Talk:Sailor tattoos

Peer review 1

You guys have a good article going. the only problem i have is that it is kinda hard to read. there are a few grammatical errors and a couple of incomplete sentences. I suggest throwing what you have written into microsoft word, that should help point out the little mistakes.

Kevmoe (talk) 15:22, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

D1Engineer (talk) 15:24, 11 April 2012 (UTC) This is a really good article my consers would be witht he flow and some grammar mistakes. other than than its coming along nicely. I would remove those lists and turn them into sentences.

I would suspect that the 2012 college project is long over! This article is AWFUL by Wikipedia standards! It is illiterate, ill-organized, and its subject matter wanders all over the map (and outside the subject.)ExpatSalopian (talk) 22:34, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Peer review 2

Completeness:

   500 words per person: Looks like you guys need to add a little more content and detail.
   Lead Paragraph: First paragraph look good,just a few sentence structure problems.
   4 Sections of content: yes
   Minimum ammount of citations: yes
   Images:yes but requesting more

Evaluation of Resources:

   Are the sources listed in the References of sufficient authority?: yes
   Are the sources listed in the References of accurate?: yes
   Conduct searches of the topic yourself. Do you feel like the authors found worth while articles or just easily available articles?: yes

Readability & Content:

   Is the information being presented factual in nature?: yes
   Is the information being presented objective? (No Bias): yes
   Does the article flow effectively?; It is easy to tell the difference between the different authors 
   Does the article feeling like it is missing content?: Yes, just more words to meet the requirements.

Concept12 (talk) 15:35, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Peer review 3

What is the title of this article going to be?

Since you have 3 people working in your group it looks like you only are about half way there for the amount of content you need to provide. I see that you have section headings with no content so I imagine that is where the content will go.

I see some incorrect information being presented in your article. Most importantly, it was Captain James Cook not Captain Hook or James Cooked that sailed to the South Pacific and encountered natives; please fix that. Also tattoos did not originate with Captain Cook, but he discovered their use among the natives. This misinformation and disinformation makes this a hard article to trust.

I would like to see more references related specifically to maritime or nautical tattoos. They are out there for you to find.

Bbolin (talk) 15:56, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

The last frontier...

And here I thought WP had become a quiet, civilized place, with nothing for editors to do but fuss over sourcing and minor verbiage disputes. This article is a charming throwback to the wild, wooly days of WP, and I'm excited for the chance to try to tame it! By thunder, it's such a terrible article, it's glorious! The Cap'n (talk) 15:48, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

Aye, ye were a worthy adversary, Sailor tattoos, but no match fer me, bucko. I'll get ye to WP:GA, iffin it kills one or the both of us! The Cap'n (talk) 21:23, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

Aloha Monkey

Article refers to Aloha monkeys as a common tattoo at that time, but links to both the phrase 'Aloha' and 'monkey' separately. Don't know how to do it, but someone should fix that. --2605:A601:A991:EC00:6836:7575:256:C9BD (talk) 04:44, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

We don't seem to have an article aloha monkey, so I just removed the links. Someday, let us hope, someone will come by and give this article the attention it deserves, and that will be one of the many things fleshed out (if the choice of words may be forgiven). EEng 05:13, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

Additional information about Lombroso tattoo plate

In case it's helpful for anyone in the future, here's a copy of the Reference Desk question I asked:

