![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Here's the problem I have with most non-Japanese Japanese scholars who can't read Japanese and don't bother actually using published books, academic articles or even, Lilith save us all, Google Book Search: your information is crap! It's not even information, it's half a paragraph you plagiarized from some blog and then made blind guesses on the rest based on, what? something mentioned in InuYasha? and not only do you neglect to cite your references (there were none except an article that actually contradicted what was written here, larf larf), but based on some of the comments in the talk section, apparently the editors who feel passionate about this article seem to revel in the fact that ignorance is bliss, because they got everything wrong. You can prove me that I'm overeating by citing, wherever I put a citation needed tag, where you got these "theories" about Tsukumogami. All I'll say about any editor who writes "this is a encyclopedia so we have to present all sides," you might want to look up the word "encyclopedia" because as Inigo Montoya put it: You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means. Duende-Poetry ( talk) 19:44, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
I understand that those of us with no first-hand exposure to Japan outside anime and mangas will think that listing monsters that vaguely resemble Tsukumogami is somehow important. It isn't. First, nothing in Pop Cult is referenced, which means it shouldn't be there to begin with. Secondly, it embarrassing to the rest of us since it gives undue weight to things that are the definition of trivia. Once you break open an actual book (hint, hint) and do some research that would stand up to academic inquiry (and if you're not old enough to know what academic research requires ... how cute!), in other words take Japanese mythology seriously, then whatever you come up with should and will go into this article. Anything else needs to be drop kicked and deleted. Duende-Poetry ( talk) 20:13, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
Why include this "Moe-chan"? Why do Wikipedia editors seem so obsessed with including anime examples? Most anime are distortions of traditional yokai and are not reliable or accurate sources of information or knowledge by any means. Since it's an established fact that yokai are repelled by electricity, how can an electrical robot device be a yokai? Plus...it's a robot! Robot does not equal tsukumogami.
Shikino 21:32, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
I have to say, don't merge the other shorter articles with this one. This is on tsukumogami as a category of yokai or obakemono; the other two are on specific types. No one is suggesting merging oak and cedar into the tree article, are they? Shikino 19:49, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
No merge - I think super-short articles are acceptable if they are branches off of a categorical article like this one. Since there is a Wikiproject that fully encompasses these articles, I think separate articles will be the "clean" way to go. -- Emana 07:25, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
I'm not quite satisfied with this article because it doesn't seem fully linked to some other Japanese legends -- but I lack the knowledge to do it properly. The RPG book GURPS Japan seems to identify finely-made objects that have "souls" as tsukumogami, but the definition here only encompasses objects that are just plain old. The GURPS definition seems mixed up with the legends of willful swords made by the smiths Masamune and Muramasa -- see Masamune#Legends_of_Masamune_and_Muramasa and Muramasa -- and with those of enchanted calligraphy done by the monk Kobo-Dashai aka. Kukai. (That reference doesn't seem to be in the WP article, but is discussed at length in Lafcadio Hearn's Glimpses of Unfamiliar Japan.) Is there a good way to mention the similarity of the concepts without OR? - Kris Schnee ( talk) 16:10, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
The listed translation is not good. A direct translation would be "mourning attachment diety" - though kanji-by-kanji translation like this is generally a bad idea. Many sources use terms like "artifact spirits" (found in a few dictionaries) or "transfigured objects" - online example of the latter's use here: http://www.nanzan-u.ac.jp/SHUBUNKEN/publications/afs/pdf/a1042.pdf I'm going to change the existing translation to 'artifact spirit' for now, as it's the best term of the bunch. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.189.190.199 ( talk) 18:56, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
Munna was proven to be based upon incense burners called koro that are often shaped like pigs with the smoke coming out the nose. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.243.137.64 ( talk) 04:45, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
(付喪)tukumo"(神)gami". gami is kami. 211.122.250.144 ( talk) 05:59, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
One very easy reasoning for this is: there are no gods(神 kami) in Buddhism. It comes from the old Shinto religion. Not even bothering to discuss the rest.— Preceding unsigned comment added by SharkMeetShark ( talk • contribs)
There have been some edits on this page recently attempting to remove the list of tsukumogami or to remove specific entries from the list of tsukumogami. The ones that are listed on the page absolutely do belong here in my opinion. Many of them appear in tsukumogami emaki scrolls dating back to the Muromachi period and through the Edo period, and are pretty much universally accepted examples of tsukumogami. I will undo any removal of them unless there is a good reason to remove them. If there is a specific example that someone thinks does not belong on this page, please post here so we can talk about it, rather than just deleting it. Osarusan ( talk) 17:02, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
Voice of this article is extremely confusing. Many sentences are unnecessarily long and separated into too many clauses. This should be avoided when using long foreign words for readability purposes. There are many grammatical errors and poor style throughout. The article reads as if it has been poorly translated or written by a non-native English speaker. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2606:A000:6390:8700:B482:D131:8DE1:5E80 ( talk) 17:00, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
My edit summary from the second of my two April 2019 edits:
I left the term "kanji" without italics, but moved my hidden comment from my previous edit of this page to the talk page with an explanation, since the scope of needed discussion is larger: Note that "kanji" is now an English term ( https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/kanji#English) and therefore does not become italicized as a foreign term ... I came back to add the en.Wiktionary URL because the enWP Kanji article's body text italicizes the term "kanji" but its templates do not.
