Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Japan/Mythology task force/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4

Jmyth infobox

Good idea for a wikiproject! One suggestion I have off the bat is that we compile a list of references people can use to write articles on Japanese mythology. I've written quite a few articles on Japanese folklore myself (unfortunately, most before I became a convert of WP:CITE), but the only references I've been able to find have been web pages. A list of books would be incredibly useful!

Secondly, I've got to say that I don't particularly care for Template:Jmyth infobox. I saw it on yōkai, and it just looks too distracting as a sidebar-style thing. Besides, aren't there thousands of kami? How will the infobox ever be able to display them all? If it stays, it should probably be a horizontal template that goes along the bottom of the article. That'd make it less obtrusive. Thoughts? — Amcaja 04:17, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

Heh, if you think it's bad now, you should have seen it initially. The person who created it had some color schematic that was incomprehensible, and when I turned it into a template, I should have fixed it a lot earlier.
As for the template itself, I figured it was going to be transitional, and that we would eventually replace the names there with topical lists (again, look at an example of how the infobox used to look for what it was like). I think we could probably create supplemental horizontal boxes for the bottom as well, but that's just me. Hopefully, someone else has some ideas on that as well.
Lastly, I've been working on a list of references; the problem is that most of them are in Japanese, and most of the ones that aren't are either Lafcadio Hearn books or translated manga. Still, I'm hoping to have something in the next few days, so if you've got anything, feel free to start that section up. ^_^--み使い Mitsukai 04:38, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
I know of at least one. I'll add it when I get home from work. — Amcaja 14:13, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
One thing about the infobox that bugs me (it looks fine and isn't all that distracting to me) is that it pushes any right-justified pictures down below it. I don't know if there's anything that can be done about that, but it would be nice if right-justified pictures were simply lined up on the edge of the box instead of being pushed below it. Also, is it cool to add or mark off things that have been done on the to-do list on the project page? MikeDockery 11:06, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
That's just it. Right-justified infoboxes should have something to say about the article in question, not be general "Here are a bunch of related topics" call-outs. Like I said, I'd have no problem with a bottom infobox, as it would not be so prominently displayed in the article. And it would also solve the problem of messing up right-justified images. (None of this is intended to trivialize the work done by Mitsukai, mind you. I just have strong feelings about this infobox, for some reason. :)) — Amcaja 14:13, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
See Template:Norse mythology for the kind of thing I'm talking about. (Also note Norse mythology uses two infoboxes, the right-justified one being an example of what ours will look like if we let it get out of hand. :) — Amcaja 14:54, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
Looking at the Norse mythology template, I can see what you mean. Too many additions and it will get way out of hand. Maybe we should think about having just a horizontal infobox at the bottom. I personally think the right-justified one looks good on pages...it's prominent and it's useful, but I take the point that it can clutter up pages and mess up the formatting of an article, which wouldn't be an issue with a horizontal box. Also, the new to-do template and news / announcements section are great. MikeDockery 22:05, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
I might take a stab at creating a horizontal infobox based on the Norse mythology one, just so we can compare the two and make a decision. I will work on it in my Sandbox, so if anyone wants to help you can mess around with it there as well. MikeDockery 02:31, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
I don't see a problem with a To-do list (in fact, probably have to create one). As for the pictures issue, I think there will probably have to be some rearranging done on some pages or such, unless someone has a better idea of how to handle it.--み使い Mitsukai 13:54, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
It'd be cool to set up a to-do template like the one over at Wikipedia:Africa-related regional notice board. What do y'all think? — Amcaja 14:13, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
I went ahead and set this up. Didn't realize Template:To do was multipurpose/adaptable! — Amcaja 15:11, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Categories

Another goal of ours ought to be sorting out the relevant categories. When do you use Category:Japanese folklore? When do you use Category:Japanese mythology? Should either or both of these be a subcategory of Category:Religion in Japan? If not, when is that category appropriate? An article like segaki is a good example of something that blurs these lines.

The fact that Japanese folklore and mythology are so integrated makes me wonder if we should merge the two categories completely. The oni is a creature of both mythology and folklore, as is the tengu, and the gaki, and the rokurokubi, etc. Perhaps we should just migrate everything to Category:Japanese mythology and nominate Category:Japanese folklore for deletion? Or vice versa? — Amcaja 14:13, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Further note: I just checked, and currently Category:Japanese mythology is a subcategory of Category:Japanese folklore, and very little thought seems to have gone into which articles belong to which. A merger seems in order here. — Amcaja 14:15, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

I agree. The categories were set up long before anyone thought of doing this project, and apparently have been done haphazardly. Perhaps taking it to WP:CFD might be in order, so we can then break it up along more realistic lines.--み使い Mitsukai 14:23, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I've analyzed the distinction made between folklore and mythology in other categorization schemes. Deleting Category:Japanese folklore seems like a bad idea in light of what I've found. Here's the rough breakdown:
So here's my proposal:
Thoughts? — Amcaja 14:54, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
We're also going to have to look at Category:Shinto kami, Category:Japanese gods and Category:Japanese goddesses. This looks like it was done rather haphazardly as well.--み使い Mitsukai 16:04, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
Agreed. I almost started adding {{Asia-myth-stub}} to a bunch of Shinto god and goddess articles then stopped myself. I'm not sure what the protocol is on labeling something a part of "mythology" when it's part of a living religion. My personal preference would have a category tree like this:

Religion in Japan

Japanese mythology
Japanese deities
Japanese gods | Japanese goddesses | Shinto kami

Religion in Japan

Shinto
Shinto kami
In this scheme, we're acknowledging various deities' roles in Japanese mythology, but we're also listing them as part of the living religion (Category:Religion in Japan and its subcategories). Category:Shinto kami becomes a parallel category, so many articles will be listed in it as well as in Category:Japanese gods, Category:Japanese goddesses, or Category:Japanese legendary creatures. — Amcaja 16:34, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
No argument there. In fact, I think MikeDockery and I talked about this a few days ago regarding these roles. At the time, I had mentioned that we'd come to some sort of agreement with the Shinto project on this; I've since found out that there's no formal Shinto project (well, nothing other than some dedicated adherents on the Shinto talk page), so we have a little more discretion in how we can handle this.--み使い Mitsukai 17:10, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
I agree with this proposed structuring. (^_^) --nihon 19:42, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
Changes made to the tree. Now we just need to go through everything in the relevant categories Category:Japanese folklore in particular) and recategorize accordingly. — Amcaja 14:29, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Names...

