Talk:Seal (East Asia)

message: The word chop does not come from Malay, it comes from Hindi where is has the exact meaning and is usually pronounced as chappa----ravi@suns.ae
Inkan should be merged here because these are essentially the same things, devised from the same tradition, and only differentiated by the different languages. We've already included Japanese in the lead, why not create a new section from that article? --Jiang 06:01, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: *How about changing the title from Seal (Chinese) to "Seal (Oriental)" or "Seal (Eastern)"? Oriental/Eastern being broader terms that apply to the region and culture/s in general, since Japanese and Korean usage is also mentioned. Eilu 13:59, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *No. (IMHO.) Japanese and Korean usage of the Chinese seal does not differ significantly and is essentially the same as Chinese usages. What Japanese today use are still Chinese seals. Besides, Eastern and Oriental are too generic. -- Миборовский U|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai! 23:28, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Words and merger

message: "迴文印 ??? Character Seals: Same as the personal name seal, but the family name and personal name is seperated by the word 印. Sometimes used in writing (i.e. to sign a preface of a book)."
Why are there question marks? What is the difference between this and a Personal Name seal? --Jiang 00:31, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Character seals 

message: Searching for "Chinese chop" should point to this article (currently returns "no page with that title" with most relevant search result being chop suey). A lot of people probably call it that, or assume that a Chinese seal is called a chop. Eilu 02:36, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. -- Миборовский U|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai! 02:58, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Accessibility 

message: Types mentions "Zhuwen" as having red characters, example is labelled as "Hongwen." Which term is correct or are both acceptable? (I know Hong is red and wen is words but not sure regarding Zhu; is this an alternate prononciation?)
Also, can someone find a picture of the "another type" which is mentioned as being both zhuwen and baiwen together? What is this called? I've never encountered one; may need further verification.
Eilu 13:50, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It should be Zhuwen. My bad. -- Миборовский U|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai! 23:25, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Types of Seals clarification 

message: Do you guys think we can submit this article to peer review and then hopefully FAC? -- Миборовский U|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai! 03:03, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peer review? 

message: I am not sure if personal seal's usage in China can be considered widespread. I live in US now, but back in China, no one I know carried their seals with them. It's more ceremonial than otherwise, you would use it on a formal occasion. For daily stuff like bank withdraw, you just need signature and present your ID. 
It is still used by government and corporations. It's not difficult to find official stamped documents. --Voidvector 23:13, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Personal seal usage in China 

message: I feel that since this article covers seals and their usage in Korea and Japan, we should rename the article to reflect that. Something like "Seals (Asia"?
Kerowyn  Leave a note  06:55, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, just saw the discussion at the top of the page. I still think that the title should be changed in the interest of accuracy. Kerowyn  Leave a note  06:57, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Article title

message: Other things about inkan: ″The increasing ease with which modern technology allows hanko fraud is beginning to cause some concern that the present system will not be able to survive.″ Sorry but where is the source? Please erase this - I found nothing about this or sa;e as for Western signature... Gentil Coquelicot (talk) 13:48, 12 December 2015 (GMT+9)
: I'm a laser cutter and engraver. I can churn out a reproduction seal very easily, from a photograph of another seal's imprint. It's just not hard these days. Andy Dingley (talk) 09:35, 12 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Modern forgery 

message: Would Chinese character seal or Seal (Chinese characters) be an acceptable compromise name?  Because that's their defining characteristic, and even in Japan and Korea seals use almost exclusively Chinese characters.  (Hiragana/katakana/hangul seals do exist, but are quite unusual.) Jpatokal (talk) 07:39, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I guess Wengier moved it back at this because of seals in East Asia are generally inscribed with "Chinese characters", but I also disagree with the idea of the title containing "Chinese characters". Nowadays in South Korea, seal with hangul is getting widely used for making personal or official purposes instead of hanja such as bills, bank documents or company seals. I believe North Korea would do the same since they discarded to use hanja for writing system). Therefore, Seal (Chinese) and "Seal (Chinese character)" could not hold such info. Seal (East Asia) seems to be good to me. --Caspian blue (talk) 12:00, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

