Milestone-Proposal talk:First Electric Railway in Japan, 1895

Advocates’ Checklist (Read Only; Do Not Edit)

1. Is the proposal for an achievement rather than for a person? If the citation includes a person's name, have the proposers provided the required justification for inclusion of the person's name?
2. Was the proposed achievement a significant advance rather than an incremental improvement to an existing technology?
3. Were there prior or contemporary achievements of a similar nature? If so, have they been properly considered in the background information and in the citation?
4. Has the achievement truly led to a functioning, useful, or marketable technology?
5. Is the proposal adequately supported by significant references (minimum of five) such as patents, contemporary newspaper articles, journal articles, or citations to pages in scholarly books? At least one of the references should be from a peer-reviewed scholarly book or journal article. The full text of the material, not just the references, shall be present. If the supporting texts are copyright-encumbered and cannot be posted on the ETHW for intellectual property reasons, the proposers shall email a copy to the History Center so that it can be forwarded to the Advocate. If the Advocate does not consider the supporting references sufficient, the Advocate may ask the proposer(s) for additional ones.
6. Are the scholarly references sufficiently recent?
7. Does the proposed citation explain why the achievement was successful and impactful?
8. Does the proposed citation include important technical aspects of the achievement?
9. Is the proposed citation readable and understandable by the general public?
10. Will the citation be read correctly in the future by only using past tense? Does the citation wording avoid statements that read accurately only at the time that the proposal is written?
11. Does the proposed plaque site fulfill the requirements specified in the Milestones Guidelines? (i.e. publicly accessible, appropriately related to the achievement, security, etc.)
12. Is the proposal quality comparable to that of IEEE publications?
13. Are any scientific and technical units correct (e.g., km, mm, hertz, etc.)? Are acronyms correct and properly upper-cased or lower-cased? Are the letters in any acronym explained in the title or the citation?
14. Are date formats correct as specified in Section 6 of Milestones Program Guidelines? Helpful Hints on Citations, plaque locations
15. Do the year(s) appearing in the citation fall within the range of the year(s) included at the end of the title?
16. Note that it is the Advocate's responsibility to confirm that the independent reviewers have no conflict of interest (e.g., that they do not work for a company or a team involved in the achievement being proposed, that they have not published with the proposer(s), and have not worked on a project related to the funding of the achievement). An example of a way to check for this would be to search reviewers' publications on IEEE Xplore.
17. Are the GPS coordinates correct and in decimal format?
18. 18. Is the proposed achievement controversial because of various reasons including but not limited to: ecological, environmental, social impact, political scandal, etc.? (A relatively simple Google search on the achievement by the advocate, combined with words such as "protest", "scandal", "environmental impact" should be sufficient to alert the advocate.)

Independent Expert Reviewers’ Checklist (Read only; do not edit)

1. Is suggested wording of the Plaque Citation accurate?
2. Is evidence presented in the proposal of sufficient substance and accuracy to support the Plaque Citation?
3. Does proposed milestone represent a significant technical achievement?
4. Were there similar or competing achievements? If so, have the proposers adequately described these and their relationship to the achievement being proposed?
5. Have proposers shown a clear benefit to humanity?
6. Are the supporting reference texts credible? Are there reference texts which ought to have been included in support of the proposal, but which are missing?
7. If personal name(s) in the plaque citation, has proposer(s) demonstrated unassailably that the criteria for name inclusion in criteria have been met? The criteria are described in Section 6 of the IEEE Milestones Guidelines https://ieeemilestones.ethw.org/Milestone_Guidelines_and_How_to_Propose_a_Milestone#Citation
   

In answering the questions above, the History Committee asks that independent expert reviewers apply a similar level of rigor to that used to peer-review an article, or evaluate a research proposal. Some elaboration is desirable. Of course the Committee would welcome any additional observations that you may have regarding this proposal.

Re: Independent Expert Reviewers’ Checklist (Read only; do not edit) -- Tomohiro Hase (talk) 11:59, 1 September 2025 (UTC)

The checklist for the Expert Review Report, comprising seven questions, was revised and published on August 29. Prior to this update, I, as the Advocate, had submitted a request to the Expert Reviewer on August 21 using the previous five-question format.

