Talk:Isshin-ryū

message: I redirected the article Ishin Ryu to here as it appeared to be a simple alternate spelling.  That page was very basic and appeared to contain no additional information that wasn't already present here. Roachmeister 14:44, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Older discussions 

message: I think a plain u is better here than a ū here and in the other similar articles. JJL 03:15, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Why? LordAmeth 09:16, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  It's easier to type and is the more common English rendering. Compare, for example, the What links here for Isshin-ryū and the What links here for Isshin-ryu. Almost all links for the former are redirected from the latter. Most people editing the site use Isshin-ryu. It's  the same for Uechi Ryu. That's also how it generally appears in most martial arts magazines, which are edited, and on the web. People disagree about Uechi Ryu vs. Uechi-ryu but are quite consistent on this point. Additionally, I don't see any gain from using the ū. I'd much prefer to see these changed back to the way people editing this site generally render the names. JJL 14:14, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I realize that these styles have become heavily Americanized, and that many people studying karate do not also dabble in other elements of Japanese culture. But karate is still originally an Okinawan/Japanese practice, and 流 (ryū) is still a Japanese word. Do you wear the kanji on your gi? I know my friends who do Uechi do. "ryu" is not a word, plain and simple. ryū is. LordAmeth 23:31, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Neither of them are words in English...and this is the English language Wikipedia. I think the What links here for the various x-ryu pages--and, indeed, their original titles--show what most people do with such diacritical marks in typed English, where they are not easily made. But even in martial arts magazines--excepting possibly Classical Fighting Arts--it's almost always ryu (and Ryukyu, not Ryūkyū). Most people will have difficulty even making such a mark on their computers--I think this pedantry is misplaced here. It makes the site less useful rather than more useful. Those editing pages involving the martial arts and, based on a quick search, have already decided by "voting with their fingers"--diacriticals are to be avoided in such cases. Are there pitch accents on words like Kung Fu on the site?JJL 01:31, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In accordance with Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_%28Japan-related_articles%29#Article_titles, I am suggesting that ryu, like Tokyo, is standard (at least within the martial arts community). Again, it's common in print such as Black Belt Magazine. A search on ryu in Google News seems to back this up. JJL 01:38, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The u in ryu 

message: The "Features" section of the article describes thumb placement on an Isshin-Ryu punch as being on "top" of the fist, which I can only assume means resting on the fingers, between the first and second knuckles (Counting from the back of the palm outwards).  However, I've never even heard of an Isshin-Ryu punch being delivered in such a way, the thumb is supposed to be on the "side" of the fist, next to the fingers (Not on them) and between the second and third knuckles (Againg counting from the palm outwards).  I'm by no means a combat expert, but even just making a fist the way the article says is uncomfortable (If I draw the thumb back) or extremely exposing, the thumb sticks right out in front.  Hitting a punching bag that way could break the thumb, and who knows what else.  What's the source for that description? JBK405 03:06, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Thumb Placement

message: It stands that some serious detail is missing from how much Isshinryu is splintered into different groups and reasonings, as well as relevant differences in teaching.RCHM 00:45, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: factions

message: The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.
*Please expand the lead to conform with guidelines at Wikipedia:Lead. The article should have an appropriate number of paragraphs as is shown on WP:LEAD, and should adequately summarize the article.[?]
*Consider adding more links to the article; per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (links) and Wikipedia:Build the web, create links to relevant articles. jmcw (talk) 11:40, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Auto review 

message: "After the death of Shimabuku in 1975, many variations of Isshin-ryū were formed." This needs a paragraph in the body explaining it. --Nate1481( t/c) 12:08, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  to do: Document the Splintering of Isshin-Ryu 

message: :Image:Megami.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 14:08, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Megami.jpg

message: Concerning the article vertical punch, there are no references, links, sections, etc. The article is orphaned and appears to cover material already covered in Isshin-ryū. Noxia (talk) 00:21, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. The existing vertical punch is talking about isshin-ryu exlusively, not about the vertical punch employed in so many martial arts (tate-tsuki (立て突き) in karate, hung fa yi in wing-chun), etc. However, if we could write about other styles, it would be a useful article on its own right. --Cubbi (talk) 15:16, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger proposal 

message: JWPce translates kotekitai (こてきたい) as "drum fife band" (鼓笛隊). Same result from an on-line dictionary. Could someone with Japanese language skill say something here? jmcw (talk) 08:38, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Meaning of Kotekitai 