text: Not to mention (increasingly) Latin script as well. How about Seal (stamp) or Seal (chop)? Bendono (talk) 08:01, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

text: This Chinese innovation has spread widely, especially in East Asia. The article includes important information about seals not only in China, but also in other places. I support renaming the article to encompass its contents. The present name, "Seal (Chinese)," is not broad enough. Fg2 (talk) 11:26, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

text: My main problem with the article's name is that the article inkan, which solely relates to the seals as used in Japan, redirects to this article, but the title of this article does not seem to reflect that at all. --TorsodogTalk 16:12, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

text: Perhaps something like Name seal or Name stamp would work? ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 17:20, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Naming 

message: OK, I don't know much about this, but it would be good to have some info on the direction into which the characters are written. I've seen seals with the 印 in any of the four quadrants, which is slightly confusing. Is there a rule about this? This site has them at the bottom left, while another one at chinese-tools.com (a pretty cool seal generator) puts them at the top left. The only comment so far about this is the rotating characters seal with its anticlockwise chars, but it would be good to have some sort of explanation about the order (clockwise, anticlockwise, N-shaped, Z-shaped, etc) and the starting points. Anyone? JREL (talk) 20:05, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Depends on the country and the person. In Japanese, like Chinese I think, you traditionally read from right to left and up to down. In Japan, you can put the characters whatever way you want. Or not use characters at all. As for inserting "印", I have never seen that before, and it looks retarded.184.155.130.147 (talk) 00:22, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Character direction 

message: I saw this Japanese term used for a cheap inkan. Maybe it should be added to the article? Additionally, from where does it derive? Mo-Al (talk) 16:56, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: See 三文判. Bendono (talk) 17:52, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

text: FWIW, I asked a friend in Japan if there was a more specific name for the type of seal referred to in the Mitome in (認印) section of the article by, "Most Japanese also have a far less formal seal used to sign personal letters or initial changes in documents; this is referred to by the also broadly generic term hanko." He said that if someone was pressed to come up with a name for that type of seal, they might say Sanmoband (三文判), but that the term Sanmoband really just refers to an inexpensive off-the-shelf seal and that those far-less-formal seals are, in fact, just a type of Mitome in. I do, however, think that the term is worth mentioning in the article and have boldly added it in the appropriate place. TransporterMan (talk) 16:00, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  三文判 "sanmonban" 

message: I have been bold and added the Kanji for Ginko in with a high degree of certainty (because it appears at http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E9%8A%80%E8%A1%8C%E5%8D%B0), but I did not add the kanji for Gago in, which I'm fairly sure is 雅号印, because I found it odd that it doesn't appear on the ja.wikipedia page (which I think uses 落款 for the Gago in type of seal). Can someone who is bilingual add the right Kanji for Gago in? TransporterMan (talk) 14:04, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Further research indicates that 雅号印 is correct for Gago in. Rakkan (落款), which is used in the ja.wikipedia article, means "a signature," which in reference to an artwork can include the artist's real-name seal, plus the artist's Gago in pen name seal, plus other information, but the pen name seal itself is a 雅号印. I'm going to be bold again and add those Kanji to the article. TransporterMan (talk) 15:06, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kanji for Ginko in and issue regarding Gago in 