Submission and Approval Log (For staff use only)

Submitted date: 21 August 2025
Advocate approval date: 8 September 2025
History Committee approval date:
Board of Directors approval date:

Expert Reviewer's Report_1_Onoda uploaded by Advocate -- Tomohiro Hase (talk) 10:14, 29 August 2025 (UTC)

In my capacity as Advocate, I am submitting the attached Expert Review Report, which was received on August 29, 2025, from Dr. Shigeru Onoda of Railway Technical Research Institute.

---

Review Report: First Electric Railway in Japan, 1895

(1) Is suggested wording of the Plaque Citation accurate?

Yes, I have confirmed that the text on the plaque provides a concise explanation of the historical significance and characteristics of the Kyoto Electric Railway.

(2) Is evidence presented in the proposal of sufficient substance and accuracy to support the Plaque Citation?

Yes, the text is accurately written based on official documents and literature, covering the historical significance of the Kyoto Electric Railway and its contemporary context. Furthermore, drawing upon these historical materials, it provides detailed descriptions of the impact brought about by the Kyoto Electric Railway.

(3) Does proposed milestone represent a significant technical achievement?

Yes, the text specifically addresses the historical context, social impact, and influence on technological progress of the Kyoto Electric Railway, demonstrating its value as worthy of an IEEE Milestone.

(4) Were there similar or competing achievements? If so, have the proposers adequately described these and their relationship to the achievement being proposed?

Yes, the proposer accurately explains this from a technological historical perspective, comparing overseas examples and basing the argument on the historical context in which the Kyoto Electric Railway was realized and related technologies such as hydroelectric power generation.

(5) Have proposers shown a clear benefit to humanity?

Yes, Japan's electric railways achieved a unique development even on a global scale. Initially starting with tramways like the Kyoto Electric Railway, they later developed EMUs and spread these nationwide. The Shinkansen is one such example. The proposer also accurately explains the contributions electric railways made to society.
Conclusion
As “First Electric Railway in Japan, 1895”, the Kyoto Electric Railway possesses extremely significant value as a technical and historical heritage. We recommend it as an IEEE Milestone that greatly contributed to the development and spread of electric railways.

－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－
Shigeru Onoda, Dr. Eng.
Advisor, Railway Technical Research Institute
Member, Expert Panel, Cultural Affairs Council, Agency for Cultural Affairs
Fellow, Japan Society of Civil Engineers
－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－

[Advocate remarks] The Railway Technical Research Institute (RTRI), founded in 1986, is Japan’s leading rail technology center. Located in Kokubunji, Tokyo, it employs over 500 researchers. RTRI conducts advanced studies in railway safety, infrastructure, and vehicle systems, contributing to innovation across Japan’s rail industry.
Dr. Onodera retired from his position as a researcher at RTRI and is currently serving as an advisor to RTRI.

Expert Reviewer's Report_2_Katou uploaded by Advocate -- Tomohiro Hase (talk) 15:58, 2 September 2025 (UTC)

IEEE Milestone Review Report:
Milestone Proposal: Japan’s First Electric Railway, 1895

(1) Is suggested wording of the Plaque Citation accurate?

Yes. The proposed citation is accurate. It correctly states that the Kyoto Electric Railway began operation in 1895 as Japan’s first electric railway, and it clearly identifies the two lines: Kyoto Station to Fushimi, and Kyoto Station to Nanzenji. The plaque text is concise and fact-based, and it aligns with the historical records presented in the proposal.

(2) Is evidence presented in the proposal of sufficient substance and accuracy to support the Plaque Citation?

Yes. The proposal includes substantial supporting documentation. The “Historical Significance” section states:

This statement is corroborated by sources such as Tomosaburo Onishi’s Kyoto Electric Railway Story (Railway Pictorial, No. 356, pp. 30–37, December 1978), as well as other contemporary engineering reports. These references substantiate both the opening date and the pioneering status of the railway in Japan. Therefore, the evidence is both sufficient and accurate.

(3) Does proposed milestone represent a significant technical achievement?

Yes. The Kyoto Electric Railway was not only Japan’s first electric railway, but also the starting point for the nationwide adoption of electric traction technology. As the proposal notes:

This achievement laid the foundation for Japan’s railway technology development, ultimately positioning the country as a global leader in railway engineering—particularly in high-speed rail. Thus, the project represents a significant milestone in the electrification of transportation and the modernization of infrastructure.

(4) Were there similar or competing achievements? If so, have the proposers adequately described these and their relationship to the achievement being proposed?

