Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Three Beauties of the Present Day/archive1


 * The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by Graham Beards via FACBot (talk) 18:33, 18 November 2014 (UTC).

Three Beauties of the Present Day

 * Nominator(s): Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 23:04, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

A well-known colour print by ukiyo-e master Utamaro, dating to c. 1792–93 and featuring three real-life beauties who frequently appeared in his works and the works of others. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 23:04, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Comments from Margin1522
This is my first post on this board, so I will limit it to comments. I think this is a really good article. I like the lead, the images, the analysis, and the conclusion. Some small things that I think might be done to improve it.
 * It seems a bit short on the background. I think a bit more material could be added on bijin-ga as a major genre in ukiyo-e.
 * I've added on line on bijin-ga. Do you think it needs more? Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 23:22, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
 * That's good. Maybe more, but we do talk about it later, so maybe this is enough.
 * There are a lot Japanese terms and names, which some readers might have trouble with. For example, we link to sharebon but perhaps we could describe in a few words what kind of books those were.
 * Reworded—let me know what you think. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 23:22, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Perfect.
 * In the sentence "Kyōden was manacled for fifty days, and Tsutaya was penalized half his property.", maybe we could say "the artist" instead of "Kyōden", and "the publisher" instead of "Tsutaya". When I came to "Kyōden", I had to go back and see, who was he again?
 * Handled in the response to the previous item. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 23:22, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Is "Tomohisa's" correct? Should that be "Toyohina's"?
 * *Burp* One of those things spellcheck will never catch.  Fixed. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 23:22, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
 * The Tomimoto-bushi article we link to is quite weak. I'll try to see if I can expand it. It was a genre of jōruri, which is a storytelling song. This particular genre was especially refined and popular with rich townspeople and samurai, and she played the accompaniment. If we could add some of that information, I think it might fill out our picture of her, which is shorter than the other two models. – Margin1522 (talk) 11:42, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I look forward to seeing what you can do with Tomimoto-bushi. Please don't feel that any nit in the article is too small to pick.  I hope you'll be hanging around FAC more—there's been much wringing of hands lately over the lack of reviewers. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 23:22, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Discovering now that the main article on jōruri (music) is also pretty meager. Urk. This may take some research. – Margin1522 (talk) 13:17, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm also wondering if there isn't a better term for ōkubi-e than "big-headed pictures". I know it's often translated this way, but it's not that the subjects had big heads, but that the image was a close-up of the head, or upper body actually. Other translations I've seen are are "torso portrait" or "bust portrait", but these don't seem quite right either. Is there some term (Italian?) in art criticism for "upper body portrait"? If not maybe we could just explain again what it was. Also, there were ōkubi-e of kabuki actors before Utamaro. His innovation was to do it for bijin, so maybe that could be clarified.  – Margin1522 (talk) 17:13, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm partial to "big bust portrait", but everyone keeps shouting me down. If you check out the "Background" section you'll see that ōkubi-e is attributed to Shunshō, and the association is made with yakusha-e. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 23:22, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
 * OK, that's true, the background section is fine. Also, I finished expanding the Tomimoto-bushi article. I seem to remember seeing a print of Toyohina standing on a veranda and looking like she was teaching the shamisen a child, which would have been nice to add. But I can't remember now where I saw it, or even if it was her. – Margin1522 (talk) 22:02, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
 * One more nit. At Amazon the ISBN for the Yoshida dictionary goes to the 3rd edition. And I'm wondering if 定本 actually means "Revised". It could, but publishers like to put that on dictionaries regardless, just to make it look authoritative. There is a used copy of the 1974 edition on the Amazon page and the cover has 定本 already. Is it not enough to just say 3rd edition? – Margin1522 (talk) 22:09, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Well, that's weird. Worldcat lists three editions with that ISBN—one from 1974, another from 1994, and another undated.  A Worldcat search for the title indicates the first edition was in 1944.  The thing is, I got the ISBN information right from the book itself—I'm looking at it now, and it clearly says: "Printed in Japan © 1972 Teruji Yoshida 1571—0006—1033 ISBN 4-87364-005-9 C1571 P25000E". Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 23:27, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
 * That is strange, but if says so in the book it must be correct. The National Book Network says "If you are revising a book and there is a substantial change of the contents, the book should be assigned a new ISBN. A rule of thumb is that 15-20% of the text or content should change to treat the book as a new edition." So perhaps all of those editions are substantially the same. Or not, I don't know. But the cite gives the year, so there's no doubt as to which edition was consulted. I guess it's OK then, we can't do anything about the ISBN. – Margin1522 (talk) 00:26, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Comments from Bamse
Very beautiful article and artwork. Unfortunately I don't have time for a full review. Just a couple of comments...