message: If I'm not mistaken the Isshin-ryu translation at the start of main article is incorrect, it should read "whole-heart way" or "one-heart way"
:Do you have a reference (a book maybe)? It would improve the article. jmcw (talk) 12:18, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Isshin-ryu translation 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Isshin-ryū. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151017173712/http://www.usika.com/history/tatso-shimabuka/ to http://www.usika.com/history/tatso-shimabuka/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:55, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Cleaned up some of the dates and history based on published articles. One of them is a critical article. If anyone disagrees with the time lines investigated in the article, please DO rebut it--I have no "dog in the fight." Thus: "While Classical Fighting Arts says he had his horse gelded in Naha, in 1943, CNN interviewed him gelding the horse in Burbank, behind the Dennys, 1942." Something like that.
The article also recapitulates the issues with splits, grading, and all of that which I did not include. Though it does not mention a "Grand Master of the Snap Kick!"
TheDoctorX (talk) 19:54, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lineage 

message: Thanks for the response. A couple of things:
Thing the First: I have "no dog in this fight." I am only interested in accuracy. Seriously.
Thing the Second I did not list David Chambers as the author because he is not listed as an author. Now, if you have evidence that he IS the author and is hiding behind "Staff" or something like that, PLEASE put it HERE--Talk--and I will get the opinion of a Power That Be on how to handle the reference.
Thing the Third I "neutralized" your edit since, at this point, we have a difference rather than a rebuttal based on what is in the WIKI article. Now the WIKI article does not need paragraphs of Messieurs Sloane and Chambers questioning the chastity of their respected mothers, but, for example, something like THIS:
The CFA article claims that Shimabuko spent his time in Okinawa frightening the local children. Sloane's rebuttal cites the Okinawa Weird People Tribune which documents him teaching karate, splitting the atom, and curing cancer.
So then the reader can compare and make a decision.
SOOOOOO . . . I leave it to YOU to utilize the rebuttal you reference to do so! Please!
Point the Fourth The ONLY reason I removed the Facebook reference is because it is Facebook. That is not a reliable reference in my opinion. If David Chambers posted his article on his Facebook, I would not have at all considered it. If he posts later on his Facebook that "Sloane is a Doody-Head and I am Awesome!" I will ignore that.
BUT . . . if you think I am wrong, I will ask a Power That Be to review it. Let me know.
Again, I am interested in accuracy.
TheDoctorX (talk) 07:55, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Thanks 

message: Right, so PRense apparently looked at the article and repaired all of the references I borked--saving me time--thanks. I specifically asked on his Talk Page about citing the CFA article as "Staff" and/or "David Chambers." Since he did not comment yet I do not know what that means. Again, I do not have a "dog in the fight" regarding that: if WIKI allows adding evidence to a reference citation, neat and awesome. 
If I do not get a response on THAT particular issue, I will look to see if there are Powers That Be who handle citation rules in the next few days.
Since he has not commented yet I do not know if that means he has any opinion on the revised text. I assume if he felt it was a mess he would have taken a cyber-blow-torch to it.
Anyways, take a look, let me know.
TheDoctorX (talk) 05:08, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Revision UPDATE 

message: Added NPOV tag for the "Tatsuo Shimabuku" section under "History." The current language does not fairly represent a balance of perspectives from high-quality secondary sources. Mainstream views should be represented as mainstream, while a minority viewpoint should be represented as such. Specifically, undue weight is being placed upon a single, disputed source, and the section's language leads with that disputed source's supposed "controversy" (it appears immediately after the subject's birth and death dates) rather than presenting it in context of the subject's generally accepted biography. 
In the interest of avoiding continuance of an "editing war," sample section language representing aims of clarity, accuracy, and proportional representation of secondary sources appears here below, should other editors wish to address the specific, recurring issues of undue weight and proportionality Billyinthedarbies (talk) 13:59, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV Tag 

message: Unfortunately, questions about neutrality arise with all of the sources, especially when the only rebuttal to one appears to consist of a well poisoning fallacy. Reliance on such a fallacy rather does raise questions on neutrality from the other direction of course. Since an article that cites sources is not "spurious," I must recommend a familiarization with the definition "spurious." Nevertheless, that one may not "like" it, or one may even find it "wrong" does not free one of the responsibility to engage it objectively.
As explained previously, the objective, indeed, critical response to either of the principle sources is to demonstrate where they are correct and where they are wrong based on evidence.
I think "fresh eyes" should assist the in the matter.
That being written whether or not to identify an article based the journal is a matter of taste. Given the insistence that the article represents the sole "spurious" opinions of the publisher of the article, one might think the previous references as "CFA claims" rather than "the CFA article claims" would actually convey that insistence.
No matter.
However, the claim that one person--who disagrees with the article--is the "primary source" for the article is a claim. It may be a correct claim; it may be, dare I type this . . . spurious. Readers can go to both articles and make an informed decision.
"Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln," the play seems fine.
TheDoctorX (talk) 20:54, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neutrality 

