Good articleKimigayo has been listed as one of the Music good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Good topic starKimigayo is part of the Law Regarding the National Flag and National Anthem (Japan) series, a good topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
December 24, 2007Good article nomineeListed
October 17, 2010Good topic candidatePromoted
On this day...A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on November 3, 2022.
Current status: Good article

GA nom on hold[edit]

— Dihydrogen Monoxide (Review) 02:50, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Passed — Dihydrogen Monoxide (Review) 04:53, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kana script[edit]

The fifth line of the lyrics should run as いはほとなりて in the time-honoured traditional script which could be transcribed as "i`a`oto narite". Here the grave accent stands for medial 'h'. Both the medial 'h' and the letter 'w' are separators which are realized as a bilabial semi-vowel only when immediately followed by the 'a' sound. Particles used not to be separated from the preceding word. "いわおとなりて" is a result of prepocessing applied to the original script to make it conform to the romanization system synchronically conceived in the Meiji period. Talk:Romanization of Japanese#An Extended-Hepburn System is a panchronic system and does not need preprocessing. It is a transliteration system of the full set of Kana syllabary including ヂジ and ヅズ. Hepburn did not think it necessary to differentiat this affricate/fricative pair and provided only for affricates. So instead of ジ and ズ, ヂ and ヅ should have been given priority in Present-Day Kana Usage. You can see other examples of this system at [懐かしい唄の数々]--Kmns tsw (talk) 15:33, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Emperor never sings Kimi-ga-Yo in public[edit]

Zscout370 told me that the source should be showed. [1]

Because of the nature of this song, it is so natural that this is not the matter that is often mentioned. Every summer, on 15th August (JST), you can watch it on TV. Everybody who attends the end-of-the-war-memorial ceremony sings at him, and the Emperor, with his mouth shut, listens to the song.

I found an article about this[2]. Is this enough? --Griffin in a Door (talk) 11:18, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Finally got the encoding to work so I can see the text. Keep in mind that I am in the US, so I do not see the ceremonies on television like normal Japanese could. Anyways, I think with this source, we can make a one sentence statement saying "By tradition, the emperor doesn't sign the lyrics of Kimi ga Yo during public functions" and cite the URL. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 21:20, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That page uses Shift_JIS-coded character set. If your web browser has Shift_JIS encoder, you can try to correct Mojibake by selecting Shift_JIS. The key shortcut for the menu is....
Windows Internet Explorer 6 / 7: [Alt ][V][D]
Firefox 1.5 / 2.0: [Alt ][V][C]
Griffin, you had better at least say "written in Japanese" when you set a link to a Japanese page on an English page. Even IE 7 for Japanese installed to Windows XP (on my PC) failed to encode that page, resulting in Mojibake. --Dumpty-Humpty (talk) 15:14, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Back to the subject, well, I think we cannot expect the present Emperor to sing Kimi ga Yo especially at official peace memorial ceremonies in August, because this anthem has history of being used by militarists with propaganda to inspire people to 'war for the Emperor' in early Shōwa period. Don't you know that the present Emperor, for example, had memorial foreign visits to former battlefields including one called "Banzai Cliff"? And, I remember the late Emperor Shōwa acted faithfully both to the pacific constitution (平和憲法) and the Imperial House Law (皇室典範). Besides, Emperor of Japan customarily doesn't use in public honorific words, like traditional "kimi" in Kimi ga Yo. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dumpty-Humpty (talk • contribs) 15:28, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry to have failed to mention that Wayback Machine of Internet Archive has an unfavorable feature. The machine always incorrectly tells your browser that the char-set of the document is utf-8, no matter what it really is. So you need to set the char-set manually every time you get a non-alphabetical document.
Now Back to the subject. The point I think to be mentioned in wikipedia about Kimi ga yo is that "Kimi ga yo is the anthem that the head of the state never sings." or "Kimi ga yo is the anthem not to be sung by the head of the state." I think this fact implies much and is very important. --Griffin in a Door (talk) 05:10, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Honestly, now that I think about it, it is not important to add. So what if a head of state doesn't sing their national hymn. It happens a lot, so I don't think it is worthy to add. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 07:05, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV[edit]

This article seems a bit NPOV. Granted, I feel criticism should be included, but it seems like it was written with the sole purpose to weasel-word in piles of criticism. It's like writing five sections on the imperialism of "God save the Queen," or the Star Spangled Banner, which has had controversy over baseball fans being arrested for going to the bathroom during the song. Each of those much larger articles has no controversy section, so the large and pretty irrelevant criticism sections seem disproportionate. Nvgton (talk) 04:32, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Translation?[edit]