Yes. The proposal acknowledges that electric railways were already in operation overseas, including Siemens’ demonstration railway in Germany (1879), the Berlin line (1881, the world’s first practical electric railway), the Richmond Union Passenger Railway in the United States (1888), and other European systems. However, as stated in the “Justification of Uniqueness” section:

This distinction is significant. Japanese engineers adapted foreign technologies—such as track gauge and power supply systems—to local conditions, thereby initiating domestic railway electrification. The proposal appropriately explains these relationships and contextualizes the achievement.

(5) Have proposers shown a clear benefit to humanity?

Yes. The proposal outlines both social and technical benefits. As described:

Moreover, as a pioneer of electric transport in Japan, it directly influenced nationwide adoption, reduced air pollution, and enabled mass urban transit throughout the 20th century. Its long-term contributions to mobility, air quality, and urban growth clearly demonstrate benefits to humanity.

Conclusion
The opening of the Kyoto Electric Railway in 1895 marked a groundbreaking event in the history of transportation in Japan and Asia, as the region’s first commercial electric railway. The proposal presents an accurate plaque citation, robust supporting documentation, and a clear recognition of comparative achievements. It demonstrates both technical significance and societal impact.

Recommendation
I strongly recommend that this proposal be approved as an IEEE Milestone.

Yukihiro Katou
Director, Japan Railfan Club

[Advocate remarks] The Japan Railfan Club, founded in 1953, is a nationwide group of train enthusiasts. Based in Tokyo, it has nearly 3,000 members. Activities include publishing Rail Fan magazine, hosting railway tours, and awarding the Blue Ribbon and Laurel Prizes to outstanding Japanese train designs each year.

Expert Reviewer's Report_3_Okamoto uploaded by Advocate -- Tomohiro Hase (talk) 02:37, 6 September 2025 (UTC)

Review Report for IEEE Milestone Proposal: First Electric Railway in Japan, 1895

Reviewer: Ken-ichiro Okamoto
Manager and Curator, The exhibit and collection department, Kyoto Railway Museum
Date: September 6, 2025

(1) Is suggested wording of the Plaque Citation accurate?

Yes. The proposed plaque citation is accurate and concise. It generally identifies the Kyoto Electric Railway, inaugurated in 1895, as Japan’s first commercial electric railway. While it is true that the Kyoto Electric Railway utilized hydroelectric power, the expression “pioneering” is inappropriate. Furthermore, instead of describing it as “the foundation of Japan’s railway electrification,” it would be more accurate to characterize it as “the forerunner of Japan’s electric railways.” The wording is historically and technically sound, and well within the IEEE guidelines for plaque text.

(2) Is evidence presented in the proposal of sufficient substance and accuracy to support the Plaque Citation?

Yes. The proposal provides substantial and well-documented evidence to support the citation. The “Historical Significance” section references primary sources and scholarly works that confirm the railway’s inauguration date, its use of electric traction powered by hydroelectric energy, and its influence on subsequent developments in Japan’s rail infrastructure. The inclusion of archival photographs, technical descriptions, and contextual analysis further strengthens the credibility of the proposal.

(3) Does proposed milestone represent a significant technical achievement?

Yes. The Kyoto Electric Railway represents a landmark technical achievement in Japan’s modernization. It was among the earliest implementations of electric traction in Asia and demonstrated the feasibility of integrating hydroelectric power into urban transit systems. This innovation influenced urban development and transportation within Japan and paved the way for the expansion of suburban transit. The technical integration of electric motors, power distribution, and rail infrastructure in 1895 was a forward-looking accomplishment for its time.

(4) Were there similar or competing achievements? If so, have the proposers adequately described these and their relationship to the achievement being proposed?

Yes. The proposal acknowledges earlier electric railways in the United States and Europe, such as the Richmond Union Passenger Railway (1888), and clearly distinguishes the Kyoto Electric Railway as the first of its kind in Japan and one of the earliest in Asia. The proposers have adequately contextualized the achievement by comparing it to global developments and emphasizing its regional significance and unique reliance on hydroelectric power.

(5) Have proposers shown a clear benefit to humanity?

Yes. The proposal demonstrates that the Kyoto Electric Railway contributed to the evolution of safe, efficient, and sustainable urban transportation in Japan. It fostered public trust in electric transit, reduced reliance on horse-drawn carriages, and promoted technological innovation. The long-term societal benefits include improved mobility, reduced environmental impact, and the establishment of a model for future electrified rail systems.