message: I am proposing the following clarifying revision to the third, fourth, fifth, and sixth paragraphs of the mitome in section of the article (additions in bold, deletions struck out):
:A mitome in's form is governed by far fewer customs than jitsu in and ginko in. However, mitome in for business use adhere to a handful of strongly observed customs. The size is the attribute most strongly governed by social custom. It is usually the size of an American penny or smaller. A male's is usually slightly larger than a female's, and a junior employee's is always smaller than his bosses' and his senior co-workers', in keeping with office social hierarchy. To violate this custom would be roughly equivalent to a Western company's junior employees parking in a senior employee's reserved parking spot. The mitome in always has the person's family name, and usually does not have the person's given name (shita no namae). It is often round or oval, but square ones are not uncommon, and rectangular ones are not unheard-of. They are always regular geometric figures. They can have red lettering on a blank field (shu bun) or the opposite (haku bun). Borderlines around their edges are optional.
:[Paragraph moved] Most Japanese also have a far less formal seal mitome in used to sign personal letters or initial changes in documents; this is referred to by the also broadly generic term hanko. They often display only a single hiragana, kanji ideograph, or katakana character. They are as often round or oval as they are square. They vary in size from 0.5 to 1.5 cm wide; women's again tend to be smaller than men's.
:Plastic mitome in in popular Japanese names can be obtained from stationery stores for less than US$1, though ones made from inexpensive stone are also very popular. Inexpensive Such inexpensive prefabricated seals are called , and are unacceptable for business use. Prefabricated rubber stamps are unacceptable for business purposes.
:Mitome in and lesser seals are usually stored in inexpensive plastic cases, sometimes with small supplies of red paste or a stamp pad included.
:[Original location of moved paragraph]
I am seeking comments, rather than being bold, because I'm not certain that the addition of "for business use" in the first paragraph quoted above and the elimination of the reference to "rubber stamps" in the third paragraph are appropriate. Though I did not change it, I also wonder if the statement, "though ones made from inexpensive stone are also very popular," in the third paragraph doesn't refer to the do-it-yourself-kit seals mentioned later in the article; if so, then those ought to be acceptable for business, I would think, since they are custom-made.
Comments from individuals having personal experience with mitome in would be particularly welcome. TransporterMan (talk) 17:18, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Proposal abandoned after additional research indicated that parts of proposal were of doubtful accuracy.TransporterMan (talk) 21:53, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Seeking Consensus: ''mitome in'' subsection revision 

message: So what would a seal for Wikipedia look like? Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 03:18, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: It's at the top left of every page...184.155.130.147 (talk) 16:23, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Seal of Wikipedia 

message: Is there a reason why this article is a different subject from Seal (emblem)? It appears to be the same, just with regional examples. Also, the Japanese and Korean sections are unreferenced. A merge may be worth discussing? Widefox (talk) 22:09, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: East Asian and Vietnamese seals have a completely different culture to them than seals in other regions of the world, both in style and production and the way they were used. Don't get me wrong there are plenty of similarities with the ways seals were used elsewhere, but in a lot of ways they are distinctive enough to warrant a separate article. --Donald Trung (talk)  12:47, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Seal (emblem) topic 

message: Yug (talk) 10:08, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Illustration 

message: This section is plagiarized, word for word. I am not knowledgeable enough to rewrite it but it comes up in a quick google search. Someone please fix it.  
: I've moved this from article to talk page. Please state where you think it's plagiarised from (this makes checking easier) and be careful they didn't take it from here. Andy Dingley (talk) 11:30, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyvio allegation on [[Seal_(East_Asia)#Seal_paste]] 

message: Would  be a good illustration for the Korean section? Zipzipzip (talk) 19:42, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Illustration from Walters Art Museum 

message: OK, just stop now. 8-(  We've gone from 
* Seal (East Asia)
to 
* Seals in East Asia
and now 
* Official Seals in East Asia
The last one also has the problems that it broke all the inbound wls to the double redirect (OK, a bot caught it later) and the name now breaks WP:MOS for the capital S on "Seal". The name is  also now plural, contra to WP:MOS. 
Both of these renames are also, IMHO, a poor move as they are against the principle of using name disambiguation (the "(East Asia)" part) to make inline linking to the page easier from other pages. A longer, conversational, name like this can't be used as easily from an inline wikilink like, 
: "The Han Emperor applied his ." 
to give an easy link without having to hand-write a long-winded piped link like 
: "The Han Emperor applied his seal.".
Andy Dingley (talk) 10:24, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed, the name "seal" is most common and concise, and "(East Asia)" is a sufficient disambiguator. Besides, this article is about a specific kind of seal and not about seals in general in East Asia. --Cold Season (talk) 11:08, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that the undiscussed moves are problematic, and I would support moving back to Seal (East Asia), for concision and minimal disambiguation as Cold Season mentioned above.  Any other editors care to weigh in and discuss? Wilhelm Meis (☎ Diskuss | ✍ Beiträge) 15:02, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Repeated undiscussed renames 

