Jump to content

Talk:Cherry blossom: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Line 170: Line 170:


:The debate on whether China, Korea, or Japan cultivated cherry blossoms has been a fairly recent development. If you have historical sources that depict these cultivations before the 20th century then they are welcome, but the history of Japanese cherry blossoms is documented in detail, not to mention the fact that there are specimens several hundreds of years old in Japan and no such thing documented outside of the islands (as far as I am aware). [[User:Reconrabbit|<span style="color:#6BAD2D">Recon</span>]][[User talk:Reconrabbit|<span style="color:#2F3833">rabbit</span>]] 14:09, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
:The debate on whether China, Korea, or Japan cultivated cherry blossoms has been a fairly recent development. If you have historical sources that depict these cultivations before the 20th century then they are welcome, but the history of Japanese cherry blossoms is documented in detail, not to mention the fact that there are specimens several hundreds of years old in Japan and no such thing documented outside of the islands (as far as I am aware). [[User:Reconrabbit|<span style="color:#6BAD2D">Recon</span>]][[User talk:Reconrabbit|<span style="color:#2F3833">rabbit</span>]] 14:09, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

::Many of the cherry trees that people admire in streets and parks are cultivated varieties. And many of these are based on the Japanese Oshima cherry. It is only in recent years that China and South Korea have shown an interest in developing cherry varieties, and historically it is Japan that has developed by far the largest number of cherry varieties. It was only after the Second World War that cherry trees became increasingly popular in China and Korea, and large numbers of the general public began to go to see the cherry blossoms. China received technical advice on cherry blossom cultivation from Japan after the war and planted many cherry trees introduced from Japan.[https://web.archive.org/web/20210522173349/https://www.nishinippon.co.jp/item/n/322318/][https://web.archive.org/web/20210522163847/http://www.mutusinpou.co.jp/news/2018/04/50965.html] In addition, most of the cherry trees planted in Korea are of Japanese origin, brought from Japan, and they have recently announced a plan to replace Japanese cherry trees with Korean varieties.[https://v.daum.net/v/20220406115612680][https://n.news.naver.com/mnews/article/081/0003263664?sid=102]--[[User:SLIMHANNYA|SLIMHANNYA]] ([[User talk:SLIMHANNYA|talk]]) 23:37, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

Revision as of 23:37, 4 April 2024

Why is this article titled "Cherry blossom"?

Why is this article titled "Cherry blossom"? It should probably be titled "Japanese cherry". The article is defining the tree, not the blossom. A blossom is a flower that blooms on a tree. One admires the cherry blossoms, i.e. the flowers of the cherry tree.

It would seem popular usage has begun to refer to the trees themselves as "cherry blossoms". However, we don't call apple trees "apple blossoms", nor peach trees "peach blossoms". My theory is that "sakura" has been glossed as "cherry blossom" so often that people learning about Japan with little botanical knowledge have begun to refer to the trees themselves as "cherry blossoms". Encyclopedia Britannica properly refers to the trees as "cherries" or "cherry trees" and uses the term "ornamental" to describe the ornamental ones. There are also many gardener blogs and articles that claim that "cherry trees" and "cherry blossom trees" are different species of cherry.

This seems to be an arbitrary definition. I searched 19th century sources on Google Books, and there were only three books mentioning "cherry blossom tree", all in reference to Japanese cherries. There were a multitude more books referring to "Japanese cherries" or "Japanese cherry trees". All references to "cherry blossoms" I saw referred to the flowers of the tree. Wikipedia is a major source of information for many people and can influence the language, so I would suggest that we preserve the traditional distinction. The opening sentence "A cherry blossom also known as Japanese cherry or Sakura is a flower of many trees of genus Prunus or Prunus subg. Cerasus." is painful to read as it says that a cherry blossom is a flower, but is synonymous with Japanese cherry, the name of a tree. I propose we maintain the following distinction throughout the article:

blossoms, cherry blossoms, etc. -- refer to the flowers/blossoms

Japanese cherry, Japanese cherry tree, etc. -- refer to the tree

It's fine to say "a cherry blossom" or "cherry blossoms" in a context where "a flower", "a bundle of flowers" or "the flowers" would make sense as well. Many instances in this article use it correctly, but there are some instances where "cherry blossom" is used where a word for a tree ought to be used. For example,

