Talk:Seal (Chinese)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Heraldry and Vexillology Portal

Seal (Chinese) is within the scope of the Heraldry and vexillology WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of heraldry and vexillology. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.

This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. (FAQ).

Inkan should be merged here because these are essentially the same things, devised from the same tradition, and only differentiated by the different languages. We've already included Japanese in the lead, why not create a new section from that article? --Ji ang 06:01, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

T'will be a good idea and save space. --CharlieHuang 13:14, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
Some might object to grouping that under Seal (Chinese). Keyword being "Chinese". Other than that, I don't see why not. They are for all intents and purposes almost identical.
-- Миборовский ^U|T|C|E 23:26, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

How about changing the title from Seal (Chinese) to "Seal (Oriental)" or "Seal (Eastern)"? Oriental/Eastern being broader terms that apply to the region and culture/s in general, since Japanese and Korean usage is also mentioned. Eilu 13:59, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

No. (IMHO.) Japanese and Korean usage of the Chinese seal does not differ significantly and is essentially the same as Chinese usages. What Japanese today use are still Chinese seals. Besides, Eastern and Oriental are too generic. -- Миборовский ^{U|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai!} 23:28, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Whereas the other article called it "inkan", this article does not call it "yinzhang". "seal" is english. We can argue that "Chinese", a "mere" disambiguation, refers to "Chinese characters". --Ji ang 00:25, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

1 Character seals
2 Accessibility
3 Types of Seals clarification
4 Commentary?
5 Peer review?
6 Not True

[edit] Character seals

"迴文印 ??? Character Seals: Same as the personal name seal, but the family name and personal name is seperated by the word 印. Sometimes used in writing (i.e. to sign a preface of a book)."

Why are there question marks? What is the difference between this and a Personal Name seal? --Ji ang 00:31, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

I don't know the translation of that word yet (I think it means "return"), so I put question marks. It is not the same as the Personal Name seal as stated, coz the word 'yin' seperates the family name and personal name, e.g. Xu Yin Yongyu. Kong Yunbai's book clearly states that it is seperate from your average Personal Name seal.

--CharlieHuang 11:28, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

It's not really "return" - more like "revolving". Basically 迴文印 characters are read in an anti-clockwise (i think) fashion whereas other seals are up-down up-down. See [1] --Sumple (Talk) 05:22, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Accessibility

Searching for "Chinese chop" should point to this article (currently returns "no page with that title" with most relevant search result being chop suey). A lot of people probably call it that, or assume that a Chinese seal is called a chop. Eilu 02:36, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

Done. -- Миборовский ^{U|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai!} 02:58, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Types of Seals clarification

Types mentions "Zhuwen" as having red characters, example is labelled as "Hongwen." Which term is correct or are both acceptable? (I know Hong is red and wen is words but not sure regarding Zhu; is this an alternate prononciation?)

Also, can someone find a picture of the "another type" which is mentioned as being both zhuwen and baiwen together? What is this called? I've never encountered one; may need further verification. Eilu 13:50, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

It should be Zhuwen. My bad. -- Миборовский ^{U|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai!} 23:25, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Yes, the correct term is Zhuwen. Zhu means crimson or red in Chinese. As for the 'other type', I do have a seal I craved in that style, but I would stick it up when I get into the mood. The red and white type is called "Zhubaiwen Xiangjianyin". I'll type it up soon. --CharlieHuang 17:49, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Commentary?

Much of the article, as it is now, seems to dispense with a lot of advice and commentary about the purchase and quality of seals. I'm not convinced this kind of advice belongs in an encyclopedia article. There's information among the commentary that might be worthwhile, though. For example:

...The worst are ones carved with English characters in conjuction (the artist do not take these seals seriously and are often deemed tacky). For a good seal to be made, one must first be very sure of what kind of seal they want, what characters they want to carve, the approximate size, price range, etc. Good seal carvers are difficult to find, and their prices can be steep, especially if one wants a seal carved out of hard and precious stones like jade. There are sources on the internet that have seal carving services. You also have to talk to the carver carefully about the design you want to get your money's worth.

There's also care-oriented commentary in the paste section which (if kept) might better belong in the care section. I'm not sure that commentary about "Chinatown," which is vague anyway (Chinatown, where?), is really useful, or that the advice on fixing the paste is necessary.

There are also a lot of grammatical errors, but I didn't want to fix something I'm not sure belongs. I thought I'd bring up my view on the talk page before I try to do anything like remove a whole bunch of text that someone's in love with. JFHJr (㊟) 16:41, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

I have removed this, since it looks redundant on review (if you buy a bad product, there's nothing you can do about it):

In buying paste, it can be difficult since they are sealed and you cannot try them out. Most pastes sold in Chinatown can be inferior. Sometimes, they are too dry, or the silk strands are to short, therefore, when pulling the seal out of the paste, chunks of the paste comes off. The imprint is very blotchy, and not very clear, like there is a lack of oil or cinnabar. These can be corrected if one has caster oil or cinnabar at hand, but trying to fix it yourself is a bit of a hit-and-miss job. Good paste should hold together after being mixed with a spatula, bad paste disintegrates after being stired.

Neutral advice would be better here. Rather than where to buy good paste, how to handle paste (eg with a spatula) and how to fix paste with castor oil and cinnabar. Also, it would be nice if the photo of the paste were identified as silk or plant paste and even better if there were photos of both. -April 14, 2006

As for the rest of the article, it seems fine to me. Yes, it's an encylopaedia, but that doesn't mean we can't be fully informative (we have plenty of space). If someone has bought (or planning to buy) a seal comes forth to this article, much of the information should not be confinded to history and descriptions, but also contain instructions of use and care if need be. We need to be thorough. It's not like we are teaching people how to play a musical instrument or something. --CharlieHuang 18:14, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

I'm a bit confused about the space issue in light of your comment at the top of the page. Instruction manuals sure are nice, though. Wiki's a good resource for many things that way. I just wasn't sure it was encyclopedic in the usual sense. Anyway, the article is very informative. Thanks! JFHJr (㊟) 13:26, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

just as a matter of writing style, an encyclopedia should be a collection of facts and information. it shouldn't sound like instructions or recommendations. the same content could be worded as "x is generally done this way", avoiding "you" and "one" construction. Appleby 19:03, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Appleby, that was another big concern of mine. I've tried to clean it up a bit. Hopefully it will continue to improve. JFHJr (㊟) 05:04, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

OK. After re-pairing some vandalisms, I've reduced it thus far. I've removed the 'instructions' and hopefully the remaining stuff is deemed as 'information of how seals are used'. --CharlieHuang 17:28, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

looking much better, i think. could still be tightened up, & maybe a infobox table for all the various names? Appleby 18:04, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Done. --CharlieHuang 20:40, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Peer review?

Do you guys think we can submit this article to peer review and then hopefully FAC? -- Миборовский ^{U|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai!} 03:03, 14 March 2006 (UTC)