Category talk:Japanese

We can use this one, seeing as we don't have categories for Japanese writings, food, cars, trains, planes or what have you. We don't use differentiate between those, so this does no harm. Everyone will understand it is about Japanese individuals. People really are not that stupid. Nesty ^{Contact me!} 11:54, December 18, 2013 (UTC)

It's not a matter of stupidity, it's a matter of whether it's correct or not. We have Category:Englishmen, so for consistency's sake, are we going to change that to Category:English? (Answer: Unlikely.) If we have "Englishmen" we should have "Japanese persons" (since "Japanesemen" is even worse.) --Jasca Ducato (talk | contributions) 11:58, December 18, 2013 (UTC)

Englishmen is the term used to refer to English individuals. As in "What are you?" "I'm an Englishman". A Japanese would not say "I'm a Japanese person." He would just say "I'm (a) Japanese." Also, I'll be traveling home for the next few hours, so not really answering very quickly, if at all, until I'm home. Nesty ^{Contact me!} 12:01, December 18, 2013 (UTC)

Understood, I'm at work currently. As an Englishmen, I can assure you that is not what would be said; "I'm English" is as far it it would go, but that doesn't change the fact that the correct term is "Englishmen" (actually, it's "English person"). A Japanese person would say "I'm Japanese", I grant you, however that has no bearing on the fact that the term is Japanese persons/people. --Jasca Ducato (talk | contributions) 12:15, December 18, 2013 (UTC)

I think we should keep this...we do have a category for Category:Chinese, not Chinese peoples, so how is this any different?--Fragment ^-Animus- 12:42, December 18, 2013 (UTC)

Saying "we have x so we should keep y" is not a valid reason. The fact is it's incorrect, and quite obviously, if this change had not been contested then I would have also corrected Category:Chinese shortly thereafter. --Jasca Ducato (talk | contributions) 15:01, December 18, 2013 (UTC)