"Books from that period recorded more than 200 varieties of cherry blossoms" ought to be "Books from that period recorded more than 200 varieties of flowering cherries" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:6C64:507F:AA6C:197F:FBFB:AF5B:62A0 (talk) 15:16, 14 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think some of the above issues were fixed by recent copy editing.
Portions of the text may have originally been translated from Japanese, with "sakura" replaced by "cherry blossom". I updated the lead section to explain that "sakura" can mean either the tree or the flowers. "Japanese cherry" could be used as a translation when "sakura" means the tree, but I don't think that would sound right in long sections about Japanese culture. Also, "Japanese cherry" seems to (increasingly?) be used as a common name for a particular species of tree, rather than meaning all sakura trees (I also tried to clarify this a bit in the lead section).
"cherry blossom tree", "ornamental cherry tree" and "sakura tree" sound ok to me, in context. Having some variety in the phrasing possibly helps readability. KaiaVintr (talk) 02:50, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Replace/Add Image

Apparently there seems to be some resistance replacing the old image with the new image (both linked above). Initially I boldly added an image that I thought was supperior image of an ornamental use of a Sakura and replaced the image, which was reverted with the comment that the plant in the background was not a Sakura, which almost all the Sakura images on the page include other non-Sakura plants and objects so I re-added the image back. It was again reverted stating consensus must be reached to replace it. So lets discuss it. — raeky (talk | edits) 02:36, 8 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

responding to the comment in the recent edit why I swapped the image instead of just adding another: I was looking at it more like that there was already an over abundance of images, and one more might be too much. — raeky (talk | edits) 02:45, 8 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Then how about to create a gallery like rose and Wisteria and make the article neat? Oda Mari (talk) 04:51, 8 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe or elimiate a few of the lower quality images. Some of the other images that might be removed/replaced/gallery'd I put below in a gallery with my comments. Maybe this would be a good opportunity to review the pictures in the article and look for new ones, I'm willing to rework/suggest new pictures for the article or change the arrangement of them if the work would be welcome. From my inital expereince of just trying to add an image is any indication this article may be too protected by it's editors? — raeky (talk | edits) 06:36, 8 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • noisy, distracting background, not very high EV
    noisy, distracting background, not very high EV
  • Sakura not the focal point, not really contributing to the article?
    Sakura not the focal point, not really contributing to the article?
  • pretty picture, might deserve better placement in the article if one/both of the others are removed, otherwise it's just adding redundancy.
    pretty picture, might deserve better placement in the article if one/both of the others are removed, otherwise it's just adding redundancy.
  • Sakura makes up a very minor aspect of this image, great shot of the castle though.
    Sakura makes up a very minor aspect of this image, great shot of the castle though.

