Talk:Naidaijin

Japan: Royalty & nobility Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Japan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Japan-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project, participate in relevant discussions, and see lists of open tasks. Current time in Japan: 04:15, May 6, 2024 (JST, Reiwa 6) (Refresh)JapanWikipedia:WikiProject JapanTemplate:WikiProject JapanJapan-related articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is supported by the Royalty and nobility task force.

WikiProject Japan to do list:

Peer review: Kako River (Japan)
A-class review: None

Featured content candidates –

Articles: None
Pictures: None
Lists: None

Good article nominations: Pure Japanese, Vinland Saga (TV series), Japanese destroyer Ume (1944), Mai Fujisawa, Godzilla Minus One
Add requested images to articles that need them.
Pages for Deletion: Participate in Japan-related deletion discussions.
Improve and expand Japan-related stubs.
Create some requested articles.
Help translate an article from the Japanese Wikipedia into English.
Assess unassessed articles

Merge proposal[edit]

This is clearly a duplicated article and should be merged with Lord Keeper of the Privy Seal of Japan. Bueller 007 (talk) 07:30, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not clearly duplicative. Not appropriate for merging at this time. --Ooperhoofd (talk) 13:38, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Removing merge tag -- probably premature for now.--Ooperhoofd (talk) 21:18, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just offering additional context for removing merge tag because "[t]he office of the Lord Keeper of the Privy Seal was identical with the old Naidaijin only in name."[1] and [2]

Under the circumstances, perhaps it will be perceived as helpful if this exchange (originally here at Talk:Naidaijin) is redundantly copied at Talk:Lord Keeper of the Privy Seal of Japan? --Ooperhoofd (talk) 20:31, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Arguably constructive strategy[edit]

A dispute about this article has arisen.

The diagram at the right may prove helpful in focusing on specific areas of disagreement? --Tenmei (talk) 19:23, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]