Talk:Japanese sword/Archive 5

message: I am neither European nor Japanese, so I am relatively objective.  But, is it just me or is the article, particularly the last article EXTREMELY biased towards a European perspective. I realize none of you will agree because of well...who you people are, but just letting you know what the article sounds like. p.s. I don't know if this is a European or white thing, I doubt the latter, but words such as "extremely exaggerated" are not very objective.  --Yellowfiver 00:11, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  European Bias 

message: The article on the Jintachi says that it was invented in 1550 and was a predecessor to the katana.
:Not possible. The katana (uchigatana, if you want to be specific) already saw widespread use during the early Muromachi, just some time after 1392. Secondly, I have never come across the term "jintachi" before, and all Google seems to be finding are suspicious wallhangers. CABAL 13:06, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Resolved, here and on jintachi.  jintachi (no) koshirae seems to have been bastardized by anime and wallhanger-makers into jintachi, which does not match any real blade or koshirae over used.  I added text here about how the katana form came to be.  —  jesup 16:07, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Contradiction

message: There is a line in this article that needs removing, but I can't see where to edit it out.
The text is:
"katanas can also be forged by using the flesh of goats with paper. the resaulting is the best katana EVER!"
And is located just above the Decoration section. However, when I go to edit the page, this text does not appear.
:I don't see it. Somebody must have fixed the problem. If you still see it, please make sure you're looking at the most recent version of the article (click the Article tab above the article title), and let us know again. Thanks! Fg2 01:35, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You were looking at an oudated copy of the page. I checked the page history, and that was fixed a while back. See here. CABAL 06:01, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Text Needing Removal

message: I see no reason or purpose whatsoever of a "Famous Historic katana users"-section. Sword-smiths yes, sword-users no. Its like having a "famous pistol-users" section on the pistol article: simply too many to name to make it even remotely interesting. It is a waste of space.Fred26 11:41, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. If any one user has such a heavy importance they can be mentioned elsewhere in the article or, if really pressing, a list can be created. -xiliquiernTalk 15:02, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

text: Agreed  jesup 01:27, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks like there is vandal loose (or maybe two) that are trying to change Jesups vote to "opose" (not even spelled properly). Fred26 16:29, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removing the "Famous Historic katana users" 

message: The section is completely OR, not sourced(only provided link does not mention anything said in the section) and is incorrect in the history of Katana.  The section compare the shorter version 打刀 with single handed or one and a half handed swords, where earlier Katanas like 太刀 are generally longer, weighted similar to two handed swords like Claymore and is designed to fight against Armoured opponents.  野太刀 and 大太刀 are even longer and heavier(up to 220cm in length) which is nowhere near the discription of Not effective against Armour.  What I have said here is sourced from the Japanese and Chinese wiki, may not be the perfect source, but is still way better than the unsourced OR of the removed section. MythSearchertalk 05:32, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of ''Comparison...'' section. 

message: I'm not sure when or why this article was promoted to GA class, but it appears to never have been through peer review, or ever underwent GA review.  In my opinion, it fails to meet a number of GA criteria. Please visit WP:GA/R to support or oppose delisting. Bradford44 04:31, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[WP:GA/R|Good Article Review]] for potential delisting

message: I wouldn't call nihonto from the 700's "Katana"; they were generally tachi (or ken or tanto).  "Katana" is a term and a style of sword (and how one carries the sword) that originated around the 1400's.  So I'll change 700 back to 1400.  While this article verges on being about nihonto in general, the title is "Katana".  —  jesup 21:06, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  katana vs nihonto 

message: I own copyright on some high quality professional sword photographs, and would be willing to grant use here if someone gives me a heads up on how to do so. Mars11 22:38, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: All you need to do is register on Wikipedia Commons, hit "upload file" and choose an appropriate license from the list provided. A guide is given on Commons:Commons:First steps/Upload form. Chris Cunningham 10:56, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I would love to see more photos - I noticed one image had the granular patterning of the steel on the side I think was mentioned in the article.  This is one article where the inclusion of many beautiful photos would be welcomed and appreciated and I dont think that any number would be too many.... Mattjs 05:58, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There are plenty of katana images over at the Commons that could be linked to from the article. They're found here specifically. CABAL 17:16, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  photographs 

message: Some of these links really don't need to be here, namely the Zanpakutō link. This is an article about a real Japanese weapon and the Japanese culture, NOT about anime shows and the weapons the animators imagine. Darkskul 22:08, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Feel free to be ruthless. This article has a history of anime incursion. Chris Cunningham 11:07, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Unnecessary Links

message: Under Use there is the following paragraph:
:The tachi became the primary weapon on the battlefield during the Kamakura period, used by cavalry mounted samurai. The sword was mostly considered as a secondary weapon until then, used in the battlefield only after the bow and spear were no longer feasible. During the Edo period samurai went about on foot unarmored, and with much less combat being fought on horseback in open battlefields the need for an effective close quarter weapon resulted in samurai being armed with daisho.
This is not only unsourced, but also fails to explain why the spear wouldn't be the primary battlefield weapon during the Kamakura period, and it also seems to suggest that the spear was out of vogue ever since. Which of course was not the case. My suggestions would be something in order of
:*listing source
:*more information as to why a cheaper and easier to use and learn weapon would not be preferred on the battlefield
:*specifying that the spear/pike was, in fact, the preferred weapon on the battlefield whether peasant or warrior (except if there is actual evidence to suggest otherwise for certain eras)
Am I being unreasonable?Tsuka 10:38, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think you are being unreasonable. The quoted statement seems a bit off or maybe he/she expressed it too vagely. Everything I've read says that it was the spear that became the primary weapon during these times and also during most of the Sengoku Jidai-era, and that the spear was preferred in battle with the sword being the fall-back weapon. Fred26 20:20, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tachi as primary weapon? 

