"Sayuri" in Wikipedia entry on Japanese mythology
lmarceau
wondering what students might encounter if they went to Wikipedia for
information on Japanese myths. Nestled in a summary of the myths
found in the two works was a curious passage:
...Another figure in mythology was the tree contentor Sayuri, a maiden
who can only be spotted when the wind is mild and the weather is
frosty. Legends tell that she strangled unfaithful men with her long
greasy hair, coal-black, with no light. She can be seen wondering in
the fog or the inner tree of tranquility. Scholars say that dark
beauties are often referred to as Sayuris because of their dark hair
and foggy mane. Folklore states to beware a maiden with coal hair and
a chalky expression, derived from her name Sa-, meaning dark, black,
coal, or greasy, and yuri, meaning lady, girl or maiden. However, the
name evolved into meaning early lily, or little lily, in Japanese
kanji...
Does anyone know how this might have found its way there? Looks to me
as though someone is pulling the collective leg of the Wikipedia
editors...
Another reason to warn students against considering Wikipedia to be a
reputable source.
Lawrence Marceau
MJP
article reads "This article does not cite any references or sources.
Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable
sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (July
2007)"
For people who use Wikipedia for background information or for quick
summaries, this line is a very clear warning that the article is not a
"reputable source." This is one of the things that Wikipedia is good
at--flagging articles that need work, that are controversial, or that
are not useful. Why not see the flaws here as a challenge for
students? A potential assignment? Some of them may know how to fix
this article. And we all know how many people read this stuff compared
to properly peer-reviewed publications, alas.
Morgan
*****************
Morgan Pitelka
Associate Professor
Asian Studies Department
Mailing address:
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
CB #3267, New West 113
Chapel Hill NC 27599-3267
Office address:
New West 319
Tuesday/Thursday 11 a.m.-12 p.m
Email: mpit...@unc.edu
*****************
Diego Pellecchia
Diego
Diego Pellecchia, PhD candidate
------------------------
Department of Drama & Theatre Studies
Royal Holloway University of London
国際能楽研究会
INI - International Noh Institute
http://nohtheatre.wordpress.com/
> --
> You are subscribed to PMJS: Premodern Japanese Studies.
> To post to the list, send email to pm...@googlegroups.com
> To unsubscribe, send email to pmjs+uns...@googlegroups.com
> Visit the PMJS web site at www.pmjs.org
> Contact the group administrator at edi...@pmjs.org
Susan B Klein
no Michizane. I didn't reply to it at the time, but when I first started
teaching my Japanese Ghosts class, I realized that the wikipedia
article on Michizane was mistaken (they were treating the medieval
legends about Michizane as though they had actually happened). I think I
discovered this because some students in the class had used the
wikipedia article rather than actually doing the assigned reading
(Robert Borgen's book on Michizane). So for the final exam I gave them
the wikipedia article (the part that was wrong) and told them that after
taking the class they should know enough to edit the wikipedia article
themselves. It was eye-opening for the students to realize that
Wikipedia might be wrong, and empowering for them to realize that they
knew enough after one course to write a better entry than whoever had
written it. So I highly recommend encouraging students to critically
analyze Wikipedia articles, rather than just warn them off of them.
~~Susan Klein
Michael Wachutka
I think the description quoted by you from Wikipedia is wrong and I agree with you that we have to caution our students not to rely solely on that as a reliable source. By the way, I checked the Wikipedia article on Japanese mythology today and someone (maybe of this list) erased the part on Sayuri on 31 October 2010.
Anyhow, there is no "Sayuri" anywhere mentioned in Kojiki or Nihon shoki, but what can be found is a "Sayori-bime no mikoto" in Kojiki that is named in Nihon shoki as "Ichiki-shima hime". She is one of the three female deities that are produced as a result of the "divine trial" (ukehi) between Amaterasu and Susanoo.