So, the topics I think need to be discussed are:
I hope to come back here and flesh this out a bit, including links and a centralized discussion, but my real-life limitations might get in the way so I'm data-dumping all I can. — Geekdiva ( talk) 00:25, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Here's the problem I have with most non-Japanese Japanese scholars who can't read Japanese and don't bother actually using published books, academic articles or even, Lilith save us all, Google Book Search: your information is crap! It's not even information, it's half a paragraph you plagiarized from some blog and then made blind guesses on the rest based on, what? something mentioned in InuYasha? and not only do you neglect to cite your references (there were none except an article that actually contradicted what was written here, larf larf), but based on some of the comments in the talk section, apparently the editors who feel passionate about this article seem to revel in the fact that ignorance is bliss, because they got everything wrong. You can prove me that I'm overeating by citing, wherever I put a citation needed tag, where you got these "theories" about Tsukumogami. All I'll say about any editor who writes "this is a encyclopedia so we have to present all sides," you might want to look up the word "encyclopedia" because as Inigo Montoya put it: You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means. Duende-Poetry ( talk) 19:44, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
I understand that those of us with no first-hand exposure to Japan outside anime and mangas will think that listing monsters that vaguely resemble Tsukumogami is somehow important. It isn't. First, nothing in Pop Cult is referenced, which means it shouldn't be there to begin with. Secondly, it embarrassing to the rest of us since it gives undue weight to things that are the definition of trivia. Once you break open an actual book (hint, hint) and do some research that would stand up to academic inquiry (and if you're not old enough to know what academic research requires ... how cute!), in other words take Japanese mythology seriously, then whatever you come up with should and will go into this article. Anything else needs to be drop kicked and deleted. Duende-Poetry ( talk) 20:13, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
Why include this "Moe-chan"? Why do Wikipedia editors seem so obsessed with including anime examples? Most anime are distortions of traditional yokai and are not reliable or accurate sources of information or knowledge by any means. Since it's an established fact that yokai are repelled by electricity, how can an electrical robot device be a yokai? Plus...it's a robot! Robot does not equal tsukumogami.
Shikino 21:32, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
I have to say, don't merge the other shorter articles with this one. This is on tsukumogami as a category of yokai or obakemono; the other two are on specific types. No one is suggesting merging oak and cedar into the tree article, are they? Shikino 19:49, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
No merge - I think super-short articles are acceptable if they are branches off of a categorical article like this one. Since there is a Wikiproject that fully encompasses these articles, I think separate articles will be the "clean" way to go. -- Emana 07:25, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
I'm not quite satisfied with this article because it doesn't seem fully linked to some other Japanese legends -- but I lack the knowledge to do it properly. The RPG book GURPS Japan seems to identify finely-made objects that have "souls" as tsukumogami, but the definition here only encompasses objects that are just plain old. The GURPS definition seems mixed up with the legends of willful swords made by the smiths Masamune and Muramasa -- see Masamune#Legends_of_Masamune_and_Muramasa and Muramasa -- and with those of enchanted calligraphy done by the monk Kobo-Dashai aka. Kukai. (That reference doesn't seem to be in the WP article, but is discussed at length in Lafcadio Hearn's Glimpses of Unfamiliar Japan.) Is there a good way to mention the similarity of the concepts without OR? - Kris Schnee ( talk) 16:10, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
The listed translation is not good. A direct translation would be "mourning attachment diety" - though kanji-by-kanji translation like this is generally a bad idea. Many sources use terms like "artifact spirits" (found in a few dictionaries) or "transfigured objects" - online example of the latter's use here: http://www.nanzan-u.ac.jp/SHUBUNKEN/publications/afs/pdf/a1042.pdf I'm going to change the existing translation to 'artifact spirit' for now, as it's the best term of the bunch. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.189.190.199 ( talk) 18:56, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
Munna was proven to be based upon incense burners called koro that are often shaped like pigs with the smoke coming out the nose. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.243.137.64 ( talk) 04:45, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
(付喪)tukumo"(神)gami". gami is kami. 211.122.250.144 ( talk) 05:59, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
One very easy reasoning for this is: there are no gods(神 kami) in Buddhism. It comes from the old Shinto religion. Not even bothering to discuss the rest.— Preceding unsigned comment added by SharkMeetShark ( talk • contribs)
There have been some edits on this page recently attempting to remove the list of tsukumogami or to remove specific entries from the list of tsukumogami. The ones that are listed on the page absolutely do belong here in my opinion. Many of them appear in tsukumogami emaki scrolls dating back to the Muromachi period and through the Edo period, and are pretty much universally accepted examples of tsukumogami. I will undo any removal of them unless there is a good reason to remove them. If there is a specific example that someone thinks does not belong on this page, please post here so we can talk about it, rather than just deleting it. Osarusan ( talk) 17:02, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
Voice of this article is extremely confusing. Many sentences are unnecessarily long and separated into too many clauses. This should be avoided when using long foreign words for readability purposes. There are many grammatical errors and poor style throughout. The article reads as if it has been poorly translated or written by a non-native English speaker. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2606:A000:6390:8700:B482:D131:8DE1:5E80 ( talk) 17:00, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
My edit summary from the second of my two April 2019 edits:
I left the term "kanji" without italics, but moved my hidden comment from my previous edit of this page to the talk page with an explanation, since the scope of needed discussion is larger: Note that "kanji" is now an English term ( https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/kanji#English) and therefore does not become italicized as a foreign term ... I came back to add the en.Wiktionary URL because the enWP Kanji article's body text italicizes the term "kanji" but its templates do not.
So, the topics I think need to be discussed are:
I hope to come back here and flesh this out a bit, including links and a centralized discussion, but my real-life limitations might get in the way so I'm data-dumping all I can. — Geekdiva ( talk) 00:25, 8 April 2019 (UTC)