Talk:Shigehiko Hasumi

Bizarre editing changing name

Another anonymous editor keeps changing the person's name from Shiguehiko to Shigehiko without the unusual "ue". As evidence, this person added a URL to a page, which leads to http://mube.jp/wp/20120307/117, where it is spelt Shiguehiko. Per MOS:JAPAN this is the form used by the person himself, so it should be the one used in the Wikipedia article. If there is a citation to the contrary, where SH clearly shows a preference for the form Shigehiko, please add that. JoshuSasori (talk) 12:41, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

That's not true. The URL I added is http://mube.jp/wp/tag/shigehiko-hasumi. 123.224.121.75 (talk) 12:37, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

And that doesn't have his romanized name on it. It only has his name in the URL, which is hardly evidence - do we know he wrote that or decided the URL himself? It's more than likely some web designer did that. At the bottom of each page linked from there, we find the form Shiguehiko, which he clearly did put there and intended it to be spelt like that. There is a very strong weight of evidence for Shiguehiko on that website. I am not sure why you are trying to prove that he doesn't spell his name like this, when the best evidence is linked from the very page you offer as a citation. JoshuSasori (talk) 12:41, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

I don't think "he clearly did put there and intended it to be spelt like [Shiguehiko]". Is there an evidence? I think it's more than likely some web designer (or mube quartet) did that.

He spells his name "Shiguehiko": [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7]. Please, stop this. JoshuSasori (talk) 13:43, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

You should not lie to other users. In [8], it's written "Shigehiko". [9] is not Hasumi's page, but Junji Hori's one. [10] and [11] just proves how TT (who is it?) and Toya Tetsuro spell their teacher's name. [12] tells us that Hasumi spells his name "Shiguehiko Hasumi" when writing in French. 123.224.121.75 (talk) 13:56, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

I'm not lying to anyone, but thanks for the personal attack. You are correct that there are some duds in there, but most of them support Shiguehiko. For example, Hasumi is (or was) a member of an advisory board for the large science facility Riken and has clearly chosen to have his name spelt "Shiguehiko" on the Riken documents. There is also more clear cut evidence there which you chose to ignore. In contrast to your accusation of dishonesty, I note the following. Your anonymous account is a single-issue account which has only been used for edits related to the "ue" issue; you have no record of editing Wikipedia prior to yesterday. However, despite your apparent newness to the project, you seem to know enough about Wikipedia to know to add the edit-war template onto my talk page, and immediately add this discussion to an adminstrative noticeboard, even though you don't follow policies like WP:RS, WP:SYNTH, WP:CITE and WP:BURDEN. I believe there is something disingenuous in your methods. JoshuSasori (talk) 02:30, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

In all his recent books, it is spelled "Shigehiko". (e.g. Look at the Godard Mant Foucault book cover.) He actually spells his name "Shiguehiko" when he writes in French. (e.g. Cinéma 03.) However, "Shigehiko" is the right spell in English. (e.g. FIPRESCI, LOLA and Rouge.) And this is the English Wikipedia.

In his most recent book, Eiga Jihyo 2009-2011 (Kodansha. 2012. ISBN 978-4-06-217494-7. page 295), it's written "Shigehiko Hasumi". 123.224.121.75 (talk) 13:19, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

• Godard Mant Foucault book cover - do we know that he was responsible for the book cover?
• FIPRESCI - it's a translation from Japanese, do we know that he told the translator how to spell his name?
• Rouge - do we know that he was responsible for this writing? Is it on his personal website under the name "shigehiko"?

On his personal website, on articles dated to 2012, he spells it "Shiguehiko", rather than the obvious romanization "Shigehiko". So far you have presented no evidence at all that this person deliberately spells his name one way when he writes in English, and another way in works translated into French, and yet another way when he writes in Japanese. You don't seem to have evidence beyond a few book covers and some random Google results that this is the case. And the evidence for Shiguehiko is very clear indeed. So please stop altering the article text to reflect what you imagine, rather than what can be clearly demonstrated. JoshuSasori (talk) 13:33, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Important note: Mube is not his personal website. (http://mube.jp/wp/mubeis) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.224.121.75 (talk • contribs)

You are correct that it is clearly not his personal website (it's listed as such on the Japanese wikipedia, which is why I wrongly assumed it was). Once the article comes out of protection, that should be modified to state that it is not his official website. However, the link actually states that he is the site's "coordinator" (in Japanese) and it states that the bulk of the site is currently made up of his essays and writings. Thus the romanization used there is presumably one he's responsible for. The crux of the problem here is that "Shigehiko" is just the standard Hepburn romanization of his name, しげひこ, and "Shiguehiko" is more of a deliberate choice. Using Shigehiko might be a spelling mistake or it might be his current choice, but, as I've told you over and over already, what is needed is not your best guess but reliable evidence as to which it is. JoshuSasori (talk) 05:03, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

As far as I remember, the most recent update of mube.jp is March 2011, even though the URL says "20120307/117". Either way, it's a bit older than his 2012 book Eiga Jihyo 2009-2011. It's clearly evidence.

