Talk:三相女神

The concept is plausible, but I can't seem to find more than a couple of uses in the usual places, and those may be different versions of the same book. With my first-year Mandarin and minimal Japanese, I can't tell for sure, but I suspect there's lots more where this came from. Chuck Entz (talk) 02:50, 8 December 2012 (UTC)


 * w:Triple deity, 三相女神, 三相女神. —Stephen (Talk) 07:31, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Ok, we have a Japanese Wikipedia article created by an IP from Yunnan, and a Chinese Wikipedia article created by a user from Yunnan who seems to be very interested in Japanese culture, and an English Wikipedia article that doesn't mention the Japanese word. Like I said, I'm not doubting the Triple Goddess part, I'm questioning whether the term as given in the entry name is in actual use by the Japanese. For all I know, the IP who created the ja:wp article could be the same person as the creator of the zh:wp article, and the British IP who created the en:wt entry could have gotten the spelling from either of those. This British IP looks suspiciously like the same person who has done hundreds of very bad Japanese edits using at least half a dozen IPs, all of which have been blocked.
 * All I could find through Google Books and Google Groups were a couple of Chinese editions of Sophocles, both with the same cover art. Without taking the time to wade through the Chinese, I have no way of knowing whether these are both by the same editor/translator. It would be nice to have someone who knows Japanese check to see whether I'm missing something. Chuck Entz (talk) 08:53, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Checking around the web and excluding WP / WT pages shows some use, albeit very limited, by a few users that might be native JA speakers: (the "の" helps limit search results to JA pages).  However, I cannot say much for durable sources:  yields zero hits.  Even if we opt to keep this, the 三相女神 is a bit of a mess.
 * generates more reliable hits. For that matter,  generates over 15K hits, strongly suggesting that 三相女神 is bogus.
 * Looking through the history of the JA WP article, there are lots of anon IP users, all but one of which are in southern China (the other one is from Yokohama, and only intervened to tweak a typo and minor formatting here), several bots, one user Æskja who did some minor housekeeping, and one user Iokseng who self-identifies as not having very good Japanese. And oddly, the only references listed for the entry are English books.  All in all, I find the JA WP article to be highly suspect.  -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 19:01, 25 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Deleted. Is the Mandarin section OK? - -sche (discuss) 23:19, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I've deleted the uncited Mandarin section as well. - -sche (discuss) 19:59, 28 June 2013 (UTC)