Talk:Naruhito

Regent?

Hadn't Naruhito served as Prince-Regent, sometime in 2003 during Emperor Akihito's surgery-recovery from cancer? GoodDay 16:19, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

request for cleanup

Am I the only one to notice that all these royal monarch pages are exactly the same? Its like someone just cut and pasted the same stuff from Prince Charles to Prince Naruhito, changing some names. I mean, even where it talks about marriage and their weddings, its exactly the same!

yes, it' obviously paste .. this page require cleanup --Melaen 18:14, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

Is there any evidence that Constantine II of Greece is a "close personal friend of the imperial family" as mentioned in the marriage section. That area has been lifted directly from Charles and should be rewritten by someone with knowledge of the subjects involved. Prsgoddess187 21:12, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Picture?

Hey, is it just me, or is it strange that Prince Akishino has a picture displayed and Crown Prince Naruhito doesn't? Do you think one should be put in? --clevomon 5:27, 3 April 2006

I agree, I think there was one before. Could someone please provide a picture? Jamandell (d69) 16:32, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

There must be a better picture somewhere, that reminds me of the picture of Lost's Alvar Hanso! I'll have a look. Ghostreveries 09:58, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, the current pic is ridiculous. Jamandell (d69) 22:57, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Actually, I rather like the picture. --Swift 06:50, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

The picture stinks (his face is obscured by a shadow), looks similiar to the cover of Stephen Brunt's book Facing Ali. GoodDay 19:38, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

It's horrible indeed. --Saintjust (talk) 23:22, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Ah hah, it's been replaced, great. GoodDay (talk) 22:05, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was moved to Crown Prince Naruhito. "Naruhito" is unlikely to be confused with other subjects, so the disambiguation is unnecessary. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 15:01, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

---

Naruhito, Crown Prince of Japan → Crown Prince Naruhito — He is generally referred to as "Crown Prince Naruhito" in the English-language media,[1] and there is no obvious reason why Wiki should use a different style. "of [country]" is a wiki style to disambiguate the names of European kings. There is no need to do this for Japanese names as they are distinctive to Japan. Dead tree encyclopedias put the given name first so names can be alphabetized, but that is not an issue on Wikipedia. Notice that it is Pope John Paul II and Crown Princess Masako. Kauffner (talk) 10:43, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

• Support. There doesn't seem to be a fixed standard for article titles Japanese royalty but none save this one use "Japan" in the title. See Category:Japanese princesses and Category:Japanese princes for examples. Note the recent similar discussion and move of Crown Princess Masako at Talk:Crown Princess Masako. — AjaxSmack 02:18, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

• Comment Royals with substantive titles such as in this case always have their title after their name per WP:NCNT. He is referred to as the Crown Prince of Japan or the the Crown Prince on the official website of the Imperial Household agency.[2][3] - dwc lr (talk) 18:13, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

• WP:NCNT doesn't apply here. It says "East Asian monarchs are discussed at...Wikipedia:Manual of Style (Japan-related articles)..." You'll notice that in the first linked source you give (where he is referred to as "Crown Prince of Japan"), the name "Naruhito" doesn't appear anywhere on the page so the "of Japan" is necessary.[4] However, on the second linked source you give (where he is referred to as "Crown Prince"), his name "Naruhito" appears and the "of Japan" doesn't.[5] Since the Wikipedia article is to be at "XXX Naruhito" or "Naruhito XXX," the "of Japan" would be redundant here just as it is in the second source. — AjaxSmack 00:37, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

• He is The Crown Prince of Japan and that is the correct style and not Crown Prince Naruhito. Individuals with substantive titles articles are always named “Name, Title of Place”, hence Charles, Prince of Wales or Felipe, Prince of Asturias, for example even if they may be called Prince Charles (instead of The Prince of Wales) or Prince Felipe (instead of The Prince of Asturias). In this case his name is Naruhito and his title is Crown Prince of Japan, hence Naruhito, Crown Prince of Japan is the best you will get, neither his name nor “of Japan” is redundant. - dwc lr (talk) 00:57, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

• For European nobility you would be 100% correct, but we're talking about a Japanese noble, here.
  — V = I * R (talk) 01:12, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