"Use the form of the name in English that the person personally uses" - from the project page.

This isn't gonna work for mythological figures / legendary people / anyone that's dead ;-). I didn't change it because I don't know what our policy should be. Use the name in most common use? MikeDockery 22:10, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Okay, this is what I get for trying to copy sections of the Anime and manga WP and Hindu myths WP to try to get this page up to snuff. ^_^;;; Yeah, the name in most common use should work, unless anyone else has any ideas.--み使い Mitsukai 23:41, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
No worries :-). I changed it for now, but "common usage" is a little vague and we may want to be more specific. Perhaps simply refer to the Manual of Style. MikeDockery 02:54, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
Since these names generally fall into the Wikipedia:Manual of Style (Japan-related articles) area of pre-Meiji names, I clarified that bit in the MOS-JA to indicate that. --日本穣 02:10, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Horizontal Infobox

I'm taking a stab at a Horizontal Version of the infobox on my Sandbox, just so we can compare the two and come to a decision regarding which is better. The advantage of the current vertical, right-justified version is that we can fit much more information and links in that style. If we decide to go with a horizontal version, we will need to condense the information a bit. This may not be a bad thing. Ideas? Suggestions? MikeDockery 02:35, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Well, personally, I'm particular to the vertical one, as I've seen that used most often on mythological and religion-based pages; however, I see the merits of the horizontal one as well. Ultimately, I'm for whatever works best.^_^--み使い Mitsukai 03:00, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
I personally don't mind the vertical one, except for the issue with the page formatting being goofed up. But we can work around that by going through and fixing pages that need it. One thing I noticed, our infobox is quite wide compared to many other vertical infoboxes that I've seen, with the obvious exception of the Christian one that it was modelled after. I wonder if Brian would find it as obtrusive if it were thinner, like say Template:Hinduism small. In fact, it might be a good idea to follow the example of the Hindu pages, which have a large, horizontal version and a small, vertical one, which are standardized with a common color scheme. That way page editors would have a choice, depending on how they want to format the article. MikeDockery 08:30, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
I still prefer to avoid a vertical infobox, but that thin Hinduism one is much better than a lot of the other ones I've seen (like that Norse one). But what happens when there's a picture? Typically, if we've got artwork, it should lead the page (like at kappa (mythical creature)). That means that vertical infoboxes work well when they are tailored to the individual page (like the presidents infobox used on, say, Chester A. Arthur), but when you try to stack them with an image, things get hairy. Are we suggesting a vertical infobox for pictureless pages and a horizontal footer one for pages where there's a lead image? I'd have no problem with that. — Amcaja 13:08, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
After thinking about it, I think we should have two versions, and leave it up to the editors on individual pages to decide which one works best. Having the vertical infobox doesn't preclude an opening picture (Buddhism for example), although I couldn't get it to work with our infobox on the Kami page (I'm not sure why - can someone help?). We may even want to have a large vertical infobox for pages with no pictures, then a smaller vertical and large horizontal one so that editors will have a choice. MikeDockery 13:51, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
Tried the infobox on the Kappa page, too, and やっぱり, the infobox goofed up the formatting. There's got to be a way to force it under the picture, but I can't figure out how. At any rate...one more thing, about the current infobox. I was trying to find some information on some of the dragons to stub them, but no luck. Perhaps we fold Japanese dragons into "Legendary Creatures"? MikeDockery 13:58, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, I played with it at kappa (mythical creature) and had no luck. I'm not sure how they got it to work at Buddhism. If we do end up going with thick and thin vertical infoboxes, I think we should still write some guidelines on when to use what. I'd rather do any negotiating once than to have several minor edit wars on many different pages! :) As for now, let's try for a thick vertical, thin vertical, and footer version. Then we'll talk about when to use what where. — Amcaja 14:18, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
Okay, I'll play around with the templates tomorrow. If anyone wants to mess around with them, they're still in my Sandbox. Hopefully Mitsu will take a look, because he knows more about templates than I do. All I can do is cut and paste and change colors from other templates. Which reminds me, we should decide on a color scheme for the templates...it will keep them looking standardized once we have three different versions. MikeDockery 14:46, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
Well, I was thinking of the crimson red that's associated with Shinto (though, in truth, that's an import from China), though I'm sure other colors can work as well. I'll look into the boxes and see what I can do.--み使い Mitsukai 14:57, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
I actually had the same idea (I was specifically looking at the red from the Shinto portal) but the links don't show up well on top of it. If you can get the link issue worked, the red will get my vote as well. Also, do you have any idea why our current infobox won't allow pictures to be placed on top of it? MikeDockery 15:32, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
I also vote crimson if we can get it to work (but only for the header bar). I'm a big fan of the less-is-more school of infobox design (see what we came up with at Template:Infobox Province of Cameroon, for example), so I definitely want to maintain the white background. White fits in better with the look of the rest of the site and avoids the gaudiness so many infoboxes are prone to. It also won't present a problem with text showing up. — Amcaja 15:44, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
I agree with the majority of the box being white. I've seen more than enough psychadelic infoboxes around here (Mike will attest to that, having been a victim of the original version of our infobox).--み使い Mitsukai 17:06, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
I definitely agree with that. The actual collection of links should be on a white background. Before, I meant the links in the header bars don't show up well on red. Just to mention it, I do like the way the hindu_small template has the category headers colored, though. It uses the colors in a way that is not too garish. MikeDockery 16:32, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Infobox