Conclusion
Based on the evidence and analysis presented, I strongly recommend the recognition of the “First Electric Railway in Japan, 1895” as an IEEE Milestone. This achievement is of profound technical and historical significance and exemplifies the spirit of innovation and public service that the IEEE Milestone program seeks to honor.

[Advocate remarks] The Kyoto Railway Museum, opened in 2016 by JR West, evolved from the Umekoji Steam Locomotive Museum. It spans 30,000 m² and showcases over 50 trains, including steam locomotives and Shinkansen. Interactive exhibits, simulators, and Japan’s largest railway diorama highlight its immersive experience.

Re: Expert Reviewer's Report_3_Okamoto uploaded by Advocate -- Tomohiro Hase (talk) 07:36, 7 September 2025 (UTC)

Dear Mr. Okamoto
I appreciate your courteous and constructive feedback on the citation. I have conveyed your comments to the proposers and asked that they make appropriate revisions accordingly.
Advocate

Expert Reviewer's Report_4_Tsunashima uploaded by Advocate -- Tomohiro Hase (talk) 02:47, 6 September 2025 (UTC)

Review Report for IEEE Milestone Proposal: First Electric Railway in Japan, 1895

This report provides a review of the IEEE Milestone proposal for the First Electric Railway in Japan, 1895, based on the content of the official proposal document.

(1) Is suggested wording of the Plaque Citation accurate?

Yes. The proposed plaque citation accurately summarizes the achievement, highlighting its pioneering role as Japan's first commercial electric railway, its use of hydroelectric power, and its foundational impact on the nation's modern electric rail industry. The wording is concise and effective for a plaque.

(2) Is evidence presented in the proposal of sufficient substance and accuracy to support the Plaque Citation?

Yes. The "Historical Significance" section provides substantial evidence to support the citation. It details the railway's inauguration in 1895, its connection to the Keage Hydroelectric Power Station, and its broader role in fostering urban transit and public confidence in electric technology. The proposal references external documentation and sources to corroborate its claims, such as its status as a groundbreaking achievement and its influence on later rail development like the Shinkansen. This content, presented in the proposal, is also described in the 150-Year History of Japanese Railways (published by KOTSU SHIMBUNSHA CO., LTD., 2025, ISBN 978-4-330-00825-7, in Japanese) and is recognized as a significant achievement.

(3) Does proposed milestone represent a significant technical achievement?

Yes. The Kyoto Electric Railway represents a significant technical achievement for several reasons. It was not just a new form of transportation but a complete technical system. Its most notable technical accomplishment was the successful integration of electric traction into urban transit and, crucially, its operation using renewable hydroelectric power. This demonstrated an early commitment to sustainable energy sources and required advanced engineering to link the Keage Hydroelectric Power Station with the railway's power needs. The project also overcame significant challenges related to electrical systems, track construction, and seamless integration into a dense urban environment, setting a global precedent for electric railway systems in historic cities.

(4) Were there similar or competing achievements? If so, have the proposers adequately described these and their relationship to the achievement being proposed?

Yes. The proposal's "Features Setting This Work Apart from Similar Achievements" section adequately addresses this question. It clarifies that while electric railways existed elsewhere, the Kyoto Electric Railway was unique as the first commercial electric railway in Japan and one of the earliest in Asia. It also highlights the pioneering integration with hydroelectric power and its unique deployment in a culturally sensitive urban setting, which set it apart from other contemporary achievements and showcased its unique technical and logistical innovations.

(5) Have proposers shown a clear benefit to humanity?

Yes. The proposers have demonstrated a clear and lasting benefit to humanity. The railway's success built public trust in electric transport, which led to widespread adoption across Japan and the development of one of the world's most advanced rail networks. This innovation reduced pollution, improved urban mobility, and became a model for efficient and sustainable public transportation. Its principles of efficiency and reliability continue to shape Japan's transportation infrastructure today, offering a valuable historical example of how technological innovation can improve quality of life and support societal progress.

Conclusion
The "First Electric Railway in Japan, 1895" is a deserving candidate for an IEEE Milestone. Its technical achievements—particularly the pioneering integration of electric traction with hydroelectric power—and its significant historical impact on Japan's urban development and technological progress make it a milestone of enduring value. I strongly recommend this proposal for approval.