I stand by my earlier opinion that the field of moss pink in the background is too striking/distracting for an introductory picture, a casual reader might well think it's sakura as well and that cherry trees come in that flourescent shade as well. (Indeed, it's called shibazakura or "grass sakura" in Japanese, but scientifically it's entirely unrelated.) That said, it's fine for the gallery, and I'm no huge fan of the original. File:Newark cherry blossoms.jpg is quite striking, demonstrating the effect of cherry flowers en masse nicely, and would make a good replacement. I also agree that the first two pics in the gallery above are eminently disposable. Jpatokal (talk) 09:06, 8 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So promote File:Newark_cherry_blossoms.jpg to lead, remove Image:Ornamental Cherry Tree In Full Bloom.JPG and File:Shidare sakura flowers.JPG (I also think File:Castle Himeji sakura01 adjusted.jpg should go too), create a gallery with some of the better remaining images? — raeky (talk | edits) 09:22, 8 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'd like some more opinion on if the Phlox in the background of File:Sakura and Moss Pink - 桜(さくら)と芝桜(しばざくら).jpg is too misleading to what Sakura is given the caption as well. — raeky (talk | edits) 09:26, 8 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think the color of moss pink is too loud and mars the color of cherry blossom. The purple at the bottom and the green in the middle are also disturbing. As for the Newark cherry blossoms, it surely is a striking photo, but it looks like a Commons:Prunus pendula or a double flowering cherry tree and IMHO it is not a typical cherry blossom image. And most importantly the color is too dark. When refer to the color of the cherry blossom, sakura-iro, is pale pink. See this traditional Japanese color page. #6 is sakura-iro/cherry blossom pink. And see the photos here. I hope you'll understand why I think, no matter how striking the Newark image is, the photo is not appropriate to use as a lead image. Oda Mari (talk) 15:15, 8 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
What you describe as "typical" is the classic someiyoshino (ソメイヨシノ) color, but it's by no means the only type of sakura, and this article isn't about the species anyway. Since the first image is someiyoshino (or at least something close to it), I think it's OK for the second to be a different variety. Part of the pinkness of the Newark pic, though, is caused by color balance -- the entire image is shifted to the red. Jpatokal (talk) 16:11, 8 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Jpatokal, this page isn't about a specific species or color, it's about the blossom's of a cherry tree, all species, also the Newark image is color shifted to the red. I'll put it in photoshop and see about correcting the color balance. — raeky (talk | edits) 17:35, 8 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ok I tweaked the color balance some to be less red shifted, still pretty pink but looks better. — raeky (talk | edits) 17:40, 8 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm going to boldly take on reworking the images later today (if not today then soon as I get time) per the discussion here unless theres any objections to doing that? — raeky (talk | edits) 17:07, 19 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
IMHO, tweaking the dolor balance is a dirty trick. Oda Mari (talk) 17:21, 19 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't change it unaturally I used a natural white point (girl with white pants) and a natural black point (black shirt) to establish the two white & black points on the color correction, that didn't unnaturally change the colors but made them more natural since it corrected any white balance issues the camera had when it took it. I'm well experienced in doing this kind of work, thanks. — raeky (talk | edits) 17:25, 19 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Cherry blossom. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 10:42, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Cherry blossom. 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:

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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 11:33, 4 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Cherry blossom. 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:

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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 08:04, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Edible or inedible?

In the last paragraph of section 5 (Cultivars), a sentence reads:

All wild varieties of cherry blossom trees produce small, unpalatable fruit or edible cherries.

The grammar of this sentence suggests the cherries are inedible and does not distinguish fruit from cherries. I don't know how to improve it, and am asking for an expert to do so.

Please excuse the lack of markup code. Though I do know how, a gremlin has infested my keyboard.


Cwilsyn

Cwilsyn (talk) 02:21, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Cherry blossom

Shillong is India's Cherry blossom hub during the months of winter. Every year in the month of November, there's an international cherry blossom held in Shillong. November is also the best time to visit Meghalaya as the weather and temperatures are perfect- cold but not too cold! 202.142.104.194 (talk) 09:28, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you have a WP:CITE we can use that. Invasive Spices (talk) 22:21, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

P. cerasoides blooms twice a year

P. cerasoides blooms twice a year. I was very confused by edit under India section which says it blooms only in autum, this is not true but it blooms twice a year. I grew up in Manipur in India and have seen it bloom during both season, in January-March and later in Aug-October-Sept.

Here is the science journal study also saying the same V Kurniawan et al 2021. https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1755-1315/948/1/012047/pdf

I will update that section based on this source.17:56, 16 May 2023 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.198.113.19 (talk)

Date of Origin of Hanami

The section "Flower viewing in Japan" has this near the end, which contradicts other information in the article (and the Hanami article):

The custom of hanami dates back many centuries in Japan. The 8th-century chronicle Nihon Shoki (日本書紀) records hanami festivals being held as early as the 3rd century AD.

Is there controversy about how old the practice of Hanami actually is? If so, it should probably be mentioned. Otherwise, since the above text has no reference and is out of place in the article text, I think it should be removed. KaiaVintr (talk) 00:49, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Global variations in blooming season

I noticed that someone had cut and pasted text from the Spring (season) article into the "Australia" section here, and I'm guessing that they wanted to see an explanation of the September-October date-range for the Cowra festival. I'm removing that text, since it was confusing in this context, but I'm adding a paragraph to the "Blooming season" section acknowledging the variation.