Until Godard Kakumei (Chikuma Shobo, 2005), Hasumi spelled his own name "Shiguehiko". However, at least since Aka no Yuwaku (Shincho Sha, 2007), he spells "Shigehiko" in his Japanese books. 123.224.121.75 (talk) 13:48, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Guy, if you have evidence that he uses this form or he changed his preference, PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE add the EVIDENCE to the article. All I am asking is for the EVIDENCE that what you are saying is true. Please can you familiarize yourself with the most basic Wikipedia policies about reliable sources and burden of proof. You can't add stuff to Wikipedia articles without evidence for it in the form of citations. If you have evidence, add it. If you don't have evidence, stop playing this game of adding fake things to the article and arguing in edit summaries using pictures and links and quibbling, on and on and on. What you are saying may be perfectly correct. For all I know you might be S.Hasumi himself. Or you may be just imagining things and then presenting them as facts. THE ONLY WAY TO DECIDE IS BY ADDING MEANINGFUL CITATIONS. Do not add junk like pictures and URLs which might be spelling mistakes. PLEASE FIND EVIDENCE FOR WHAT YOU ARE SAYING AND THEN ADD IT TO THE ARTICLE. STOP ARGUING WITH ME. FIND SOME REAL EVIDENCE. JoshuSasori (talk) 15:07, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Third opinion

Perhaps to calm down this discussion, I would like to point out that all the official University of Tokyo pages I could find use Shigehiko not Shiguehiko. Since he was President of the University, one would presume they were using what the head of the university himself wanted. ([13], [14], [15], [16], [17], [18], etc.). Since Mube is not created by Hasumi himself, it cannot serve as absolute proof that its spelling is his preferred one in English. It is no better proof than the University of Tokyo, but at least the University of Tokyo is an established, world-recognized institution, not a small site made by fans of Hasumi. JoshuSasori also has to provide evidence that Shiguehiko is what Hasumi prefers in English. The page cited on Mube merely gives a name without context--but can JoshuSasori prove this is supposed to be the English rendering? At least all the University of Tokyo pages give the name on their English pages. (My impression has always been that Shiguehiko is his preferred use in French, but not necessarily in English.) Michitaro (talk) 02:34, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your input. Please note that the above comments aren't in chronological order, and the other user's intention seems to have been to deliberately provoke me, as reported here. The problem as I see it is that Shigehiko is just a standard Hepburn romanization of the person's first name, whereas Shiguehiko is an unusual romanization. It's more than likely that a lot of people "correct" his name to Shigehiko, but extremely unlikely that people change Shigehiko to Shiguehiko against his wishes. As far as "authoritative" goes, the Shiguehiko version is used, for example, on the Riken Research Advisory Council documents, which are in English. He must have specified Riken to use that version of his name on the English documents, otherwise how on earth would such a spelling even have appeared? From reading the Japanese book, Hasumi's book on Ozu was translated into French by a translator; in the 2003 edition of the Japanese-language book the copyright notice actually says Shiguéhiko.

A sensible solution to this discussion would be to give both names, and add a paragraph on the naming issue. As I stated on the administrator's noticeboard, it is my guess that the anonymous user (who disappeared once the article was protected) intended to deliberately provoke an edit war and then use that noticeboard as a way to force the edits into the article. One other thing: the anonymous user also seems to claim a knowledge of Hasumi's wishes about how he wants to be named, but does not provide a reference. I find it strange that the anon would know such a thing - if so, then why can he/she not provide a reference? Either it is a case of assumed omniscience or someone connected with Hasumi. JoshuSasori (talk) 04:14, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Michitaro notes

“ My impression has always been that Shiguehiko is his preferred use in French, but not necessarily in English. ”

by a strange coincidence, that was the anonymous editor's impression too. Any hope of a reference, from either you, or the anon? WP:BURDEN, etc. JoshuSasori (talk) 04:55, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi. Although my IP address has changed, I'm the same person as 123.224.121.75.