Hitoshi Tsunashima, Ph. D.
Professor, College of Industrial Technology, Nihon University
Deputy Director, Professor, Centre for Railway Research

Expert Reviewer's Report_5_kondo uploaded by Advocate -- Tomohiro Hase (talk) 07:18, 7 September 2025 (UTC)

Review Report for IEEE Milestone Proposal
Milestone Title: First Electric Railway in Japan, 1895

Reviewer: Keiichiro Kondo, Ph.D.
Professor of Department of Electrical engineering and Bio science, School of Advanced Science and Engineering, Waseda University.
Professional Engineer (PE) in Japan (Mechanical Society and Technical Management Society),

[Advocate remarks] Research topics of Professor Kondo are power electronics, motor drive, and their application to railway and automobile.

Date: 7th、Sept, 2025

(1) Is the suggested wording of the Plaque Citation accurate?

Yes. The proposed plaque citation is both accurate and concise. It correctly identifies the Kyoto Electric Railway as Japan’s first commercial electric railway, inaugurated in 1895. The citation also appropriately highlights the use of hydroelectric power appropriately and the foundational role in the beginning era of electric railway in Japan. The wording adheres to IEEE guidelines and is both historically and technically sound.

(2) Is evidence presented in the proposal of sufficient substance and accuracy to support the Plaque Citation?

Yes. The proposal presents robust, well-documented evidence to support the citation. The “Historical Significance” section references both primary sources and scholarly research, confirming the railway’s inauguration date, its electric traction system powered by hydroelectric energy, and its influence on Japan’s electrical railway system development. The inclusion of archival photographs, technical schematics, and contextual historical analysis enhances the credibility and depth of the submission.

(3) Does the proposed milestone represent a significant technical achievement?

Yes. The Kyoto Electric Railway represents a major technical milestone in the modernization of Japan’s transportation infrastructure. It was among the earliest applications of electric railway traction in Asia and served as a model for integrating hydroelectric power into urban transit systems. The successful implementation of electric traction motors, electrical power collection, electrical power feeding system, and supporting rail infrastructure in 1895 marked a pioneering effort that contributed to Japan’s later innovations in rail technology, including the Shinkansen.

(4) Were there similar or competing achievements? If so, have the proposers adequately described these and their relationship to the achievement being proposed?

Yes. The proposal acknowledges earlier electric railway developments in Europe and the United States—most notably the Richmond Union Passenger Railway (1888). It clearly differentiates the Kyoto Electric Railway as the first commercial electric railway in Japan and one of the earliest in Asia. The proposers effectively place the achievement in a global context, emphasizing its regional significance and unique reliance on hydroelectric power.

(5) Have the proposers shown a clear benefit to humanity?

Yes. The proposal demonstrates that the Kyoto Electric Railway contributed meaningfully to the evolution of urban transit in Japan. By replacing horse-drawn carriages with electric railway vehicle, it offered a cleaner, safer, and more efficient mode of urban transportation. This innovation encouraged public trust in electric traction system and stimulated technological advancements. Long-term societal benefits include improved urban mobility, reduced environmental impact, and the establishment of a essential technologies for Japan’s modern electrical railway traction systems.

Conclusion
Based on the evidence and analysis presented, I strongly recommend approval of the “First Electric Railway in Japan, 1895” as an IEEE Milestone. This achievement holds considerable historical and technical significance and exemplifies the spirit of innovation and societal contribution that the IEEE Milestone Program seeks to honor.

Advocate’s Recommendation -- Tomohiro Hase (talk) 07:29, 7 September 2025 (UTC)

Advocate's Recommendation for the IEEE Milestone #2025-23 “First Electric Railway in Japan, 1895”

September 7, 2025

Dear IEEE History Committee,

I am honored to be an advocate for the Milestone Proposal #2025-23, “First Electric Railway in Japan, 1895”.

URL to Proposal:
https://ieeemilestones.ethw.org/Milestone-Proposal:First_Electric_Railway_in_Japan,_1895

(1) Review:

I invited five independent experts in the field to conduct a detailed technical review of the proposal. I asked the expert reviewers the following five questions:

Q1: Is the suggested wording of the Plaque Citation accurate?

Q2: Is the evidence presented in the proposal of sufficient substance and accuracy to support the Citation?

Q3: Does the proposed milestone represent a significant technical achievement?

Q4: Were there similar or competing achievements? If so, have the proposers adequately described these and their relationship to the achievement being proposed?

Q5: Have the proposers shown a clear benefit to humanity?

I have uploaded the five expert reviewers’ reports to the ETHW website at the following URL to expert reviewer’s reports:
https://ieeemilestones.ethw.org/Milestone-Proposal_talk:First_Electric_Railway_in_Japan,_1895

Based on my reading of the five expert reviewer reports, I have received positive ratings from all, indicating their agreement with the proposal's appropriateness for the Milestone.