If anyone knows of any sources discussing how Japanese cherry trees adapt their blooming seasons when transplanted to different parts of the world, that would be very useful information I think! KaiaVintr (talk) 21:18, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Most, if not all, of the studies done on cross-continental transplants focus on survivability of the targeted species, disregarding bloom or fruiting periods.[1][2] I wasn't able to find anything regarding transplants of cherry blossoms; you may have better luck if you have a good understanding of Japanese and have access to research libraries in that language. Sorry if this wasn't much help. Reconrabbit 18:30, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

Passed. Chiswick Chap (talk) 21:09, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Cherry blossom/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Chiswick Chap (talk · contribs) 16:56, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Preliminary comments

Extended content
  • This article, while interesting and at first glance not too badly cited, seems to me to have a major structural problem: it consists of two completely different articles. The first is what might be called Sakura or Cherry blossom in Japan; the second, in chapter 6 "By country and region", is a list of some 19 countries (but apparently not regions?); it should probably be a separate list article List of countries celebrating cherry blossom, or something of that sort. The current composite is extremely uneven – massive textual detail on Japan, rapid summary on each of the other countries; it makes the article lengthy, awkward, and unbalanced; and it just doesn't "work" as a single article, so this will be a quick-fail (WP:UNDUE coverage of one or other of the 2 subjects) if the list is not removed.
    (If this reply should be put below everything else, please move it or let me know - doing it this way just makes responses to specific comments clearer) I see the justification for splitting off the list of countries (List of countries that cultivate cherry blossoms?). I will propose it on the talk page, and there will be a sort of - placeholder to demonstrate what the resulting article will look like without the huge list of countries in that proposal. (As a note, the chapter did at one point have subheadings that distinguished regions and not just countries, but at some point that came to no longer be the case and it was never changed.) Reconrabbit 18:10, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Replying inline like this is much the best. There is no value to having part of a GAN discussion on the talk page, indeed it's undesirable as it starts multiple threads and different people may see different things. Suggest we just bring it back here.
    Cherry blossom cultivation by country has been made, though I would like to get at least one other person's input before completing the split on this page. Reconrabbit 20:15, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Many thanks. I'm not sure what we might be waiting for: if you've done the split then we simply need to remove the material from the article here, as we obviously can't have the list both here and separately. Chiswick Chap (talk) 21:01, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I've finished it. Will start working on the citation needed tags now. Reconrabbit 21:11, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • One might wonder why we should have a Sakura article as well as the existing Hanami (and why Hanami gets italics when Sakura does not?), and there is certainly some overlap, but I suppose that having an article on the blossomy trees, and an article on the viewing of them, is a defensible split.
    It's probably appropriate to italicize Sakura. I'd say the split is more down to the difference between the practices surrounding the trees and the trees themselves (the ornamental varieties and cultivars of cherry trees). Cherry blossom is just the 'common name' for broad usage as far as I am aware. Reconrabbit 18:10, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    OK, that's fine.
  • Rather than review all the text and images, I suggest we go ahead with splitting off the list article, and then we can review what is left. I note in passing (not a GA matter) that the list will need a brief paragraph on 'Japan', with a "main" link to this article.