Okay, I have a few versions of a new infobox up on my Sandbox. The aren't ready to go (almost none of the links have been changed), but they should give you an idea of the style. Suggestions? How's the color, etc.? BTW, technically what we have here are Navigational templates, not infoboxes.MikeDockery 17:40, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Exactly what I was thinking of. Nice. ^_^--み使い Mitsukai 17:55, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
I'd suggest removing the image from the footer-type box, er, navigational template. :) Alternatively, replace it with an image that is as tall as the box itself. But other than that, I think they look quite nice. — Amcaja 18:07, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
Okay, I've got final versions (style-wise - the links still have to be worked out) of three different versions of our new "Nav"boxes. One is a small verticle navbox, one is a small horizontal navbox with a picture, and one (scroll to the bottom) is a huge navbox with no picture but with a "hide" feature so users can hide it if it's in the way. We need to decide which of these to keep (or all of them), and then we need to decide how to break up the link categories in the various boxes (in the smaller versions, not all the information from the current infobox will fit). MikeDockery 03:29, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
I like the top two the best. Good job. (^_^) --日本穣 05:31, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
Thanks! I agree that the top two look better, but the bottom one is the only one that will hold as much information as the current infobox...it will hold way more, in fact, so we may want to keep that one around to use as the number of articles goes up. MikeDockery 06:06, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
The extra tweaks look even nicer. Great job! --み使い Mitsukai 05:56, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
Thanks. Trying to coax all that HTML (which I haven't coded since High School) out of my head was no easy task. MikeDockery 06:06, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
The top two are done now, links and all. I had to move the dragons into the Mythical Creatures page, and I had to create List of sacred objects in Japanese mythology (haven't actually made that list yet...). Also, I would like to add some links at the very bottom of the vertical box, but I don't know what to add. Suggestions? If you guys are cool with these two boxes, we can take them live as soon as that list of artifacts is done. MikeDockery 06:06, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
Argh...navbox formatting is slightly wonky in Safari; they looked fine at work on IE. The top two boxes are okay (I think the vertical box actually looks better in Safari - picture is a little off-centered in the small horizontal box), but the large horizontal is screwed. There's obviously a difference in the way Safari and IE handle the "hide" thingy. What does everyone think? Do we want the large box? If so, I'll work with it some more and get the links entered in. If not, I won't bother. MikeDockery 08:32, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
Just checked these. I definitely like the vertical box. The big vertical box is way too big, IMHO. I'm not sure what good it does anyone to have all those links on every page related to Japanese mythology (or even on some of them). It'd be better (IMO) to make a new page: List of articles about Japanese mythology or somesuch and include it on a much smaller navbox. But what happened to the small horizontal box? I kind of liked that one. BTW, I also use Safari, and the big box is somewhat messed up for me, as well. Good work, nonetheless! — Amcaja 14:01, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
It went live! The general opinion seemed to be in favor of the two smaller ones, so I went ahead and took them live: {{Jmyth navbox long}} and {{Jmyth navbox tall}}. MikeDockery 15:17, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
Nice work! — Amcaja 17:05, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Kami

Nice job, Mike, on sorting out the kami from the gods and goddesses categories! Now what about Category:Japanese legendary creatures? Are any of those considered kami? — Amcaja 04:26, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

It's a bit complicated really, because often creatures in folklore are later incorporated into Shinto, thus receiving the title "kami." I mean, kami is a bit amorphous so a lot of things could be considered kami, depending on how wide you want to throw the net. But I'll take a look. MikeDockery 05:49, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
I'm going through the creatures category and adding the Shinto kami cat. to some of the articles ('m through the "N"s now). Basically, I'm only adding the Shinto kami cat. when there is an obvious link to Shinto. Some of the ones I skipped could be considered kami as well, but I'll leave that to others to decide. MikeDockery 01:16, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Potential switch to {{Japan-myth-stub}}

Anyone know how many articles we have left? By my count, we should have enough to start making the switch and making the announcement over at Stubs proposal.--み使い Mitsukai 05:11, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

Brian has the count at 53, I think, on the project page. I added one more last night, so 54? Seem right? MikeDockery 05:51, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
56, then. I added two more a couple of hours ago.--み使い Mitsukai 06:08, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
57, I just added the japan stub tag to one that was missing it. I'm gonna stub some more later, as well. We should be over 60 by tomorrow. MikeDockery 06:12, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
Make that 58. Found one that was hiding in a corner and tagged it.--み使い Mitsukai 06:39, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
59. Just finished stubbing Amikiri. MikeDockery 06:47, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
60. Stubbed Harionago. We have enough now. MikeDockery 10:38, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
Actually, I just noticed that we had enough a long time ago. We only need 30 if the articles are related to a WikiProject. Anyway, having more will help us when we propose the stub. MikeDockery 10:44, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

Shall we propose the stub, then? I've never done such a thing, but if we meet the requirements, why not get the ball rolling? — Amcaja 21:49, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Fine by me. I started to yesterday, but I have never done it either, so I'm not sure what we should write in the proposal. But, yeah, the sooner the better in my opinion. MikeDockery 22:50, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Proposed the stub...

I don't know if it kosher for people from a project to agree or disagree with the stub proposal, but the stub has been proposed. We can start re-marking the stubs in a week if there are no objections to our stub tag. MikeDockery 05:59, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Do you have a link to the proposal? --日本穣 17:22, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
I just placed the link in the announcements on the project page in response to your question. But here it is if you're lazy: Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals#Japanese Mythology Stub. :) — Amcaja 17:41, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
Thanks. (^_^) --日本穣 19:56, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
Well, since I doubt it's going to be shot down, perhaps we should start looking into the design of the stub. Side image, wording and such.--み使い Mitsukai 18:30, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

News and announcements

How long should items remain on the "News and announcements" section of the project page? If we don't delete old items now and again, the list will get very long! Perhaps a week would be good? Two? What about crossed-out items on the To-do list? — Amcaja 19:51, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Thought about that earlier myself. I think a week on the striked To-do items, then delete. Should we archive the News and Announcements every week or so? Or is archiving unnecessary? Simply delete after a couple of weeks? MikeDockery 00:09, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
A week would suffice, I think. As for what to do with the items, it would best to archive, if for no other reason than historical record.--み使い Mitsukai 04:31, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
That sounds good to me. MikeDockery 05:25, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Archive Box

I added an archive box to the News and Announcements section on the project page. Basically, I figure we archive about once a week (if needed), but put all the archives for a single month into a single archive page, seperating them into weeks by sub-head. Then link to the specific sub-head for each week of a month, but only for the CURRENT month. So the current month will have its archive links seperated into seperate weeks in the archive box, but other months will only be listed by month. Hopefully this will make things easy to browse, while not making the box too cluttered. OK? We can change it if it seems like too much trouble.

