Well, I placed a comment in what I suppose is not the right location for discussion and that comment was asking why there was no mention in this JREF article to the middle of the 6th century as we are informed by the National Diet Library should be the start of any essay concerning calendars in this country?
And I cannot seem to find a tool that allows me to move a quote from that comments section to this thread, so I'll use an image to show you what I wrote, if it is you don't have time to go find the comments section for that article.
Thank for your feedback, @TGI-ECT, it is much appreciated!
As for now, we have focused on describing the various calendar systems that were/are used in Japan. I'll be glad to add more historical details at a later stage. By the way, many of our articles are updated quite frequently and evolve over long periods of time.
The comment section, as well as the discussion threads, constitute two parallel systems of feedback. Whether this solution is beneficial to users remains to be seen.
I am quite happy to receive feedback as it proves that some of our articles are actually being read. What we'd appreciate even more are contributions and article submissions by our member base.
Please help us expand our article and review sections.
The title using the vocabulary "traditional" and the first sentence referring to a switch to the Gregorian calendar in 1873 would lose points on a term paper, for starters.
Then we see this second sentence in the first paragraph:
"Before 1873, however, Japan used a lunar calendar that was completely distinct from the solar calendars first developed by the Ancient Egyptians and the Romans."
That seems a very crafty way of insinuating that the "traditional Japanese calendar" in some way, shape, or, form equates with that of the ancient Egyptians. But according to the National Diet Library the Japanese didn't even have a calendar recognized by the royal authority in Japan until at some point in the 6th century.
Of course, you can blast that manner of thinking with all sorts of fancy phrasing of this or that idea and state that I am off my rocker and so please leave the room, but what I am writing as an analysis could just as easily be supported with that of opposite fancy phrasing and all that.
Then we do not see any reference at all to anything related to the history of the Japanese calendar and the mid-6th century and serious concerns of other elements arise in certain scholarly quarters.
I feel very odd offering a sort of thank you for the edits that were done, because I wasn't exactly really polite in my style, but to not acknowledge the changes would also be impolite --- so I'll err on the side of trying to be polite and offer a thank you.
Definitely fine editing work, for sure.
By the way, about that idea of contributing something --- I've been doing some research around JREF and I don't see any proper disaster advice thread. I thought of that when I read that September first post/article/something. Of course, we see that every year on September first, but it is the first time I decided to see what you folks have in the way of actual advice/ideas. Like one big error I have been noticing even government folks make --- all you ever read about is how much drinking water one should have. That isn't quite right. What about water to treat minor cuts or even bad cuts, or scrapes or whatever for medical needs. Seems folks don't think about extra water for other than drinking.
Okay, back on topic --- those changes are mighty cool --- for a 60s/70s style assessment.