Talk:Baduanjin qigong

message: Two of the four current external links in the article are to commercial websites (one selling a book, the other selling a course on the subject). I did not really look to closely, but these sites themselves don't seem to contain a lot of(any?) further information on the subject. The main pupose of the links seems to be to sell the stuff. IMHO they should be deleted, as I don't see how this is conform to wikipedia's standards. 213.183.85.194 (talk) 13:48, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed -- and the other two are specialized research articles -- neither the commercial websites nor primary scientific literature seem significant enough to be singled out for inclusion in the external links section.  Note, per wikipedia guidelines on external links, the burden of providing justification for inclusion is on the person who wants to include an external link Wikipedia: External links, and none has been given. A leading and freely-available instructional link from one of the major schools would be one obvious choice for an external link, since many people probably come to this page to learn about the practice. Brian Hill (talk) 06:46, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

text: Agreed - These links are inappropriate as they ar not references and are commercial promotions. I will remove the links. Ricbolzan (talk) 06:27, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External Links 

message: In naming this article I have carefully considered the many options. Translation is often difficult and contentious. In order to have the subject align with NPOV by giving equal weight to all the significant English translations, I have decided to name the article Baduanjin qigong. Simply saying baduanjin would IMO be too confusing, and so qigong is the best way of disambiguating the practice. See the list below for a breakdown of Google hits on all the common translations. VanTucky Talk 01:20, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Naming 

message: How does it illuminate on the subject? It's an historical portrait of the man the style is attributed to. --Ghostexorcist 00:27, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: First, you can hardly make out Yue Fei (even if it is the most accurate portrait). Second, what Yue Fei looked like has absolutely zero to do with his creation of the practice. Having an illustration of him illuminates nothing about baduanjin. I'll be adding some substantial pictures of the baduanjin itself soon, so when that occurs the Yue Fei pic might be in order if it doesn't crowd things visually. But having it alone only makes the lack of topically appropriate images more glaring. VanTucky Talk 01:37, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Yue Fei pic 

message: I like the singular photo of the man because it is much larger. --Ghostexorcist 02:35, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, in that you can see what he is doing much better. But maybe the present one gives better context? I'll change it for now. VanTucky Talk 02:36, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lead photo 

message: I don't really dislike it, but as it isn't a martial arts style is it really necessary? I don't think it imparts any basic info that the lead doesn't. VanTucky Talk 03:09, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Like I said in the edit summary, you can keep or delete it if you want. It was only a test. Qigong has a small info box, but no integrated picture. I used the martial arts template to include your photo. --Ghostexorcist 03:10, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh I see, that makes sense. Well, unless you change your mind about caring I'll go ahead and rm it... VanTucky Talk03:16, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox 

message: You could group of all of the eight photos of the standing routine from Wikicommons into a gallery. Just a thought.--Ghostexorcist 04:02, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, we might do that. I don't think some the forms lend themselves to still capture however, as ones such as the last look like he's just standing there unfortunately. I'll put all the decent ones in a gallery now though. VanTucky Talk 04:04, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: He is standing on his toes in the last photo. The last movement is called "bouncing on the toes". --Ghostexorcist 04:07, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: To be quite honest,  I'd rather keep four, six and eight out for the simple reason that he is doing them very badly. Some of the postures in those could seriously injure someone imitating them. VanTucky Talk 04:15, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I would recommend removing all of these pictures, he is performing them so poorly that they barely resemble the forms (most notably Aiming the Bow as if to Shoot a Hawk).  Not only would we want to discourage improper form should people try to imitate, but also prevent injury. -SuperficialBob 00:25, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Some sort of image showing the forms is better than none, and I objected to some only on the basis that they could cause serious injury if people performed them that way. But as to general comments on "how well" he does the form: to maintain a neutral point of view, we must refrain from making value judgements based on our personal subjective knowledge. There are many, many ways of doing the Baduanjin. What may look like good form to one school might be horrible to another. Bottom line: unless you can find some freely licensed images to replace the current ones, removing a necessary illustration isn't a good idea. VanTucky Talk 00:33, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Commons photos of baduanjin 

message: 1) Are the sections the ones that are standardized? 
2) What influence did the Chinese Health Qigong Association have on this form? What did they change?--89.14.87.198 (talk) 20:05, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chinese Health Qigong Association