|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Geisha article.|
|This article used to be a very good article. |
This means the community feels this article was written very well, but is not now.
- Delink dates
- Geisha are very respected and it is hard to become one. According to who?
- Way to many Japanese translations to English in lead; first is only one relevant
- The lead is particularly weak. It doesn't explain what a geisha is or what they do.
- Geisha are more modern than many people think. Opinion
- Create the dead links on Wiktionary
- Throughout this section I would like to see more references.
- More or less by the year 1700 Idiomatic Albacore (talk · changes) 01:52, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
- Albacore I'm currently working on fixing up the article, while I cannot fix it all myself, I will fix the biggest problems --Thegooduser Let's Talk! :) 🍁 23:31, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
here's what I've done so far[change source]
- "Geisha are very respected and it is hard to become one" Source added fixed --Thegooduser Let's Talk! :) 🍁 23:39, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
- Also, I'm not sure, but judging by the age of this message, I think some of the other issues were fixed since the writing of the message --Thegooduser Let's Talk! :) 🍁 23:55, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
I had to change it so that people who don't know what a prostitute is can understand.
Japanese in text[change source]
This article has way more Japanese in it than any published English-language article I have seen. "Simple" English would suggest using fewer non-English elements than conventional writing, not more. The polylingualism of "English" Wikipedia doesn't belong here. I created a language box for the native name. IMO, the box should be the only place Japanese is used. That would still be more Japanese than most other encyclopedias give. Kauffner (talk) 07:39, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
- That isn't actually true, simple means the English words are simpler, because we cater to other language readers here, we actually tend to have more "foreign" looking things in our articles to help with description of subjects. That is why it was always amusing that people would point you towards simple.wiki when you would get worked up about diacritics since we highly use them here. -DJSasso (talk) 13:21, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
- The author is obviously an English speaker trying to explain Japanese to other English speakers. I doubt this sort of thing does much for a Japanese speaker. But if the idea is to write in a non-standard form so that Japanese can read it more easily, that's Jap-lish. That's not what any language learner wants to read. People learning English want to know what real English looks like. Kauffner (talk) 15:28, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
I made many changes in the page today. Earlier this month someone added not-simple English, and I took that out. Most of the links to web pages in the references were dead. I found saved copies at archive.org and added those links. When two sources were the same, I combined them to make one reference. One link had been wrong for a very long time, and I fixed that. Cheers, BlackcurrantTea (talk) 23:42, 31 May 2019 (UTC)