The Japanese page gives the translation as:
A thousand years of happy life be thine!
Live on,my Lord, till what are pebbles now,
By age united,to great rocks shall grow,
Whose venerable sides the moss doth line.
But this page gives it as:
May your reign
Continue for a thousand, eight thousand generations,
Until the pebbles
Grow into boulders
Lush with moss
And the Japanese page gives it [in Kanji and Kana] as:
君が代は
千代に八千代に
さざれ石の
巌（いわお）となりて
苔（こけ）のむすまで
While this page gives it as (which appears to be correct per the government page):
君が代は
千代に八千代に
さざれ石の
いわおとなりて
こけのむすまで
Could someone give a more accurate translation to either the Japanese page or this one? moocowsruletalk to moo 05:26, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Whether this is more accurate is debatable, but it's more literal:
May your reign last
1000 years; for eternity
Until the pebbles
Become boulders
Covered with moss
Exploding Boy (talk) 02:41, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
May your reign continue for a thousand, eight thousand generations,

Can this sentence be translated as "for infinite generations", "forever" or "for all eternity" (like the one above)? According to the Kami page, in Japanese the number "eight million" (八百万) is often used to imply infinity. And a thousand of eight thousand is exactly eight millions. -- DTRY (talk) 18:30, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Changing the article's title[edit]

I suggest we change the title to "Kimigayo" as it is spelled in Japan, An Illustrated Encyclopedia, Kodansha Ltd., 1993, p. 780 or in most Japanese English-language newspapers, f. ex. [3] or [4]. --Mycomp (talk) 07:58, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am not certain why this title was used, unless it had something to deal with the kanji used in the title. I'm not particular bent on what title is used; I just want to be sure we get it right. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 20:54, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It's at this title because it's three words, not one. "Kimi" is a pronoun, "ga" is a particle, and "Yo" is a noun. Kimigayo already redirects here, too. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 21:47, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, that explains it. Then, keep it at this title please. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 00:51, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, but the "kimi" in Kimigayo is not a pronoun, it is a 名詞 (noun), meaning "ruler", "sovereign". And why do you think the sources I mentioned above write it in one word? Because Kimigayo is simply the romanization of 君が代 not of 君　が　代. In Japanese, unlike in English, words are not separated, and Kimigayo is not English it is just the romanized version of the Japanese title. Japan, An Illustrated Encyclopedia uses "Kimigayo", The Japan Times does, Donald Keene does, Reischauer does, The Daily Yomiuri does, The Japan Times does, Asahi.com. does, etc. Google (I know, it is not always the best source) has 65.800 for "Kimigayo", and 23.500 for "Kimi ga yo". Which authoritative sources, if I may ask, do you have for "Kimi ga Yo" being the correct romanized spelling? (Why capital Y, by the way?)--Mycomp (talk) 04:32, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
My bad, that's what I meant. Noun. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 04:54, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There are a lot of places that use all sorts of romanizations which we don't here (such as "syo" instead of "sho"). We have a manual of Style on purpose, to cover instances such as this. It specifically says to romanize a word using capitalization rules used in English. "Yo" is a noun, and therefore it is capitalized in the title. If you have an issue with how romanization is done on Wikipedia, then you need to take the discussion to WT:MOS-JA. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 07:04, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I give/gave you several reliable sources where the spelling is "Kimigayo", like the 12.000-article Japan, An Illustrated Encyclopedia (with advisors such as Donald Keene, Edwin Reischauer, Eleanor Jorden etc.), the Japanese Foreign Ministry [5], The Japan Times [6], the BBC [7], The Daily Yomiuri [8], Asahi.com [9] The Japan Policy Research Institute [10] etc. What are your reliable sources for the "Kimi ga Yo" spelling, except for the Manual of style? Why is it then not "Hi no Maru" but Hinomaru? --Mycomp (talk) 00:44, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Still waiting for an answer to why it is Hinomaru but Kimi ga Yo. And BTW, I couldn't find where in the manual of Style it says that Kimi ga Yo would be the correct way to write 君が代. --Mycomp (talk) 06:35, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Since nothing happened, I just moved the page. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 07:34, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment[edit]

I made some changes to this p[age a month or so ago and I note that they have now been removed. I have a photo copy of the original notation for Kimigayo as it was written by Akimori Hayashi. It is part of a large collection of songs written by the court musicians (Gagaku) and predates Fenton's et als version. I included a copy of the original notation but I see now that this has been removed. I don't understand why. I spent several years in Japan studying Gagaku and this where I first learned of this history. I would like to know on what basis my entry was removed.

