Difference between revisions of "Talk:Emperors of Japan"
From SamuraiWiki
Jump to navigationJump to searchm (Mythical emperors) |
m |
||
| Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
Is there a discernable point where the imperial line goes from myth to accepted reality? --[[User:Shogun|Kitsuno]] 11:18, 19 November 2006 (PST) | Is there a discernable point where the imperial line goes from myth to accepted reality? --[[User:Shogun|Kitsuno]] 11:18, 19 November 2006 (PST) | ||
| + | :Ojin is supposed to have been the first "historical" emperor, IIRC [[User:Nagaeyari|Nagaeyari]] 12:59, 19 November 2006 (PST) | ||
Revision as of 16:59, 19 November 2006
I think some of these need macrons, but I don't know which. Also, wouldn't it be a good idea to put the different "eras" in as well? --Kitsuno 19:48, 15 November 2006 (PST)
- Many of them needs macrons. I'll add those in later today. As for eras, I would have to research more--or I guess you could copy them from the S-A site. I deleted them out so I could get all their numbers. Nagaeyari 05:46, 16 November 2006 (PST)
Empresses
Can we get (Empress) listed next to the names of the empresses? It would definately help to show who is male and who is female. --Kitsuno 17:46, 18 November 2006 (PST)
- Sure, thing Nagaeyari 07:30, 19 November 2006 (PST)
Dating
I support using B.C., versus BCE. Since this is everyone's wiki, do you want to make a poll? Nagaeyari 07:30, 19 November 2006 (PST)
- BCE has been the standard so far, but I'll make a poll, then. --Kitsuno 10:04, 19 November 2006 (PST)
Mythical emperors
Is there a discernable point where the imperial line goes from myth to accepted reality? --Kitsuno 11:18, 19 November 2006 (PST)
- Ojin is supposed to have been the first "historical" emperor, IIRC Nagaeyari 12:59, 19 November 2006 (PST)
