Talk:Japanese art

In keeping with such article titles as History of Japan and Culture of Japan, shouldn't this be Art and architecture of Japan? -- Zoe

The question that should be asked is how much portion of Japan related article should be named hogehoge of Japan. For example, people of Japan or Japanese people? I think articles that are not linked directly from Japan article don't need to be named something of Japan. -- Taku 03:55 15 May 2003 (UTC)

The only reason why "This is different" is because you created it, and you're notorious for not cooperating. -- Zoe

And? -- Taku 03:58 May 15, 2003 (UTC)

And give us a reason why it shouldn't be changed. -- Zoe

I thought I already showed "I think articles that are not linked directly from Japan article don't need to be named something of Japan." -- Taku 04:01 May 15, 2003 (UTC)

Japanese art and architecture could be about Japanese-American architects. For clarity's sake, I think it should be moved to art and architecture of Japan. Tuf-Kat

I know what you mean but either one can be vague if we once started to worry about it. Art and architecture of Japan might be interpreted as Art (in general sense) and aritecture that is found in Japan. -- Taku 04:09 May 15, 2003 (UTC)

I second Taku. If one intended to mean Japanese-American architects, the title would be Japanese-American art and architecture, not just Japanese art and architecture. For Art (in general sense) and aritecture that is found in Japan, the title would be Art and architecture in Japan. Either Art and architecture of Japan or Japanese art and architecture means art of architecture of Japanese origin. I would like to know why Zoe is so annoyed by it. -- kt2 04:17 May 15, 2003 (UTC)