message: I couldn't find in the article (I may not have read it well enough) reference to the phrase "Katana" being used as a way of describing how the sword was worn, as opposed to a name for the sword itself. It was mentioned earlier on this page (discussion) however. Am I incorrect in believing this information? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.31.33.21 (talk) 
: Some of the confusion is because in the western world a sword is integrated with its pommel, and the scabbard is considered something separate and not very important. The sword's style of make indicates the use. So you can look at it, and say this is a rapier or this is a falchion and you use it by doing such and such. Scabbard is just to carry the sword to the battlefield with.
: With the Japanese sword, the blade is by itself not a useful object, it needs to be integrated with its mounts (koshirae). So with an unsigned sword just sitting there, it is not possible offhand to know with certainty whether you are looking at a tachi or a koshirae as it is just a blade, it is not a complete weapon. Like an axehead with no handle, it's not complete. The koshirae then are a group of all the sword dress, with pommel, grip, guard, and scabbard as an integrated set of matching items. Add them to the blade, and now you have the fully functional tool, a "sword." Once you do that you can specify what exactly you have.
: A sword made as a tachi is intended to be worn edge down in tachi koshirae. There are indeed construction hints that show that the smith was intending the sword to be mounted like this... If you flip it upside down and wear it in katana koshirae, it is now a katana. Most tachi have been modified to fit katana mounts and were mounted as katana... making them katana. When mounted. When unmounted, usually if there are no hints that show it was constructed with intention to be a tachi, then we'll call it a katana. This is kind of an overloading of the terms, it is most fair to use these to describe the set of blade + koshirae: katana or tachi. Even if it is a Naginata that has been modified, it is fair to call it a katana. So primarily the difference is in how the sword is being used... and without the information about how it is being used, we look to the intended use. Failing information about the intended use, it's just called a katana. I'll have to dig up the references, probably in Kokan Nagayama's book and others. 
: In the meantime, here's a link to a Japanese sword dealer's page (Sumie Kawashima) who explains the difference. Tachi and Katana. Mars11 01:28, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'll also add that the katana fighting techniques sometimes include the koshirae. This is possible because the koshirae can be easily removed from the belt and would sometimes be discarded during combat. Sometimes the sword would be wielded in saya still if the samurai wanted to be non-deadly, or the saya could be wielded in the off hand to use to parry or as a club (which would necessitate one-handed katana fighting). I'm just noting it because the difference between katana and tachi in terms of "how it is worn" is actually a functional difference rather than an ornamental difference, in many ways (primarily in the faster draw of the katana). Mars11 01:31, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: "Katana" as name of manner in which sword was worn?

message: :: Could we clarify the lengths of the swords quoted? Does blade length mean from guard to point or the overall length of the weapon, from pommel to point?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vectorb (talk • contribs) 20:27, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Clarify Length Numbers

message: I was always led to believe that it was illegal in pre-industrial Japan for women to own or wield katanas, but I have found nothing about this in this article. I'd say that's a pretty important fact about the katana's history, especially since women and katanas have now become so synonymous in recent popular culture (Azumi, Kill Bill, Sky High etc.) And there would also have been a date when women owning katanas in Japan was legalised, which would also be an important historical fact. I'm sure there are other users here who have better knowledge and resources to research and include this in the article than I do, so I would humbly ask you to look into it please? Arigato! 79.75.100.187 23:33, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, sources about this is quite hard to find, yet I think I can answer you with my own knowledge.  It is not illegal for women to own or wield a katana, but pretty much not legal for civilians other than samurais to wield one in puplic.  Yet owning one and taking it around in a special made carry pouch(pretty much just two strip and a piece of cloth) is legal.  And it is not because the law prohibit it totally for civilians to wield katanas, it is because you are in trouble if a samurai sees you with one and askes you to duel and you probably cannot refuse since you are of lower social status and you cannot kill him, also because of your social status, so you are pretty much screwed no matter what you do. MythSearchertalk 03:03, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

text: In fact, women with longer pole weapons like the Naginata is pretty common. MythSearchertalk 03:36, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Women and Katanas

message: As a final note, it should be noted that some companies and independent smiths outside of Japan produce katana as well, with varying levels of quality. Also all katana swords have a groove in them known as a blood line. The point of these blood line'swas when someone was stabbed with a katana they usually tended to squirt blood and possibly blind the samurai. The blood line gave the blood an outlet it would run down the sword almost to the hilt and the drip or flow to the gound Sincerely Ghost a.k.a Ninja
Needs revision and cleanup. --124.170.182.150 08:10, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sincerely Ghost a.k.a Ninja