Speaking of archiving, this talk page is getting pretty long. We'll need to talk about whether to archive the talk page by month or by discussion. What does everyone think? MikeDockery 06:08, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

I usually go by the KB limit (once a talk page exceeds 30 KB, archive but keep any active discussions on the main talk page). At this stage, we're talking quite a bit since the project is still getting on its feet. Later, things might run quite smoothly and monthly archives won't be necessary. Discussion-by-discussion archives would create some awfully short archives, too. — Amcaja 12:58, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
Ok. I was just going by the "getting to be quite a scroll to the bottom" criteria. ;-) How do you check the page size? Monthly archives (or however long...) seems good to me. Discussion-by-discussion would be somewhat of a pain, anyway. MikeDockery 13:19, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
When you're in edit mode, there will be a message above the edit box if the article is 30 KB or more. Currently, there's not message, which means we're in the clear. :) — Amcaja 13:35, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
Gotcha! Sounds like a plan, then. MikeDockery 13:51, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
I just thought of something else. Rather than strike items from the to-do list and leaving them there for a while, here's my proposed procedure for when something on to-do gets done: 1) Remove the item completely from the to-do list. No strike-through. 2) Add a note to "News and announcements" that you've completed that task. This way, the to-do list keeps from getting cluttered, and there's no need to archive the to-do list, since the items get mentioned in "News and announcements" and thus get archived there. Make sense? — Amcaja 13:01, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
I like the idea of archiving the to-do box along with the News and Announcements, but I'd like to keep the striked items up as well, for a certain amount of time. Mainly because there is something quite satisfying about having that crossed-off task on there for a bit. ;-) But also, it will give other editors a chance to make sure the task is done. For complicated things, like the category stuff, it would be easy to miss something, so having the finished task in a conspicous place may serve some purpose other than the simple satisfaction of having something crossed out on a list. We could do it this way - strike out and add the announcement to the News and Annoucement section. Then a week later delete entirely from the to-do list. That way we still don't have to archive the To-Do list. MikeDockery 13:19, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
That works for me. — Amcaja 13:35, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
I think that doing it by KB makes a lot of sense as well. Discussion by discussion will make for some short pages, and even month to month might do so as well, should, say, all of us somehow get tied up during one particular month.--み使い Mitsukai 13:44, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
True. By KB seems to be the way to go. MikeDockery 13:53, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
Speak of the devil, we're currently at 31 KB. I'll leave it for the moment, but we should probably archive today! — Amcaja 14:21, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Stub design

(Thoght I'd start this discussion in a new section in preparation for archiving most of the rest of this talk page.) So, what do we want the stub to say? What should the image be? As for the latter, it should be something simple, and therefore easily seen at small sizes. Any of these images would be cool: Image:ManjuNetsuke.jpg, Image:MaskNetsuke.jpg, and Image:KagamibutaNetsuke.jpg. We'd use the left-hand image and cut the netsuke out so it'd be on a white background. I don't know whether they'll show up at the reduced size of the stub image, though. I particularly like the oni and think it would probably show up best at a small size. Another option: Image:Metal dragon side view.jpg, though a dragon could be construed as Chinese. This might work, too: Image:Onigawara.jpg. If we cut him out from his background, Yebisu would be fun: Image:RA-Ebisu.jpg. If we could find a free image of the Japanese imperial regalia (particularly the paisley-shaped thing), that would also be good. (The only image Wikipedia has of this is copyright: Image:Sanshu no Jingi.gif). All that, and I only got about halfway through Category:Japan at Wikimedia Commons! — Amcaja 16:54, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Brian, did you mean a magatama?--み使い Mitsukai 18:25, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, that's it. Looks like the image of it there is also not free. It'd be a simple solution to the graphic issue if we could find a free one. As of right now, I like the oni netsuke and Ebisu versions. — Amcaja 19:01, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
I'll see if I can gen one up tonight. Working on a graphic for another article, so it shouldn't be much of a problem.--み使い Mitsukai 19:03, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
Personally, I think Kagamibuta or Ebisu would work well, though I'm leaning slightly more towards the former.--み使い Mitsukai 17:02, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
I'm going to play with this at my sandbox. Anyone who wants to can drop by and change things up as much as they please. — Amcaja 18:09, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
Brian, have you tried the Inari image? I think it would look good if it was cut out on a white background. Not sure it would show up at a small size, but it might be worth a try. The Ebisu image looks good, too. But I'd like to see the fox image on a white background and at a small size before I vote. If no one has done that by the time I get home (no photoshop on my computer at work) I will have a go. Thanks for working on the stub tag! MikeDockery 01:38, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
I added a rough version of the fox, just to have an idea. It doesn't look as good as I hoped, mainly because the original image was a little too dark. MikeDockery 03:08, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
So far my favorite is Fujin. A Noh mask would be wonderful if anyone can find a free-license one. Something like this, only free. :) — Amcaja 04:35, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
I might have something like that...I'll check my pictures. Also, if you can think of specific requests, I can take my camera out to some shrines or something this weekend. MikeDockery 05:04, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
I uploaded a picture of a guy wearing a mask sort of like that. It's from the front, though, and it has hair so it's hard to put against a background. Anyway, it's here for the original, and here for a small version. MikeDockery 05:47, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
Good picture, but you're right; the hair gets in the way. Basically my thought process was that I liked the oni netsuke version, but that it would be better if we had something similar but more colorful. Your mask photo would be perfect if the mask could be easily cut out and placed on a white background, but I don't think that's possible with the hair. — Amcaja 14:09, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Starting back over here because I'm lazy like that. ^_^ Anyway, added a magatama version with an image I made in Illustrator a couple of minutes ago.--み使い Mitsukai 04:42, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Not bad! But I think a photographic megatama would be better; the pop-art vibe seems to be more appropriate for something like WikiProject Anime than for us, methinks. My favorites are the oni netsuke, Fujin, and Yebisu. The oni netsuke would be better in color (a painted Noh mask like the one Mike posted, only on a white background); it's possible some piece of art may have a bit more contrast to it to replace Fujin (but I like the close-cropped painting motif; very Japanese website); and at that size, Yebisu kind of looks too much like a garden gnome for me to rank him higher. :) I don't think it's worth fretting too much more about the image. Anyone else have any preferences at this stage? — Amcaja 14:09, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
I chose the pop-art look so that it would better match many of the other stub icons floating around here {{rock-album-stub}}, {{politics-stub}}, et al. I do agree though that Ebisu looks like he'd be hanging out over at Travelocity instead of on the stub.--み使い Mitsukai 14:27, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Just to give my thoughts. I would reject the Onigawara and Kagamibuta_netsuke, because you can't really tell what they are when they are made small enough for the stub template. The inari I put up might have the same problem - I can't really tell because I know what it's supposed to be. You can kind of tell what the dragon is at that size, but it kind of gives off a China-vibe.