 * Images need ALT text
 * Done. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 01:10, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks. bamse (talk) 21:04, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
 * The sentence Unlike as was common in ukiyo-e, the subjects were not courtesans, but young women known around Edo for their beauty reads quite hard to me. Could perhaps be rephrased/simplified.
 * Does it read better now? Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 01:10, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
 * It does. bamse (talk) 21:04, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Might need to decide on AE/BE spelling (e.g. centre, symbolize), but perhaps the -ize are ok in BE (I am not native).
 * It's in Canadian English to maximally frustrate readers. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 01:10, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Oh, I guess fine in this case. bamse (talk) 21:04, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Perhaps spell out what Tamamuraya is (a teahouse?)
 * Not a teahouse—but I can't find a source that says explicitly what it was, other than being in Yoshiwara. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 01:10, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
 * There were teahouses in Yoshiwara, and visits always started there. [Here] is one description (in Japanese). The place where she worked probably had a teahouse in front where visitors would wait to be ushered into an inner entertainment room. This is all too complicated to explain, so I just added "house" to "the Tamamuraya house". "Pleasure house" would sound like a brothel, which it wasn't exactly. – Margin1522 (talk) 13:29, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the clarification & the link. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 23:32, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the clarification. I personally don't care, but is there a MOS issue with the doubling of -ya + house (I assume -ya is 屋)? bamse (talk) 21:04, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
 * There are articles with "Naninani-ji temple" in them. I think the helpfulness of such a construction far outweighs the redundancy—it's not confusing, inelegant, or misleading, and dropping the "ya" from the name is not (at least in this case) an option. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 02:55, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I am confused by: ...it was the first time in ukiyo-e history that the beauties were drawn from the general urban population rather than the pleasure quarters. From the first part of the article my understanding was that these beauties were from the pleasure quarter, no?
 * Toyohisa worked in Yoshiwara, but the other two were teahouse girls (some sources describe them as "看板娘") and worked oustide the pleasure quarters. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 01:10, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the clarification. bamse (talk) 21:04, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
 * As testimony to the popularity of the three models, the three models often appeared in the works of other aritsts. Should be rephrased to get rid of the two "three models".
 * Ack! Fixed. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 01:10, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
 * OK. bamse (talk) 21:04, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Article could probably be added to a few more categories (e.g. bijin-ga).
 * I don't see a Category:Bijin-ga. Anything else you think would be appropriate? Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 01:10, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Indeed, my fault. Perhaps something with "women" then?! Also maybe move it to Category:19th-century portraits‎!? bamse (talk) 21:04, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I've added Category:18th-century portraits, but I haven't found anything with "women" in it that seems to fit. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 00:39, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Perhaps link "impression" to Printmaking in the infobox to avoid confusion.
 * I've changed "impression" to "printing". Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 01:10, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
 * OK. bamse (talk) 21:04, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Yes, at least in Western prints, "impression" = individual copy. "Printing" or "edition" are for groups, or "State (printmaking)" for groups showing a particular point in a changing work. Johnbod (talk) 11:59, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Somehow I missed this. Is this okay? Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 00:06, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
 * For consistency you might want to add more information in some of the image captions (e.g. which Museum, year...).
 * Done. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 01:10, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks. bamse (talk) 21:04, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I must say I don't really like adding the collections - it takes too much space, and encourages people to think they are unique objects, which many will, despite being told. Johnbod (talk) 17:48, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
 * You're right; I've kept the dates and dropped the museums. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 07:36, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
 * bamse (talk) 00:10, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Just one more thing...
 * Under "Portraits of the three Kansei beauties by Utamaro", you might want to swap Hisa with Kita in order to (a) have the same position of the beauties as in the main image and (b) not having them face to the border of the screen. bamse (talk) 21:04, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Of course—how silly. Done. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 02:55, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

Comments from Johnbod
Generally there, but: Maybe more later. Johnbod (talk) 17:49, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
 * "Her clothes and hairstyle are in the showier style of a geisha compared to the plainer, teahouse-girl garments of the other two models..." I must say they all look identical to me. If there is a difference it needs explaining.


 * Here is a page where you can see the difference. The image is at the top (1781～1789) is a bit earlier and the hairstyle isn't quite as elaborate. The 2nd and 3rd from the top (1789～1801) are exactly this period. The 2nd is a geisha, and her kinono has more layers. The 3rd is a tea house girl, and she has a simpler kimono. The hairstyles of all 3 models are really elaborate -- it says Utamaro wasn't exaggerating, this was real. But the geisha's is a bit taller and has more ornaments. The ornaments make the difference. Perhaps we could say "ornamental hairstyle" and "elegant kimono" about Toyohina. But it's true, I can't see calling any of those hairstyles simple. – Margin1522 (talk) 21:09, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
 * But all these 3 seem to have exactly the same styles and ornaments. Johnbod (talk) 21:25, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
 * One lacks the comb, but I don't know if that's significant. The kimono are different, but you're right, the hairstyles are very similar. Instead of talking about the differences, maybe we should try to find out the name of this hairstyle and why teahouse girls were wearing it in the first place. I think that's pretty remarkable. It might be a characteristic of this period. – Margin1522 (talk) 05:10, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
 * If you mean the top one, I thought that was just the angle of vision - there's a little bit coming out of the back at right, similar to the other two. Johnbod (talk) 11:30, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
 * There are other details that distinguish Toyohina's hairstyle if you're willing to cross your eyes and hold it up to the light, but anyways I may have misinterpreted the source: it compares their clothes, and along the way says "派手な芸者髷を結わせ" to describe Toyohina's hair, but doesn't explicitly compare her hair to that of the other two—just the clothes: "家つきの娘らしいやや地味な着物を着せて、それぞれの身分の違いを描くことに務めている". I've tweaked it, dropping reference to the hair. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 07:43, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Ok, thanks - the top one has a plain kimono and the other two patterns, but I won't argue the toss with sources on historical Japanese women's fashion (do we have articles on any of this stuff - I doubt it).  Johnbod (talk) 11:30, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
 * On the hairstyle, I have expanded the article on Shimada (hairstyle) so that now it explains the style that all 3 models are wearing and slightly reworded Toyohina's description to point to it. – Margin1522 (talk) 20:57, 6 October 2014 (UTC)