Thus, Sayori-bime (or Ichiki-shima hime) is also one of the three female Munakata-deities. She is for instance enshrined at the Munakata Taisha in Fukuoka as well as in Itsukushima-jinja on Miyajima island near Hiroshima.
The Munakata deities are believed to have originally been sea deities and I am not aware of any relation with trees. (Motoori Norinaga in his Kojiki-den by the way explains the name Sayori as derived from "se-yori
I hope this helps.
Best regards,
Michael Wachutka
Resident Director
Tuebingen University Center for Japanese Language
at Dôshisha University, Kyoto
> Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2010 21:51:53 -0700
> Subject: [PMJS] "Sayuri" in Wikipedia entry on Japanese mythology
> From: lema...@gmail.com
> To: pm...@googlegroups.com
Mark Schumacher
For added clarity concerning Professor Wachutka's fine response,
plus a quick question concerning the modern-day reading of deity names.
- Sayoribime no Mikoto 狭依毘売命 (Kojiki)
- AKA Ichikishimahime 市寸嶋比売（Kojiki）
- AKA Ichikishimahime 市杵島姫（Nihon Shoki）
- Can Sayoribime 狭依毘売 also be ready "Sayorihime" ?
- Can Ichikishimahime 市寸嶋比売 also be read "Itsukishima" or
"Itsukushima" ?
I constantly find Japanese & English scholarly references and web pages using Itsukishima-hime or Itsukushima-hime.
Should these be discarded as modern-day misreadings? Or allowed as legitimate modern-day readings?
mark in kamakura
|
MARK SCHUMACHER |
Alexander Vovin
Quick Questions.
- Can Sayoribime 狭依毘売 also be ready "Sayorihime" ?
- Can Ichikishimahime 市寸嶋比売 also be read "Itsukishima" or "Itsukushima" ?
- I constantly find Japanese & English scholarly references and web pages using Itsukishima-hime or Itsukushima-hime.
Should these be discarded as modern-day misreadings?
- Or allowed as legitimate modern-day readings?
Hope this helps.
Best,
Alexander Vovin
Professor of East Asian Languages
Department of East Asian Languages and Literatures
University of Hawai'i at Manoa, USA
========================
iustitiam magni facite, infirmos protegite
Marc Adler
Unlikely, because man'yoogana 毘 is clearly bi1 [mbi1]
A few questions from a non-specialist. Would this (and hi) have been pi?
Again, unlikely. 寸 is ma'yoogana for ki1. I am unaware of 市 standing for /itu/ either.
It is in modern "zuuzuu-ben" dialects, which have been around long enough to produce pairs like ちぢむ/つづむ. Could this be related to that?
- I constantly find Japanese & English scholarly references and web pages using Itsukishima-hime or Itsukushima-hime.
Should these be discarded as modern-day misreadings?Yes.
- Or allowed as legitimate modern-day readings?
No.
http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%82%A4%E3%83%81%E3%82%AD%E3%82%B7%E3%83%9E%E3%83%92%E3%83%A1
Again, Wikipedia and unsourced, but it does say: その意味では、中津宮・沖津宮の祭神とする『記紀』の記述の方が神名の由来に近いことになる。厳島神社（広島県廿日市市）の祭神ともなっており、「イツクシマ」という社名も「イチキシマ」が転じたものとされている。
Ditto here: http://detail.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/qa/question_detail/q1448016479
In fact, Googling "市杵島姫命" "厳島" produces a non-negligible number of hits (although of course they could all just be parroting a single unreliable source), but even 広辞苑（第６版） has "...厳島神社の祭神とも言う。"
--
Marc Adler
http://www.linkedin.com/in/adlerpacific
Gauçac eztira multçutu eta berretu behar, mengoaric eta premiaric gabe.
