This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Japan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofJapan-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like toparticipate, please visit theproject page, where you can join the project, participate inrelevant discussions, and seelists of open tasks.JapanWikipedia:WikiProject JapanTemplate:WikiProject JapanJapan-related
This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Human Genetic History, a project which is currently considered to beinactive.Human Genetic HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Human Genetic HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Human Genetic HistoryHuman Genetic History
This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Russia, aWikiProject dedicated to coverage ofRussia on Wikipedia. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at theproject page, or contribute to theproject discussion.RussiaWikipedia:WikiProject RussiaTemplate:WikiProject RussiaRussia
This article is within the scope ofWikiProject East Asia, a project which is currently considered to bedefunct.East AsiaWikipedia:WikiProject East AsiaTemplate:WikiProject East AsiaEast Asia
This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Ethnic groups, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles relating toethnic groups, nationalities, and other cultural identities on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.Ethnic groupsWikipedia:WikiProject Ethnic groupsTemplate:WikiProject Ethnic groupsEthnic groups
This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Anthropology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofAnthropology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.AnthropologyWikipedia:WikiProject AnthropologyTemplate:WikiProject AnthropologyAnthropology
Here is what the Japanese described Russians with Ainu in the 18th century " Interest in the Russians, described as “red-haired Ainu” by some writers, led to a work by the Sendai doctor Kudo ̄ Heisuke, who memorialized the Tanuma government in 1783 urging that defensive measures be taken against the Russians. "
Source is right here:The Making of Modern Japan - Page 261Marius B. Jansen · 2002
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between19 August 2025 and12 December 2025. Further details are availableon the course page. Student editor(s):WtrMelon02 (article contribs).
Pinging @Dekimasu as relevant editor. I looked at the MOS in specific andconsensus seems to treat a single photo of many individuals of a given ethnic group separately from a collage or gallery. The way the majority of people interpret "photomontage or gallery of images" is seemingly very narrow. I also do not understand how choosing an infobox image is definable as doing OR, you wouldn't say the same about putting an image on the article itself given that it's sourced, which is where my suggested infobox image came from.TansoShoshen (talk)15:37, 20 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I do not read the related discussions the same way as you, but I will not revert the readdition of the single photograph on those grounds at this time. However, what indication, other than the caption by the uploader, is there that the people in the photograph are Ainu people? This is different from being an image from a reliable source. The second image is from a reliable source that is in the public domain, as is the "Sakhalin Ainu" photograph farther down the page.Dekimasuよ!04:39, 7 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Digging around previously and to respond here, the image is an original from Torbenbrinker, it has been reproduced in academic papers and scientific magazines repeating that the individuals are Ainu. The photo, as per the description, and in line with other photos taken by others, show it was taken at the former Ainu museum, which was re-opened as part the Upopoy in 2020. Ainu individuals have been employed to demonstrate at the museum to visitors, so it is possible these are Ainu employees at the museum presenting traditional clothing.Torbenbrinker is still active at Commons, having last uploaded an image in December 2025, so asking for clarification over there may be of help.
An alternative option is to use one of the many photos taken of groups of Ainu people who were presented in human zoos, such as the following:
This section was cut despite extensive sourcing on a user's baseless claim that "it legitimizes outdated and disproven theories". No evidence was made to support this assertion. I readded it, only for it to be deleted again on the basis that many of the sources were too old (despite the large majority from being within the past few decades, and Wikipedia frequently using material from the much older 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica, whose sources are older still) and that it used a racial slur. Setting aside the fact that "mongoloid" is not aracial slur as its usage with regards to intellectual ability is not about race,Wikipedia is not censored so that is no reason to exclude something.~2025-40370-86 (talk)07:10, 2 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
The "extensive sources" are outdated by at least half a century, conform to outdate racial standards and categorisations that have long been discarded by ethnography and anthropology. The comment on racial slurs was not in relation to "mongoloid", I would like to see if you can identify which word is actually a racial slur in the text you added, as it is a commonly known one in fields relating to this topic, and you should ideally know of such matters prior to writing. --Cdjp1 (talk)12:50, 16 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Now to break down the sources used (in order of appearance):
Ohnuki-Tierney 1981 is on the cusp on inclusion, the information is at least verifiable.