 * "confections"? Not really an English word for food, is it? In the UK we have "confectionary" aka "sweets" = "candy" in the US.  If that is the title they use, then you are stuck with it, but in the text something understandable should be used.
 * I see "confection" with the same meaning in a couple of dictionaries (and Wiktionary), but now that I see "sweet" is part of the definition, it's not really the best translation of 菓子, which includes salty snackfoods. I'm about to go to bed, so I'll sort this out tomorrow. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 12:57, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
 * For now, I've substituted in "snacks", though somehow it doesn't seem right ... dictionaries seem to favour "sweets", "confectioneries", "candies", or even "cakes" (!), which I think any Japanese speakers here will agree is not right (ja:菓子 describes kashi as 甘味や塩味など "sweet, salty, etc.") Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 07:34, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
 * See my comment in Bamse's section. This print has two states & that should probably be used & linked. You might also link this there, as it mentions no Japanese prints at present. Johnbod (talk) 12:21, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
 * About why the later state lacks the names, another explanation I have seen is that the bakufu cracked down on these frivolous prints and forbade printing the names of models. I wonder if any of the sources mention that. Censorship seems like a more plausible explanation than that they moved away. – Margin1522 (talk) 20:57, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Plausible, although none of my sources suggest so—the "moved away" one is the only one I've seen, and only in the one source, and even then only put forth as a conjecture. It would be difficult to determine anyways, given that the different states are undated (even the original is only estimated at 1792–93).  Of course, if a source turns up that says anything like that, it'll have to be added. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 07:34, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I found a reference and mentioned it on the Talk page. – Margin1522 (talk) 16:57, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I left a response there. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 23:25, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

Images are appropriately sourced and licensed. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:22, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Support Sorry, forgot this was open. Comments dealt with well enough, Johnbod (talk) 16:26, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

Support I think the page is there now, after the discussions, which I followed, above. More please. Ceoil (talk) 19:14, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Comments from Dudley Miles

 * The second paragraph of 'Background' is a bit random, jumping around in subject and date.
 * Is this better? Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 23:29, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
 * "fined the publisher half his property. In the wake of this setback, Utamaro began producing the first ōkubi-e" This seems a non-sequitur. Did Tsutaya commission them as a response to his setback?
 * How's this? Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 23:29, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
 * "The success of these bijin ōkubi-e reversed Tsutaya's fortunes" Reversed does not sound right to me - recovered?
 * Done. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 23:29, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
 * indivuated is not recognised as a word in the Oxford and Cambridge online dictionaries.
 * In the h/c OED the verb is first cited in this sense (#2) from 1614, and the participle from De Quincy in 1813 I think. Johnbod (talk) 16:30, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Typo—it should be "individuated". Fixed. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 23:29, 2 November 2014 (UTC)


 * "others emphasize the subtle differences.[14] There are subtle differences" Repetition.
 * I've merged the two sentences. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 23:29, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
 * A first rate article. Dudley Miles (talk) 15:09, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Support. Dudley Miles (talk) 23:40, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

Notes -- Hi Curly, pls seek a source review, and check your duplinks. Tks/cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 09:22, 5 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Duplinks obliterated & source review requested, thanks. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 10:24, 5 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Source review
 * All "p" and "pp" are in their proper place
 * No broken Harv references
 * Davis source: title of the chapter or contribution? Also, why include the page number, when your SFNs include several other pages?
 * Fixed. Should've been a page range and should've had the chapter title. Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 05:48, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Check your alphabetization (only one mistake that I can find, but it's rather glaring). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:19, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
 * It's not glaring quite brightly enough for me to see it. Could you name for me? Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 05:48, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Kondō, Fumito (F) should be ahead of Kondō, Ichitarō (I). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:52, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Arrgh. Fixed.  Thanks. Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 08:38, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Excellent. Sources look fine. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:45, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

Support on prose per standard disclaimer. These are my edits. - Dank (push to talk) 02:56, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

Graham Beards (talk) 18:33, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.