Mitsukai's magatama looks good, but I'm not sure that the random person knows what a magatama is, much less what they look like. I agree that the demon mask picture doesn't work because it can't be put on a background. Ebisu's okay (now that you said that about the garden gnome, though, it's all I can see...). I like Fujin and Oni netsuke (although it would be better in color... しょうがない). I like the fox, too, but I can't really tell how it looks to someone who didn't spend time working on the original. That's my 2-cents. In the end, whatever everyone else likes is okay by me. MikeDockery 14:39, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Tried another version of the fox. I know, I should just let it go.... ;-) MikeDockery 15:41, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

I think the oni netsuke or oni mask would be the way to go. Fujin is a little hard to make out at the smaller size with all those sepia tones, unless you know what the image is meant to be. I like the fox, too (the full shot more than the head-only one), but I think the oni work a bit better. Shimeru 08:45, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

question

hi, may I join or is there a limit of how much you have to contribute first? I have another question regarding the naming which has "xxxx no xxxx" as name. For example it's Ninigi-no-Mikoto with the hyphen, but it's Soga no Kitashihime. Is there a certain rule or it's not clear? I personally prefer the version without hyphens... domō. Gryffindor 12:26, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Hi, Gryffindor! Anyone is welcome, so please sign your name to the project page. As for the names of articles, that's an area we haven't yet strayed into. It's a good question, though, and one that should be addressed. In the meantime, you might post something at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (Japan-related articles), as your question deals with an issue with not just mythology-related subjects. — BrianSmithson 13:04, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Soukou

Not 100% sure, as the information does not come from a Japanese source at all, but actually from a friend who is a hardcore emu-gamer(and thus is hearsay): the Soukou is the final boss of the Super Famicom videogame Kidou Soukou Dion. I wasn't able to confirm this on Google JP or on Goo. If someone else can take a shot at it, that'll probably be better, but I trust my source enough to change the {{unverified}} tag on the article to a {{hoax}}.--み使い Mitsukai 18:57, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Images

The main page here mentions that as Japan has a long artistic tradition, a lot of pictures, etc, are in the public domain, and many of the pages on Japanese mythology and folklore can benefit from this fact. Now, I am traveling to Japan at the end of this month, more specifically the 28th, and I'm going to be visiting Tokyo, as well as Kyoto and, if I remember correctly, Osaka, and have therefore a great deal of opportunities to take alot of photos(as I've got a digital camera, so it's quite possible for me to take a number of decent pictures). And as I was going to take a lot of pictures anyway, as I don't like to trust my own mind at these things, and I prefer to reserve it for my brainpower, it's not too big a burden for me to get some pictures taken. So if there is any sites or places for me to take pictures of, especially if they are specifically related to this, don't hesitate to list them here, as I'd more than happily take some extra pictures. Satanael 21:21, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Kamakura would be a good place to do so, if you can. It's just a trip south of Tokyo (on the Yokosuka line), and it has a rich history and cultural importance that might come in handy.--み使い Mitsukai 21:32, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
The comment about public domain is more aimed at the fact that you can pretty much swipe a scan of an old Japanese paintings from any old website and post them to Commons with no problem. But if you're going to Japan and want to do some footwork, I'd second Misukai's suggestion. Nara is another treasure trove of cultural artifacts; I believe it's part of Kyoto now. Just snap photos of any statues, scrolls, masks, carvings, etc. that you see (particularly statues). Here are a few statues it would be nice to have a Commons copy of: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9]. (Actually, I notice that a lot of these are licensed under Creative Commons 2.0 and could therefore be uploaded to Commons already). Also keep an eye out for mythology-related statuettes, tourist items, etc. Some of these would be nice illustrations for articles. Sounds like fun! Have a good time in Japan! — BrianSmithson 21:51, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Nara's actually fairly far from Kyoto, but Brian's right, both are probably the best places in Japan for "Japanesy" pictures. Kamakura is also very good. But keep your camera on you all the time. There are small shrines virtually everywhere, and you never know when you'll get the perfect picture. Osaka and Tokyo are very modern cities, but they both have their traditional places if you know where to go. If you can't get to Kamakura, the best place to go in Tokyo is Asakusa, which is very traditional and also right in the middle of the city, whereas Kamakura is about an hour's train trip. The Emperor's palace and its gardens (there are some that have been opened to the public) are also good. Have a good trip! MikeDockery 00:50, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

BTW, make sure you are allowed to take pictures before you take them. In Kyoto, Nara or Kamakura they are generally used to tourists, so it won't be a problem, but in smaller areas you should make sure. If it's just a statue or something in a public place, it's fine, but inside the smaller shrines you should make sure. Basically, just use common sense, but you can look for: 写真 (photograph) and this:　止 (stop, or "no".) If these are written somewhere (there'll most likely be other kanji as well, but look for those) you probably can't take pictures. Or, if someone's around, just hold up your camera and ask "OK?". Although most Japanese people would never confront you about it, they do get irritated, and those of us who live here bear the brunt of their irritation. ;-) (I say this because I once took a picture of a car being blessed at a Shinto shrine, and my Japanese friend who was with me was horrified...) MikeDockery 01:05, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Oh, ok. Thanks a lot for the heads up. I'll see what I can do then. :) Also, on a secondary not, I was wondering if you guys might know if obake karuta are commonly found(I'm pretty sure there might be, but hey, asking never killed 'ya ;)), and if so, are there any specific places where(also, are there any good, or famous decks that I should look out for)? Anyways, thanks for the kind comments. I'll be sure to enjoy myself. :) Satanael 21:51, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

If you remember it (or can write it down), you can say, "Koko de shashin wo totte mo ii deshou ka." (Is itokay to take a picture here?) --日本穣 23:14, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Consensus on the stub design...

Our stub proposal will be accepted tomorrow, so we can put up the template and start restubbing then. I think the general consesus on the picture is oni netsuko, although if we can find a color version it would be better. I suggest we go with the oni netsuko for now, and if something better comes along we can always change the template. どう思いますか? MikeDockery 00:41, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

I just finished finding and tagging all the mythology- and folklore-related images on Commons (the Japanese stuff there is still far from well categorized, but I put a dent in it), so I'd like to propose a few other design ideas. In the meantime, I don'ty see anything wrong with putting the oni netsuke up as a placeholder. — BrianSmithson 00:56, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
Just put up a colored oni mask version. Still fairly monochromatic, but the horns are much more prominent. I suggest we just go with this one and be done with it. It's the bottom one on my sandbox. — BrianSmithson 14:34, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
Go for it.--み使い Mitsukai 04:54, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
Looks like the devil when it's made smaller. Not a problem for me, but could be confusing for the random user. I prefer the new fox to the new oni. But we all know of my thing for foxes...since you've probably done the most work on the stub template, why don't you just pick one? The time limit is up on our proposal, so we can start re-stubbing whenever the template is ready. MikeDockery 06:18, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
Ha! It kind of does look like Satan, only he's sad about something. The fox is okay by me, only it's a bit too tall. Maybe if we monkey with it a bit more. As for the template, who creates it? The stub gods to whom we submitted the proposal? — BrianSmithson 12:45, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
Heh, maybe we should have called it {{depressed-demon-stub}}. ^_^ Anyway, I think the rules state that if there's no opposition (and there wasn't), after a week (which it has now been), we can start making the stub. So I guess we can move it from the sandbox and slap it on a template.--み使い Mitsukai 13:36, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Lord Capulet...huh?

