 2007 Featured article candidate Not promoted April 12, 2007 Featured article candidate Promoted April 14, 2011 Featured article review Kept Current status: Featured article

This  level-3 vital article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Asia: Japan Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Asia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Asia 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.AsiaWikipedia:WikiProject AsiaTemplate:WikiProject AsiaAsia Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Japan (assessed as Top-importance). Countries This article is within the scope of WikiProject Countries, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of countries 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.CountriesWikipedia:WikiProject CountriesTemplate:WikiProject Countriescountry WikiProject Countries to-do list: Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Article requests : Check out the article alerts; see if anything catches your fancy. Cleanup : clean-up listing for Countries Stubs : de-stub articles in Category:Stubs by region. Other : add {{WPCountries}} to talk pages of related articles, and assess. East Asia (defunct) This article is within the scope of WikiProject East Asia, a project which is currently considered to be defunct.East AsiaWikipedia:WikiProject East AsiaTemplate:WikiProject East AsiaEast Asia

	Other talk page banners

I recently introduced a line mentioning the crimes against humanity perpetrated by the Japanese Empire to the lead. This is a significant event in Japanese history and failing to mention it here would be like failing to mention the Holocaust in the lead for Germany. @Moxy apparently wishes to challenge these changes, but provided no policy-based explanation for their challenge. Moxy, do you care to say more? Brusquedandelion (talk) 05:52, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Simply WP:Undue .....as its not something that is covered in quick summarizes of the country like Germany and the holocaust. Every major power has crimes attached to them but only a few are defining in nature. Moxy🍁 06:06, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So, I checked Britannica,^[1] and it's a bit complicated since the lead for Germany's is significantly longer than Japan's or either of ours'. However, it seems to roughly equivocate to the present proportion. Are there any other tertiary sources we can be looking at to evaluate lead dueness here?Remsense ‥ 论 06:38, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

But why is it undue? Contrary to your claim, the Wikipedia article for Germany does mention the Holocaust in its lead. Brusquedandelion (talk) 23:58, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I was under the interpretation that they were making roughly the some observation as me above: i.e. it is mentioned in tertiary summaries elsewhere for Germany more often than for Japan. Remsense ‥ 论 00:11, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WP:DUE states that Neutrality requires that mainspace articles and pages fairly represent all significant viewpoints that have been published by reliable sources, in proportion to the prominence of each viewpoint in those sources and not anything specifically about tertiary sources. WP:V says that Base articles largely on reliable secondary sources. Could you cite the specific policy that states or suggests we should weight our coverage based on how Brittanica, or another tertiary sources, covers the topic? This runs into all sorts of issues in application, including one that you have already encountered—the Britannica Germany lead being significantly longer than the Japan lead. Brusquedandelion (talk) 00:40, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I checked around wikipedia - many country also have mentions of crimes in the lead section - e.g the US lead section talked about slavery and displacement of Native Americans, China's had the Great Leap Forward, Cultural Revolution and Tiananmen Square. Same with the USSR/Russia regarding the loss of lives due to rapid industrialisation and Stalin's policies. Considering Japanese war crimes very much influence the current geopolitical situation of Japan and the relationship it has with its neighbours, I think it should be involved in the lead section. Hemlockian (talk) 05:08, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect having it in the lead of the History of Japan article (it isn't) might be the bigger priority. As for defining, I note that what happened then is still very much present in many people's minds in nearby countries (see Controversies surrounding Yasukuni Shrine) so it affects current regional politics. Erp (talk) 07:08, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is a good point, I might focus there. The body of that article also has some major holes. Brusquedandelion (talk) 00:41, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's already in the lead of the Empire of Japan article, where they are more closely associated with. Modern Japan is usually not often associated with these acts anymore, if you like that or not. Even in the lead of the Germany article, a country that is still widely known today for its war atrocities and is often regarded as having started both World Wars, the Holocaust is only mentioned in one word. Maxeto0910 (talk) 23:48, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Considering that Japanese war crimes are often to be considered on par in cruelty and scale with Nazi Germany (see comfort women, Nanking massacre, Unit 731) I feel like there should be at least some mentioning in the lead section as opposed to none.

"Modern Japan is usually not often associated with these acts anymore, if you like that or not"

Yes, neither is modern Germany, but acts such as the Holocaust is still mentioned there, which I think is a good thing, because it is a vital part of history of that country.

I'm happy and open to hear your thoughts and arguments on this! Hemlockian (talk) 04:46, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think arguing about which crimes were crueler is the wrong approach, as is direct comparison to other countries. The question is, what weight do reliable sources give to these relative to all of the other details about this country? Nikkimaria (talk) 05:35, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Good question, and I think I agree with your statement that arguing on subjective factors such as cruelty is wrong, my mistake.

From what I gather, Britannica seems to be the standard of a 'reliable source' in the Wikipedia community, but its article for Japan doesn't even talk about the atomic bombing at all in its article, which obviously is a significant event in Japanese history.

Notably, in other wikipedia articles such as the USA and China, many of their countries crimes are mentioned, whilst they are not mentioned in a Britannica article. I know it sounds like (and probably is) whataboutism, but I do think its evidence to suggest that Wikipedia diverges in some instances from certain reliable sources to include certain events in the lead section of a country if it is significant enough. And as I mentioned in my other posts, I do think Japanese war crimes in WWII do have a significant legacy on its geopolitical relationships to warrant itself at least one sentence in the lead section.

Of course, Britannica isn't the only reliable source, and I'm willing to hear you bring forward other reliable sources of information as well! Hemlockian (talk) 06:13, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

We have talked about this in a few other places as well as here as seen in the archive. One of the most poignant reasonings for not being mentioned in alot of history books about Japan itself is that the atrocities "mainly" happened in Japanese occupation territories. It definitely had a dramatic historical relevance to the occupied territories but not all that much when it comes to actual Japanese history within the country. Where I believe the German situation is a little bit different because it happened on its own citizens... much like the Soviet Union and Armenia

That being said it's definitely brought up in history books alot when looking at the world wars.... but generally gets a passing mention when it comes to the country itself. Moxy🍁 06:25, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I feel like the content about Japan's video game sector in the science and technology section would fit better in the media section since it is more focused on Japan's video game market instead of its video game industry. Maxeto0910 (talk) 07:14, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I now moved the paragraph to the industry and services section because placing it in the science and technology section was probably just a mistake by someone. However, I still think the content about the video game sector rather belongs in the media section. Maxeto0910 (talk) 07:27, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Japan has no official language. There is no law that makes Japanese the official language. The Wikipedia page in the Japanese language also states this face clearly. Why does this page list the official language as “Japanese”. Shouldn’t it be listed as a national language? 240D:1A:D3F:3D00:604F:82CA:30A2:644B (talk) 14:51, 2 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Japanese is treated as the official language by sources of a similar format such as UNGEGN. That said, the explanations in both this article and the main article do seem lacking. CMD (talk) 15:02, 2 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]