Talk:Jan-ken-pon

This redirect 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: 05:37, November 4, 2024 (JST, Reiwa 6) (Refresh)JapanWikipedia:WikiProject JapanTemplate:WikiProject JapanJapan-related articles

This redirect is supported by the Culture task force.

WikiProject Japan to do list:

Peer review: None
A-class review: None

Featured content candidates –

Articles: None
Pictures: None
Lists: None

Good article nominations: Vinland Saga (TV series), 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

Game theory

This redirect is part of WikiProject Game theory, an attempt to improve, grow, and standardize Wikipedia's articles related to Game theory. We need your help!
Join in | Fix a red link | Add content | Weigh inGame theoryWikipedia:WikiProject Game theoryTemplate:WikiProject Game theorygame theory articles

Rock, paper, scissors

Shouldn't both articles be merged into one? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.42.45.102 (talk) 02:17, 25 October 2007 (UTC) I agree - merge please. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.128.85.139 (talk) 21:21, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I added a merge tag earlier today. I'll do the merging provided no one objects, but I have to say, either way, there is really no reason there should be separate articles. With the two users above this statement in agreement, the merge tag is merely notification as a courtesy IMO. --Roehl Sybing (talk) 00:16, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kuma Ken

Anyone else realize that Kuma Ken is basically exactly the same thing as Janken? I've added a sub-section to the Kuma Ken section to point this out. 75.34.99.57 02:30, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mature Use of Janken

As an American who lived in Japan for several months, I was surprised to see how many decisions are made by this method from adults. Not that this is a verifiable "source" worthy for addition to an article, but just something I noticed. It led to a joke about the Japanese government secretly making all decisions by Janken. 165.190.89.145 03:52, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merge?

Can someone give me a good reason why I shouldn't post {{merge}} for Rock Paper Scissors? I mean, the Japanese significance of the game is interesting and all (and could be covered in a merged article), but essentially they're the same game, yes? - PhilipR 03:26, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, I would say that the Rock Paper Scissors article is already pretty long, and adding more material from this article might make it too long. Plus I think Janken deserves an article in its own right because of its significance in Japanese culture. Bobo12345 07:35, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with PhilipR. Janken/Rock-paper-scissors is basically the same game, and, if they're not going to be merged, there should be at least an article covering the game all over Asia. After all, the game is not unique to the Japanese and their culture. I know, for example, that the game is played in other parts of Asia with different names. IE, in parts of China, rock is the same, but paper and scissors are called a river and crane respectively. (The rock kills the crane, the crane drinks up the water, and the water washes away the stone.)Kogejoe (talk) 06:27, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If they are merged, then we would need to keep all information in both articles. That's a huge job. Additionally, what would be the title of the new article? I don't think a merge is a bad idea (though if they have different histories and just are the same game coincidentally, it could be difficult), but it definitely needs to be done correctly, not haphazardly and quickly. Luminifer (talk) 17:41, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ugly paragraph

Does anyone know what the "Guu Paa Janken" section is trying to say? Some of the spaces aren't even ASCII spaces, and are double-width. Never mind how impossible the language is. --86.41.122.179 19:31, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

-It is probably that a person from Japan or the Phillapines or something used a translator program. The paragraph should be fixed or deleted.

I think I can guess the meaning, and if I guess correctly, I think it is relevant to the article. However, as it stands, it is so horrible that I hereby move it from the article to a talk page subpage, /Guu Paa Janken.--Niels Ø (noe) 16:37, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I attempted to fix that shit up. Someone edit it for me; too lazy/tired to do anymore right now. 70.253.71.91 05:18, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

More than two players

I've often seen Janken played by more than two players. How exactly are winners determined? Could somebody who understands better Japanese than I do maybe look at the Japanese version of the article and translate the section 勝敗の決定 (the part about 3 players and more). --84.174.126.190 15:53, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pesos?

Just what is with all the pictures of Pesos replacing Paper on the page? I'd fix it, but I don't know how to revert.

It looks like the image file itself was replaced and I don't know how to revert an image. I've re-uploaded the original image from the image's history section

Err, I stupidly missed all the other instances of that image. I've fixed them all FyreFiend 05:35, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

images

the hand images are all the same (paper) and don't match the description. kwami (talk) 22:52, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It looks as if all of the other images were deleted at some point - the article needs to be cleaned up to work around that. We certainly shouldn't be using images to explain the rules of the game, for accessibility reasons. --McGeddon (talk) 17:32, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Article Title

The fact that I don't believe that Janken merits its own article notwithstanding, should this article be called "Jan-ken-pon"? Is that the actual full Japanese name of Janken? Certainly the Japanese wikipedia article is just called "Janken". --awh (Talk) 09:47, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merge

So is the debate on merging with Rock Paper Scissors now over? It seems to have petered out... (Strong support for merge, by the way.) Leushenko (talk) 14:38, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Seconding this. Why is this still not merged? The discussion is already on a talk page archive. 141.151.87.203 (talk) 21:21, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Meaning of 'Ken'

Does 'Ken' actually mean 'fist?' I've just checked on this translation website and although 'ken' has many meanings ('sword' probably being the best known), 'fist' isn't one of them. There are different Japanese words for 'fist'. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.159.222.35 (talk) 19:41, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Japanese characters can have several pronunciations depending on the context. The character for "fist"　拳 is pronounced "ken" in this context, but by itself is written as "kobushi". It can also be pronounced "gen" in some contexts.58.0.206.3 (talk) 14:50, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Get's!

This looks the same as Get's![1] Would it be worth a mention? I'm not sure which came first, or if it's just another Japanese fad that died off. But it was apparently huge at one time. DemonCleanerUK (talk) 00:27, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

merge?

where is the discussion on merge? why not merge yet? wshun (talk) 13:59, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's a lot of work to merge them correctly, without losing any information. I imagine no one wants to do it :) Luminifer (talk) 18:17, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done! Luminifer (talk) 04:15, 23 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Permission to Edit on WikiPedia?

Is there a reason edits I make keep being reverted? Is there like someone who owns this article now or something? The contributions I make are quite constructive. Are contributions now subject to what any one contributor thinks is "constructive" now?Kogejoe (talk) 06:12, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]