This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Onna-musha article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
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)
This paragraph "During the earlier Heian and Kamakura periods, women who were prominent on the battlefield were the exception rather than the rule. Japanese ideals of femininity predisposed most women to powerlessness, in conflict with a female warrior role.[2] Women warriors were nonetheless" is incomplete. Perhaps someone could look over the edit history and restore what was said? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Missed the Action ( talk • contribs) 00:30, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
I am a bit concerned about this article. The one source no longer works and I have been unable to find information on the internet. Yes, there were "women warriors" in Japan, but is this term more the view of one academic?
I'm hesitating over nominating for deletion. Although I won't state this is a completely "false" term, I'd like to see it being widely used to deserve an entire article on it. John Smith's ( talk) 11:18, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
Fg2 ( talk) 11:52, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
You guys got to be kidding me. If the title is incorrect (I have no idea about this), just change it. Like, move the article to an other name. Or in the worst case, merge. Not delete. -- Asperchu ( talk) 16:25, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
isn't gozen just japanese for 'dame'? 79.220.92.196 ( talk) 17:03, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
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)
Special:Contributions/167.160.159.178 p.p. - KTo288 ( talk) 11:22, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
The article says:
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)
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)
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)
The result of the move request was: Moved, unopposed ( non-admin closure) BegbertBiggs ( talk) 16:11, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
Onna-bugeisha → Onna-musha – 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, [1] 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) [2] and some academic papers that seem to mostly be about such historical novels. [3] 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. [4] [5] 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 [6]) actually does appear to have been used in English-language scholarship prior to 2006, [7] and continues to be used today [8] (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, [9] Gender Matters: Discourses of Violence in Early Modern Literature and the Arts, [10] and several works on the Noh and kabuki theatres. [11] [12] [13] Hijiri 88 ( 聖 やや) 07:01, 15 December 2020 (UTC) —Relisting. BegbertBiggs ( talk) 10:59, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
There probably ought to be an article on the life, status, and role of women in samurai families, indeed, but onna-musha would not be a good title for such an article. Hijiri 88 ( 聖 やや) 10:36, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
I have just noticed that this page has been moved in January 2021 by the non-admin proposer of the move, @ BegbertBiggs. As per the opening line of WP:Requested moves/Closing instructions#Non-admin closure: Experienced and uninvolved registered editors in good standing are allowed to close requested move surveys. This guidance has been broken here and subsequently the move should potentially be reverted.
Additionally, I have concerns about the justification for the move having been due to a WP:HOAX claim which seems too strong. A search on Google Books will show that the previous page name of Onna-bugeisha has been used prominently in publications numerous times, for example: Onna Bugeisha (2014) [16]; Japanese Women in Warfare: Naginata, Empress Jingu, Onna Bugeisha, Matsudaira Teru, Tomoe Gozen, Komatsuhime, Kunoichi, Mochizuki Chiyome (2010) [17]; Women Warriors Tales of the Onna Bugeisha [18]; Bushido Code, The Way Of The Warrior In Modern Times: Chapter 3 - Onna-Bugeisha - The Female Samurai Warriors (2019) [ [19]; History as They Saw It Iconic Moments from the Past in Color (2012) [20].
Whether or not the move was inherently 'correct' or not the term 'Onna bugeisha' seems to be fully in common usage by this point in English and needs to be mentioned, otherwise you have an article in which none of the references include the title of the page. You can see the term 'Onna bugeisha' across many popular news/magazine articles using the term [21] [22] [23], as well history exhibitions such as this one in Turin [24], as well as sites such as Alamy [25], which has 32 images tagged for Onna Bugeisha compared to 5 for Onna musha.
My question to @ BegbertBiggs: how can you disregard these sources? Seemingly because you feel they were influenced by this article title, when it was a stub until very recently. At the very least the term 'Onna bugeisha' should be referred to and bolded in the lead or there could be a section on the term to describe the terms 'onna-musha', 'onna-bugeisha' or even better 'Female warriors in Japanese history'. In fact, the only other editor to comment on your move proposal was @ Hijiri88, who explicitly said that they didn't feel Onna-musha was a good title for an article on the lives of 'samurai women' (which this article effectively is at this stage, though the term samurai shouldn't be used for women).