Lord Capulet - this article is in the category Category:People involved with Shinto. Does this really belong there? Does this really belong anywhere? MikeDockery 15:33, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

It's a joke statement. He's a writer for International Idiocy, a nn website. Which means we can probably {{prod}} this.--み使い Mitsukai 16:56, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
I just noticed that User:VanillaX, who has signed our project page, is a major editor of the Lord Capulet page. Perhaps he could address some of these concerns? MikeDockery 00:04, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, I can definitely understand your concern. I take Japanese class at school so I have gotten really into Japanese mythology and Shinto (I actually started the WikiProject:Shinto and the Category:People involved with Shinto). While I was on the rouseindahouse forums, Lord Capulet began making posts about Shinto and how he wishes it was a more commonly accepted religion. I searched some on Google and I realized the guy has actually made a pretty big impact on the Internet (involvement in lots of sites, several of which he helped create) so I checked Wikipedia, and sure enough, there was an article on him by User:Elminster41111. I've since gotten to know Lord Capulet some. I think the guy really does believe in making sure Shinto and Japanese mythology are recognized. In a religion that has fewer and fewer notable figures as time goes on, I think we ought to recognize some of Shinto's biggest supporters in today's world, and, I've come to the conclusion that Lord Capulet might actually be one of them. I think that we should keep the article on him. I'm on the same page as you guys, I've put a lot of work into increasing Shinto-related knowledge on Wikipedia, I wouldn't want a joke page involved with it either, but Lord Capulet's no joke, so I'm fine with it staying. - User:VanillaX 22:39, 6 March 2996 (UTC)
Even in light of all that, I still think the article might not pass Wikipedia's standards for notability. My main concern is, I couldn't verify anything other than the fact that Lord Capulet wrote a single story on International Idiocy, which would clearly make the article non-notable. If you can point us in the direction of some sites where the stuff specifically related to Shinto can be verified, I might reconsider, but my current opinion is we send the article to AfD and see what the community says. MikeDockery 05:50, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
The Shinto claims can be verified here. These guys here link to one of his projects. Lemme find some more links to him. The guy is notable, he's made a pretty big impact on the internet community. - VanillaX 22:02, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

I just don't see enough evidence that this article is notable. Why don't we send it through the deletion process, and if there is evidence of Lord Capulet's notability, it will come out during the debate. We can send it through AfD, rather than prod, because there is some controversy. MikeDockery 01:12, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Straw poll on stub

Two kitsune, two oni. I like all four, so let's decide this! :) Sign your name under your favorite. — BrianSmithson 14:55, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

This article relating to a myth or legend from Japan is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.
This article relating to a myth or legend from Japan is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.
This article relating to a myth or legend from Japan is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.
This article relating to a myth or legend from Japan is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.

Futen and Fujin

Quick quetion: Is Futen the same god as Fujin? They're both gods of wind, as far as I can tell, so I'm wondering if it's just an alternate spelling. Here's the deity in question: Image:Hanabusa Futen, the Wind Deity.jpg. — BrianSmithson 03:58, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

They are not same. Futen (風天) is a god of prosperity and longevity (not wind) in Buddhism (not shinto). nnh 00:15, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
Thanks. Seems the Boston Museum of Fine Arts has him mislabeled. — BrianSmithson 01:41, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Article Improvement Drive / Collaboration of the Week

I think the project should have a specific article that we all work to improve. Similar to the Article Improvement Drive or the Collaboration of the Week, but specific to the Japanese Mythology project. Thoughts? MikeDockery 09:50, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Getting something mythology-related through FAC is definitely on my to-do list, but without good sources, I feel like I'm kind of up a creek. It seems that most Japanese mythology articles are sourced with webpages, and such articles have come under round criticism in FAC lately. But I have no problem with a collaboration, though I can't promise very active contributions. I'd suggest something well-known and probably well-covered in print sources. Maybe Amaterasu or another major deity. — BrianSmithson 13:02, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
I was thinking more of a general improvement drive, not neccesarily to the level of a Featured Article, but just a collaboration to work some of the stubs into full article status. Also, I'm sure we're going find some stubs that will likely never be expanded, so we should come up with a grouping system to redirect those into a single, full-length article. We have a lot of stubs under the project at the moment; I think a better way to go about these would be to start with a single, full-length article, and then break off articles from there when the sections become too large.
A FAC drive would definitely be more difficult. If we wanted to do that, we should use the availabilty of written sources as a criteria for which article to focus on. MikeDockery 02:12, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Verification

An editor has called to question something on the Tsukumogami page, namely the inclusion of an anime character as an example of tsukumogami. The reason is that the character is an automaton that comes to life after 100 years of being shut down. While it's clear that he dislikes anime (and that's not the issue), I have rewritten things slightly to accomodate him without removing the reference (I kept it because it's one of the few - if not the only - cases of a "modern" tsukumogami).

The issue at hand is that he says it is impossible for the character to be a tsukumogami, as the automaton ran on electricity, and electricity repells yokai. This is the first I have ever heard of this information (not much electricity - other than lightning and static - going on back in pre-Meiji times), I'm suspecting that this is a bias to edit out a unique example that just happens to be anime-based. As he has presented no citation for this claim, and I have not found any, I'm asking all to see if there's anyone who has heard of this.--み使い Mitsukai 14:01, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

