Talk:Geisha

Liza Dalby website

There are four separate citations to this now dead link on Liza Dalby's website: An immediate solution to this is to search for a web archive copy, but more broadly, this article ideally shouldn't be relying on self-published, blog-style material, even if the author in question is more generally a reputably published author on the subject. Alternative sources for statements presently supported by this material, if available, would be preferable. Iskandar323 (talk) 20:14, 11 November 2021 (UTC)

@Iskandar323: - damn, I hadn't realised that url had died. I ought to have saved it; a quick look on the WayBack Machine shows it was saved once in 2008, but doesn't appear to be loading for me. archive.is appears to be struggling with it as well.

From what I can remember, these were supplementary notes in numbered list form, taken from the 21st-century edition of Geisha, reproduced for the internet. They had a number of statistics on them, including a graph of geisha numbers, and were, from what I can recall, sourced.

I'll try and see if I can find the information used elsewhere, but I might struggle. It may have appeared blog-like, but it was the most appendix-y-style source I had to hand for a number of years; sometimes all the information I can get on the karyūkai is from social media posts, which is worse. Dalby is possibly the biggest name in this area of study in the English-speaking world, and for good reason, too. If I can't get an archived version to load, then I'll keep looking.--Ineffablebookkeeper (talk) 21:30, 11 November 2021 (UTC)

Also, while I'm here - is there a reason you're changing the citation style? Save for repeated citations, it appeared to be working just fine.--Ineffablebookkeeper (talk) 21:31, 11 November 2021 (UTC)

Well in an ideal world there shouldn't really be too many repeat citations, because they should all have page numbers, but generally, it's both a bit cleaner to extract the book and journal references into a formal sources section, and useful for when the page numbers are located, as multiple citations of the same work can be created with different page numbers but without duplicating the other information. The process is also a bit of a soft nudge in the direction of filling out all of the citations with author names and identifying slightly weaker sources that might be better cited from a journal or book - which is ultimately the holy grail. Iskandar323 (talk) 21:43, 11 November 2021 (UTC)

But beyond my word, it's simply the referencing setup of all the more advanced and higher class articles on Wikipedia. Iskandar323 (talk) 21:45, 11 November 2021 (UTC)

@Iskandar323: - Fair enough. It'll take me a while to get my head around it, but that's merely because I've never actually used it as a citation style.

As for the newgeishanotes page - having had a look at this page through the WayBack Machine, you can see that it's titled "Addenda to Geisha in the Twenty first century". Looking on Google Books, I was right - it's possibly annotations from the 25th anniversary edition, which I annoyingly don't have a copy, nor can I find. However, it may also be extra annotations to this introduction, only found online.

Seeing as I had been using it as a source for more than just a Wikipedia page, it's possible that the sources for the information Dalby writes were mentioned both within their referencing here and elsewhere in my notes, so I don't think all is lost. If nothing else, I can send her an email.--Ineffablebookkeeper (talk) 11:31, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

Take this example: In the previous formatting of the citations, the citations without page numbers did not link correctly to the source, which was only listed in full for the reference where page numbers were available. In all instances, it said just "Iwasaki", omitting "Brown". Iskandar323 (talk) 12:07, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

I have a question back at you about citations: what do all the ""-type reference marks mean for sources such as McCurry? I'm not familiar with this and the other hidden notes this page has using the "rp" template. For the McCurry source, this is a single news webpage, so they can't be page numbers. On a secondary note, the Japanese language sources should ideally have English language "|trans-title=" elements - one for anyone who knows Japanese. Iskandar323 (talk) 16:32, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

@Iskandar323: - apologies for the (very late!) reply, but these denote page numbers. It's used for calling the same reference with different page numbers, without having to write out a different reference in full for each page number selection.