गते गते पारगते पारसंगते बोधि स्वाहा
lmarceau
Wachutka, Mark Schumacher, Sasha Vovin, Norman Havens, Greve Gabi,
Sasha Vovin, and Marc Adler for your comments and questions. Thanks
especially to Sasha for clarifying the pronunciations of the deities'
names. (I'll leave to the linguists the tricky problems of Tohoku
dialects as they might have been pronounced in the 7th or 8th
centuries... The only early sources we have are the sakimori uta, and
I don't believe they are in the same "zuuzuu-ben" dialect.)
I especially appreciate the comments by Morgan, Diego, and Susan,
rightly suggesting that it is unproductive just to "condemn"
Wikipedia, but rather to use what we find there to help empower
students, giving them the opportunity to demonstrate how (and why) a
passage might be inaccurate. This is especially relevant given the
case that for most people now, Wikipedia is the first (and often only)
authority they might refer to when gathering information. I'll
definitely keep that in mind as I work with student in class
discussions and on essays in the future.
As for where this passage originated, I agree with Norman that it
probably originated from much more recent pop culture (manga, anime,
video game, computer game, etc.). I thought someone on the list might
know, but my tuned-in undergraduate students are more likely to have
access to such knowledge that members of this list...
Many thanks to all,
Lawrence (I hope we can skip the honorific titles on this list...)
On 11月2日, 午前9:59, Marc Adler <marc.ad...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Unlikely, because man'yoogana 毘 is clearly bi1 [mbi1]
>
> A few questions from a non-specialist. Would this (and hi) have been pi?
>
> > Again, unlikely. 寸 is ma'yoogana for ki1. I am unaware of 市 standing for
> > /itu/ either.
>
> It is in modern "zuuzuu-ben" dialects, which have been around long enough to
> produce pairs like ちぢむ/つづむ. Could this be related to that?
>
>
>
> >> Should these be discarded as modern-day misreadings?
>
> >> Yes.
>
>
> >> No.
>
> http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%82%A4%E3%83%81%E3%82%AD%E3%82%B7%E3%...
> Again, Wikipedia and unsourced, but it does say:
> （広島県 <http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%BA%83%E5%B3%B6%E7%9C%8C>廿日市市<http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%BB%BF%E6%97%A5%E5%B8%82%E5%B8%82>
>
> Ditto here:http://detail.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/qa/question_detail/q1448016479
>
> In fact, Googling "市杵島姫命" "厳島" produces a non-negligible number of hits
> (although of course they could all just be parroting a single unreliable
> source), but even 広辞苑（第６版） has "...厳島神社の祭神とも言う。"
>
> --
Chris Kern
specialist articles tend to be a sticking point for Wikipedia. On the
one hand, you sometimes get interested people who really do know what
they're talking about and make good articles. On the other hand,
because the topics are so specialized, there's a much lower chance
that someone will detect and correct errors. With the increasing use
of Wikipedia, I like the idea of students fixing the mistakes.
I wouldn't be surprised if the erroneous "Sayuri" information comes
ultimately from some manga or anime; because those sometimes have
subjects connected loosely to traditional mythology, fans can be
overzealous in adding information to the articles based on their
secondhand knowledge through the anime. You might compare it to a
Japanese teenager watching Disney's Sword in the Stone and then
editing the Japanese wikipedia article on Le Morte d'Arthur or King
Arthur based on that.
-Chris
Michael Pye
"I wouldn't be surprised if the erroneous "Sayuri" information comes
ultimately from some manga or anime; because those sometimes have
subjects connected loosely to traditional mythology, fans can be
overzealous in adding information to the articles based on their
secondhand knowledge through the anime. You might compare it to a
Japanese teenager watching Disney's Sword in the Stone and then
editing the Japanese wikipedia article on Le Morte d'Arthur or King
Arthur based on that."
Well, exactly. So that's why Wikipedia is completely useless when it
comes down to it. Isn't it?
Even in apparently dry and detailed entries, there may always be
somebody with an axe to grind.
I'm beginning to imagine a new world in which students from various
places are all pitching in with their "corrections" based on lectures
which they didn't listen to properly because they were on facebook at
the same time...