message: Mine is round. And fully legal. How do you explain that?184.155.130.147 (talk) 00:06, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  実印-Must be square-never round 

message: Why is the history section about fingerprinting?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonk (talk • contribs) 16:53, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know. It was mostly added by a blocked user, and it is a load of rubbish, so I have removed the entire section. BabelStone (talk) 17:22, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  History section 

message: I noticed a large range of "POV-pushing" types on Wikipedia that try to define Viet Nam in different ways, let us look at the current section: "" This is literally identical to "seal culture" in the People's Republic of China where official government seals are round seals with a red star in the middle while in Vietnam it is the national emblem and for corporate seals which are names with the corporation's registration. From what I can tell both South Korea and the Republic of China have this system too with only Japan having maintained a system somewhat similar to how it used to be before 1945. So why call out Viet Nam in particular for having "abandoned" its seal culture (which has only happened on an official level as Vietnamese artists use traditional Chinese seals in the same way as Mainland Chinese artists).
What is more fitting is the location of Viet Nam within this article at "Usage in Southeast Asia" which is geographically correct but is then placed after the Philippines which while being derived from Chinese seal culture is completely different while Vietnamese seal culture was identical until 1945. The issue is that on Wikipedia there are people pushing conflicting points of view for example you have the "Pure Land nationalists" that try to present Vietnamese history by completely ignoring any Chinese elements within it unless it is unavoidable (but even then some resort to creating fantasies to avoid "the Chinese reality") and making Viet Nam "a purely South-East Asian country" (whatever that means), the polar opposite of these people are those that try to make Viet Nam "more Chinese" (note that I am not referring to the country of "China" here but "Chinese civilisation"), and the "Post-Colonialists" that try to take the position of one of the earlier two (2) types and then present colonialism as if it "ruined" whatever was "uniquely Vietnamese" by the French. Likewise when it concerns "East Asian history" (which already excludes Viet Nam based on geography) we have a type of nationalist I would like to term "Chinese Nation Statists" (or alternatively "Chinese Civilisation Statists") that present Chinese civilisation as intrinsic to what is now Mainland China but wholly external to countries outside of it (ironically Taiwanese nationalists adopt this view as well to differentiate themselves from "the Chinese"). All thee POV-pushers violate the NPOV in some way. Sometimes I am convinced that each camp want to use Wikipedia to "gaslight its readers" by presenting these biased historiographies, this article in its current state about Viet Nam actually manages to do all of the above, it manages to exclude a lot about Viet Nam in the history of Chinese-style seals while also presenting it as being on equal footing with the Philippines in respects to adoption of Chinese seal culture. To read the part about Hong Kong: "" Most of this also applies to Viet Nam.
But unlike Hong Kong Viet Nam actually maintained all of its seal culture during the colonial period and some of it endured well into the 1950's. I managed to add this to the "Seals of the Nguyễn dynasty" article because the way it is presented in this article makes it difficult to actually cover it in the appropriate ways, but I think that the general overview of the history of seals in Viet Nam needs a re-write. What might be wiser would be to have separate articles about Chinese-style seal cultures in Japan, Korea, the Liao Dynasty, Okinawa, Etc. To try and combat any biases that might exist in such a general article like this one. --Donald Trung (talk)  08:17, 3 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why is Vietnam seen as lesser? 

message: I'm planning on writing a new history section which, kind of hypocritical in light of my above diatribe, will be quite sinocentric. I think that this is fine for its early history but will ask others to expand upon it with both more "general" and "localised" information if possible as I don't have access to the wealth of information about East Asian and Vietnamese seals throughout history but will add what I can find (when I'll find the time). --Donald Trung (talk)  12:38, 3 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  New history section 

message: An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect :Seal (Chinese and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 October 27#Seal (Chinese until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  Steel1943 (talk) 19:21, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Seal (Chinese" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 20:06, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: There seems to be an ongoing edit war between several users about the following text: 
; === Filipino usage ===
The Philippines also had a sealing culture prior to Spanish colonization. However, when the Spaniards succeeded in colonizing the islands, they abolished the practice and burned all documents they captured from the natives while forcibly establishing a Roman Catholic-based rule. Records on Philippine seals were forgotten until ancient seals made of ivory were found in an archaeological site in Butuan in the 1970s. The seal, now known as the Butuan Ivory Seal, has been declared a National Cultural Treasure and is in the collection of the National Museum of the Philippines. The seal is inscribed with the word "Butwan" in a native suyat script. The discovery of the seal proved that pre-colonial Filipinos, at least in coastal areas, used seals on paper. Before the discovery of the seal, it was thought that ancient Filipinos only used bamboo, metal, bark, and leaves for writing. The presence of paper documents in the classical era of the Philippines is also backed by research by H. Otley Beyer, father of Philippine anthropology, finding that Spanish friars 'boasted' about burning ancient Philippine documents with suyat inscriptions, one of the reasons why very few ancient documents from the Philippines survive. Nowadays, younger generations are trying to revive the use of seals, notably in signing pieces of art such as drawings, paintings, calligraphy, and literary works.
I don't really see how this type of seal is in any way related to the East Asian and Vietnamese seals otherwise discussed in the article, these Pre-Hispanic seals seem to come from a completely unrelated tradition and would probably have to be their own article and not a section here, especially not one which makes it seem on equal footing with Vietnam (which fully copied the Chinese system). The "native suyat script" mentioned in the above text also doesn't seem to be relevant to Chinese seal script as used in East Asian and Vietnamese sigillography, my guess is that the person / people that added just saw "Southeast Asian" and thought that any native seal culture from the region fitted in not knowing that the Vietnamese tradition is identical to the Chinese, Korean, Japanese, Etc. traditions. Singapore, which is a Sinosphere country, is a lot more fitting for inclusion than the Philippines. Likewise, Overseas Chinese in the Philippines and Nusantara also use the Chinese seal types, but none of these are related to the forgotten seals of the Philippines. --Donald Trung (talk)  12:43, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Going over that section again, it might be better to move it to the regular "Seal (emblem)" article. --Donald Trung (talk)  12:49, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

text: The removal of this section was 100% (one-hundred percent) justified from the main article. --Donald Trung (talk)  14:56, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Filipino usage? 

message: I keep reading about the Mongol Empire's imperial seals, but are there any images of the prints of these seals? As I keep seeing references to them, yet I seem unable to find documents with them online. --Donald Trung (talk)  12:44, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Imperial seals of the Mongols 

message: I've noticed an odd trend when working with these articles and that is that geography is misused to try to exclude Vietnam from any topics related to the Sinosphere. In this version of this article one can clearly see that the seal culture of Vietnam which is identical with that of China, Japan, and Korea is regarded as "less important" in Vietnam and Vietnamese history. In fact, for years the Philippines was placed above Vietnam and had detailed information about a completely unrelated seal culture while dismissing their usage in Vietnam. The way the article is currently written also suggests that when the French arrived these seals just disappeared and that Vietnam's current seal culture is somehow different from that in the People's Republic of China. None of which are true, currently the traditional seal is still used as a personal seal in Vietnam in exactly the same way as it is being used in Mainland China, likewise the claim "" also fully applies to Vietnam, though government seals typically use the emblem of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam while companies use their name, not too dissimilar from Chinese government seals. This doesn't just apply here, it also applies elsewhere as Vietnam is often excluded from "East Asian" topics because Vietnam is "Not East Asian". 
This often leads to many articles about topics which are identical in Vietnamese culture to those found in Chinese, Japanese, and Korean cultures to be excluded, see examples, here, here, here, here, here, and here. 
I think that more editors in the future will try to remove Vietnam being mentioned from this article in the future because the name "East Asia" might imply something other than the Sinosphere. --Donald Trung (talk)  14:44, 27 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  (Mis)using geography to exclude Vietnam from the Sinosphere.