I'm doing research for the article Sailor tattoos. In Commons, there's a plate featuring a French sailor from The Criminal, 2nd edition (1895). It appears to have also been in the first edition. As indicated by the caption in the image, the plate was originally published by Cesare Lombroso, but I'm not sure where. It isn't in the 1st edition of L'uomo delinquente (1876) , but I found it in a version from 1889. Can anybody help me find out if that's the earliest appearance of this plate? I want to make sure that I have the right date for its first publication. --IcebergSings (talk) 04:56, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Google Books has the 1884 edition, which does not appear to contain the image. Page 308 of the 1884 edition initially corresponds to page 297 of the 1889 edition, but diverges after the paragraph with the image of a cross above the numeral "208". In the 1889 edition, the plate with the tattoos, "TAV. XXIX", is referred to on the next page, page 298 (and on several later pages). I did not see any similar reference in the 1884 edition. BTW, I did not see where the 1889 edition refers to specifically figure 3 of the plate XXIX, with the tattooed text "LE PASSÈ ME TOURMENT[E] / LE PRESENT ME [DÉCHIRE] / L'AVENIR M' EPOUVANT[E]", nor where it states that this is a French sailor. However, this information can be found in a French atlas of 1888, of images related to Lombroso's oeuvre. This French atlas was published in Turin, Italy, by the same publisher as the Italian editions. It is the second edition. There were at least five Italian editions of the atlas.^[1] It is conceivable that the image was published in one of these atlantes before it appeared in the main oeuvre. In any case, we know that the image was probably published after 1884, but at the very latest in 1888.  --Lambiam 13:50, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Thank you so much, that's exactly what I was looking for! I will incorporate it into the article. --IcebergSings (talk) 14:32, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

IcebergSings (talk) 15:02, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

US Navy vs Marines/Army tattooing prevalence, early 1900s

I thought this was too detailed for the page; stashing it here.

Tattoos Recorded at USS Independence, 1900-1908, vs. Marine recruiting office, San Francisco, CA, 1909-1912

Group Examined	% Tattooed
First enlistment, US Navy, 1900-1908	23.01
First enlistment, US Marines, 1909-1912	21.41
Second or subsequent enlistments, US Navy, 1900-1908	53.00
Second or subsequent enlistments, US Marines, 1909-1912	35.64
First enlistment, US Marines, 1909-1912, with previous service in US Army	34.21

IcebergSings (talk) 04:36, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

Tattoos & US Navy professionalization, early 20th century

Does anyone have an academic source that explores whether the US Navy's tattoo regulations in the early 20th century were part of a broader attempt at professionalization and/or emerged from the "new Navy" movement that started in the 1880s? I'm getting a vibe that there is a connection, but I haven't found scholarly writing on this angle.

An example of a non-academic source that is pointing me in this direction:

There is a change abroad among the enlisted men of our Navy, and the decline of that once flourishing naval habit of tattooing is one of that change's visible signs. The horn-handed old salt, with his rolling gate and his supreme contempt for any vessel propelled by steam, is being replaced by alert youngster with a taste for mechanics.

Parry—who can be rather sensationalistic, so I'm not sure how reliable he is on this specifically—has:

At one time so widespread had [obscene designs] become in the American navy that the authorities felt obliged to intervene. In 1909 a government circular stated, in connection with recruiting: "In­decent or obscene tattooing is cause for rejection, but the applicant should be given an opportunity to alter the design, in which event he may, if otherwise qualified, be accepted."

I found that exact language in the 1914 MANMED and in a circular from 1916, but I haven't found earlier examples of it online, so I'm not certain that Parry's 1909 date is correct.

There's this bit from Naval History and Heritage Command:

During World War I—in line with the Progressive era’s sense of higher purpose that also abolished alcohol rations in the Fleet—Navy recruits were strongly encouraged to get any risqué art covered up, since perceived "moral" failings might disqualify them from service. This was accomplished by having the offending (usually) female figure “dressed” or another design tattooed over it.

Does anybody know of a well-sourced article or academic paper on this topic? --IcebergSings (talk) 20:42, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

Merge swallow tattoo here

The article at swallow tattoo is a stub without strong sourcing. I don't think there's a lot of material about swallow tattoos separate from it being a common sailor tattoo; it's part of both the historical tradition and the newer "old school" symbols popular among non-sailors. I propose we merge it into this article, retaining the sourced material. Dreamyshade (talk) 20:50, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia Ambassador Program course assignment

This article is the subject of an educational assignment at California Maritime Academy supported by the Wikipedia Ambassador Program during the 2012 Spring term. Further details are available on the course page.

The above message was substituted from {{WAP assignment}} by PrimeBOT (talk) on 16:52, 2 January 2023 (UTC)