Talk:Onna-musha

message: I have a small problem translating bugeisha as martial artist - the term donates something a little bit more professional.Peter Rehse 10:13, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Martial art?

message: isn't gozen just japanese for 'dame'? 79.220.92.196 (talk) 17:03, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  gozen as personal name 

message: There is a wiki article about Hangaku Gozen as well. Should it be added to the list of notable female warriors?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.71.204.79 (talk) 07:49, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Another example 

message: *Needs revision/clarification Masako Hojo was not a warrior or onna bugeisha but a political figure
*The preceding passage reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of the principles.  "Fearless devotion and selflessness are often directly related to quiet and passive obedience.  Nor is this limited to women warriors, this has to do with interpretation of Confucian principle laid out in didactic texts used at the time.  Also needs revision.Book of Filial Piety for Women It also bears mentioning that political marriages had been the norm much farther back than the Edo period. 
*Women were not allowed to be samurai. Samurai are a male only hereditary position passed from father to sons, typically on sons of his primary wife should he have multiple.  Noblewomen, like those of the samurai/bushi, were not to leave the home unaccompanied or risk sullying the reputation of their house.  Also, it was forbidden by law for anyone, male, female, commoner, or noble to travel between domains of different daimyo without the consent of the shogun/the proper travel documents.The Making of Modern Japan  This whole section is misleading in implying that female samurai existed during the Edo or Tokugawa period.  For reading discussing women with martial training the book "Women of the Mito Domain" discusses noblewomen being trained with naginata but they were not samurai or soldiers.Women of the Mito Domain
Special:Contributions/167.160.159.178 p.p. -KTo288 (talk) 11:22, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Feel free to integrate corrections and references into the body of article, however the operative word is integrate, this is an article not an essay, the discursive style where previously introduced ideas and assertions are examined and repudiated is not how articles are written here. Please use the talkpage for discussion. If you think something is factually wrong, Be bold and rewrite it especially as you seem to be able to reference your edits.--KTo288 (talk) 11:22, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: comments moved from article space

message: The article says:
: In contrast to the katana used universally by their male samurai counterparts, the most popular weapon-of-choice of onna-bugeishas are the naginata...
As far as I know, this is a misconception - the katana was never the primary weapon of the samurai; the samurai's primary weapons were the bow and the spear. Is this correct? SpectrumDT (talk) 08:23, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: You are correct. Samurai fought in battle primarily with ranged weapons (yumi/bows, teppou/arquebuses) and polearms (yari/spears, naginata/glaives), with conventional swords being mere backup weapons. Which is why I deleted that erroneous statement. The misconception (for both samurai and knights) probably derives from swords also being easily worn in peacetime and thus elevated to a symbol of their status. Twincast (talk) 12:49, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Katana overrated?

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:
* 
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 09:51, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion 

message: Hello Wikipedia Community, 
I wanted to explain both what I did and ask a few questions. 
First, the explanation. I edited a few words and phrases I thought were already had emphasis. One example is a sentence that described a clan "powerful and prominent" I decided to only keep "prominent" because inherently prominence includes power in a specific area. If anyone disagrees, I'm definitely fine with that. I also added hyphens between a few mentions of Onna-bugeisha to keep with the page's consistency. Also, I made all appearances in the beginning of the entry proper by making the "O" capital since it is a title. 
Now, my questions. As I scrolled through the entry I noticed there were weapons that were lower-cased. I just want to bring up the question: Are they all' not suppose to be proper? Another thing I noticed is the word shogun often being lower-case even when mentioning a specific shogun. I was not sure so I did not take the liberty to change what I wanted. I saw the same pattern when the word shinobi was mentioned as well. I do not know everything but I am pretty sure being a Shinobi is a title and should be capitalized but I would like someone to co-sign this before assuming.
There is a passage I want to bring attention to as well. 
It states the following: "The existence of these two prominent female generals confirms that the status of women during this time was still less unequal than future periods." 
This seems more like someone is making connections and not using a source to validate this assertion. A source would be excellent here. I did not delete this before consulting another Wikipedian. 
Hope this explains some of what I changed and addressed some questions.  Jalapinata (talk) 05:07, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyediting & Questions 

