Talk:Irezumi

message: Excellent article, but two quibbles about the following paragraph, which I've excised for now:
Japan is the only society where tattooing is known to have become a prevailing social fashion, and Japanese tattooing, which takes years to master and whose secrets are jealously guarded by its various practitioners, is rightfully called an art form.
# Tattooing has been always been a minority phenomenon in Japan, and there are plenty of other cultures (eg. much of Polynesia) where tattooing has played a bigger role, if anything
# And it's not Wikipedia's job to decide what is 'rightfully' an art form.
Jpatokal 13:33, 24 Jan 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Quibbles

message: The section "tattoos in modern japan seems to be taken directly from this website: "http://www.tao-of-tattoos.com/japanese-tattoos.html". someone could have at least reworded it slightly. Hellfire83 23:47, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Article source

message: Googling around for "Nara black" I found an AssociatedContent article which seems to lift substantial portions of its content from the "History of Japanese Tattoos" and "Japanese Tattoos in the Edo Period" sections of this page, but fails to cite the way Answers.com and others do. Those sections remain largely unchanged from almost a year before the Associated Content version's August 2006 publication date, so I seriously doubt it works the other way around.
Is that kosher? If it isn't, I haven't made any edits to this article and don't have any claim to it, but maybe someone who has and does could drop a note to AC and see what should be done about it? Mockingbus 01:49, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Plagiarism on AssociatedContent.com?

message: It is somewhat astonishing that this is an article about a traditional form of body art and yet there are no images to provide examples of the very same! I do not know how to add images to wikipedia articles, so if anyone else has the impulse to do so, I think images depicting Irezumi would be sensible!
The Koi photo is of a Brazilian man, not Japanese. Follow the source. Can someone fix?
66.227.133.26 (talk) 14:31, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Images 

message: As the definition of Tattoo (at least in Wikipedia) is equal to the definition of Irezumi ('bringing ink under the skin'), Irezumi is not "a form of tattooing", it IS tattooing  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.159.153.80 (talk) 11:28, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Definition 

message: The whole introduction needs to be reworked. There is way too much emphasis on language aspects. This is the English language Wikipedia: the fact that irezumi is written in Japanese using various Chinese characters is not of great importance. Such material can be moved to a subsection. 
Also: "The Japanese word refers to the insertion of ink under the skin to leave a permanent, usually decorative mark" means exactly the same thing as saying "The Japanese word means tattoo".
I'm moving the language material to a separate section and putting some more substantive material in the intro.Ordinary Person (talk) 07:20, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Balance in the introduction 

message: I haven't the time to re-write this article at the minute - I just wanted to pass on through and give this source  as a potential citation. It gives some decent detail as to the history of tattooing in Japan and makes the important distinction of both Ainu tattoo culture and  tattoo culture being separate from  - both need and deserve some greater detail. --Ineffablebookkeeper (talk) 19:24, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Potential source for this article 

message: اسب بدن ساز 5.115.170.33 (talk) 09:33, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: اسب 5.115.170.33 (talk) 09:33, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  تاتو