Jansen 2002 is within a timeframe for inclusion but provides no page.
Kindaichi 1942 is way out of inclusion, not to mention is a tourist book.
Shigematsu 2004 is fine and verified for inclusion.
Travis 1997 is a dead url, I've found ithere, verified for the info on generally lighter skin, but not for "full blooded", and the main text of the article is now outdated by more recent genetic research.
Sleeboom-Faulkner 2004, has a new edition from 2014, looking at the 2004 edition though the item fails verification, as for the pages preceding, including, and proceeding page 56 make no mention of Ainu or Ryukyuans.
Clews Parsons 1967 is way out of inclusion.
Cavalli-Sforza 1994 is within inclusion but the text added is purely of genetic relations to other groups which we cover in the "Origins" section and its corresponding independent Wikipedia article (Origins of the Ainu).
Hudson 1999 is within a timeframe for inclusion but provides no page.
Koppel 2010 (who you don't name, see "Lost World: Rewriting Prehistory") discusses the Jomon, not the Ainu.
Savage Landor 1970, is a reprint of his 1893 work, so way out of inclusion.
Custred 2000 is used to describe a study by "Chatters et al." which comments on the Ainu, but Chatters is not linked to any comments on the Ainu that are presented in Custred 2000, so fails verification.
Chatters 2001 is within a timeframe for inclusion but provides no page.
Custred 2000 again, again used to cite Chatters comments on the Ainu, which it does not do.
Chatters 2001, again, is within a timeframe for inclusion but provides no page.
Powell and Rose 1999, url link is dead,archive here supports the text, but linking to "Peoples of the Caucasus" for the authors saying "Western Eurasia", when the authors are using "Western Eurasia" as a superseding term to "Caucasoid", is a problem.
Jinam et al 2015 use to support the same text as the previous, but this article is about genetics and not physical characteristics, and is already included in the appropriateOrigins of the Ainu.
Chatters 2001, again, is within a timeframe for inclusion but provides no page.
Powell and Rose 1999, to claim that the Ainu have sundadont teeth, the source makes no mention of dental analysis of the Ainu, failed verification.
Brace et al. 2001 supports the text.
Picón-Reátegui 1979 is out of inclusion, it is verified, but the text added is also at odds with the conclusions of the more recent sources, showing why it shouldn't be used.
Gill 2014, is within a timeframe for inclusion but provides no page.
Kura et al. 2014, while being verifiable is a very poor source, as the paper itself makes no morphological or genetic analysis, only refers to a couple of previous morphological studies on crania that look at overall size/capacity, not providing great detail in the many, many areas of comparative analysis. The claims of genetic similarity are claimed based on similar performance scores in cognitive tests between the Ainu and other groups, which strays into heavy genetic determinism of intelligence which we know is not correct.
Omoto 1992, can't access a copy
Omoto & Saitou 1997 support the text on dental analysis, but makes no mention of fingerprint analysis, makes no mention of "Western Eurasian" nor "Caucasian".
Journal of the Anthropological Society of Nippon 1993, the proper citation with author and article title are not given, just a journal volume, and while I can't access the full text (at least not without the proper citation) the preview from the url provided does not support relating a similarity to Indigenous Taiwanese nor the claims of group divergences presented in the text.
So, in the text added, from reviewing the sources we can see multiple sources do not support the text they are used to cite, sources are used to present "position of researcher" separate from the what are the consensus views and hypotheses for inter-group relationships (which we already mention elsewhere), some are used for genetic relation claims which don't talk of physical characteristics (and again we discuss the genetic relations elsewhere), multiple sources are missing specific information from their citations preventing the ability to check verifiability, and it seems in multiple instances OR/SYNTH is being built on top of verifiable information while claiming this OR/SYNTH is the determination of specific researchers. --Cdjp1 (talk)14:03, 16 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
level-5 vital article is ratedC-class on Wikipedia'scontent assessment scale.
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between19 August 2025 and12 December 2025. Further details are availableon the course page. Student editor(s):WtrMelon02 (article contribs)..jpg)
%2c_early_1900s%2c_Central_Africa%2c_Democratic_Republic_of_the_Congo%2c_Pende_people%2c_wood%2c_fiber_-_Cleveland_Museum_of_Art_-_DSC08700.JPG)