message: Well, I do not believe Classical Fighting Arts is a refereed journal, as The Lancet, Nature, JAMA, etc., so I am not sure it is unassailably "scholarly" in nature. In fact, I recalled how that particular article garnered some infamy around the Web for its sensationalism. (Here's a discussion about it on Martial Arts Talk that popped right up when I Googled it just now: http://www.martialtalk.com/threads/classical-fighting-arts-on-isshin-ryu.105709/). So, I still find it odd to base a whole bio of Shimabuku around that one questionable piece. It's curious. 
Be that as it may, there remains undue weight and a lack of proportionality in the section. I maintain that this section should not be a referendum on a dubious magazine article, but a straightforward and mainstream bio of the founder of the style that is the subject of this page. Billyinthedarbies (talk) 01:45, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Undue Weight, Disproportionate Representation

message: While I understand you may think I am "slightly less neutral than biased," I do not have a "dog in the fight." This is why I asked you on your Talk and HERE to engage the subject. You think the CFA article is biased. It may be. Frankly, seriously, really, I would not be surprised if it was.
Which is why I asked for rebuttal rather than initiate a pointless "Edit War" and demands for arbitration and all of that crapola. It is also why I when I contacted PRense I was not asking him to step into solve a personal conflict and all of that. Declare my edits "Awesome" and your edits "stupid!" and all of that! I am only interested in an accurate history.
I will say, however, that you probably are biased--and that is not meant as an insult. I assume Isshin-Ryū is your style--perhaps I assume too much--though I will write that  I do not think you have put in too much "personal/conflict of interest" argument, but biases are very hard to avoid. I can understand why that article could upset an Isshin-ryū practitioner just as the facts on my styles have and still do upset practitioners of them. As a late venerable Aikido teacher joked to me on the whole problem with history and martial arts, "yeah, but I KNOW Ueshiba teleported himself!"
So THANK YOU for "I posted the issue on the Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard." because I had hoped to find others who could look at the section and give their opinion. I searched in vain for a group of martial arts who might be willing to do that. I will add my "2円" so they know this is a sincere request from the both of us rather than one editor bitching about another.
TheDoctorX (talk) 06:16, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Oh Yeah? Well, Let Me Tell You!" 

message: For what it is worth as I posted on my fellow editor's Talk, it seems no Power That Be has found this article objectionable. From my standpoint, it seems to be fair in that competing sources have been cited, one I used has been "neutralized" so that it does not appear "authoritative," with other sources that disagree with it included, all done so the individual readers can make an educated decision.
I will not remove the Neutrality Warning box. I will leave that to other Readers/Editors.
However, if anyone wishes to weigh-in and make changes I would ask that they explain them with their edits and, even better, HERE in Talk.
TheDoctorX (talk) 06:21, 6 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neutrality/Sources: The Story Thus Far! 

message: Since people may not read their own Talk, particularly if they are nothing more than an IP number, I will explain some issues HERE:
==== I Don't Wike Bishop! Information False! ====
An "IP Number" editor removed a section declaring it false. He provided no evidence that it is false. I restored it and asked him on his "IP Number" Talk page to provide evidence that it is false.
==== Patch/Symbol ====
Same "IP Number" editor claimed that A.J. Advincula created the symbol then patch. This may be true. He provided no reference. I asked him to do that. If anyone has a reference kindly provide it.
This is on the Wikipidea article about Advincula: 
 Isshinryu Karate-Do, David D. Evseeff & Milledge Murphy Ph.D., One-Heart Publishing Co. January 1997 (2nd Printing)
 "Some of his other notable accomplishments include; designing the Isshinryu patch,[2]"
Hope that helps. Pibolata (talk) 16:20, 27 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rank Issues, "I Don't Wike Bishop!" and Patches! Patches? We Don't Need No Stinkin' Patches! 

message: Same "IP Number" editor claimed that A.J. Advincula created the symbol then patch. This may be true. He provided no reference. I asked him to do that. If anyone has a reference kindly provide it.
This is on the Wikipidea article about Advincula: 
 Isshinryu Karate-Do, David D. Evseeff & Milledge Murphy Ph.D., One-Heart Publishing Co. January 1997 (2nd Printing)
 "Some of his other notable accomplishments include; designing the Isshinryu patch,[2]"
Hope that helps. Pibolata (talk) 16:20, 27 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Patch/Symbol 

message: Kyan no Sai bears the name of Shinei Kyan Sensei (no relation to Chotoku Kyan) who studied with Shosei Kina (and others). 秋山夕子 (talk) 02:03, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Per WP:RS:  Kire1975 (talk) 02:21, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kyan no Sai have no relation to Chotoku Kyan