Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Martial arts/archive 8

message: OK. Categories are broad but largely accurate, so if we change to  'Focus'  with the options ofStriking, Grappling, Weapons and Mixed/Hybrid, pick one per art (i.e. mixed or hybrid if you would need to put two), and LINK the them to help clarify things.
In brackets put any specialisation e.g Grappling (Ground-work) for bjj, Striking (kicking) for TKD. For a hybrid or mixed focuses, try to put striking, grappling or weapons in the brackets if appropriate.
We edit the template to state these options, any changes to this list are discussed.
Will this work? --Nate1481( t/c) 10:03, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This sounds like a good solution.  The focus should always be the same as how the art is listed in .  Parentheses could used if necessary to mention a major sub-focus.  --Scott Alter 12:26, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds good. I prefer it without the parentheses--just one of the four big categories. Otherwise I fear we'll get the same run-on parenthetical comments, e.g. Tae Kwon Do Focus: Striking (kicking, punching, locking, throwing, gator-wrasslin', etc.). 'Focus' may be a better term--I think of the FMAs, known for Weapons but practitioners often think of them as empty-hand arts that use weapons to develop attributes--though I'm not sure it's important what that term is, and 'Style' is OK by me. I agree it should match . There may be a rare case where two major headings are appropriate but Hybrid in that case is OK by me (including for, say, Hapkido, Hybrid (Striking/Grappling)) as long as this is done relatively rarely. JJL 14:01, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plan of action 

message: I would like to invite the members of this project interested in wrestling to look at the wrestling articles in WP:AFC and help to decide if the wrestler is notable.  Perhaps even to create the article for the anonymous contributor.  Many of them do not have adequate sources.  But they may be found!
*Wikipedia:Articles_for_creation/2007-09-17#Ron_Hutchinson
*Wikipedia:Articles_for_creation/2007-09-24#Will_Scoville___Actor.2FProfessional_Wrestler.2FStuntman
*Wikipedia:Articles_for_creation/2007-09-23#Brian_Rogowski
*Wikipedia:Articles_for_creation/2007-09-26#Taylor_Matheny
*Wikipedia:Articles_for_creation/Today#Steve_Bradley
*Wikipedia:Articles_for_creation/Today#Big_Dick_Johnson
Graeme Bartlett 09:24, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Wrestling Articles 

message: I've been seeing a proliferation of improvised tables for martial arts terms and techniques, so I made an infobox at Template:Infobox martial art term.  Let me know what you think. For an example of implementation, see aiki (martial arts principle) and compare it to the table previously in place. Bradford44 17:45, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Good to be able to see the characters in the new version, but needs to be reduced in size. User5802 11:15, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: New template for martial arts terms

message: There is constant warring going on here. The boards Shinyo and Shingen are constantly being deleted and resubmitted. The people deleting these boards do not like that this information is being released to the public. However, specific reference is given from notable sources on the content of these boards. The boards are publicly available both on the internet and in many schools. Need help from the community on coming to a consensus here. User5802 11:13, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I feel that lists of techniques are useless to the reader unless they are a practitioner of the art or the list either links to articles describing the techniques (which I think shouldn't have their own articles anyway, since WP is not an instruction manual) or includes a brief description of the technique.  Does anyone else have thoughts about technique lists? -- Medains 14:35, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I would go back to notability. Is a technique notable enough to warrant description? (For example, a 'signature technique' of a particular art.) Is a group of techniques notable enough to warrant a stand-alone list? (I cannot think of an example just now, but a case might be made if an art was the foundation for others later on, and hence, notable.) To me, lists of techniques are more appropriate on external organisations' websites than on Wikipedia. Janggeom 15:13, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If this is the general consensus then we should remove all of the Atemi-waza from the Judo technique article. Is this the general consensus? User5802 04:05, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Judo techniques is a list article, not quite the same thing as a list in an article. --Nate1481( t/c) 10:48, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, my opinion equally applies to the Judo technique article - which should describe the difference between the various throwing technique categories and give better examples, none of the individual technique articles is likely to get better than B-class; whilst the main article itself could  go a long way up the scale. (Not that I have time in my busy schedule to move it along) -- Medains 12:01, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

text:  There is more information given in the Danzan Ryu lists than the Judo technique list, why would the Judo list be classified as a "list article" and the Danzan-ryu list be classified as a "list in an article" Nate? User5802 11:15, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Sorry got the miss read & thoght you were talking about the main Danzan-ryū article. I'd Say keep them but ad a brief description or a translational. --Nate1481( t/c) 11:23, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

text: I've put together a brief outline of a replacement for Judo technique at User:Medains/JTcleanup, any comments welcome. -- Medains 14:40, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmmm... it's an outline but it is going to take quite a bit more work to turn it into something that can replace the judo technique article. Couple of things that need to be added in my opinion: The references section and the hyperlinks to the articles on the various techniques. Perhaps your intention is not to include all these technique names, but I personally like them. User5802 04:21, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, my point was that it's an outline for a replacement in order to make it into an article instead of just a list - I don't currently have the time to give all the techniques the "laymans description" treatment.  The plan would be to keep all the techniques and references, and probably after a while retire the techniques individual pages - preserving the little information that they add by including it in the broader article. -- Medains 11:46, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That sounds good User5802 22:03, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Warring over inclusion of "secret" boards 

message: Ernest Emerson has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:12, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Ernest Emerson FAR 

message: I have just nuked this leaving only 3 lines as it was in such a state. See it's talk page.--Nate1481( t/c) 12:26, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wong Shun Leung]] 

message: Abir has been nominated for deletion. It is supposedly an ancient form of empty hand and weapons combat utilized by Jewish soldiers thousands of years ago. However, the current grandmaster of the art is well-versed in Korean Kuk Sool Won, leading some to think Abir is just a rehash of his Korean training. Please read the article and then cast your vote on the deletion page. --Ghostexorcist 13:44, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Just to note to anyone coming across this.  The AfD debate resulted in much of the article being moved to Jewish military history and the remainder rewritten as a biographical article for Yehoshua Sofer. -- Medains 08:11, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Abir (martial art)]] deletion 

message: Re-wrote the other week & just removed a section on the meaning of coloured belts, needs a couple more sources but pretty much at b-class, just wanted someone else to look over before it's promoted. --Nate1481( t/c) 08:07, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have reviewed this article against the criteria noted in WPMA's assessment section, and have promoted it to B class. Good work. I have added review comments to the article's discussion page, and will implement them when I get time to do it properly, assuming someone else doesn't get around to it first. Janggeom 13:38, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Demoted back to Start class; see the article's discussion page for details. Janggeom 09:18, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Black belt (martial arts)]]