Regarding to "copyright notice" of Hasumi's recent books, please see the below:

"(c) 2005 Shiguéhiko Hasumi" - Godard Kakumei (ゴダール革命)

"(c) Shigehiko Hasumi 2007" - Aka no Yuwaku (「赤」の誘惑)

"(c) 2008, Shigehiko Hasumi" - Eiga Hokai Zenya (映画崩壊前夜)

"(c) 2008 Shigehiko Hasumi" - Eigaron Kogi (映画論講義)

"(c) 2008 HASUMI Shigehiko" - Godard Manet Foucault (ゴダール マネ フーコー)

"(c) Shigehiko Hasumi 2012" - Eiga Jihyo 2009-2011 (映画時評2009-2011)

I guess Hasumi's own book is the "real evidence," at least about his name spelling. So, when unprotected, I'm willing to add Eiga Jihyo 2009-2011 as a reference to the article. 123.224.164.187 (talk) 21:53, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Ho hum. Copyright notices on books don't really count as reliable sources for what name Hasumi prefers. Can you please try to find a statement by Hasumi himself? What bothers me is that you keep on saying things along the lines of "I think Hasumi prefers this ..." but I don't know why you think that. Could you just tell me why? It would make this discussion go a lot easier. JoshuSasori (talk) 22:10, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

I agree that the sensible solution is to give both names. I would argue, however, that the article title should be Shigehiko, and that Shiguehiko should be the alternative spelling. First, we currently have no absolute evidence of what Hasumi himself uses, one way or another. In that case, WP:ENGLISH is likely our guide, and that states we should "use the version of the name of the subject which is most common in the English language." Starting with Google searches, we can see that Shigehiko ([19]) is much more common than Shiguehiko ([20]) or "Shiguéhiko" ([21]). Looking through periodical indexes, it seems that there are more of his authored publications (in various languages) that use "Shigehiko" than "Shiguehiko":

• Hasumi, Shigehiko. John Ford ou l'éloquence du geste. Cinéma - Revue Semestrielle d'Esthéthique et d'Histoire du Cinéma 8 (Autumn 2004)
• Hasumi, Shigehiko. A Tokyo, devant la caméra de Hou Hsiao-hsien. Cahiers du Cinéma 582(Sept 2003)
• Hasumi, Shigehiko. First look: Bright future. Film Comment XXXIX:2 (Mar-Apr 2003)
• Hasumi, Shigehiko. Inversion, échange, répétition: les comédies de Howard Hawks. Cinéma - Revue Semestrielle d'Esthéthique et d'Histoire du Cinéma 3 (Summer 2002)
• Tokyo Koen. Hasumi, Shigehiko. Film Comment, Jan/Feb2012, Vol. 48 Issue 1, p51-51,
• L'arbre mort et le jeu de la flute. Hasumi, Shiguehiko. Trafic, Winter 1997, Issue 24, p75-83,
• Sadao Yamanaka. Hasumi, Shigehiko. Andere Sinema, Nov/Dec 1989, Issue 94, p25-27,
• Missing Link. Hasumi, Shigehiko. Film Comment, Jan/Feb2002, Vol. 38 Issue 1, p41,
• The articles in Rouge: [22], [23], [24], and [25]
• The article in Undercurrent: [26]
• Sunny Skies, in David Desser, ed. Ozu's Tokyo Story

Frankly, there are not many of his publications that use "Shiguehiko", and all in French:

• A l'epreuve du "recit vestimentaire. Hasumi, Shiguehiko. Cahiers du Cinema, Jun 1998,
• Yasujiro Ozu (the French translation) [27]

It is true that references to him by others use both spellings (though again, more Shigehiko than Shiguehiko), but we should give preference to articles that he himself authored since we can better surmise that he approved that in one form or another. The argument that since Shiguehiko is aberrant, it must be the result of his intention is an interesting claim, but one can counter that, while that may have been his intention to deal with French mispronunciation of his name, does not prove that that is what he intends in English. In other words, it is insufficient to counter the weight of evidence that "Shigehiko" is the majority form used in his own publications and at his own university or at the Library of Congress ([28]). The one reference in Riken does not counter the fact that the only reference I could find to "Shiguehiko" at the University of Tokyo just cites a French article ([29]) (compare with [30]). Finally, I don't understand what is referred to by the above phrase "by a strange coincidence" (do you think I am this other user?), but my impression was simply based on knowledge of the French translation of his Ozu book and of many of his articles in English. The objective fact that "Shiguehiko" was used in some (but apparently not all) of his French publishing, but not at all in his English publishing, simply gave me the impression he was dividing the use of his name. Not a scientific survey, just an impression. Perhaps he did change his preference over time, but we have no evidence of that either.Michitaro (talk) 22:43, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

do you think I am this other user? - no comment. JoshuSasori (talk) 23:23, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi. Although my IP address has changed, I'm the same person as 123.224.121.75.

I thought the use of "Shigehiko" on Hasumi's own publications was the real evidence. But it seems I was wrong and I should admit that "we currently have no absolute evidence of what Hasumi himself uses"...

Anyway, I'm glad that the community reached a solution. Thank you. 123.225.8.140 (talk) 11:27, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

You seem to enjoy wasting people's time. JoshuSasori (talk) 20:59, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi. Although my IP address has changed, I'm the same person as 123.224.121.75.