The article needs a re-work and complete re-reference and in my opinion a move to a more general title such as the one proposed above Female warriors in Japanese history would solve a lot of the issues here and fit better alongside/within the existing category:Japanese women in warfare. Mountaincirque talk 12:33, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
this page has been moved in January 2021 by the non-admin proposer of the move, @BegbertBiggs: I did not propose the move. I was an uninvolved editor and I closed the move as unopposed, because it was. If you prefer a different title, feel free to open a new request with your sources. BegbertBiggs ( talk) 13:35, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
I apologise to @ BegbertBiggs, the way that you had relisted the move request showed up on my android tablet display made it appear (to me) you were the original one who requested the move, I can now see having logged in to my PC that is not the case, the way that OP had twice responded to their own post conversationally also confused me. I am withdrawing from this page as I am intimidated by Hijiri 88 whose aggressive comments both here and on my talk page have been highly incommensurate to my civil attempt to check the veracity of this page move, I hope that others can use comprehension to see that my comments were well-meant and not intended to mislead anyone. I hope that some other brave editors in the future can look at the terminologies used here and come to a fair representation of this concept (and work out what concept this page is trying to cover which seems to have no consensus), as well as taking into account the most commonly used terms in English as noted at Wikipedia:Naming conventions (use English). Mountaincirque talk 14:33, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
Just to add another view here. First, I think it's important for everyone to remain calm and not seek to point fingers at each other.
Second, the problem with this topic is that there was or is no consensus on how to refer to Japanese female warriors because the topic has been neglected for so long. Instead works about Japanese women focused on their involvement in court life, literature, politics, etc.
It is, however, not a hoax to say that there were female warriors in Japanese history or that they were prominent in a way that they weren't in other societies. My reading of WP:HOAX is not that you shouldn't have an article title that isn't commonly used in academic circles, but that you shouldn't try to make ficticious articles to encourage that disinformation to spread.
If we really want to get the Wikipedia rulebook out, we should probably be using "female samurai" on the basis of WP's rules on common names and because it's the thing that best explains the article immediately to an uninformed reader. That's why WP uses "ninja" as the title of the article and not shinobi, despite the fact that shinobi is the correct reading from the Japanese. The point of that article isn't to force the reader into understanding they're stupid for using the word ninja.
Yes, generally speaking only men were samurai. But at the same time Ii Naotora was a woman and a daimyo, and I'm struggling to think of a daimyo that was also not a samurai. So it seemed that there were rules that stoppped women being samurai until those rules were broken.
Personally I think that it doesn't really matter all that much whether the article is called Onna-musha or Onna-bugeisha for now. However, I think there shouldn't be any further title moves, especially to something as uninspiring as "female warriors in Japanese history" just as it would be to have an article called "dried leaf water" instead of tea. John Smith's ( talk) 13:30, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
I'm struggling to think of a daimyo that was also not a samuraileaves little room for interpretation); the latter is a somewhat iffier matter, given that the archetypal examples are to a large extent more "legend" than "fact" (indeed, even the new example you name seems to be mostly known from various pop culture properties, doesn't have an entry in any of the encyclopedias on Kotobank, and at least one historian questions whether she was a woman at all -- that's the second hit for "井伊直虎" site:.ac.jp), but that's not an argument I have ever attempted to make on this page. There is, of course, no arguing against the historical existence, and female gender, of the fujo-tai, and the sources for Tomoe-gozen are relatively good and probably establish her historicity as a female military commander, but that is completely irrelevant to whether or not such people were called "onna-bugeisha" prior to 2006. Hijiri 88 ( 聖 やや) 01:21, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
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 nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 08:20, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
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)
You can't delete an entire page without sufficient evidence. Why not just change the title to onna-bugeisha? Threedotshk ( talk) 13:56, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
I do not know if this was done just for shits and giggles or by a rightist with the intent of embarrassing "the Internet feminists" by tricking them into inadvertently equating Japanese women with "geisha".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)
To get things moving along, let's make some lists. Feel free to contribute to them. This way, we can figure out which sources use these words and ··· 日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 22:30, 20 July 2021 (UTC)
challenged the Tokugawa clan, thus leading the Siege of Osaka(emphasis added).
Please be as detailed as possible when adding a reference to the list below.
Please be as detailed as possible when adding a reference to the list below.
Please include the other term used. Please be as detailed as possible when adding a reference to the list below.
Please be as detailed as possible when adding a reference to the list below.
Please be as detailed as possible when adding a reference to the list below.
Please include the other term used. Please be as detailed as possible when adding a reference to the list below.