And as a side note - rejoice all! I have found an archived link of the page in question! It can be found here. Praise be, etc and so on.--Ineffablebookkeeper (talk) ({{ping}} me!) 17:19, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

@Ineffablebookkeeper Great! Well done. Regarding lateness, I'd forgotten all about this! Iskandar323 (talk) 17:39, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

Potential copyright violations

While inspecting the sourcing for this article, I noticed some areas with patchy inline citations. A copyvios report revealed some potential copyright violation concerns with respect to certain paragraphs copied without rephrasing from their source. Iskandar323 (talk) 11:24, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

@Iskandar323: I'm running WikiBlame atm to figure out if these were added all in one go; I know I've edited the offending paragraphs before, but it was mostly rewording certain things. If I knew it'd been a copyvio, I would've ripped it up. Gimme a sec.--Ineffablebookkeeper (talk) ({{ping}} me!) 12:03, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

@Ineffablebookkeeper: I've got to admit, there were a few more problems than I'd been expecting, but nothing that some quote shortening /liberal paraphrasing shouldn't be able to sort out. However, I'm not really an expert on the subject or familiar with the sources, so I thought I'd flag down a professional to potentially look at it before taking a stab at it myself. Iskandar323 (talk) 12:15, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

@Iskandar323: - Okay, so. I'll detail what it's coming up with, but I think this is an issue of circular reporting - these results seem older than an article dated as originating from 2016. Here's what it's coming up with for some parts, by way of example:

"be it by dancing" was first added in 2009 here; the rest of that text seems older than this.

"Prasso wrote that Americans had" was added here in 2013.

"Compulsory education laws" I can't seem to track down in WikiBlame, but I'm pretty certain I added that sentence myself at some point.

There are a few other sentences, but these are the biggest offenders; all were added before 2016.

I don't think this is a copyright issue - I think this is a "other websites often lift wholesale from Wikipedia" issue. In cases like these, it's preferrable to do a quick WikiBlame search first, before adding a copyvio notice to the article. The source you mentioned, if it's cited anywhere, should probably be taken out of the article as a mirror of Wikipedia with a few extra details thrown in.--Ineffablebookkeeper (talk) ({{ping}} me!) 12:18, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

@Ineffablebookkeeper Some of these copyvios show up even if your run a report using just links in the page, excluding other search results. So either the article has copied extracts from these sources, or the article is citing sources which in turn are guilty of circular reporting and so are not great sources. These two: in particular. Iskandar323 (talk) 12:27, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

Oh yes, the vintage news article sources to Wikipedia - that should go. Iskandar323 (talk) 12:40, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

The Honolulu museum source is throwing up copyvios issues because the embedded note is so long - perhaps it could just be abridged? It IS rather long. That link also has security certificate issues. Iskandar323 (talk) 12:44, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

The issues are resolved now. See the updated copyvios report. Iskandar323 (talk) 13:12, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

narrative on sex work

It seems to me that the article is quick to declassify all geisha's as non prostituional, however, there are specific geisha's who do infact have sex with clients, (specifically in japan) I feel this should be reworded accordingly to stress that most geisha's dont do sex work, instead of immediately denouncing the idea of it. 2600:1005:B10C:9B3D:3168:ECC2:834C:FC83 (talk) 07:01, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Unless you've got very reliable sources on this, this isn't happening.--Ineffablebookkeeper (talk) ({{ping}} me!) 13:05, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Removed from "notable" list

I removed these red-linked names from the list of "notables" because they were redlinked. Dropping them here so they don't get lost. None were sourced, so I don't know if any pass scrutiny for an article.

• Junkyo Oishi: Japanese painter.
• Sumi Hanayagi: A Japanese classical dancer founded the "Akatsuki" dance company and initiated the "New Dance Movement".
• Sugimoto Kikui: Japanese blind singer and musician.
• Kōme Akasaka: Japanese record singer and actress.
• Fumiko Miura (dancer): Japanese classical dancer,singer and actress.
• Takako Ando: Japanese actress and TV presenter.
• Inukai Chiyoko: Inukai Tsuyoshi's wife.
• Koyama Hatsuyo: Osamu Dazai's ex-wife. She served as the model for many of the female characters in his works.
• Hara Asa: Hara Kei's wife.

Joyous! Noise! 20:50, 22 May 2026 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Composition II

This article is currently the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation–supported course assignment, between 13 September 2026 and 23 October 2026. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): MadeInHeaven444 (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by MadeInHeaven444 (talk) 12:56, 17 September 2026 (UTC)