I don't understand why JoshuSasori said I "seem to enjoy wasting people's time".

• {{hasumi-shiguehiko-ozu-2003}} - Do we really need to use this template? Because (1) The template includes author link. So when we use it on Hasumi page, it appears boldfaced (like "Hasumi, Shiguéhiko", not "Hasumi, Shiguéhiko"). (2) The title "Eiga Kantoku Ozu Yasujiro" is wrong. "監督(Kantoku) 小津安二郎(Ozu Yasujiro)" is the right title. (3) 2003 edition is not the original/1st edition, but "増補決定版 (the revised edition)". The 1st edition was published in 1983. Those are the reasons why I replaced "{{hasumi-shiguehiko-ozu-2003}}" with "{{cite book|title=Kantoku Ozu Yasujiro|trans_title=Film Director Yasujiro Ozu|first=Shiguéhiko|last=Hasumi|year=2003|edition=Revised|publisher=Chikuma Shobo|language=Japanese|isbn=4-480-87341-4}}".
• Fnac reference - I don't think replacing "|title=Yazujiro Ozu
  Shiguéhiko Hasumi" with "|title=Yazujiro Ozu - Shiguéhiko Hasumi" and adding "|publisher=Fnac" are "time-wasting edits". Why do we have to start a new line between "|title=Yazujiro Ozu" and "Shiguéhiko Hasumi"? And unless I edit it, excess "[]" appears.
• "Monogatari Hihan Josetsu" - I replaced "Monogari hihan josetsu" with "Monogatari Hihan Josetsu" because "物語批判序説" is "Monogatari (物語) Hihan (批判) Josetsu (序説)".
• Extenal links - After reading "Example: El País, a Spanish-language newspaper from Madrid" at Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Linking#External links section, I guess replacing "Mube.jp, a website for which he serves as coordinator, containing many of his essays" with "Mube.jp - a website for which he serves as coordinator, containing many of his essays" is better. 123.224.120.222 (talk) 10:58, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi. Although my IP address has changed, I'm the same person as 123.224.121.75.

There's no reply from JoshuSasori for 48 hours. So I reverted his edit, except Michitaro's change at "External links" section. 123.224.204.188 (talk) 15:23, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

I don't understand why JoshuSasori said I "seem to enjoy wasting people's time". Don't you? JoshuSasori (talk) 22:04, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

I would recommend a bit more civility here (WP:CIVILITY). The IP user has noted errors in the template that JoshuSasori then subsequently corrected. That is not a waste of time, but correct behavior on both sides. Such productive exchange is what Wikipedia should be about. Michitaro (talk) 00:55, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, IP user. If you have more suggestions for the template, then please add them to the template talk page or edit it directly. Incidentally the reason for the template is that I read the Hasumi book (actually mostly the bio at the end of the book) and used it as a reference on various pages, such as Cathay Building, Yasujiro Ozu, The Flavor of Green Tea over Rice, etc. Having it as a template saves the maintenance effort of editing the same reference across multiple pages, if it needs to be appended (e.g. if the authorlink is moved from Shiguehiko Hasumi to Shigehiko Hasumi, as happened, or if there is an error in the title, as happened, or if it needs to be noted that it is the second edition, as happened). As far as I know it's preferable to use the title in romanized Japanese rather than Japanese lettering, so that's why it is done that way. At the moment, the biography on Yasujiro Ozu is very largely a precis of Hasumi's bio, plus some bits from Kaneto Shindo's book on screenwriting. JoshuSasori (talk) 05:34, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi. Although my IP address has changed, I'm the same person as 123.224.121.75.

Now I understand the reason why we are using the template Template:Hasumi-shiguehiko-ozu-2003. Thank you for your input. I'm going to edit it directly, but please see also Template talk:Hasumi-shiguehiko-ozu-2003. 123.224.106.77 (talk) 14:57, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

Suggested compromise

Here is a suggested resolution:

1. Move the article back to Shigehiko Hasumi
2. Alter the lead section to something like

   Shigehiko Hasumi (also styled Shiguehiko or Shigue'hiko) {hinongo} is a Japanese film critic ... blah blah

3. In the body of the article, not right at the top, add a note on the various stylings of his name. I'd suggest that we don't add the WP:SYNTH analysis that he has changed his preferences, or that he uses one or the other form when writing one or another language, without clear reliable sources. I'd also strongly suggest removing most of the rather dubious references currently placed after the names, since this was the product of a rather unfortunate debating style.

If you agree with this, please indicate below, and then if this is acceptable, we'll inform the admin who protected the page. JoshuSasori (talk) 00:02, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

That sounds like a very reasonable solution. Thanks. Michitaro (talk) 00:12, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Up to additional references, this is finished I think. JoshuSasori (talk) 13:03, 2 October 2012 (UTC)