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)
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 nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 18:53, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
Although it's correct that there were female guards in the Ōoku, I'm not certain how wide this practice was in the wider samurai community. Given we haven't had a citation since October 2022 I've taken it out. Besides, it's not a vital piece of information givne there's no discussion of it later in the article. John Smith's ( talk) 05:08, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
I've removed two paragraphs. The text was mostly uncited except for the dispute over Ii Naotora's identity, and I don't think that particularly adds anything to the page. John Smith's ( talk) 05:18, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Onna-musha article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
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)
This paragraph "During the earlier Heian and Kamakura periods, women who were prominent on the battlefield were the exception rather than the rule. Japanese ideals of femininity predisposed most women to powerlessness, in conflict with a female warrior role.[2] Women warriors were nonetheless" is incomplete. Perhaps someone could look over the edit history and restore what was said? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Missed the Action ( talk • contribs) 00:30, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
I am a bit concerned about this article. The one source no longer works and I have been unable to find information on the internet. Yes, there were "women warriors" in Japan, but is this term more the view of one academic?
I'm hesitating over nominating for deletion. Although I won't state this is a completely "false" term, I'd like to see it being widely used to deserve an entire article on it. John Smith's ( talk) 11:18, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
Fg2 ( talk) 11:52, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
You guys got to be kidding me. If the title is incorrect (I have no idea about this), just change it. Like, move the article to an other name. Or in the worst case, merge. Not delete. -- Asperchu ( talk) 16:25, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
isn't gozen just japanese for 'dame'? 79.220.92.196 ( talk) 17:03, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
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)
Special:Contributions/167.160.159.178 p.p. - KTo288 ( talk) 11:22, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
The article says:
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)
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)
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)
The result of the move request was: Moved, unopposed ( non-admin closure) BegbertBiggs ( talk) 16:11, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
Onna-bugeisha → Onna-musha – 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, [1] 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) [2] and some academic papers that seem to mostly be about such historical novels. [3] 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. [4] [5] 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 [6]) actually does appear to have been used in English-language scholarship prior to 2006, [7] and continues to be used today [8] (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, [9] Gender Matters: Discourses of Violence in Early Modern Literature and the Arts, [10] and several works on the Noh and kabuki theatres. [11] [12] [13] Hijiri 88 ( 聖 やや) 07:01, 15 December 2020 (UTC) —Relisting. BegbertBiggs ( talk) 10:59, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
There probably ought to be an article on the life, status, and role of women in samurai families, indeed, but onna-musha would not be a good title for such an article. Hijiri 88 ( 聖 やや) 10:36, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
I have just noticed that this page has been moved in January 2021 by the non-admin proposer of the move, @ BegbertBiggs. As per the opening line of WP:Requested moves/Closing instructions#Non-admin closure: Experienced and uninvolved registered editors in good standing are allowed to close requested move surveys. This guidance has been broken here and subsequently the move should potentially be reverted.
Additionally, I have concerns about the justification for the move having been due to a WP:HOAX claim which seems too strong. A search on Google Books will show that the previous page name of Onna-bugeisha has been used prominently in publications numerous times, for example: Onna Bugeisha (2014) [16]; Japanese Women in Warfare: Naginata, Empress Jingu, Onna Bugeisha, Matsudaira Teru, Tomoe Gozen, Komatsuhime, Kunoichi, Mochizuki Chiyome (2010) [17]; Women Warriors Tales of the Onna Bugeisha [18]; Bushido Code, The Way Of The Warrior In Modern Times: Chapter 3 - Onna-Bugeisha - The Female Samurai Warriors (2019) [ [19]; History as They Saw It Iconic Moments from the Past in Color (2012) [20].
Whether or not the move was inherently 'correct' or not the term 'Onna bugeisha' seems to be fully in common usage by this point in English and needs to be mentioned, otherwise you have an article in which none of the references include the title of the page. You can see the term 'Onna bugeisha' across many popular news/magazine articles using the term [21] [22] [23], as well history exhibitions such as this one in Turin [24], as well as sites such as Alamy [25], which has 32 images tagged for Onna Bugeisha compared to 5 for Onna musha.
My question to @ BegbertBiggs: how can you disregard these sources? Seemingly because you feel they were influenced by this article title, when it was a stub until very recently. At the very least the term 'Onna bugeisha' should be referred to and bolded in the lead or there could be a section on the term to describe the terms 'onna-musha', 'onna-bugeisha' or even better 'Female warriors in Japanese history'. In fact, the only other editor to comment on your move proposal was @ Hijiri88, who explicitly said that they didn't feel Onna-musha was a good title for an article on the lives of 'samurai women' (which this article effectively is at this stage, though the term samurai shouldn't be used for women).
