Talk:Japanese family

-- Enochlau 08:54, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

Merger proposal

The following is a closed discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was Old and stale too much time has passed since the proposal, and the merge tag in the other page was remove in 2009[1]. Both articles are in a poor state and there is a good case for restarting the discussion.--Salix (talk): 18:22, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

As these two articles discuss different aspects of the same topic, overlapping in places, they really ought to be merged. I personally prefer that this article title (Japanese family structure) be kept over the other (Japanese family) as it sounds a bit more specific, and more academic (sociological, anthropological). "Japanese family" seems a wider, broader, far more vague subject. LordAmeth (talk) 06:30, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Of course merge the two! Chris (クリス • フィッチ) (talk) 04:51, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Merger proposal (2)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

The result was Not to merge. -- Happysailor ^(Talk) 22:26, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

---

I propose merging Ie (Japanese family system) into Japanese family structure. —Tokek (talk) 11:09, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Please clarify meaning

The following sentence does not make sense, grammatically or otherwise.

"Family members may die under no circumstances"

Neither does it appear to be related to what follows...

"(1) persons socially recognized as being related in the family line, chokkei, in which successors, their spouses and possible successors are included, and (2) members socially recognized as being outside family members, bokei, under which all other family members, including relatives and servants, are grouped (Ariga, 1954)"

Can someone please shed light on this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 38.99.136.114 (talk) 13:23, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Seconded... I came to ask exactly the same thing, and can't make sense of that part of the article either. --Svartalf (talk) 15:45, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Expert help needed

We need an expert here:

1) Some sentences in this article don't make sense - these are noted on the talk page. 2) This article seems to assume the Ie is the typical Japanese family. It doesn't seem to acknowledge more recent changes to the Japanese family. 3) There already is an article on the Ie system (Ie (Japanese family system)) Much of the content here should be there instead, probably. 4) Because of number 2, this article repeatedly contradicts the article Japanese Family.

It seems that this article should be merged - parts into Japanese Family, and other parts into Ie. This article could then redirect to Japanese family.

I myself don't know nearly enough about Japanese family systems to sort this out myself.

Dondegroovily (talk) 06:19, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Major rework needed

As it stands, this article needs a major revision. There is a number of sources at the bottom that aren't referenced in the text itself. Furthermore:

1. Removed the last two sentences of the History section. The statement that Japanese women could not select spouses in the early 20th century is as broad as it is questionable. Japan had already adopted a variation of the German civil code by 1896. Please clarify what you are trying to say and source this with appropriate literature. The part which follows it about this being a hindrance to individualism is empty conjecture and does not belong in an encyclopaedia article.
2. The statement about the "Domestic Relations and Inheritance Law" was also removed as it too is not sourced. The "rigidity of family controls" statement is also unclear. Furthermore, the koseki system was already established by 1871. See supplied source.
3. The introduction needs a rework depending on where this article should go.
4. Post WW2 section completely unreferenced. "equal inheritance by all children" does not make any sense.
5. In general, a plethora of unsubstantiated claims. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.219.106.53 (talk) 13:14, 6 February 2015 (UTC)