Fiona Graham received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.
Fiona Graham received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of 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, participate in relevant discussions, and see lists of open tasks. Current time in Japan: 02:53, November 23, 2024 (JST, Reiwa 6) (Refresh)JapanWikipedia:WikiProject JapanTemplate:WikiProject JapanJapan-related articles
This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
Fiona Graham is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women scientists, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women in science 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.Women scientistsWikipedia:WikiProject Women scientistsTemplate:WikiProject Women scientistsWomen scientists articles
The following Wikipedia contributors may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.
The contents of the Sayuki page were merged into Fiona Graham. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page.
I'm glad that "PR is a requirement to be a geisha" was not added to the article, because that is false. It is a line of argument that Graham herself has pushed for several years now. There is no evidence for it beyond Graham's own proclamations. Four years ago, Graham attempted a Reddit AMA where she tried it, and someone ended up phoning Immigration to find out the real story (https://old.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/4yeris/i_am_sayuki_the_only_nonjapanese_geisha_in_the/d6t9qbp/). I know this is not sourceworthy, but is worth mentioning in case the respected user in question, or another user with a similar modus operandi, comes back and insists that it is true and should be added. 124.197.54.156 (talk) 04:35, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
FWIW, I remember a long, long while back when this issue came up on the Geisha article - see this diff; however, the information given in this diff for removal wasn't sourced at all.
For what it's worth, I'd hazard a guess that an okiya would want a potential trainee to have a degree of security in their stay in Japan before taking them on, but this really is an educated guess.
My point is, we cannot take "if someone comes back and adds this in, give 'em the what for!" - when that 'what for' is 'a person on reddit says they phoned up Immigration and this is what they said' - any more than we can take Graham's opinion on the matter. If someone would like to come in with a handful of decent sources on the matter, please do so - otherwise it's no more than another unsourced and unencyclopedic argument we cannot support as grounds for addition or removal. -- Ineffablebookkeeper (talk) 16:53, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yes that's fair enough but the same logic applies when Graham comes back with an edit saying it's necessary and sources it to an interview with $random_insignificant_blog where she herself states, with no evidence, that PR is necessary to work as a geisha (which, again, is untrue). 124.197.54.156 (talk) 19:21, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
A post on Tumblr isn't a reliable source; we can't use it as the basis for information on Wikipedia. Not only that, but missmyloko has a habit of not sourcing her posts – even though she owns several, sometimes very hard-to-find books on geisha and the karyūkai – which makes it even harder to figure out where she's getting her information from.—Ineffablebookkeeper (talk) ({{ping}} me!) 13:19, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If you scroll the end of her Tumblr post, she links to many reputable news sites that back up her claims.
She does have sources on the post; please forgive me. I'll go through them.
Before I start – I'm only looking at these sources in terms of how she left the Asakusa Geisha Association; the claim as to her being the "first Western geisha" is a wobblier one that's based on how you define officially being a geisha. In terms of what the Asakusa Geisha Association have said below, her work as a geisha was always understood as being only temporary as part of her studies – which would also count Liza Dalby out, as her work as a geisha was also understood as only being temporary, and part of her studies, meaning that in this understanding, neither would be the "first Western geisha". I'm not going to cover this discussion here; I'm going to delve into the hoo-hah over how Graham left the Asakusa Geisha Association, and why.
The magazine article on Flickr is from before Graham left, so I can't use it when considering claims of why she left.
I put the Tokyo Shimbun article through DeepL, which is generally better than Google translate for translating Japanese. It does state that she asked to become independent in December 2010 and was refused; it then states she was expelled from the Asakusa Geisha Association in February 2011, for reasons that were not given, with the union stating that it was "a private matter and we do not comment on it". She then continued to work as a geisha, independently of the Asakusa Geisha Association.
The next source is two tweets. Wikipedia's policy on using social media as a source treats social media as self-published media, and states that it can be used as a source so long as, among other stipulations, "it does not involve claims about third parties". These tweets fall foul of this, so I can't use them as sources.