--
Michael Pye
Professor of the Study of Religions
University of Marburg, Germany (retired)
Research Associate (International Buddhist Studies), Institute for the
Comprehensive Study of Shin Buddhism, Otani University, Kyoto, Japan
Zitat von Chris Kern <chris...@gmail.com>:
Marc Adler
Well, exactly. So that's why Wikipedia is completely useless when it comes down to it. Isn't it?
--
Marc Adler
Joseph Elacqua
In addition, one thing that wikipedia can do that books cannot is link related items together. If I'm doing a paper on Ennin, for example, I can go to Ennin's (small) wikipedia page and click "What Links Here" which will give me a list of articles connected in some way to Ennin's. Many of these may not matter, but I've often used this tool to find obscure connections between things that I'd never have thought about before.
I agree with Marc that the advantages far outweigh the occasional hiccup. If nothing else at all, it provides a good place to jump-start a student's thought progression on a topic and (often, but not always) providing some initial directions for them. I do agree with everyone that student citation of wikipedia as fact should be stopped at all costs, but that doesn't mean the entire site is useless.
-- Joseph P. Elacqua
--
Morgan Pitelka
Michael,
Most academic scholarship is filled with axe grinding. Peer review works very well . . except when it doesn't. And yet it somehow manages not to be "completely useless."
I'm sure most of us on this list prefer to read and write books, but since many of our students--and most of the digitally connected people on the planet, it seems--turn to Wikipedia when in search of knowledge, it is vital that we at least understand the way it works, and hopefully contemplate the ways in which we might help our students to understand its flaws (and perhaps even make it better).
Morgan
*****************
Morgan Pitelka
Associate Professor
Asian Studies Department
Mailing address:
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
CB #3267, New West 113
Chapel Hill NC 27599-3267
Office address:
New West 319
Tuesday/Thursday 11 a.m.-12 p.m
Email: mpit...@unc.edu
*****************
*****************
Morgan Pitelka
morgan....@gmail.com
*****************
Michael Pye
As I'm addressed directly, here's my brief reply.
I'm really quite touched by the careful and caring way in which so
many colleagues are approaching the Wikipedia problem. Since I've now
retired from regular teaching, I can indulge in greater simplicity of
comment perhaps. And so I somehow stand by my comments!
Moreover, while I'm at it, I'll just add that I've never really
been sold on the "peer review" concept. (I wasn't thinking of that as
an alternative.) It's sometimes helpful (mainly to authors) but often
doesn't really work, as hinted by yourself. Moreover it's scandalously
exploited by uncomprehending funding authorities.
In my view the solution to the Wiki problem would be to have
signed contributions, which could be edited by the originators on the
basis of helpful and convincing comments from their peers. On
controversial matters there could be alternative articles.
As it stands I do think that Wikipedia is fundamentally flawed
(though Wiki.. is performing a public service in other
fields...off-subject here).
Finally, I admit that I do use Wikipedia :) - but only for clues!
And I don't think that's what the ambition of its originators was.
Michael
PS Just off to the second hand book fair at Chionji, there's a lot of
real knowledge lying around there, and nobody has got anywhere to put
it...
--
Michael Pye
Professor of the Study of Religions
University of Marburg, Germany (retired)
Research Associate (International Buddhist Studies), Institute for the
Comprehensive Study of Shin Buddhism, Otani University, Kyoto, Japan
Zitat von Morgan Pitelka <morgan....@gmail.com>:
Michelle Li
From: Joseph Elacqua <joseph....@gmail.com>
To: pm...@googlegroups.com
Sent: Mon, November 1, 2010 4:34:45 PM
Subject: Re: [PMJS] "Sayuri" in Wikipedia entry on Japanese mythology
JL Badgley
> In my view the solution to the Wiki problem would be to have signed
> contributions, which could be edited by the originators on the basis of
> helpful and convincing comments from their peers. On controversial matters
> there could be alternative articles.
That's similar to what one project I've helped with is working on.
The S-A Wiki, though far from perfect, at least screens the people who
are putting in the information. Of course, this means that there is a
lot less information posted because it is a more onerous system, with
fewer contributors because of the attempt to keep control on who is
contributing. Furthermore, as an amateur project, it is limited by
the time and willingness of individuals to contribute.
> As it stands I do think that Wikipedia is fundamentally flawed (though
> Wiki.. is performing a public service in other fields...off-subject here).
> Finally, I admit that I do use Wikipedia :) - but only for clues! And I
> don't think that's what the ambition of its originators was.
This is what I commonly use it for, and how I recommend others use it.
When I hit a topic I don't know anything about, or have never
encountered, I usually perform an Internet search, which often pulls
up a wikipedia article. The article will at least give me an idea of
what subjects I need to explore more fully. If the *only* evidence is
a wikipedia article, then I'm not going to give it much credence.
On the other hand, there is the problem that the brain does a terrible
job categorizing "good" and "bad" information, but since we cannot
scrub the Internet the only recourse is to try to inundate the system
with more good information than bad--a constant struggle!
-Joshua Badgley
Alexander Vovin
On Mon, Nov 1, 2010 at 2:48 PM, Alexander Vovin <sasha...@gmail.com> wrote:
Unlikely, because man'yoogana 毘 is clearly bi1 [mbi1]
A few questions from a non-specialist. Would this (and hi) have been pi?
In a nutshell: modern Japanese initial h- was p- in the Nara period (and possibly later -- both Kiyose and Frellesvig argued for the preservation of p- throughout at least Heian). Modern Japanese b was [mb] (prenasalized b) phonetically, as it is still in Northern Toohoku. Phonologically, in native words it is /Np/, as except in very few cases we cannot specify whether the nasal was /m/ or /n/.
Again, unlikely. 寸 is ma'yoogana for ki1. I am unaware of 市 standing for /itu/ either.
It is in modern "zuuzuu-ben" dialects, which have been around long enough to produce pairs like ちぢむ/つづむ. Could this be related to that?
I doubt so, for several reasons. The merger of /u/ and /i/ in zuzu-ben as /i"/ is a recent phenomenon. Ainu loanwords from Northern Old Japanese do not reflect it. I cannot check it the moment, but if my memory does not betray me, the language of the Toohoku folks shipwrecked in Russia in the late 18th c. does not provide evidence for it either. Finally, such a merger outside Toohoku is known only in southern Ryukyus, but not as far as I know, anywhere in Western Japan.
- I constantly find Japanese & English scholarly references and web pages using Itsukishima-hime or Itsukushima-hime.
Should these be discarded as modern-day misreadings?Yes.
- Or allowed as legitimate modern-day readings?
No.
http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%82%A4%E3%83%81%E3%82%AD%E3%82%B7%E3%83%9E%E3%83%92%E3%83%A1
Again, Wikipedia and unsourced, but it does say: その意味では、中津宮・沖津宮の祭神とする『記紀』の記述の方が神名の由来に近いことになる。厳島神社（広島県廿日市市）の祭神ともなっており、「イツクシマ」という社名も「イチキシマ」が転じたものとされている。
Ditto here: http://detail.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/qa/question_detail/q1448016479
In fact, Googling "市杵島姫命" "厳島" produces a non-negligible number of hits (although of course they could all just be parroting a single unreliable source), but even 広辞苑（第６版） has "...厳島神社の祭神とも言う。"
Let us turn from the phonology to etymology -- my previous post was concerned only with the fact that 市杵 can be read according to man'yoogana rules only as Itiki1, not Ituku, and not Ituki1.