I think what he's referring to is the fact that there's kind of this idea that the introduction of electricity to Japan chased away the yōkai. It's sort of an analogy for Japan's modernization destroying belief in the old traditions. The only direct reference to the idea I could find is in this interview with Shigeru Mizuki—a manga/anime creator. At any rate, the idea that an idea like this can be held to be absolutely true is ludicrous. Folklore and mythology are fluid in nature, so the beliefs about monster X in one place will not match those in another. Any "rules" are especially breakable in anime and manga. That said, I don't particularly care for anime/manga examples, either. ;P — BrianSmithson 14:28, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
I'm familiar with the Shigeru interview. However, I don't find the issue so alarming about the anime character (it's not from a series that I care about, truthfully), so much as the squelching of information and the concept that the concept is absolute, especially (as you note) with something as fluid as folk traditions. But thanks for the info, though.--み使い Mitsukai 16:27, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, it seems kind of silly to build an arguement on something like "electricity repels Yokai". I think the way you distinquished it is fine, since there's only one pop culture reference at the moment. But if someone adds another one, I think they should probably be moved under a seperate "Pop Culture" section of the article, just to distinquish it from traditional folklore. I only have a problem with anime references when the article is just a few sentences on the folktale, and then two screens of anime references; the folklore should be the main focus of the article. But the single anime reference on the tsukumogami article seems fine to me; like you said, it adds information, so why not? MikeDockery 22:13, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, in this case, it's harmless. But beware: Pop-culture references are like cancer. As soon as someone adds that "In popular culture" section (alias "In media" or "Trivia"), the bullet points multiply until the section becomes that two-page monster you describe! I'm being fairly tongue-in-cheek with my naysaying, but I do think a reasonable guideline for whether a particular pop-culture reference is appropriate is the importance of the character/thing in question. For example, good: "I Love Tengu is an anime about a college-aged ne'er-do-well who is befriended by a ronin tengu." Bad: "A tengu can be seen in the crowd during the bike racing scene of the video game Speed Yasha Z-hime. :) — BrianSmithson 04:15, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
Speak of the devil, I just added a "trivia" section to The Dream Of Akinosuke. ;P MikeDockery 05:30, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Karuta card images...

Brian, it would be much easier to name these creatures if the reading cards from the set were available. For now, I will show the images to some Japanese people and see if they have any guesses, but my feeling is most of them are gonna ask for the reading cards. MikeDockery 01:43, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, unfortunately the website I got them from didn't post that part. :( — BrianSmithson 04:23, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
The kana will be simple enough. My current suspicion is that the monster depicted shares the same first syllable as the kana depicted; if so, that will make identification a little easier. I can't comfirm that yet, though. Looking through them now. Shimeru 05:27, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
Okay, perhaps not. I've identified 1-08 (chochinobake, chi -- the "cho" is written "chi(subscript yo)" in kana, so this would fit the theory) and 1-02 (rokurokebi, ro), in addition to the previously-IDed 2-04 (tanuki, ta), but the theory seems to fall apart with 1-12 (kana wo, but it looks like it might be nekomata). Similarly, 4-06 is "shi," but it seems to have been identified as hitotsume-kozo. I think that 2-03 ("fu") is meant to be futakichi-onna, but I can't say for sure. Will go through tomorrow and ID all the kana. Shimeru 06:18, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
Probably not, although I couldn't say for sure without the reading cards. Normally, the reading cards have a short verse or sentence that describes the situation depicted in the picture. The verses or sentences would probably have the name of the Obake in them, but the first word wouldn't neccesarily be the name of the creature. Typically, the kana would be the first word in the sentence (the first word the caller says), not the first word of the Obake's name. But there's many different kinds of karuta, so I can't be certain without the reading cards. MikeDockery 07:24, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
I could be wrong on the hitotsume-kozō card, Shimeru, so don't use that as evidence against your theory. There are a few that the site itself named; I'll try to add those in later today. — BrianSmithson 12:43, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
I've tentatively IDed a couple more. Two support the card syllable = first syllable of creature name theory: nue and Yuki-onna. Three (supported by the source website) do not: tsuchigumo, funayūrei, and kitsune. — BrianSmithson 14:43, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
The "tsuchigumo" one is correct. If the kana is ra, the person on the card is undoubtedly Minamoto no Yorimitsu, better known as Minamoto no Raikō, the famous tsuchigumo slayer. I amended the card info to reflect that.--み使い Mitsukai 14:51, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

deity infobox

User:Squilibob was very generous in making a template for Hindu gods and goddesses. May be you guys would like to take a look and make your own Template:Hdeity infobox 

{{Hdeity infobox| <!--Wikipedia:WikiProject Hindu mythology-->
  Image                    = 
| Caption                  = 
| Name                     = 
| Devanagari               = 
| Sanskrit_Transliteration = 
| Pali_Transliteration     = 
| Tamil_script             = 
| Affiliation              = 
| God_of                   = <!--eg. god of death-->
| Abode                    =
| Mantra                   =
| Weapon                   = 
| Consort                  = 
| Mount                    = 
| Planet                   = 
}}

--Dangerous-Boy 20:46, 17 May 2006 (UTC)


new catagory and moving topic

Hey all. Not quite sure to go about this as I am pretty new to wikipedia, but I figured this was a good place to ask.

First off, the article Kwaidan should be labled Kaidan. I brought this up on the discussion page for that article, but no editor seems to be monitoring it, so it was suggested that I post here.

Also, I would like to have a new category, "kaidan," created to link together all of the articles on Japanese ghost stories. Is it possible to get this done?

Thanks in advance for the help.

MightyAtom 03:28, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Unfortunately, this project has been pretty dead for the past few weeks. But hopefully Nihonjoe or some of the other Japanese speakers are monitoring and can answer your first question.
As for the second (regarding the category), would this be different from the hypothetical Category:Japanese ghosts? -- BrianSmithson 14:02, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

To bad! I get excited about something after the ball is over! Ah well...

Moving Kwaidan should be a bit of a no-brainer, and I am surprised it hasn't been done before. If you look at all other uses of kaidan in wikipedia, such as Yotsuya Kaidan, they all use the correct spelling. That page is the only hold-out.

and Category:Kaidan would be different from Category:Japanese ghosts for the simple reason that, while all ghosts are kaidan, not all kaidan are ghosts. Things like the Yuki Onna and Kappa would be considered kaidan, along with yurei and onryou. Kaidan is just a broader, more inclusive term that covers everything.