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 
The result of the move request was: Moved, unopposed (non-admin closure) BegbertBiggs (talk) 16:11, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Onna-bugeisha →  – The idea that onna-bugeisha is a term used by Japanologists or anyone else to describe historical/legendary Japanese woman warriors appears to be a WP:HOAX. At the time this article was created, it was almost immediately tagged as unsourced, and since that day it has been drastically expanded with "sourced" content from sources that seem to uniformly fail to use the phrase onna-bugeisha. A quick Googling of the phrase in Japanese brought up a number of popular historical novels (時代小説) and some academic papers that seem to mostly be about such historical novels. At least one uses the phrase to refer to women in the pre-modern popular media of China. As for English (maybe, like with Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jigai, the English term had a history separate from its Japanese root?), a blank Google Books search brings up a lot of hits, but limiting it to books predating the creation our article decimates those results. Conversely, the term onna-musha (女武者, the less-problematic equivalent term used in both the Asahi Nihon Rekishi Jinbutsu Jiten and the Nihon Jinmei Daijiten to describe Tomoe-gozen) actually does appear to have been used in English-language scholarship prior to 2006, and continues to be used today (though seemingly much less so, perhaps because since this article was created non-specialist sources have come to Wikipedia and thus used the phrase onna-bugeisha rather than consulting specialist sources). Noteworthy books that use it include Ningyo: The Art of the Japanese Doll, Gender Matters: Discourses of Violence in Early Modern Literature and the Arts, and several works on the Noh and kabuki theatres. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 07:01, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

text: Somewhat tellingly, Japanese Wikipedia doesn't have an article of this title, and, more disturbingly, most of the other foreign-language Wikipedia articles seem to be varying levels of translation of our article, and, even worse, the Google News hit-count comparison for 2006 and 2020 is even worse than that of Google Books. Spanish National Geographic is not inherently a reliable source on pre-modern Japanese history and I don't see anything on the author's resume to indicate that he has enough of a specialist knowledge on this topic to debunk Wikipedia, but it is always unsettling to see things like this find their way from Wikipedia into popular magazines that are theoretically reliable sources of information. (Needless to say, I have been unable to find any instance of National Geographic using the phrase prior to 2006.) Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 08:00, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 15 December 2020 

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) 08:20, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: Hi! i checked all sources and searched on google and findout, that the sources cited are fictitious. Only this article called japanese warriors onna musha. I find out that real name for female warriors was onna bugeisha.
So my conclusion is that this article is a hoax, therefore, this article can be deleted.
--90.128.39.199 (talk) 18:27, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that much of the information in this article is a hoax. It was devised by someone back in 2006 in order to trick people into believing that women warriors played a much bigger part in Japanese history than any serious historian (including virtually all Japanese feminist historians) would admit, and that such women warriors were called "onna-bugeisha", a word that did exist prior to that date (in works of fiction, mind you), but that meant something quite different. I do not know if this was done for shits and giggles and to make people on the Internet (who don't know anything about Japanese history, the history of feminism in Japan, or even seemingly the history of images of Japanese and "Asian" women in western media) make what they no doubt thought were "feminist" statements but were in fact equating Japanese women with "geisha". Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 12:55, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: On a reread (ironically some weeks after someone vandalized my comment and I reverted them...), the final sentence of the above was poorly constructed. I don't remember quite what I meant, so I won't alter it, but I probably meant to say  There are, no doubt, fake "feminists" on the Internet who don't actually know about women's issues in Japan or anything in Japanese history for that matter (I won't name names, but I first came to this article because a white male YouTuber I occasionally watch "ironically" seemingly got a lot of his information from this article, while his other videos make it it pretty clear that he's not an actual feminist), but it wouldn't make sense to say that such people were the ones being trolled. It would be non-Japanese authentic feminists who would have been the actual targets of this trolling, if trolling was even the intent. It might have just been for "shits and giggles". Or it might not have been a hoax at all but a case of someone falling victim to a telephone game. (Back in 2006, just two years after I started studying Japanese, I definitely would have believed Ikenami's novels were an accurate reflection of Japanese history can definitely could have misinterpreted 女武芸者 as referring to something it didn't.) Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 02:15, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  this article is a hoax 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
* 
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:51, 9 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion 

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) 18:53, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion