Talk:Kimono/Archive 1

Japanese

Whisper to me, why is it you insist on putting a link to Japanese language where one is not needed? Exploding Boy 14:16, May 23, 2004 (UTC)

whispers: I believe the discussion on how to translate "kimono" is a glowing example of why it is needed. Kimono and kitsuke make extensive use of Japanese terminology, aka the Japanese language. --fraise 30 June 2005 15:15 (UTC)

Iromuji and Edo kimono

I'm not completely sure about the formality of an Iromuji, nor of Edo komon - any help is appreciated. - fraise

I think it's difficult to assign a specific formality to either kimono because they're both highly versatile. (Edo komon appear to be a solid color from a distance, so they function the same as iromuji, or solid color kimono.) Perhaps a good English description of their formality is "dress casual", because they're appropriate for all but the most informal events. Unlike dress casual, though, they're appropriate for formal occasions.

As a general rule, I would call them semi-formal. The number of kamon (crests) will be the final factor in deciding formality (following the rule, the more crests, the more formal). I think single and 3 crested iromuji are the most common, so that's why I figure "semi-formal" is a good description.

The following link is a chart (translated) from the magazine Utsukushii Kimono, noting the appropriate occasions for each kimono. A circle means "ok", an x means "not ok", and a triangle means "acceptable but not recommended". Perhaps this would be a good outside link at the foot of the kimono article? -- http://i95.photobucket.com/albums/l146/claw789/kimono-occasion-1.jpg Naeelah 20:15, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

formality

I'm not sure the following statement is accurate.

"While very formal women's outfits do not include hakama, men's usually do."

Women wear hakama at college gradution ceremonies and some girls wear hakama for Shichigosan ceremonies. I would consider these formal events.

Info on Japanese Graduation Ceremonies Kimonos for Shichigosan --Feiriri 17:16, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

I think the focus is on "very." I think graduation ceremonies or Shichigosan ceremonies would only be "slightly" formal. --Kjoonlee 18:02, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

I see what you mean. Thanks.--Feiriri 01:21, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

wedding kimono

i have some pics from our traditional (kimono-wearing) wedding at my website www.davejenkins.com that are under the GFDL, if anyone would think they might work here... help yourself! Davejenk1ns 04:06, 10 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Meaning of Kimono

We need to reach a consensus on what the literal English translation of "Kimono" should be. My proposal of "clothing" was reverted to "something one wears" by user:Exploding Boy. -Himasaram 10:05, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)

"Ki": to wear; "mono": something. Exploding Boy 20:10, Jun 6, 2005 (UTC)

Exploding Boy, you're missing the point. It's not a good idea to translate kanji in Japanese words one by one. "Kimono" is a unit and should be translated as such, not as a collection of kanji. And the word "kimono" simply means "clothing" or "garment". -Himasaram 21:21, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)

On the contrary, it is you who are missing the point, both on this page and on the Geisha page. Kimono does not mean "clothes." As I explained on talk: Geisha, the literal translation of the kanji (here, "something one wears") is different from the actual meaning of the word, which here is "kimono," given that only the particular types of clothing -- the long, rectangular robes -- described in the article are called "kimono" in Japan, and not "clothes," which are called "fuku," "wafuku" or "yōfuku." Exploding Boy 23:34, Jun 6, 2005 (UTC)

Ah, I return to wikipedia after a two-year absence just in time for an interesting discussion. Kimono does indeed mean clothes, as do fuku, wafuku and yōfuku. Kimono also means "worn things," as well as meaning "things worn in a fashion that they hang from the shoulders" - as opposed to things worn on the feet, etc. This can be found in Liza Dalby's "Kimono". In other words, its definition is not black and white; there are several shades of meaning which, while self-evident to a Japanese speaker, are rather impossible to put across in a single English word, or even a "literal" breakdown of the kanji. A Japanese speaker certainly sees "kimono" as a single unit (I say this as someone who knows several Japanese who wear the garment and have said as much), while also being aware of its more "piecemeal" meanings. English does not have the luxury of such eloquent simplicity! --fraise 30 June 2005 15:12 (UTC)

This is almost a silly discussion. I have to agree with fraise: Kimono, in Japanese, has always meant clothes and only took on the specific meaning of traditional garments as they became less and less common. Though nowadays few people, and almost none under the age of about 60, use the word in reference to anything but the traditional garment (also called 呉服 gofuku), people like my mother-in-law (born in 1933 and a dialect speaker) still say kimono (often shortened to kimon) in reference to any type of clothing.

As far as the etymology goes... I agree about the inadvisability of breaking down words into their kanji elements to explain them, and indeed suggest going a step further: Don't mistake kanji as the defining elements of words used in Japanese. For example, though written 着物, kimono is not a "kanji word" (i.e., a Chinese word adopted into Japanese or a Sino-Japanese word): kimono is a native Japanese word (yamato kotoba) and itself a shortened form of kiru mono ("things worn" = "clothes").

The above said, I think there is some justification for explaining that kimono was originally the Japanese word for clothes of any kind but later came to be associated with a particular traditional garment, and that this meaning is itself different from what English speakers associate with kimono as it is now commonly used in English—i.e., in reference to a loose-fitting bathrobe-like woman's garment. Jim_Lockhart 15:37, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

I disagree that we need to find a translation. The word has been imported into the English language and the article should continue as Kimono. Having said which, there is nothing against adding a section for Meaning ... clothes (derivation .. whatever). Kittybrewster 22:14, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Obi-belt or sash

Obi is in the section about Japanese clothing articals, however it has no artical. Obi leads to a disambiguation page, on which the only definition of obi as clothing reads a belt worn on a kimono in certain martial arts and does not point one to an artical other than kimono. I left a message on the obi talk page, however to do so I had to first create the talk page, leading me to beleive that no one will see it. I know nothing on the subject of obi, so if someone could create at least a stub on this subject it would help me greatly. --1 black han d 13:13, 21 August 2005 (UTC)

Should it be referred to as a belt or sash? The article obi suggests sash. -- Aronzak (talk) 23:48, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Men's kimonos

Are there any pictures of men in a kimono? All the pictures are of women. --Angr (t·c) 14:14, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

I'm glad someone asked this. I found one off a person's user page. I expect that since I'm not the group that runs this article (every article has a group of several people or just 1 person and several sockpuppets who run it), I'll be reverted, but still mine should be kept and one of the others removed. Tempoo 18:49, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Angr, you're the one who plasters their naked picture all over the pedia. Tempoo 18:50, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Sorry... had to take it off. A photo of a Westerner posing in a kimono in a photo salon is no more befitting of inclusion in an article on kimonos than what a family posing at Silver Dollar City should be included in an article describing western wear. See the link if you don't get the reference.

Photo

Ntk53s 11:30, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for getting rid of that. It looked like a vanity photo! Now if we could get rid of the ass-shots of the three old bats waiting for a train, all we'd need is a good photo of man (preferably Japanese) in kimono... Jim_Lockhart 11:38, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Well, thanks for that vanity comment, given that as far as I can remember I have never editted this page and I have no connections with the user that did add the picture. It really helps to say that. elvenscout742 14:37, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

I apologise for the blunt nature of my comment—it was meant to be about the photo within the context of the article, not the photo itself. Hence the "looked like". Nonetheless, I'm sorry for hurting your feelings. However, I do feel that a photo of a gaijin in a kimono in an article about kimono, is kind of incongruent. Best regards, Jim_Lockhart 15:54, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Better a photo of a wester man in a kimono than no photo of a man in a kimono. Exploding Boy 16:47, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I would be inclined to agree. The article is about clothing, not about race. Still, I should make it clear that this is not an attempt to get my photo reinstated - if others deem it inappropriate then that's that. elvenscout742 21:36, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

I agree that any is better than none, and also that race ideally should not be a factor—which is why I did not remove it myself much earlier, and if the photo gets placed back, I won't touch it unless I think I have something better to replace it with. Nonetheless, I now no that I'm not the only person who thinks it looks incongruent, and I still feel that a photo of a native-looking man walking down the street (or in some other situation where the kimono's features are mostly in view) is preferable to a glossy studio shot picture of a gaijin. Jim_Lockhart 00:51, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

This article really needs a picture of a male in a kimono, and seeing as how its been a couple months and nothing with a Japanese male has been put up maybe you should put up the gaijin male one, or if one of you is Japanese, take a picture of your self dressed up :) Highlandlord 13:25, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Actually, I think a gaïjin (or a black man, for instance) would be great! It would help push the idea that a kimono is not some kind of oddly dressed Japanese woman, but a sort of clothing. I would also like to see a formal gathering (wedding or else) with lots of people wearing lots of different kimonos. That'd be neat.--SidiLemine 16:36, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

You will find several photos of men in kimono on the section for kimono in Wikipedia Japan. [1]--Tsumugi (talk) 04:39, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Merging Wafuku

Someone created a Wafuku page. I thought it would be better to mention wafuku at Kimono instead, so I made it a redirect. I'd do the merging myself, but I'm not very knowledgable. --KJ 06:40, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Well, wafuku seems like it just refers to traditional Japanese-style clothing. Perhaps as a result of very little research in the area, I have not come across the term in English, but if an article can be created on the subject that isn't just a copy-paste of this page with the word "kimono" changed to "wafuku", then it should. But I really don't know. elvenscout742 21:44, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Yes, but was there other information at Wafuku? Kimono is not the only wafuku, so unless we're going to expand this article to discuss all the types of traditional Japanese clothing (which we shouldn't; this topic is big enough to have its own article, and could probably be expanded a lot further), then really what should happen is that Wafuku should be expanded --- for starters, it could have short sections on all the types of clothing discussed in this article --- with a short section on kimono and a link to this page (as the "main article). Exploding Boy 22:28, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

How odd. I just looked at the history of the Wafuku page, and it appears that the user who started it simply c&pd the Kimono article, changing "kimono" to "wafuku" throughout. The situation gets weirder still; "Traditional Japanese clothing" redirects to Kimono... I suggest that "Traditional Japanese clothing should point either to Wafuku or to a disambiguation page (perhaps List of traditional Japanese clothing), with links to both articles on individual types of clothing. The more I think about it, Wafuku and Japanese clothing should point to Traditional Japanese clothing as well.

...and, holy crap! There already is a list of Japanese clothing, which can be found at Japanese clothing. What a very odd situation. Ok, to begin with I'm going to redirect both Wafuku and Traditional Japanese clothing to Japanese clothing. Exploding Boy 22:35, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Mink stole?

In a lot of pictures of kimono I've seen (in fact, the picture of the little girl on this article has one) there is a short, white mink-stole-looking t hing they wear around the collar. What is that? I've never seen one on a geisha (my area of knowledge). --Iriseyes 01:50, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Fur and feather stoles are a relatively recent accessory (as in, from the last decade or so). I don't know exactly when the fashion first appeared, but it's definitely modern, not traditional. As such, a geisha would never have worn a stole, and Kyoto geisha still do not wear them. In my experience, it's young girls and young women who wear stoles, with furisode and houmongi. (http://www.kyoto-wel.com/item/IS81495N00322.html: That catalog page, at least, specifies stoles for wear with those kimono.) Naeelah 05:48, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

• (had to look that up http://www.japaneselifestyle.com.au/fashion/houmongi_kimono.html When a Japanese woman marries, many parents buy their daughters another kimono, the houmongi. The houmongi takes over the role the furisode played in the life when she was single. The houmongi is the married woman's formal kimono. This would be worn when attending Japanese weddings or tea ceremonies.) Chris 06:28, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

What "period of isolation"? And what does "uniquely Japanese" mean?

I removed the reference to Japanese kimono having “uniquely Japanese” aspects since, in addition to being more “Japan as uniquely unique and distinctive” nonsense, it doesn’t make sense. (I would be happy if someone would define it, of course—say, with a Wikilink to an article that explains it, albeit without the usual brown-and-smelly bull-pen floor decorations.) If my adjustments do not express what what meant with this, go ahead and change them.

Similarly, the reference to kimono undergoing modifications during Japan’s isolation does not seem very well thought-out. I assume the writer is referring to Edo-period sakoku, which did not start in earnest until the 1630s, despite earlier decrees, and which did not really (i.e., substantially) bring about a halt in contact with the Asian continent. This presents two problems: the c.450-year gap between the last-cited date (1193) and the effective beginning of sakoku, and further, what—if any-implications sakoku had for the development of kimono. Is the reference to “Japan’s period of isolation” not just a non sequitor here? If it has significance, then I’d like to suggest a Wikilink to a relevant article—one which, upon reading, will give most readers an idea of the implications of “Japan’s period of isolation” on the development of kimono.
Best regards, Jim_Lockhart 07:15, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Plural of kimono is kimonos

According to all the English dictionary sources I checked, the plural of kimono is kimonos, not kimono as this article currently treats it. Nohat 02:27, 8 May 2007 (UTC).

I have fixed all the errors. I noticed in the edit history there was an argument made that the plural of kimono is kimono ("Plural of kimono (Japanese garmet) is kimono; kimonos/kimonoes is plural for kimono, a non-J garment") but I don't believe there are any lexicographical authorities to maintain such a distinction. In English, the plural of kimono is always kimonos. [2] [3] Nohat 02:42, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

I think it is reasonable to use kimonos as the plural of kimono in English, because it follows regular English rules for making plurals. But in English, as in many languages, a word may in careful usage continue to follow the grammatical rules of its home language. That being the case I continue to use kimono for the plural of kimono; my Japanese is elementary, but I believe that nouns are not given a plural form, the concept of more than one of something is given by context and by modifiers such as counting phrases. Since this article is about the Japanese use of kimono primarily, and is greatly concerned with Japanese terminology, I don't think there can be an objection to the use of kimono as plural.Sallypursell 23:07, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

It is correct that nouns are not pluralized in Japanese, but this is English, and nouns are pluralized in English. If we were concerned about being accurate to the original Japanese, then we would write 着物 instead of 'kimono'. But we're not, and we don't, and there's no need to slavishly copy Japanese grammar when using a word borrowed long ago from the Japanese lexicon. As I wrote before, I don't know of any English lexicographical authorities (i.e. dictionaries) that suggest that the plural of kimono is kimono (in any context), so I fail to see any reason to abandon the standards of English grammar. Nohat 09:54, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for taking the time to respond, Nohat. I did not mean any criticism, and your reply seems irritated. I found this question interesting, and not knowing enough, just gave my thoughts so that people who know more could consider. I think the update referenced below is better than either choice. Sallypursell (talk) 14:05, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

This is really not a matter for Wikipedia editors to decide. If dictionaries give "kimonos" as the plural (and they all do), then that is the standard English plural. Deviating from that violates the Wikipedia principals against "innovation" and personal opinions. However, sometimes the Japanese-style plural is found in use by English writers, so this can be mentioned. But the article should use "kimonos" in the general text. 76.199.197.249 (talk) 21:32, 11 November 2008 (UTC)editor

I've just updated the article to "kimonos", with a statement in the intro about "kimonos" vs "kimono". I went through and corrected probably most of the "kimono" plurals -- but also probably missed some for you to catch! In some cases I changed "kimono are" as plural to "the kimono is", etc. for variety. 76.199.197.249 (talk) 21:32, 11 November 2008 (UTC)editor

This article currently (Aug 9, 2018) contains lots of examples of "kimono" used as a plural. Could someone (who is a regular Wikipedia editor, unlike myself) please standardize these all to "kimonos", in accordance with the English-dictionary-based reasoning stated by others above? I wouldn't have a problem with someone writing "kimono" for the plural in their own work, where they are the single author, if that is their preference. But to have this sort of flagrant inconsistency in a Wikipedia article seems quite inappropriate.

Also note the plural of "obi" is "obis". 76.199.197.249 (talk) 21:38, 11 November 2008 (UTC)editor

Interesting debate. In my area of interest, poetry, all the plurals of Japanese words in all the Wikipedia articles I've read use the Japanese form (i.e. identical to the singular). I wonder if this is because "kimono" has entered popular English usage in a way that "haiku", "renga", "kireji", "kigo" etc never will or because students of poetry are more likely to honour the source language. It would be jarring to read "kirejis", whereas "kimonos" seems unremarkable.

hakama

I believe there should be an explanation of the two types of hakama, the ones with divided skirts umanori (originally used for practicality in horseback riding, I believe) and the skirt-style ones. andon-hakama. Would it be true that only umanori are used for martial arts? As well, is it not very common for women to wear hakama out doing errands or other daily activities. in addition, it probably should be mentioned that hakama can be very formal indeed for a man.Sallypursell 23:21, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

There's already an article on hakama. Do we need a lot of detail here, given that this article isn't about hakama? Exploding Boy 00:31, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Exploding Boy. What’s the use of cluttering up this article with so much detail on separate subjects, especially when they’re covered elsewhere. Jim_Lockhart 11:54, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

mergers

Given the tiny amount of information given in the two satellite articles suggested for mergers, Hiyoku and Kimono-hiyoku-layering, I would strongly support the merger. Anyone else? Cricketgirl 18:26, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

sources

I have a good source for this article, but it's the middle of the night right now; if I don't get to editing this article within a few days, someone poke me on my talk page and remind me (I put it on my watchlist so I'll remember). The book I have in front of me is Kimono by Liza Dalby, it's got sources for most of this stuff. Kuronue | Talk 05:13, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Cleanup completed. Kuronue | Talk 02:33, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Kimonos, Hanfu, et al

As evidence that there are people who don't know that kimonos are specifically Japanese, and that similar garments in neighbouring cultures (note that "neighbours" include those who aren't specifically next-door neighbours) are known by other terms, see this link. -- TheEditrix2 01:55, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

I don't see that it matters enough to mention it. Encyclopedia articles normally describe what things are, without openly fretting about people thinking that they are something else. Beyond that, it doesn't matter whether people use a word more generically than its original application. It perplexes me that every time I read about women's head coverings in yet another Islamic country, the writer takes the trouble to introduce us to the word used in that particular country, as though it the head covering were a substantively different thing from its counterpart elsewhere. —Largo Plazo (talk) 02:07, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

My problems with including your preferred text are as follows (in order of increasing importance):

1. You're using wikt:conflate as a synonym for confuse, when it has a completely different meaning.
2. Malaysia and Vietnam can in no way be considered neighbors of Japan.
3. The placement of the material in the article overemphasizes the importance of the material to a worldwide audience. In most places in !America, people do just fine with the concept of national dress. I suspect that most Americans get that as well. All your link shows is that the questioner did not know the precise term for Chinese national dress.

You may include these other types of national dress under "See also" if you like. ObiterDicta ( pleadings • errata • appeals ) 03:08, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Wafuku

The original and exact word should be wafuku (和服, "clothes of Yamato").

Can we get a source to verify this? It sounds like it could be a retronym rather than the "original" word. --Ptcamn (talk) 21:27, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Indeed, the Japanese language link in the sidebar does lead to Wafuku (和服) but the page says that the term "kimono" can also be used.

The Kanjis of 着物 (Kimono) mean "something to wear" where else 和服 (Wafuku) means "Japanese cloth" (in this case the kanji 和 (wa) means Japanese.)

It seems to me that today the term 'wafuku' is used more to specify "Japanese" or to differentiate from the daily western clothes they wear and it englobes a wider range, including Yukatas, Hakamas and so on..., as for "Kimono" is more used to design the 'traditional garments' as shown on the photos of the article and it can include different styles such as Furisode but it does not include Yukatas. (I have clearly been told that "Yukatas" are not "Kimonos" by elders, but this may not be common knowledge(?))

Whatever the precise definitions, there's a compound for nearly every country or culture and it's not restricted to clothes.

Common examples for Japanese 和 (wa) & Western 洋 (yō):

* fuku (服, cloth): wafuku (和服, "Japanese cloth"); yōfuku (洋服, "Western cloth")

* shoku (食, food/cooking): washoku (和食, "Japanese food"): yōshoku (洋食, "Western food")

* kashi (菓子, pastry): wagashi (和菓子, "Japanese pastry"); yōgashi (洋菓子, "Western pastry")

*...etc -- － Cy21 ➜ discuss 12:51, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

cost

Is that right, the article says kimono are available for $5.00, and obi for $15.00 (500yen and 1500yen). Aren't there some zeros missing? 70.51.8.110 (talk) 22:16, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Oh, I bet. The cheapest kimono I ever saw was at least $60, and it was in pretty bad shape. Where does it say that? IceUnshattered (talk) 17:33, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, it looks like the prices marked yen in the "Cost" section should be marked dollars... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 155.91.144.231 (talk) 06:46, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Used kimonos and obi are available for such low prices, even if not damaged. It's all about where you buy and can the seller fool you... Pitke (talk) 10:11, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

heart and references

they are almost duplicates....why is it there twice....and what is "heart" section?! Noian (talk) 02:22, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

I've cut out the heart Rojomoke (talk) 23:20, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Current Kimono Fashion Trend

In ever-trendy Japan, the kimono is apparently making a comeback as fashionable youth clothing.

This subject should be researched -- all I have is a news video link -- might not be long-lasting and probably should have text not video reference.

"Kimono Comeback in Japan" AFP video on Yahoo News:

http://cosmos.bcst.yahoo.com/up/player/popup/?rn=3906861&cl=10626501&ch=4226714&src=news

Possible image

Just a quick note: it'd be amusing if File:JimmyWales wearing Kimono.jpg could be worked into the article. --Gwern (contribs) 02:11 27 January 2009 (GMT)

Speaking of images, what happened to the one with the adorable little girl in the oversized kimono? That was the best picture on Wikipedia. I wanted to link it to my userpage and now it's just gone... :( The Cake is a Lie ^{T / C} 07:32, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Speaking of pictures, for my screen resolution there are way too many. I'm going to boldly remove a few, so that images don't go on way longer then the text. Feel free to revert or change. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 13:37, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Why is it a symbol of all of Asia?

Why? I mean, It's Japanese not Chinese or Korean, So why do people think of all of Asia, not just Japan? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.11.129.170 (talk) 18:39, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

First of all, do they? That's not something I've noticed, really.

Second, as mentioned in the article, kimono did develop from historical Chinese clothing, and at least superficially similar forms of dress do exist or have existed in other parts of Asia (see Hanbok, Cheongsam, Han fu, etc.). /ninly^(talk) 19:20, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

If the article claims this, it should be changed into a cite as in "William Williams sums up the cultural meaning of kimono: 'it symbolizes all the Asia'." If the claim is unsourced and without who says this, it should be removed. Pitke (talk) 20:00, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

The word Asia doesn't even appear in the article (outside of a couple references, none of which suggest this), so I don't think there's any such problem. Since this page is for discussing change/improvement to the article, we should probably just drop it, unless there's something germane to discuss. /ninly^(talk) 22:25, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Dubious

The assertion that kimonos are often "passed down from mother to daughter" seems to have originated with this edit by an anonymous contributor, User:121.214.229.179. Should be verified to make sure it's not just a practical joke. -- Schneelocke (talk) 17:57, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

It is actually true. Because the price of kimono exceeds $10,000, it is not surprising to pass down from mother to daughter, daughter to granddaughter. For that reason, the woman's mother's kamon (family crests) is allowed even she was married. Unfortunately I couldn't find a good English source to prove the fact. ―― Phoenix7777 (talk) 12:27, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Photo caption

The photo of the couple dressed in traditional Japanese clothing is captioned "Couple being married in traditional dress" but if you click on the photo, it says they are a married couple. I don't know what a marriage ceremony looks like, but it seems to me they are not getting married in the photo. Wakablogger2 (talk) 22:20, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

The Commons description isn't necessarily the best English you can encounter (it should be something like "a couple being married", or a "freshly-wed couple"), but what is in the picture definitely is a couple shortly before or after a Shinto marriage ceremony. The clothes they wear are a good example. Pitke (talk) 22:32, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Include content about Japanese clothes before hanfu influence.

In the section about history, I find this article needs content about Japanese clothing before hanfu influence. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.23.216.252 (talk) 06:45, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

"Kimono-clad Japanese women did not wear panties and several women refused to jump into safety nets because they were ashamed of being seen from below."

Is the word "panties" widely understood in the English speaking world, outside of the USA, or an American regionalism? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.8.247.224 (talk) 14:59, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

Also, if this is likely as not an "urban myth", why include it in the main page alongside historical facts? Why not make a "kimono urban myths" page? To include urban myths at all on wikipedia seems rather silly and questionable. Aren't there other sites that are better specialized in that sort of thing? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.8.247.224 (talk) 15:07, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

Haori redirects here

Haori is currently redirecting to the "related garments" section of this article, which gives very little information on the haori garment. -Etoile (talk) 08:32, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Image caption

What is a "kimono lady"? bamse (talk) 14:04, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Copyedited. Oda Mari (talk) 14:50, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Japanese Wikipedia Information

The Japanese article for Kimono appears to have a lot of in-depth, useful information about the structure of various variations on the kimono. I think someone who understands Japanese should translate this information into English and add it to the English wikipedia! 68.1.172.2 (talk) 01:35, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Straw coat?

I'm searching for information about the ancient straw coat (See image ). I may have not found the page or it maybe missing

There seems to be one kind called "Doumino" (どうみの：蓑 、ばんどり) [source] If anybody knows what this is called... Thanks -- － Cy21 ➜ discuss 14:38, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Mino is translated as a straw raincoat. See this G-search result. Oda Mari (talk) 16:32, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Thank you Thank you!! (sorry, but better late then never ^^') -- － Cy21 ➜ discuss 09:51, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

Great Fire of Meireki

It is said that the Great Fire of Meireki was caused by a cursed Kimono. Is there any way this fact can be integrated into the article? Tradereddy (talk) 20:18, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Japanese or greek?

The father in My Big Fat Greek Wedding said that Kimono comes from Greek ξεχειμωνιάζω (el) (xecheimoniázo), meaning winter. In the winter it is cold, and one must wear a mantle to not get a cold. I don't demand, but suggest to take this "alternative theory" of the word's etymology into the article. It's at least as valid, as Creationism is a "theory" besides the Evolution "theory". User:ScotXW^t@lk 10:32, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Kimono. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20140928092022/http://www.east-asian-history.net/textbooks/MJ/ch4_main.htm to http://www.east-asian-history.net/textbooks/MJ/ch4_main.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20150504163319/http://www.oldtokyo.com/shirokiya.html to http://www.oldtokyo.com/shirokiya.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 13:00, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

Gofuku

As the kimono has another name, gofuku (呉服, literally "clothes of Wu (吳)"), the earliest kimonos were heavily influenced by traditional Han Chinese clothing, known today as hanfu (漢服, kanfuku in Japanese)…...

This description has a fundamental error. The word, Gofuku (呉服), indicates a silk fabric, not a style of clothing. This was named after 呉 (Wú) in ancient China, where the technology of silk fabrics originated from. Source : Daijisen Dictionary, Shogakukan. "呉服 Gofuku, Kure-hatori" 1. A general term for kimono textiles, a bolt of fabric 2. The name of silk fabrics as opposed to Futomono 3. A twill woven with the method from the country of Go in ancient China, Kurehatori (literally translates as a weave of Kure)

Kimono fabrics can to be classified into two categories: silk Gofuku for luxuries and cotton/hemp Futomono for everyday wear. Cotton clothing is called Momenfuku (木綿服) whereas hemp clothing is called Asafuku (麻服) in Japanese. Cotton/hemp fabrics are generally called as Futomono (太物, Thick materials) as the fiber of these materials are thicker compared to that of silk. Till the end of the Edo period, tailoring of these fabrics were handled respectively at Gofuku store (Gofuku Dana) and Futomono stores (Futomono Dana), and there was also a store called Gofuku Futomono Dana that handled all types of fabrics*. However, after the Meiji period, kimono was not worn as daily wear very often and Futomono stores eventually went out of business.

• Oodenmacho Gofuku Dana, Hiroshige (1858)http://www.ndl.go.jp/landmarks/details/detail038.html?sights=odenmacho Yakeishi (talk) 03:21, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Children?

The article contains a single mention of "kimonos for children", so I now know these exist, but nothing more than that. How do they differ from the adult versions? I would expect this to be worthy of a whole section, but there's nothing. 37.252.28.110 (talk) 14:41, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Kimono. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071101003934/http://www.vam.ac.uk/collections/asia/asia_features/kimono/index.html to http://www.vam.ac.uk/collections/asia/asia_features/kimono/index.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071107142537/http://www.ichiroya.com/ to http://www.ichiroya.com/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070513220418/http://www.vam.ac.uk/collections/asia/past_exhns/kimono/index.html to http://www.vam.ac.uk/collections/asia/past_exhns/kimono/index.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:51, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Kimono. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080616143836/http://www.ndl.go.jp/horei_jp/kakugi/txt/txt00477.htm to http://www.ndl.go.jp/horei_jp/kakugi/txt/txt00477.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20041205120141/http://www.tnm.go.jp/en/ to http://www.tnm.go.jp/en/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:39, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

Why does "kitsuke" redirect here?

It is not helpful to create such a redirect when the word is not even mentioned in the article. 86.155.78.132 (talk) 19:30, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

Kitsuke is the word to describe dressing in kimono - when we talk of someone's kitsuke, for example, we're discussing how they're wearing their kimono.

Thank you for pointing out that it's not mentioned; by all rights, it should be, and now that you've mentioned it, I think it should probably be a heading of its own. --Ineffablebookkeeper (talk) 20:40, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

Brief overview of required changes on this page

For clarity and article quality, I thought I'd outline the changes that roughly need doing on this article - if you've come here from the multiple issues tag, here's those multiple issues.

Let's start with headings that should exist. A lot of article needs re-jiggling into these categories - I'm writing these in order of appearance on the article. I've written them as wikitables to ensure the correct heading types are used, and I've added notes in italics.

1. ===History of ''kitsuke''=== underneath ==History==

The information under Layering should split between History of kitsuke and Kitsuke in the present day. The subheading Layering should be removed entirely.

2. ===''Kitsuke'' in the present day=== underneath ===History of kitsuke===

3. ====Bridal ''kitsuke''==== underneath ===''Kitsuke'' in the present day===

4. ===Fabrics used in kimono===

Textiles and construction of kimono needs splitting between this heading and the one below.

5. ===Construction of kimono===

The lead should be a short paragraph on the history of kimono construction, and history of construction only. Kimono history has its own heading.

6. ===Undergarments== underneath ==Accessories and related garments==

Information on bridal kitsuke should be moved to the relevant heading above. I have hidden some text under the existing heading; this is information that needs moving elsewhere.

7. ===Footwear== underneath ===Undergarments===

8. ==Cultural Appropriation== replacing ==Commercial Appropriation==

This needs referencing carefully. Take extra care writing this section.

And some general copyediting that needs doing. First on the list, before anything else, are:

0. Accuracy!

0. Referencing!

Before anything happens, this article needs to be accurate.

If the article isn't accurate beforehand, how can anyone trim for brevity and efficiency?

What if something accurate gets thrown out by accident? Sounds like a nightmare.

Some of the inaccuracy stems from the text, and some of it's in the sources.

The issues to deal with after that are, in order:

1. Every section is too long. This partially down to...

2. ...Information being repeated throughout the article...

Make sure you're keeping the right information when correcting this, and that it's being put in the right sections.

3. ...And also tone. It seems some of this article has been translated, but that the translator may not have known how to sum something up briefly due to language differences.

4. More references need to be added - there are large sections with very few inline citations.

5. Referencing format needs to be checked. Some references aren't written very well.

6. Some Japanese words don't need italicising, like kimono, geisha and maiko.

7. Others need italicising consistently - if it's in italics once, it's in italics throughout the article.

8. None of these words, however, need Capitalising, unless they are placenames, people names, or organisation names, such as Urasenke.

9. The right kanji and kana need to be found for several terms.

10. If you've found the right kanji and kana, it needs putting into the proper {nihongo} template consistently.

11. If the kanji or kana have a Wiktionary article, put the link in the {nihongo} template.

For Japanese terms within the text in a section, this layout gives the correct information and reads smoothly:

{{nihongo|''Romanji term''|''pseudo-Anglicanism if found and common parlance''|"translation"|[[kanji/kana]]}}

For Japanese terms within headings, this template is slightly better, as it's slightly more authoritative and suitable for a title:

{{nihongo|''Romanji term''|''English term if more commonly described with the English term over the Japanese one''|[[kanji/kana]]|''pseudo-Anglicanism if found and common parlance''|, lit. "[literal translation if applicable]"}}

Not all of these have to be filled out. Use your common judgement; you don't have to provide a pseudo-Anglicanism if it's not actually ever used in the language, and some things have incredibly literal translations.

If any of the terms described in this template have their own actual article, link it, closer to the beginning of the template the better.

Don't just link to nonexistent pages if they don't need to exist. Don't put links for the sake of them, either, if they'll only link back to this page.

12. Unnecessary Wikilinks need removing. If you can find a variant on a Wikilink that relates to Japan specifically, such as school uniform in Japan, then put the more relevant one in.

13. Images need formatting consistently. Alternate text, accurate captions, etc. Don't stuff small sections with images that fuck up formatting.

This format for images is good:

[[File:Filename.file extension]]|thumb|up[right]/[left]|alt=Alternate text that accurately and concisely describes the image|Displayed caption on the article]]

This is all I can think of at the minute. It's long, but this article is long, and it needs work!

I hope this helps someone; tackling a large page with a lot of issues can be a nightmare if you don't know where to start. --(previously unsigned by) Ineffablebookkeeper (talk) 19:40, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

A note I just thought about - a brief section entitled ===Etymology of "kimono"=== might be helpful, but then again, might not. I would appreciate any input anyone might have. --Ineffablebookkeeper (talk) 19:40, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

Men in kimono

Most of the pictures are women. Given that men wear kimono too, there should be more picture of men.—Naddruf (talk ~ contribs) 19:46, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• Kimono parts.png

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 01:07, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

New section required

I'm just going to put this here for later - below 'Textiles and construction', a separate section is needed for 'Decoration', as on a glance a lot of the stuff in the existing section needs parsing out elsewhere. --Ineffablebookkeeper (talk) 14:45, 3 February 2020 (UTC)

Including iko under "Care"

While not many homes have them, the iko still appears to be a distinct tradition of kimono care and maintenance in the cultural consciousness. The Met has a nice listing for their in-house artifact, and the key points seem to be: -historical record dates the iko as early as the Momoyama period -they were initially used as advertisements for kimono manufacturers -in about the thirteenth century, they began to be included as part of wealthy bridal trousseaus

Just a suggestion since I was looking for the info myself. Thanks! 2600:1700:6A96:60:49E1:113A:2176:5CDE (talk) 01:18, 19 June 2020 (UTC)