MightyAtom 22:20, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Roshoman gate

Any reason why the Roshoman gate is listed as a sacred and/or mythical place on the Nav Bar? It is neither. MightyAtom 06:41, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Sorry to move this comment here, but typically, archives are not supposed to be edited. -- BrianSmithson 14:11, 6 July 2006 (UTC)


Whoops! Sorry! Thanks for the help! MightyAtom 22:21, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles

Greetings WikiProject Japanese mythology! I'm part of another Wikiproject, Wikipedia:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles. I'm not sure if there's been any kind of official or unofficial inter-Wikiproject cooperation between our two projects, or if there's been any contact at all in the past, but I thought I'd come here anyways and say 'hi' and to say a little something about my project. WikiProject Missing Encyclopedic Articles' essentially goal is to help Wikipedia become better than any other encyclopedia/major repository of information, by including articles on every topic in any other encyclopedia/major repository of information. A lot of the project focusses on things like the Encylopedia Brittanica, Columbia, Gutenberg authors, etc, but the section I thought might interest you guys is the Hotlist of Mythology & Folklore. It began with a list of 17,346 articles, and it's now down to 7,678 (56% done). It includes all types of mythology, including a fair bit of Japanese. I bet if we got some input from you guys, who actually know something about mythology, we could make a serious dent in what's left. If you're interested, check out the project page, drop me a line, or just start contributing. Thanks! --Gpollock 22:30, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Take a look?

I just finished up three new articles for this project. If anyone is still nosing around here, I would appreciate it if they would take a look and give me some feedback.

Thanks!

MightyAtom 13:27, 18 July 2006 (UTC)


Encyclopedia Mythica

I added pantheon.org to the list of suspicious sites. It seems to be the source of a couple of names added to the legendary creature list which I can find no reference to on the Japanese-language internet. (Those being "Yofune-nushi" and "Uwibami" for the record.) Kotengu 04:59, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Might interest you guys that we figured out the source of the Yofune-nushi legend over at obakemono.com . It's been recorded by a guy called Richard Smith, and can be seen in full here. Still, no Japanese sources. Should the legend be included with a disclaimer? It does get mentioned around in the English internets, so it is in a way notable, only possibly fictious... TomorrowTime 01:12, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
I would say yes... as long as there are English sources. Even if it's a hoax, as long as it's a noteworthy one, it merits inclusion. Shimeru 05:00, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
Done. Yofune-nushi. I'm having difficulties coming up with categories for this. I'm not sure whether it should be categorized as J-myth, since it most probably doesn't belong. What say ye?TomorrowTime 12:59, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
Hm. It is hard to say. I think I'd put it in Category:Japanese folklore and Category:Fakelore, just to be thorough. Shimeru 20:42, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

New username, old contributor

I've been doing some minor editing and stuff around wiki Japan-related sites for a while now, but now I've got myself a username. I added myself to the project - I'm not really an expert, but I'm interested in Japanese folklore, and I speak fluent Japanese, so I hope to be able to help out here and there. TomorrowTime 01:12, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Peer review for Kitsune

I'm working on bringing kitsune up to at least GA status. There's a lot to be done, but I don't think it's too far out of reach. I'd appreciate any feedback at its peer review. Shimeru 01:49, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

I've now cited the article, and nominated it as a good article. Shimeru 20:52, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Zashiki-warashi & Kamaitachi

I rehashed these two articles with some help from the Japanese versions. I was mostly looking to give them a more serious, less anime-y feel. Take a look and tell me what you think. Also, can anybody find a decent picture of a zashiki-warashi? I'm not particularly happy with the stereotypical manga lass that's there now. Other than the caption underneath it, there's nothing "zashiki-warashi" about her. If nothing better can be found, I'll just kick out the pic that's there now.

One more thing: I deleted this from the article:

" the zashiki-warashi inhabits an astral plane within the home, and will only materialize when something happens, such as when the inhabitants are in grave danger or some other serious issue threatens the home and its residents".

Huh? Excuse me? Astral plane? Say what? The info stems from this (overall rather dodgy) edit: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Zashiki-warashi&direction=next&oldid=28241740 Also from the same edit is the notion of subterranean lodges constructed for zashiki-warashi. I wouldn't be in the least surprised if the Japanese actually did something like this, but until I see some proof I'm still weary of this particular bit of info, and will probably kick it out in some time. TomorrowTime 18:56, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Yyyyyeah... that sort of claim I'd want to see sourced. I think you did the right thing there. Both articles look pretty well improved to me. I'll see what I can do about other sources. As for the image, have you tried searching Japanese woodblock print images for one? Yokai were a fairly popular subject, so there might be something there, and the traditional ones have the additional benefit of being in the public domain. Shimeru 10:22, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
I'm not particularly happy with the stereotypical manga lass that's there now. Other than the caption underneath it, there's nothing "zashiki-warashi" about her. If nothing better can be found, I'll just kick out the pic that's there now.
It looks like it wasn't even uploaded by the artist, so I'd say it can be kicked out with impunity, or at least replaced with Mizuki's version without losing any copyright face. Kotengu 04:56, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Ratings

I've enabled rating articles and article importance within the Jmyth template. See Template talk:Jmyth for documentation. Shimeru 23:36, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

FAC for Kitsune

Kitsune is now a Featured Article candidate. Reviews welcome. Shimeru 10:24, 10 December 2006 (UTC)


I just gave the Navbox a major contents overhaul. I couldn't understand why "Nezumi Kozo" was in there and "Amaterasu" wasn't, and from the talk page it looks like I wasn't alone. Hope nobody minds. Kotengu 09:56, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Requesting help from this project

Hello. I'm currently trying to get the article List of haunted locations cleaned up a bit. The two main problems with it are lack of references, and a western bias. Someone specifically requested on the talk page that information be added on haunted locations in Japan. They said that "Japan is widely considered to be the most haunted place on earth" (I have no idea where that assertion comes from). I asked for help with this at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Japan, and was advised to try asking here. Would someone from this project mind heading over to that article with references and working on the section on Japan? I found a little bit of information on the Yūrei page, but more would be nice. Thank you. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs) 20:54, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia Day Awards

Hello, all. It was initially my hope to try to have this done as part of Esperanza's proposal for an appreciation week to end on Wikipedia Day, January 15. However, several people have once again proposed the entirety of Esperanza for deletion, so that might not work. It was the intention of the Appreciation Week proposal to set aside a given time when the various individuals who have made significant, valuable contributions to the encyclopedia would be recognized and honored. I believe that, with some effort, this could still be done. My proposal is to, with luck, try to organize the various WikiProjects and other entities of wikipedia to take part in a larger celebrartion of its contributors to take place in January, probably beginning January 15, 2007. I have created yet another new subpage for myself (a weakness of mine, I'm afraid) at User talk:Badbilltucker/Appreciation Week where I would greatly appreciate any indications from the members of this project as to whether and how they might be willing and/or able to assist in recognizing the contributions of our editors. Thank you for your attention. Badbilltucker 18:53, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Japan/Mythology_task_force/Archive_1&oldid=1238782523"