72.219.187.95 (talk) 12:42, 22 November 2010 (UTC)Robert Garfias[reply]

The edit and link was removed at http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kimigayo&diff=next&oldid=385390358, which was the next edit. As for why, I have no clue. I am looking at the link and see what I can pull from that. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 06:21, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Readings[edit]

Is it a coincidence that there are no Sino-Japanese words in the anthem, or was that the intention for the country's anthem? All the words are 和語 instead of 漢語, which seems atypical for Japanese: was that a hallmark of writing during the Heian period, even though "Chinese influences were at their height"?
Ulmanor (talk) 23:37, 6 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I honestly have no clue (and I agree with your edit). User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 00:32, 7 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
In 古今和歌集, it's common. Kimigayo is not an exception.61.213.84.139 (talk) 15:33, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Adopted in 1888?[edit]

The Richard Boyd/Tak-Wing Ngo footnote says that the anthem was adopted in 1888, but the text often says that the anthem was adopted for the first time in 1999. I'm wondering where the discrepancy lies, was it adopted in 1888 and formally abolished after WWII, only to be readopted in 1999? Was it only adopted as an imperial anthem (the anthem of the emperor) in 1888? Or did nothing at all happen in 1888 to the status of the anthem and Boyd/Ngo are mistaken? What exactly transpired in 1888?--Canuckguy (talk) 19:10, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Just going to the Japanese version of the page says "対外正式公布" next to 1888 in the Japanese info box, but I don't know enough Japanese to get a good handle on what that means. (Google translate says "promulgated official foreign", but that doesn't really tell me what that means as to what the status of the anthem was at the time.) --Canuckguy (talk) 19:16, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Give me some time and I will get you what I know and what I wrote. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 22:26, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The song was adopted for use as the national anthem when it comes to diplomatic ceremonies in 1888, so that is where one of the official adoption dates go. In the 1890's, the song was used in school ceremonies as the anthem but there was no official anthem until the passage of the 1999 law. There were times that other songs that were treated as anthems, but were not the anthems of a state until later. This was the case for the Star Spangled Banner. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 02:45, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of parody section[edit]

Good day,

would it be possible if the parody section could be removed?

The Wikipedia page is about a national anthem, and with a national anthem you also link a bit of respect. When you have in an international encyclopedia the description of the national anthem of Japan that includes an unimportant parody section, then it takes a bit the integrity and seriosity of the meaning away.

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.23.103.20 (talk) 20:16, 5 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Key[edit]

The reference to the key supposedly being C major said no such thing, and the sheet music doesn't indicate this in any way either. The melody is on the Dorian mode, but without a (minor or major) third. If anyone has a more accurate edit to make, feel free to make the necessary corrections. 72.93.173.72 (talk) 23:34, 15 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I just had to add a Controversy Section. It’s just too related to the Kimigayo.[edit]

The Japanese national anthem “Kimigayo” (君が代) is well-known that it caused controversy not only among Chinese and Koreans but also inside Japan. If you would like to talk about this, please head to my talk page and let’s discuss about it.HanSangYoon (talk) 19:35, 15 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Kimigayo. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add ((cbignore)) after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add ((nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot)) to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template ((source check)) (last update: 18 January 2022).

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 22:38, 29 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Kimigayo. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template ((source check)) (last update: 18 January 2022).

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:35, 6 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Kimigayo. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template ((source check)) (last update: 18 January 2022).

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:24, 10 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

What is "slated" supposed to mean in this sentence?[edit]

"Hashimoto Toru, the mayor of Osaka, slated [sic] the teachers as "It was good that criminals [teachers] who are intent on breaking the rules [of not singing the state anthem] have risen to the surface [public]"? Please clarify. Autodidact1 (talk) 00:20, 13 August 2019 (UTC) Deleted sentence; rewrite and clarify. Autodidact1 (talk) 17:19, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The use of "slated" is colloquial, specific to British English, and it's vulgar; that's why I deleted the sentence. Wikipedia is not the place for colloquial British English. See https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/slated Autodidact1 (talk) 16:51, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Need confirmation of translation[edit]

The second line, "千代に八千代に" should be more accurately translated as "For ever and ever" or "for eternity". Is it correct? Pichnat Thong (talk) 11:45, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No. "千代に八千代に" literally means ("For 1,000 years to 8,000 years"). 115.84.95.19 (talk) 02:12, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Categories