Talk:Kimono

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles that are spoken on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 
WikiProject Japan (Rated C-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Japan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Japan-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. Current time in Japan: 18:02, July 23, 2014 (JST, Heisei 26) (Refresh)
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
Checklist icon
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Fashion (Rated B-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fashion, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Fashion on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Japanese[edit]

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[edit]

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[edit]

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[edit]

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[edit]

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[edit]

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[edit]

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[edit]

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?[edit]

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?[edit]

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[edit]

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

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[edit]

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)

Copyedit[edit]

mergers[edit]

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[edit]

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[edit]

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 ( pleadingserrataappeals ) 03:08, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Wafuku[edit]

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)

cost[edit]

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[edit]

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[edit]

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[edit]

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?[edit]

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[edit]

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[edit]

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.[edit]

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)

Haori redirects here[edit]

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[edit]

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[edit]

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?[edit]

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 -- Cy21discuss 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)

Great Fire of Meireki[edit]

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?[edit]

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:ScotXWt@lk 10:32, 26 June 2014 (UTC)