The source after this is a blog, which also falls under "making claims about third parties", so that can't be used as a source either.
The next sources are all English ones. The Sunday Telegraph is a reputable source, but the dance between what we can and can't use in a WP:BLP, based on unnamed insiders, is one I'm unfamiliar with; I'm going to hop on the Biography of Living Persons noticeboard to ask those with more experience writing BLPs for their opinion.
I will say I have seen this source before, a couple of years ago, and my opinion has changed with more experience about how this could be used. I think it could be, in some places, with proper attribution to this being what one source states.
The WSJ article (archived copy here) gives more detail: "Graham told[...] Australian media that she had requested to operate independently after her [geisha mentor] fell ill. She alleges that she was told that the reason she could not gain tenure was because she was a foreigner. The Asakusa Geisha Association informed local reporters that being a Japanese national is indeed one stipulation to obtain tenure and become an independent geisha. "We allowed her to be a Geisha as part of her study, and we did not expect her to want to become an independent Geisha to begin with" a member of Asakusa Geisha Association told local reports."
Things then get a bit odd, because the WSJ then states that "Local Japanese reports[...] highlight that Ms. Graham did not practice enough, alleging that she didn't listen to her elders[...] and allegedly took matters into her own hands by hosting and performing at her own events in front of guests who booked her through her website. She allegedly complained loudly about not being allowed to perform in front of customers even though she was already very proficient with a musical instrument."
But the "local Japanese reports" they link to in the text is the Tokyo Shimbun, which doesn't state any of these things. It's more than a bit misleading. In fact, the only source I could find which state these sorts of things is the same one I stated is considered unreliable by Wikipedia's standards – the blog post.
The WSJ even states that "right now it's a she-said, she-said type of scenario", which makes me think they used these sources, but didn't attribute them, and hedged their bets with a "who can say?" sentence at the end.
The Horizon Sun article states much of the same as the Telegraph article, aside from the comment that "jealousy had caused geishas to make false rumors regarding Sayuki", which I question in terms of adding to a BLP; again, I don't have the most experience in this area, but I get a sense that this isn't something we could hinge a statement in a BLP on. It's too general, too vague, and shuffling in the direction of hearsay, if not hearsay outright.
I'm not gonna touch the Daily Mail article; the Daily Mail is a deprecated source on Wikipedia, and not to be used or relied upon.
The Metro article is an interview with Graham; it doesn't cover how she left, only her activities after leaving.
The womenofchina.cn source is also an interview with Graham; it also doesn't cover how she left.
The remaining sources are the stuff.co.nz source on her convictions for fraud – not relevant here – and her reddit AMA, which I don't think could be used as a reliable source.
There's definitely some extra nuance that could be added in here, based on the sources, but there's still a lot of hearsay that can't be used for anything, especially a BLP. I don't think we're likely to find that nuance at the bottom of a blog post.—Ineffablebookkeeper (talk) ({{ping}} me!) 21:51, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Damn – it's been a hot minute since I've edited any Japanese articles... certainly seems to be legit, and I can't find anything on WP:RSN about theage.com.au being dodgy or unreliable. If it is true – I don't really see a reason why it wouldn't, unless I'm missing something – then what a shame. I know I butted heads with her a few times over this article, but moving to Japan, learning the language, even attempting to enter the karyūkai (and managing to do so, and succeeding) – what an achievement. I hope there was no foul play in her death.—Ineffablebookkeeper (talk) ({{ping}} me!) 17:21, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hm, for some reason it actually has an entry on WP:RSP, and there's an essay at WP:OBITUARIES, plus her website is dead, so I think it's pretty much settled. A hear hear on her accomplishments, and my condolences, if late, to her friends and family. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:35, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I was close friends with her many years ago, though had lost touch. I just belatedly learned of her death, but I don't know any details at all. Thank you for the kind words here. 195.206.173.12 (talk) 10:25, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
.svg){kind=logo}