• Yes and I don't see how in this instance it would differ between European, Japanese, African etc, Crown Prince of Japan is still a substantive title is it not. - dwc lr (talk) 01:30, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

• The reason "Prince of Wales" is included in Charles' article title is because his official style is "The Prince Charles, Prince of Wales". There was a vote and the consensus was that this two-prince style was awkward, so the first prince was arbitrarily cut.[6] Thus there is no precident for a general "name, title of place" style for crown princes. The long-form version of Naruhito's title is "His Imperial Highness the Crown Prince".[7] -- no "of Japan" in it. Kauffner (talk) 01:54, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

• The main issue is that it's extremely unlikely that "Naruhito" will collide with another article, which calls into question the need for any disambiguation (the "of Japan" portion). The primary reason that European nobility needs to use the "of [country]" disambiguator is because many noble families (somewhat intentionally) used and reused the same names. Once that DAB text is removed, changing the order of "Crown Prince" to "Naruhito" is simply a matter of grammar, giving "Crown Prince Naruhito". More importantly though, WP:UCN applies, and to restate what is in the proposal "there is no obvious reason why Wiki should use a different style." here.
  — V = I * R (talk) 01:56, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

• If "of Japan" is not part of the title, if the title is just Crown Prince not Crown Prince of Japan then fair enough, but if the official title is Crown Prince of Japan that should be used. - dwc lr (talk) 13:30, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

• In the current title does not look awkward in this case as we are not saying Prince Naruhito, Crown Prince of Japan. That looks like a short form to me, is there a reference somewhere where it says that the title is only Crown Prince and not Crown Prince of Japan? - dwc lr (talk) 13:30, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

• Oppose it should include Japan. All of these individuals, whereever they hail from should have that (or whatever the jurisdiction is if not Japan) 76.66.192.144 (talk) 04:10, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
  • Why? Is there any confusion with a Naruhito from another country? — AjaxSmack 01:49, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

• Support — unnecessary disambiguation.
  — V = I * R (talk) 06:57, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

• Oppose styled The Crown Prince of Japan so current article name is correct form. - dwc lr (talk) 17:59, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

• Support per Kauffner and Ajax. Exploding Boy (talk) 18:03, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

left to KSA to learn more. But now he and his little sister Yuki Masako are about to go complete the EBS

These terms are obscure. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.189.103.145 (talk) 17:59, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

meaning of name?

Does anyone know the meaning of his name Naruhito? Would be interesting to elaborate a little on that. Gryffindor (talk) 16:56, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Reason for not changing the Imperial succesion

I think that we should at least mention why the issue was dropped, being that a male heir was born to the crown prince's brother. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.209.244.152 (talk) 18:44, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

"Masako controversy"

There's no indication that anything under this heading is controversial. Can someone please explain the header? Otherwise we could prehaps rewrite it. --Jfruh (talk) 02:32, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Accession date

Note: CNN source is in error. Naruhito will become emperor on April 30, 2019, not May 1, 2019. After he ascends the throne, his era will be declared to have started on May 1. This is a Japanese practice: Akihito became emperor on January 7, 1989, but his era began on January 8, 1989. GoodDay (talk) 21:32, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Unfortunately, the long-term Wikipedia user GoodDay is in error on this problem. Naruhito is expected to succeed to the Emperor of Japan from Akihito on 1 May 2019. Here are the official sources: 宮内庁–ホーム–皇室–制度–ご大喪・ご即位・ご結婚などの行事–剣璽等承継の儀, 宮内庁–ホーム–新着情報（これまでの一覧）–「天皇陛下の御退位及び皇太子殿下の御即位に伴う式典準備委員会（第2回）」に宮内庁が作成，提出した資料–資料1（歴史上の実例）, and 首相官邸–天皇の退位等に関する皇室典範特例法について–天皇の退位等に関する皇室典範特例法の施行期日を定める政令について. Thus, the relevant sentences in the lead paragraphs should be changed into "Naruhito is expected to succeed his father Akihito as the Emperor of Japan on 1 May 2019, after the latter's expected abdication on 30 April 2019." The relevant sentences in the subsection "Akihito's pending abdication" of the section "Crown Prince" should be changed into "On 1 December 2017, the Japanese government announced that the emperor Akihito is expected to abdicate on 30 April 2019. Then his elder son Naruhito is expected to succeed emperor on 1 May 2019." ––123.150.182.177 05:41, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

Then that would place is era as beginning on 2 May 2019. Best we wait until the moment of abdication. Until then, there's no need to add Naruhito's future accession (even in hidden form) to the infobox. GoodDay (talk) 07:27, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

However, you are in error again. The era name of the future Emperor of Japan Naruhito is expected to be used from 1 May 2019, when he is expected to succeed to the Emperor of Japan from Akihito. Here is the official source: 首相官邸–新着情報–平成31年1月4日 安倍内閣総理大臣年頭記者会見. Please see the 15th paragraph of the "安倍総理冒頭発言", the second paragraph of the first question proposed by "記者", and the first paragraph of the first answer of "安倍総理". In addition, I don't want to add the relevant content in this article's infobox. I just want to correct the relevant sentences mentioned above. ––123.150.182.180 11:09, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

It's best that we wait until Akihito abdicates. Until then, there's no need to place such data in Naruhito's infobox. PS: It would be appreciated if you'd either create an account or stick to using just 'one' IP. GoodDay (talk) 16:12, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

The user has a dynamic IP address, however, I think he is correct. The era name only starts on 1 May 2019, but Naruhito himself automatically ascends to the throne immediately after the former Emperor abdicates under the The Law for Special Exception of the Imperial House Law concerning the Emperor's abdication (天皇の退位等に関する皇室典範特例法) (Article 2) which is referred from the Imperial House Law (Article 4). This happened to Akihito on the death of Emperor Shōwa; he was automatically ascended to the throne. 180.48.63.248 (talk) 07:11, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

So Akihito's abdication takes effect at midnight. GoodDay (talk) 13:33, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

To 180.48.63.248: According to the official sources given above, Naruhito is expected to ascend to the throne on 1 May 2019, the date is scheduled to hold the "剣璽等承継の儀" for himself. In Japanese history, Akihito ascended to the throne on 7 January 1989, the date held the "剣璽等承継の儀" for himself.

114.246.233.6

15:53, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

GoodDay, I have reverted this edit: [8], that changed from Naruhito is expected to succeed his father as Emperor on 1 May 2019,[1][2] following the latter's abdication on 30 April 2019.[1][3] to Naruhito is expected to succeed his father as Emperor[1][2] upon the latter's abdication on 30 April 2019.[1][3], as the change of accession date from 1 May to 30 April directly contradicts the given sources. Source [1], Japan Times, says:

"A special panel chaired by Prime Minister Shinzo Abe on Friday set April 30, 2019, as the date for Emperor Akihito’s abdication [which] will pave the way for Crown Prince Naruhito, the eldest son of Emperor Akihito, to ascend the throne the following day, May 1..."

Source [3], BBC, says:

"Mr Abe later met reporters briefly to announce that they had decided the emperor would step down on 30 April 2019. His abdication will mark the end of the Heisei era, and he would be immediately succeeded by his son Crown Prince Naruhito on 1 May..."

If you have other reliable sources, or more recent publications by the JT or BBC that contradict this, please add them, thanks. --IamNotU (talk) 00:50, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

Let's hold off on the dates, until the abdication actually occurs. GoodDay (talk) 00:57, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

Sorry, but unless you have reliable sources that indicate that both the Japan Times and the BBC are in error about the announced/expected date of accession, I don't see any reason to remove this information. The rest of the article in several places makes reference to these dates, so it is confusing to the reader to have them missing from the beginning. --IamNotU (talk) 01:11, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

If you're that determined? then put it back in. GoodDay (talk) 01:13, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

Thanks... --IamNotU (talk) 01:37, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Naruhito, Crown Prince of Japan. 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:

• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://theroyalchronicle.wordpress.com/2012/10/20/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130525180439/http://www.wort.lu/img/dd65339db25b8eb0761e7a48d614fa35/560/360/0/10/792/519/75/4f36e057b79c933368225cca13aa62932526f4a8.jpg to http://www.wort.lu/img/dd65339db25b8eb0761e7a48d614fa35/560/360/0/10/792/519/75/4f36e057b79c933368225cca13aa62932526f4a8.jpg
• Added archive https://archive.is/20121217235456/https://www.borger.dk/foa/Sider/Default.aspx?fk=26&foaid=10526981&paid= to https://www.borger.dk/foa/Sider/Default.aspx?fk=26&foaid=10526981&paid=
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://members3.boardhost.com/Oranjes/msg/1434330848.html

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) 04:38, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Requested move 29 April 2019

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved. DrKay (talk) 16:01, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

---

Naruhito, Crown Prince of Japan → Naruhito – Per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC and WP:CONCISE. He's soon to be crowned emperor of Japan, and the current article name will be outdated. Zanhe (talk) 23:29, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

We should wait until he succeeds the imperial throne. At that point, an RM won't be required. GoodDay (talk) 23:32, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

• I agree with GoodDay. If all goes as planned, the article should be moved to "Naruhito" after the official announcement on 1 May - not before, not after. I hope this requested move with its 7-day waiting period doesn't interfere with a timely move on Wednesday. Zanhe, is there some way you can retract the request, or it can be closed early? --IamNotU (talk) 00:33, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

• It seems that I missed the memo that the move would be automatic on May 1 :-) If that's already agreed upon, I'm willing to withdraw the request and wait for the move to occur automagically, although I have no idea how to withdraw a move request. -Zanhe (talk) 04:02, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

• My understanding is that he will become Emperor immediately on the abdication of his father. However the formal proclamation, including the new era, will not be made until the next day, May 1. -Ad Orientem (talk) 02:46, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

I've been arguing this for weeks, that Naruhito becomes emperor on April 30, unless the abdication occurs at midnight. But, nobody will listen to me :( GoodDay (talk) 02:48, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

The BBC are reporting that the abdication takes effect at midnight: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-48020703: 'he will technically remain emperor until midnight.' Celia Homeford (talk) 08:39, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

In hereditary monarchies, the throne (ideally) is never vacant. -Ad Orientem (talk) 02:56, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

That depends on the monarchy and the constitutional traditions of the particular country. Of course there is a difference between an abdication (which can be orderly planned) and the death of the reigning monarch. In Belgium for instance upon the death of the monarch, the new monarch only becomes King or Queen after taking the constitutional oath before parliament, which is always a couple of days after the funeral of the predecessor. There is thus an interregnum during which the governement temporarily takes on the powers of the crown. -- fdewaele, 30 April 2019, 9:50 CET.

• Move at 15:00 UTC April 30, 2019 as not controversial per sources.[9] --- Coffeeandcrumbs 05:10, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

That source does seem to imply that his accession takes place at midnight. However, another article in the same publication says that the ceremony in the morning "is the first stage of Crown Prince Naruhito’s accession to the throne",[10] which seems to imply that the accession doesn't take place before that. In any case, we should wait for reliable sources that say he is in fact now the emperor, before stating so in the article or its title. --IamNotU (talk) 13:27, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

• Abstain - I'm just here for history lul.--~Sıgehelmus♗_(Tøk) 06:03, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
• Move at the top of the hour (8:00 UTC). My understanding is that Naruhito becomes emperor immediately upon abdication, as his duties are then assumed by him. For example, if the Prime Minister wishes to dissolve the House of Representatives after that time, it would be Naruhito who formally executes it.--Jasper Deng (talk) 07:14, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

Akihito remains emperor until midnight Japan time, so 15:00 not 8:00 "Akihito's reign runs through midnight (15:00GMT) then Prince Naruhito becomes the new emperor and his era begins. Naruhito will ascend the Chrysanthemum Throne on Wednesday ushering in a new era called Reiwa." [11] --IamNotU (talk) 11:33, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