(2) Advocate’s Checklist:

Below is my checklist with responses:

1. Is the proposal for an achievement rather than for a person? If the citation includes a person's name, have the proposers provided the required justification for inclusion of the person's name? <Yes>

2. Was the proposed achievement a significant advance rather than an incremental improvement to existing technology? <Yes>

3. Were there prior or contemporary achievements of a similar nature? If so, have they been properly considered in the background information and the citation? <Yes>

4. Has the achievement truly led to a functioning, useful, or marketable technology? <Yes>

5. Is the proposal adequately supported by significant references (minimum of five) such as patents, contemporary newspaper articles, journal articles, or citations to pages in scholarly books? At least one reference should be from a peer-reviewed scholarly book or journal article. The full text of the material, not just the references, must be present. If the supporting texts are copyright-encumbered and cannot be posted on the ETHW for intellectual property reasons, the proposers shall email a copy to the History Center so it can be forwarded to the Advocate. If the Advocate does not consider the supporting references sufficient, the Advocate may ask the proposer(s) for additional ones. <Yes>

6. Are the scholarly references sufficiently recent? <Yes>

7. Does the proposed citation explain why the achievement was successful and impactful? <Yes>

8. Does the proposed citation include important technical aspects of the achievement? <Yes>

9. Is the proposed citation readable and understandable by the general public? <Yes>

10. Will the citation be read correctly in the future by only using past tense? Does the citation wording avoid statements that read accurately only at the time the proposal is written? <Yes>

11. Does the proposed plaque site fulfill the requirements? <Yes>

12. Is the proposal quality comparable to that of IEEE publications? <Yes>

13. Are any scientific and technical units correct (e.g., km, mm, hertz, etc.)? Are acronyms correct and properly upper-cased or lower-cased? Are the letters in any acronym explained in the title or the citation? <Yes>

14. Are date formats correct as specified in Section 6 of Milestones Program Guidelines? Helpful Hints on Citations, plaque locations. <Yes>

15. Do the year(s) appearing in the citation fall within the range of the year(s) included at the end of the title? <Yes>

16. Note that it is the Advocate's responsibility to confirm that the independent reviewers have no conflict of interest (e.g., that they do not work for a company or a team involved in the achievement being proposed, that they have not published with the proposer(s), and have not worked on a project related to the funding of the achievement). An example of a way to check for this would be to search reviewers' publications on IEEE Xplore. <Yes>

(3) Advocate’s Comment and Conclusion:

I received satisfactory peer review results from five experts in the field. Their reports and discussions were very useful for my decision as an advocate for Milestone #2025-23 “First Electric Railway in Japan, 1895”.

1. Citation:

The five expert reviewers confirmed the citation’s accuracy and that the contents are supported by evidence, as judged by their responses to questions Q1 and Q2. As an advocate, I share the same judgment as the reviewers.

2. Technical Significance and Historical Value:

The five expert reviewers provided detailed reviews of questions Q3 and Q4. They acknowledged the historical significance. As an advocate, I share their judgment.

3. Benefit to Humanity:

All five expert reviewers provided positive comments, as judged by their responses to question Q5. I concur with their judgment.

4. Advocate’s Conclusion:

All five expert reviewers strongly recognized and supported the proposal, deeming it worthy of the IEEE Milestone recognition. After careful consideration of both the proposal and the expert reviewers’ reports, I strongly recommend the proposal, #2025-23 “First Electric Railway in Japan, 1895”, for the IEEE Milestone.

Best regards,

Dr. Tomohiro Hase, IEEE Fellow
Advocate for Milestone #2025-23, IEEE History Committee

Milestone Chair Review -- Coronath (talk) 23:41, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

I have reviewed the First Electric Railway in Japan 1895 Milestone proposal and am happy to approve it! Thank you,

Keith Moore Chair, Milestones Committee 2025

Thank you for the reviews. -- Zephyrus00jp (talk) 01:25, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

This is Chiaki Ishikawa, one of the co-proposers.

We would like to thank the reviewers for the time and attention to write the reviews for this milestone proposal.

We modified the citation slightly according to the review from Mr. Okamoto on Sept 6. (Sorry I forgot to report this in the discussion page.)

Again, we appreciate the reviews very much.

Chiaki Ishikawa, one of the co-proposers.