Comments

  • Lead section contains fifteen refs, of which eleven, namely nos [5]–[15], are not repeated in the article body. The MOS states that the lead should only summarize the article body, not introduce "new" materials. I suggest we remove all fifteen from the lead, which will entail moving the eleven unrepeated ones into the article body, probably along with the text that they cite.
  • Most of the 'Gallery' will need to be removed or distributed over the list article; I note in passing that it is rather Canada-heavy but that won't be this article's problem either.
     Done: Only saved the image from Sweden as it is a location where the ornamental cherry tree is not endemic. Reconrabbit 20:42, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • The article itself can have a "See also" link to the split-off list.
  • "Cherry ... leaves are edible........ Since the leaves contain coumarin, which is toxic...": these statements are basically incompatible; perhaps we should say "edible in small quantities", or something of that sort.
     Done Reconrabbit 17:32, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yoshino cherry is written "Somei-Yoshino" in its article, but as Somei Yoshino and "Somei-yoshino" here. Let's go with the standard format, i.e. caps, hyphen, not italics.
    Every permutation has been changed to 'Somei-yoshino'. Reconrabbit 17:32, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • "embodied in the concept of mono no aware.[32]" Please add a gloss "(the pathos of things)" after the Japanese term here. I do wonder whether a somewhat more detailed discussion of the concept would not be appropriate here, as it seems to have driven the whole of sakura and perhaps hanami as well?
    Gloss added, considering a more detailed discussion after the section is split into headings as described below. Reconrabbit 16:10, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • In fact, why not create subsections of 'Symbolism in Japan', as there are separate and major topics covered here without distinction. I'd suggest:
4 Symbolism in Japan
4.1 Mono no aware: the pathos of things (first half of first paragraph, with additional material to be written)
4.2 Nationalism and militarism
4.3 Irezumi: Japanese tattoos (and the term needs to be in italics in the text)
4.4 Popular uses (unless you are sure these are all mono no aware: if so, merge)
 Done though Mono no aware has not been expanded much as I do not have immediate access to most of these texts. Reconrabbit 20:42, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Images

Taking from the discussion that the article's subject is "Sakura" or "Japanese ornamental cherry blossom" or equivalent title, I'll assume that the "Gallery" will be removed and will not therefore review those images here (though the Osaka Castle image is fine if you want to put it somewhere in the text). It is a moot point whether images of Sakura in other parts of the world will be appropriate to the article, but given that these represent Japanese influence, I see no reason why they can't be used here and there.

  • The choice of the first lead image as the Oshima Cherry in Jardin des Plantes is a bit of a test case; my view is that the lead should contain exactly one image, and I'd suggest one from Japan, such as "Yachounomori Garden, Tatebayashi, Gunma, Japan"; the other images should be moved into the article body.
     Done Reconrabbit 20:42, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • All the images are from Commons and are plausibly licensed there.
  • A citation is needed for the caption "The Japan national rugby union team is nicknamed the "Brave Blossoms", and have sakura embroidered on their chests"; the claim needs to be repeated in the section text.
     Done Reconrabbit 16:10, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'll note in passing that the rugby image is a very small detail of a much larger image, so the quality is poor. It seems surprising that this is the best photo of a rugby shirt that can be found, but if so, it would be an idea to place a photo request for someone to take a photo for the article on the talk page (not a GA requirement).
  • An image to support the militarism symbolism would be very helpful (not a GA requirement).

Sources

  • [58]: "Brandow Samuels, Gayle." - what is that?
     Done: Now it's "Brandow Samuels, Gayle (3 January 2005). Enduring Roots: Encounters with Trees, History, and the American Landscape. Rutgers University Press. p. 75." Reconrabbit 17:32, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • [61] Huxley needs page number or subsection/entry name.
    I removed the Huxley source and replaced it with a more current one that I could find (Cherries 2017). The other location was already sourced to Trees of Britain and Europe. Reconrabbit 20:42, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Cultivars list: this has 5 citations at top, but 7 of the items are cited to 2 more sources. What does this mean, that all the other items are cited to all 5 of the top sources? It looks piecemeal, and is very hard to verify. Suggest you do as for [68] Katsuki 2017 and repeat each source for each variety in the list that it verifies. We only need one (or perhaps two) sources per variety.
     Done: [59] provides reference on all of these cultivars and [58] indicates the existence of a database of same. I added more specific references on each name when they were indicated in the sources. Reconrabbit 20:42, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Refs used repeatedly with different page numbers, like Katsuki 2015 (e.g. [15] [17] [22] [30] etc) - will be better to list the book citation once in 'Sources' (after 'References') and then reference this with {{sfn|Katsuki|2015|pp=40–56}}, etc, rather than repeating the citation over and over (or worse, displaying page numbers in the text with the rp tag). And by the way, the book is in Japanese, so it needs tags as for [7] above.
    I already screwed this one up. Will correct it to sfn; I'm just too used to Rp. Reconrabbit 17:32, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • I notice that Japanese names are given in different ways in the text. At the top of 'Flower viewing in Japan' we have parentheses in two different forms: "sakura (桜 or 櫻; さくら or サクラ) or ume (plum) trees." Why is the Japanese script not given for ume?
    Text has been standardized in that location. Reconrabbit 18:53, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Further down the section we have "Usuzumi-zakura [ja]" very properly in an inter-language link (ill) tag, without the Japanese name being displayed in the main text. Is this a deliberate choice not to trouble the reader when names are less commonly used, as for individual trees? If so it's reasonable.
    The individual trees don't have script names written out because it's not particularly useful to the reader to have them in-text, especially when they can just go to the ill. Better to use the text for generic terms such as "weeping cherry" or "ume" Reconrabbit 20:42, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Summary