• Move at 0:00 AM on May 1, Japanese time. Day one of Reiwa is on May 1 and it also seems to be the scheduled accession date of Emperor Naruhito. -- fdewaele, 30 April 2019, 10:03 CET.
• Support move with a timestamp to be granted in 15:00 UTC / 0:00 AM Japanese time. As with everyone. ApprenticeFan work 08:57, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
• Wait for reliable sources to say he is no longer Crown Prince, but Emperor. For example, the above BBC reference says "Akihito will technically remain emperor until midnight. His eldest son, Crown Prince Naruhito, will ascend the throne later on Wednesday." The New York Times says "Akihito, 85, the son of the wartime emperor Hirohito, relinquished the throne to Crown Prince Naruhito, 59, who will receive the sacred imperial regalia in a ceremony on Wednesday morning."[12] NPR says he "is set to ascend to the throne on Wednesday", and doesn't say he becomes emperor at midnight.[13] Japan Times gives much detail: "May 1 — regalia inheritance (10:30-10:40 a.m.): This is the first stage of Crown Prince Naruhito’s accession to the throne. Chamberlains will put the seals, sword and jewel on desks in front of the new Emperor as proof of his rightful succession. [...] May 1 — Emperor’s first remarks (11:10-11:20 a.m.): Shortly afterward, Emperor Naruhito will make his first public remarks as emperor in the Pine Chamber — comments that might offer hints about his goals or hopes for his reign."[14] Note that they still refer to him as Crown Prince going into the regalia inheritance ceremony, and as emperor only afterwards. I'm not seeing sufficient reliable sources that say beyond doubt that he in fact automatically becomes emperor at midnight, and not at the ceremony the next morning. Whatever theories people have about it are not relevant - only information that can be reliably verified by published secondary sources is acceptable. --IamNotU (talk) 12:43, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
  • He became the Emperor at 0:00 AM on May 1. See http://www.kunaicho.go.jp/eindex.html .--42.3.184.191 (talk) 15:25, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the reference. Between that and this: [15] I would say it's ok to describe him as now being emperor (though it doesn't specify "0:00 AM"). I support a 'move of the page immediately to Naruhito. --IamNotU (talk) 15:54, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

• Comment: It seems that someone moved this page to "Emperor Naruhito of Japan". This is arguably too unwieldy and, in accordance with the discussion above, be renamed to simply "Naruhito", in keeping with his grandfather's and his father's articles. — RAVENPVFF · talk · 15:13, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
• Move to Naruhito as soon as possible to. It is now 1 May in Japan. --Philip Stevens (talk) 15:15, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

I think naruhito is now the emperor regardless of whether has he received the regalias similarly for emperor emeritus Akihito his accession ceremony took place in February 1989 where he received the regalias however his reign started from the midnight after Emperor Showa's death

• MOVE, but had been used as redirect. Need clearance first. – Flix11 (talk) 15:29, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
• Move. Also, Japanese news outlets including NHK World-Japan began referring to him as Emperor Naruhito at the stroke of midnight. JRHorse (talk) 15:38, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

JRHorse, could you provide a citation please? Thanks... --IamNotU (talk) 15:56, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

• Move to Naruhito as soon as possible, in line with consistency with his father and grandfather. —Javert2113 (Siarad.|¤) 15:45, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
• Move He is now the Emperor since 0.00 AM. by law. Please make it in line with his father. --TeruM (talk) 15:56, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
• Move as soon as possible as the title is also informal. 🐱💬 15:57, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Simultaneous abdication and succession

The article currently states that Akihito abdicated on 30 April and Naruhito succeeded him on 1 May. But although the abdication ceremony was on 30 April, his reign continued until midnight, at which moment his son succeeded him. The two dates make it appear that these events were not simultaneous, but my understanding is that there was no interregnum. We need to make that clear. Richard75 (talk) 16:11, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

That's a fair point. But we have to use the dates that reliable sources use, which are 30 April for the abdication, and 1 May for the succession. The concept of midnight is not strictly defined, and there is no unanimous agreement on what it means, or whether it "occurs" on one date or another. It's not certain that the end of Akihito's reign and the beginning of Naruhito's were simultaneous, which might imply overlapping. In other words, I don't know that there is a point in time that is simultaneously Tuesday and Wednesday. It would be better to talk about a transition between the two reigns/days. I don't know the best way to word it but it could be something like "Akihiro completed an abdication ceremony on the afternoon of 30 April, and his reign continued until the end of the day, with Naruhito's reign starting at the beginning the next, on 1 May." It should go later in the article, not in the lead section. --IamNotU (talk) 16:53, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

Indeed, it's because the abdication occurred at midnight Japanese time, that the dates are different. At the very moment April 30, 2019 ended & May 1, 2019 began, Akihito's reign ended & Naruhito's reign began. GoodDay (talk) 20:24, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