There is OJ verb ituku 'to purify, to venerate with purification', apparently derived from OJ i 'purification' and tuku 'to be attached'. The ren'yookei of this verb, ituki1, is used in the meaning 'place of worship', but notice that in Western Old Japanese, unlike later Classical Japanese, ren'yookei does not modify the following noun by itself. Thus, ituki1-no2 mi1ya is attested, but not ituki1 mi1ya. We can, therefore, accept equasion of Ituki1-sima with Ituku-sima, but with a small grain of salt, due to the above comment on ren'yookei function. It is possible, however, that Ituki1-sima is a later formation: I have not checked on chronology of attestations, though.
Now, Itiki1 cannot be derived from Ituki1 or Ituku by any set of regular rules. Two possibilities come to mind:
1) Itiki1 involves irregular (and presumably late) vowel assimilation u > i;
2) Itiki1 being the name of the deity worshiped ai Itukushima-jinja is not originally connected to the placename and we are dealing with a folk etymology here.
Best wishes,
Alexander Vovin
Professor of East Asian Languages
Department of East Asian Languages and Literatures
University of Hawai'i at Manoa, USA
========================
iustitiam magni facite, infirmos protegite
--
Marc Adler
http://www.linkedin.com/in/adlerpacific
Gauçac eztira multçutu eta berretu behar, mengoaric eta premiaric gabe.
गते गते पारगते पारसंगते बोधि स्वाहा
--
Michael Pye
Can any art specialists out there tell me anything about a painting of
Saigyo on the Yamato Road, by Iwata Masaoto 岩田正己 ?
For my own simple reasons, I'd be interested...
Scheid, Bernhard
This user left only one other trait in the English Wikipedia, a small entry to a manga-related article:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Devil_Lady&diff=prev&oldid=127890875
So you see, there are sophisticated systems to spot and evaluate even a single new contribution. Behind the scenes, a new class of "Wikipedians" has emerged who usually reedit new contributions, especially of anonymous authors, quite critically. In the case of Japanese myths, there are certainly a few hardboiled Wikipedieans who feel responsible for the field and one of them has already removed the Sayuri passage obviously following our discussion (as Michael Wachutka has pointed out). This kind of censorship has become a widely debated issue in the Wiki community between the so-called "inclusivists" and the "not so inclusivists" ("exclusivism", i.e. censorship, being of course considered to go against the original intent of a wiki). Nobody can tell where this will lead, but in any event Wikipedia of today is quite different from Wikipedia two years and of Wikipedia in two years.
I am myself only an interested guest in the Wiki scene, but I have left a few contributions and I would encourage everyone in this list to do the same. In the same sense I would encourage to teach the use of Wikipedia in classes as Susan Klein does. I myself also use the Wiki-software (which is part of my university's e-learning equipment) producing small Wikis on certain topics in class. I encourage students to use their skills in the "big Wikipedia outside", and some do. It's a collective learning by doing for the students as well as for me and it's fun. And it is certainly a way to leave the ivory tower and still being in control to some extent what's happening then...
Bernhard
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: pm...@googlegroups.com [mailto:pm...@googlegroups.com] Im Auftrag von Michael Pye
Gesendet: Montag, 1. November 2010 23:57
An: pm...@googlegroups.com
Betreff: Re: [PMJS] "Sayuri" in Wikipedia entry on Japanese mythology
Marc Adler
has already removed the Sayuri passage obviously following our discussion (as Michael Wachutka has pointed out). This kind of censorship has become a widely debated issue in the Wiki
I did it. It's incredibly easy to do, and I only did it because nobody else did after it was brought up here. That's the whole point of a Wiki-type project. If you see something wrong, you fix it.
Mark Schumacher
Bravo. Glad to know that people like you are helping to edit Wiki.
I for one never do, as I am busy with my own online A-to-Z Dictionary
of Japanese Buddhist Statuary -- and Wiki is (frankly) a direct competitor.
Nonetheless, I too must say that Wiki is a good entry point on many topics.
Yet it is fraught with errors, and neither students nor scholars should cite it.
