Talk:Forest bathing

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): AThuVuong.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 21:40, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Short
I disagree with the phrase: "is a short, leisurely visit." Forest bathing is not just a short, leisurely visit. 1. It can be as long as desired weather permitting. It can take hours. 2. It is a concept. 3. "Short" is subjective. --Anaccuratesource (talk) 20:26, 16 May 2011 (UTC)


 * - (http://shevero.com/?page_id=588)
 * - (http://www.naturalengland.org.uk/ourwork/enjoying/health/patientsoutdoors/default.aspx) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Anaccuratesource (talk • contribs) 20:48, 16 May 2011 (UTC)


 * The wording is fine. The word "short" is subjective, but adequate. A "long" trip implies one that requires luggage and significant preparation. A "permanent" stay would imply the fabrication of a home. If a trip to the forest lasts some hours, even the entire day, I would think of that as "a short, leisurely visit". Boneyard90 (talk) 16:12, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Some people do live outdoors. The "long" trip can be called: camping. In my humble opinion the phrase "short, leisurely visit" is not at all necessary to this article. Forest-bathing as the surrounding oneself in forest with therapueic benefits.

However some people do live outdoors. We have a term the "long" trip I believe we call it: camping. My humble opinion is that the phrase "short, leisurely visit" just is not necessary to this article. The point is we better ways to describe it. We have excellent writers here, who I am sure can find a better phrase or description to describe forest-bathing with. Forest-bathing can be long trip or short one. Forest-bathing is always when therapeutically surrounds oneself in forestry resulting in therapeutic benefits.--96.46.197.108 (talk) 19:17, 5 June 2011 (UTC)


 * I wonder about the need for a "guide". After all people have been walking in forests and other natural settings for a long time. We seem to be well adapted to nature. To suggest the need for a "guide" merely creates one more obstacle for people to reconnect on their own with nature. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.162.236.146 (talk) 19:03, 12 February 2015 (UTC)


 * How about wording such as, "Forest bathing involves a visit to a forest environment, where the visitor experiences therapeutic benefits. The derived benefit depends on the length of the stay and the needs of the particular individual".  168.29.236.16 (talk) 11:52, 29 March 2016 (UTC)Robin

Perhaps, short is an inducement for those of limited time to realize that they may benefit as well. Wikipietime (talk) 12:58, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

History
The entire second paragraph of the "History" section is poorly sourced (both sources are related the group and individual mentioned) and poorly written with grammar and syntax issues. Further, this implies that the concept was developed in 2007 by the individual mentioned, which isn't supported anywhere. I'd recommend removing that entire paragraph as a violation of NPOV.208.163.133.252 (talk) 16:17, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

Merge
Forest therapy seems to be the same idea, so the articles should probably be WP:Merged. If there are no objections during the next week or so, then any editor (not just an admin) is welcome to do this at any time. WhatamIdoing (talk) 04:08, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
 * This is ridiculous. An AfC reviewer screwed up and you would force that mistake to remain? What kind of Wikipedia is that? You even agree that it is the same subject matter, which means that it should be deleted or re-draftified.  Jytdog (talk) 04:54, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I'd be inclined to say that tagging a long article as a substantial duplicate of a sub-stub is ridiculous. The "duplicate" criterion in CSD is meant for things like copy-paste page moves and people who didn't know that they could set up a redirect from an alternate name.  It's not meant for "somebody started an article, using entirely different words, on a closely related (or even exactly the same) subject".  WhatamIdoing (talk) 23:49, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

Please do not merge
Dear WhatamIdoing, Forest therapy is an internationally researched, evidence-based and structured Public health approach, whereas 'forest bathing' is a rough but media-effective translation from the Japanese phrase "Shinrin-yoku" (森林浴; actually better translated as 'being immersed in the forest'), reflected and used in media across the United States. The only communality is utilizing the forest in some form - but that is also done by logging or jogging in a forest. The prescribed and defined exercises and tasks in Forest Therapy are not identical to so-called "invitations" used by some people as part of their 'forest bathing'. These appear primarily meditative and contemplative in nature.

Best, Geopingo220.240.162.195 (talk) 04:37, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
 * This appears to be the same user as . Please confirm. Thanks. Jytdog (talk) 04:52, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
 * As they are more or less the same concept have gone ahead and merged. Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 07:15, 15 February 2018 (UTC)