We should also be careful about the wording of that. We can say that Akihito completed the abdication ceremony in the afternoon, and that his reign is considered to have lasted until the end of the day, since we have sources saying both. Which of those constitutes the "actual" abdication we can't say, not without a reliable source - we can't say that "he abdicated at the end of the day", when sources don't say that, and describe a formal act of abdication in the afternoon. I've changed the introduction accordingly, and added a paragraph about it later in the article. I hope it's clear enough. --IamNotU (talk) 23:33, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

Title

Probably a sock puppet of User:Qais13.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
It’s “His Majesty” not “His Imperial Majesty” as per the Imperial Households official website [16], this information is also available on the relevant wiki article, user goodday should perhaps read up on this.82.132.219.159 (talk) 22:00, 30 April 2019 (UTC) The other bios of Japanese monarchs are using His Imperial Majesty GoodDay (talk) 22:03, 30 April 2019 (UTC) Then they need to be updated then, feel free to do it rather than making this one incorrect to fit in 82.132.219.159 (talk) 22:10, 30 April 2019 (UTC) Also I just checked the other bios only Akihito is using the incorrect “imperial majesty” the rest are showing the correct title of just “majesty”, so again you are wrong.82.132.219.159 (talk) Obviously there was no website during Hirohito's reign, so how was he styled? Surtsicna (talk) 23:39, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

Several users have been repeatedly changing his title, between "His Imperial Majesty" and "His Majesty". There is an existing citation that seems to indicate that the latter is correct. Another, from the Consulate-General of Japan in Los Angeles, is here: [17]. Note that like the other one, it uses "Her Imperial Highness Princess Aiko", but "His Majesty the Emperor"; this indicates to me that it's not just a less-formal or shortened version. There is some evidence of "Imperial Majesty" being used, for example apparently he was addressed as such by the Pope: [18]. However, he was addressed as "His Majesty" in the official statement from the White House: [19]. For what it's worth, Google hits are about 2.4 million for "Naruhito" and "His Majesty", vs. only about 25 thousand for "Naruhito" and "His Imperial Majesty". The Akihito article has "His Majesty" in the "Name" section, but with a citation that uses "His Imperial Majesty Akihito, Emperor",[20] and has "Imperial" in the "Titles and styles" section, without citation. There appears to be no past discussion about it. Hirohito uses "His Majesty" in the "Ascension" section, also unsourced and without discussion. Given the above, I've reverted the most recent edit, and changed it back to "His Majesty" since that's what the given citation supports. If anyone has good reason to change it again, please explain it here. --IamNotU (talk) 17:06, 6 May 2019 (UTC)

PS, there's a page here: [21] that explains that tennō heika (天皇陛下) "could be translated as “his imperial majesty,” or more literally “his majesty, the emperor.”". It would seem to make sense to use the translation used by the Imperial Household and the Japanese Consulate (see above), and, it seems, by the majority of reliable sources. --IamNotU (talk) 17:32, 6 May 2019 (UTC)

105.226.197.188 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) reverted the change of the capitalization of "the" to read "His Majesty The Emperor". The given source (Imperial Household), as well as the Japanese Consulate link above, use "His Majesty the Emperor". According to MOS:CAPS, "Wikipedia relies on sources to determine what is conventionally capitalized; only words and phrases that are consistently capitalized in a substantial majority of independent, reliable sources are capitalized in Wikipedia." I was not able to find a single reliable source that capitalized "the", therefore it should not be capitalized. This is also in line with usual Wikipedia practice according to MOS:THECAPS. --IamNotU (talk) 23:40, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Emperor Naruhito3.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 17:37, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• 6اليابان.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:37, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

Expansion of "Crown Prince of Japan" and "Emperor of Japan" Sections

Is it considered proper to just translate a Japanese article into English? If so, I'm happy to contribute in that way .. Sucker for All (talk) 14:22, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

Probably not good practice to replace the entire article wholesale with a translation from the Japanese version, but it has 101 refs while the English article currently has 53. It is probably safest to expand this by small portions, being careful about the existing English article text. Dl2000 (talk) 00:15, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

Changes to the infobox

@Gryffindor: Care to explain why you have changed the commonly recognizable English term "Imperial House of Japan" to Kōshitsu in the infobox of this article and those of dozens of others? I tried to find a consensus for this change but could not locate any. Keivan.f^Talk 20:26, 9 July 2024 (UTC)