If only Wiki were more transparent -- i.e., if Wiki clearly showed readers who
made the entry, who edited it, who is in charge of the page -- that, in my mind,
would make it a much stronger and trustworthy tool.
Comments of Some Interest:
- Respected scholars make mistakes too. Not to point fingers,
but Louis Frederic
(who I applaud) made some doozies in his lifetime, and many of those mistakes
are still found in his copious publications and carried forward ad infinitum by
his many unwary readers.
- I too have made some doozies over the past 15 years in
building my A-to-Z dictionary.
When readers alert me to errors, or when I myself discover them, I take immediate
action to correct said mistakes. In fact, a great part of my online journey has involved
the correcting of errors, often thanks to reader feedback. So perhaps we should not
be so harsh on Wiki -- people make mistakes !!!!
- My biggest headache with Wiki is theft, copyright
infringement, and poor follow-up.
A big chunk of the Wiki community assumes that information is free -- and thus they
take everything, unfiltered, and pass it along without any consideration for ownership
or copyright issues, which is much like the music community. After years buying LP
records, 8-tracks, cassettes, and other formats, they feel that music should be free
-- why should they pay for the same Beatles' song each time a new format comes along?
The Internet phenomenon has unleashed great opportunities for sharing, theft, and plagiarism.
In my case, people copy my material without citation and add it to Wiki. At some later time,
I discover a mistake on my site. So I correct it. But the Wiki community, which is off harvesting
other information, fails to update their theft of my original material, and thus, sadly, my mistakes
are carried forward by Wiki. Thus, my greatest fear is that Wiki is a vehicle for prolonging the lifetime
of FALSE information. I am a fan of Wiki and yet a great detractor.
accurate, will become part of the Wiki phenomenon. But I remain, alas, pessimistic.
yours in the struggle
mark in kamakura
On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 9:44 AM, Scheid, Bernhard <Bernhar...@oeaw.ac.at> wrote:
Â
has already removed the Sayuri passage obviously following our discussion (as Michael Wachutka has pointed out). This kind of censorship has become a widely debated issue in the Wiki
I did it. It's incredibly easy to do, and I only did it because nobody else did after it was brought up here. That's the whole point of a Wiki-type project. If you see something wrong, you fix it.
Gauçac eztira multçutu eta berretu behar, mengoaric eta premiaric gabe.
à¤―à¤¤à\‡ à¤―à¤¤à\‡ à¤ªà¤¾à¤°à¤―à¤¤à\‡ à¤ªà¤¾à¤°à¤¸à¤‚à¤―à¤¤à\‡ à¤￢à\‹à¤§à¤¿ सà\�वाहा
--
You are subscribed to PMJS: Premodern Japanese Studies.
To post to the list, send email to pm...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe, send email to pmjs+uns...@googlegroups.com
Visit the PMJS web site at www.pmjs.org
Contact the group administrator at edi...@pmjs.org
Marc Adler
If only Wiki were more transparent -- i.e., if Wiki clearly showed readers who
made the entry, who edited it, who is in charge of the page -- that, in my mind,
would make it a much stronger and trustworthy tool.
But it does. It doesn't provide academic affiliation and office hours, but it gives you a way of contacting the person who made a change, and anyway, some of the most useful contributions are from independent scholars. In fact, the apparatus for tracking changes and tracking down their perpetrators is fairly robust. And if you ever can't find someone (their account is closed or their talk page is dead), then you're obviously free to make any changes you see fit. The only problem is that at some point someone will come along and ask to see your sources, because no original work is allowed on Wikipedia. Unfortunately, the rather demotic nature of the projection means that "I've taught this subject for twenty years at a prestigious university!"-type arguments are singled out for particularly brutal rejection and ridicule. The PhD's have to provide the same source citations that unlettered manga-addicts do, which irks them, understandably. But if they can't provide a source citation, then maybe they should reconsider whatever it is they're trying to post.