The article needs a re-work and complete re-reference and in my opinion a move to a more general title such as the one proposed above Female warriors in Japanese history would solve a lot of the issues here and fit better alongside/within the existing category:Japanese women in warfare. Mountaincirque talk 12:33, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
this page has been moved in January 2021 by the non-admin proposer of the move, @BegbertBiggs: I did not propose the move. I was an uninvolved editor and I closed the move as unopposed, because it was. If you prefer a different title, feel free to open a new request with your sources. BegbertBiggs ( talk) 13:35, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
I apologise to @ BegbertBiggs, the way that you had relisted the move request showed up on my android tablet display made it appear (to me) you were the original one who requested the move, I can now see having logged in to my PC that is not the case, the way that OP had twice responded to their own post conversationally also confused me. I am withdrawing from this page as I am intimidated by Hijiri 88 whose aggressive comments both here and on my talk page have been highly incommensurate to my civil attempt to check the veracity of this page move, I hope that others can use comprehension to see that my comments were well-meant and not intended to mislead anyone. I hope that some other brave editors in the future can look at the terminologies used here and come to a fair representation of this concept (and work out what concept this page is trying to cover which seems to have no consensus), as well as taking into account the most commonly used terms in English as noted at Wikipedia:Naming conventions (use English). Mountaincirque talk 14:33, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
Just to add another view here. First, I think it's important for everyone to remain calm and not seek to point fingers at each other.
Second, the problem with this topic is that there was or is no consensus on how to refer to Japanese female warriors because the topic has been neglected for so long. Instead works about Japanese women focused on their involvement in court life, literature, politics, etc.
It is, however, not a hoax to say that there were female warriors in Japanese history or that they were prominent in a way that they weren't in other societies. My reading of WP:HOAX is not that you shouldn't have an article title that isn't commonly used in academic circles, but that you shouldn't try to make ficticious articles to encourage that disinformation to spread.
If we really want to get the Wikipedia rulebook out, we should probably be using "female samurai" on the basis of WP's rules on common names and because it's the thing that best explains the article immediately to an uninformed reader. That's why WP uses "ninja" as the title of the article and not shinobi, despite the fact that shinobi is the correct reading from the Japanese. The point of that article isn't to force the reader into understanding they're stupid for using the word ninja.
Yes, generally speaking only men were samurai. But at the same time Ii Naotora was a woman and a daimyo, and I'm struggling to think of a daimyo that was also not a samurai. So it seemed that there were rules that stoppped women being samurai until those rules were broken.
Personally I think that it doesn't really matter all that much whether the article is called Onna-musha or Onna-bugeisha for now. However, I think there shouldn't be any further title moves, especially to something as uninspiring as "female warriors in Japanese history" just as it would be to have an article called "dried leaf water" instead of tea. John Smith's ( talk) 13:30, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
I'm struggling to think of a daimyo that was also not a samuraileaves little room for interpretation); the latter is a somewhat iffier matter, given that the archetypal examples are to a large extent more "legend" than "fact" (indeed, even the new example you name seems to be mostly known from various pop culture properties, doesn't have an entry in any of the encyclopedias on Kotobank, and at least one historian questions whether she was a woman at all -- that's the second hit for "井伊直虎" site:.ac.jp), but that's not an argument I have ever attempted to make on this page. There is, of course, no arguing against the historical existence, and female gender, of the fujo-tai, and the sources for Tomoe-gozen are relatively good and probably establish her historicity as a female military commander, but that is completely irrelevant to whether or not such people were called "onna-bugeisha" prior to 2006. Hijiri 88 ( 聖 やや) 01:21, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
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 nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 08:20, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
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)
You can't delete an entire page without sufficient evidence. Why not just change the title to onna-bugeisha? Threedotshk ( talk) 13:56, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
I do not know if this was done just for shits and giggles or by a rightist with the intent of embarrassing "the Internet feminists" by tricking them into inadvertently equating Japanese women with "geisha".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)
To get things moving along, let's make some lists. Feel free to contribute to them. This way, we can figure out which sources use these words and ··· 日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 22:30, 20 July 2021 (UTC)
challenged the Tokugawa clan, thus leading the Siege of Osaka(emphasis added).
Please be as detailed as possible when adding a reference to the list below.
Please be as detailed as possible when adding a reference to the list below.
Please include the other term used. Please be as detailed as possible when adding a reference to the list below.
Please be as detailed as possible when adding a reference to the list below.
Please be as detailed as possible when adding a reference to the list below.
Please include the other term used. Please be as detailed as possible when adding a reference to the list below.
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)
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 nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 18:53, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
Although it's correct that there were female guards in the Ōoku, I'm not certain how wide this practice was in the wider samurai community. Given we haven't had a citation since October 2022 I've taken it out. Besides, it's not a vital piece of information givne there's no discussion of it later in the article. John Smith's ( talk) 05:08, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
I've removed two paragraphs. The text was mostly uncited except for the dispute over Ii Naotora's identity, and I don't think that particularly adds anything to the page. John Smith's ( talk) 05:18, 10 June 2024 (UTC)