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Splitting off list of countries

As stated in the GA review above, in order to keep this article focused, the section "By country and region" should be split off into its own article. I am unsure what the best title for such an article would be. Will update this with something to substitute in its place - maybe renaming the section to "Global cultivation" or an equivalent with a brief paragraph on the incentives and history for developing ornamental cherry blossoms outside of Japan. Reconrabbit 18:17, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I proposed a title, but it's not important, as the article can easily be moved if people find a better title. Suggest we just get on with it. Chiswick Chap (talk) 19:12, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Lightburst talk 18:28, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(
)
  • ... that during World War II, the cherry blossom was used symbolically in Japanese propaganda, as in "falling cherry petals as young soldiers' sacrifice for the emperor"? Source: Emiko,Ohnuki-Tierney, Emiko (2002). Kamikaze, Cherry Blossoms, and Nationalisms. pp. 9–10. [3]
    • Reviewed:
    • Comment: Unsure if the source formatting is correct

Improved to Good Article status by Reconrabbit (talk). Self-nominated at 15:51, 25 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Cherry blossom; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
QPQ: Done.
Overall: QPQ not needed. AGF on the source. (it's formatted fine!) Generalissima (talk) 08:00, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Practice of cultivating ornamental cherry trees was centered in Japan?

That statement (Practice of cultivating ornamental cherry trees was centered in Japan) is simply not true at all. In Korea and China, both countries have just as many centuries if not millenniums of appreciation and cultivation of cherry blossoms. I looked at the source and one is a blog and the other is a book written by a Japanese cherry blossom scholar. While Japan may be more famous at least in western pov for its cherry blossoms culturally, both Korea and China's extensive cultivation and long history of appreciating these flowers, also make them a significant contributor to the global population of cherry blossom trees. Why is the article making it seem like China and Korean Cherry Blossom centuries of heritage is non-existent and nothing compared to Japan. This article needs a major revamp and a proper review on its bias. 49.180.5.114 (talk) 13:42, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The debate on whether China, Korea, or Japan cultivated cherry blossoms has been a fairly recent development. If you have historical sources that depict these cultivations before the 20th century then they are welcome, but the history of Japanese cherry blossoms is documented in detail, not to mention the fact that there are specimens several hundreds of years old in Japan and no such thing documented outside of the islands (as far as I am aware). Reconrabbit 14:09, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Many of the cherry trees that people admire in streets and parks are cultivated varieties. And many of these are based on the Japanese Oshima cherry. It is only in recent years that China and South Korea have shown an interest in developing cherry varieties, and historically it is Japan that has developed by far the largest number of cherry varieties. It was only after the Second World War that cherry trees became increasingly popular in China and Korea, and large numbers of the general public began to go to see the cherry blossoms. China received technical advice on cherry blossom cultivation from Japan after the war and planted many cherry trees introduced from Japan.[4][5] In addition, most of the cherry trees planted in Korea are of Japanese origin, brought from Japan, and they have recently announced a plan to replace Japanese cherry trees with Korean varieties.[6][7]--SLIMHANNYA (talk) 23:37, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Cherry_blossom&oldid=1217291857"
pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy