Talk:List of Chinese martial arts

message: Since this looks like a potential revert war, I figured I'd bring it up here.  It sometimes seems trendy for systems to go around calling themselves Neija.  Without arguing the merits of the term itself (which is relatively new; most "internal" systems long predate their classification as such), most Chinese systems have Neija aspects, as to many non-Chinese arts.  However, most of those arts, despite having strong internal components, are not widely classified as Internal systems.  Wing Chun is one such system - there's little doubt that it has a strong internal component, but common convention classifies it as an external system because of its strong external component.  -Erik Harris 13:20, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In that case we will just put it under the alphabetical listing. -- mh 14:38, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Wing Chun

message: Please share the Wikipedia policy or your reasoning behind deleting arts that have no Wikipedia entry.SmithBlue 16:04, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it might because some martial arts forms are non-notable? There are going to be a lot of damage and overlaps if the list is not well-maintained. In the case of I Liq Chuan, one can argue that it stems from a "recent family art". --mh 19:02, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Actually, I googled "I Liq Chuan". Anyway, you have to ask the guy who reverted your edit. --mh 05:03, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Not a Wikipedia guideline, but a WikiProject Martial Arts guideline.  See Wikipedia:WikiProject Martial Arts#Lists of martial arts.  I believe at one point, I was linking to this in my edit summaries, but it seemed like a lot of effort for little use. -Erik Harris 14:54, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

text: You're right, I didn't realize that the banner was not added to this talk page.  Thanks for pointing this out. -Erik Harris 14:19, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  only arts with Wikipedia entry "permitted" on list? 

message: For discussion:  Most martial arts are recognized as much by their current grand masters or founders as they are by their name.  For example, Jeet Kune Do is inseparable from Bruce Lee.  The Wikipedia:WikiProject_Martial_Arts  suggests that the founder be listed.  My specific concern, of course, is that Fu Jow Pai is often referred to in magazines as "Wai Hong's Fu Jow Pai" and that his name should appear next to the entry.  To do this, however, would mean some agreement from other editors of this article; he's probably better known than the system.  Either we should begin listing founders or current heads of systems, or they should be removed entirely (including Bruce). JScribner 04:22, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've had a think and changed my mind :) - it would be okay to add these details, but doesn't add much value to the list. -- Medains 21:41, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Once again, Wing Tsun is part of the Wing Chun branch as a whole.  Nobody is confusing it with Jee Shim Weng Chun or White Crane Weng Chun.  As you have been warned before the last time you were blocked, you have provided no valid references, have been pushing your WP:OR, and have not achieved consensus.  Now you're threatening to delete more material based on your WP:OR on a "shaolin weng chun", which further reflects negatively.  --Marty Goldberg (talk) 09:08, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Listing Founders/Head of System with style 

message: I am in favor of including Jeet Kung Do for the following reasons: 
* the founder is Bruce Lee and he based his new style based on his experience in Chinese martial arts (esp Wing Chun).  His writing reflects this (for example, The tao of gung fu - a study in the way of Chinese martial art, 1977 or Jeet kune do - Bruce Lee's commentaries on the martial way)
* JKD has a cultural and philosophical component that is related to Chinese Martial arts.
The question of new or hybrid styles are more difficult to address.  I believe that as long as a style have attracted a good reputation and its sincere in their effort to promote the Chinese martial arts, I give them the benefit of the doubt.  That is why I did not reject some of the more recent styles such as I Liq Chuan (意力拳) Mind-Body Art or Jing Quan Do (精拳道).  ottawakungfu (talk) 20:23, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I asked the IP to provide a reliable source and he's having problems - even arguing that the word "Do" isn't Japanese when Chinese would of course be Tao (such as Tao of JKD). If you could provide some solid reliable references for him in regards to that, I wouldn't have a problem with it being added back in.  A person's nationality doesn't have much to do with that though, it's the country of origin of the art and it's relation to other arts from that country. Whether we're talking about Jun Fan Trapping (the core of Bruce's personal art still taught in JKD today), or even the later "JKD" - you're talking about an amalgam of source material with a core element that is "mostly chinese".  For example,  Krishnamurti was just as influential to his philosophies as were other sources.  I would hardly call that a "Chinese art", any more than that fact would promote it as an "Indian" one.  And JKD Concepts (the chief format of JKD today) hardly promotes the image or connection of a traditional Chinese art - much more Filipino actually. It would be incorrect to say it's just based on Chinese martial arts experiences as is also illustrated by his source material you mention. --Marty Goldberg (talk) 21:07, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

text: Also, in relation to what the anonymous IP asked about the characters around the JKD "logo", the Chinese characters state "Using no way as way" & "Having no limitation as limitation". --Marty Goldberg (talk) 21:19, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

text: 1) the pronunciation of the character for "way" in Cantonese, and it's standard Jyutping and pinyin romanizations respectively, is Dou/Dao not "do" ((dou6/dao4) specifically).  Mandarin would be Tao.  Also incorrect would be the idea that someone would be excluded from Mandarin, most Chinese also speak minimal Mandarin, which is the international standard dialect for China. 2) Jeet Kune comes from the Eagle Claw form of the same name, the Do was picked up from the Japanese source - of which by the time the term was coined, he already had a wide exposure to non-Chinese arts, philosophies, and teachings which were also a documented part of his teachings.  3) As stated earlier, JKD is a mixture of philosophies, not just Chinese - this is all well documented, Bruce was a philosophy major.  Krishnamurti was a major influence as mentioned.   4) Nobody is trying to persuade regarding "do" except you - I've already given the link for the Japanese word, you're the first person in my 30 years of martial arts and Asian languages that hasn't known this. 5) No, you did not provide a reference that meets wikipedia's reliability requirements.  You provided a link to some school.  Reliable means references that meet the requirements on reliability at the the link given, not websites you personally feel are reliable. And even then your source clearly stated JKD as being "Mostly Chinese", contradicting the reason you were providing it for. 6) Normal consensus building in light of a content dispute involves a moratorium of said content editing until resolved.  Please respect the way we do things here, or it will reflect bad on any position on your part, and can also lead to action for disruptive editing.  We're all after the same thing here - improvement of content.  Have faith in the process if you wish to continue to participate here (which is always encouraged).  As stated, if everything is satisfied, I'll be the firstone to add it back in--Marty Goldberg (talk) 00:34, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Thinking about this further, I'd even be perfectly willing to compromise and start a "Modern Hybrid" section on the page that included JKD and several other more modern hybrids that are in the list.  That way it would still be listed on this page (which is what you want), but there'd be some required distinction as well. Let me know if you're agreeable to that and we can just move on from this. --Marty Goldberg (talk) 02:07, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

text: That's just silly, there's nothing for me to provide references for, I'm not the one claiming it's a Chinese art for inclusion on this page and reverting someone's edit from back in October.  That's how asking for references works here, not by simply trying to repeat things back at everyone like you've been trying to do from the beginning.  And you'd also be incorrect on what I do or do not know.  I'm familiar with Cantonese, and I'm a teacher of Wing Chun and well involved in the Chinese martial arts community for years.  The character for Dou are not pronounced "Do" in any dialect of Cantonese, period.  Unless you going to start arguing that you somehow know better than the widely held standards already given, at which case I'd say further conversation is pointless.  Likewise, Chinese characters around a logo simply state exactly that - Chinese characters around a logo.  The content of JKD and it's curriculum, both past and present, is more than well known, published, and taught and is far from just being "Chinese".   Regardless, matter settled, I'll create the new section. --Marty Goldberg (talk) 08:55, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The reason I asked you to provide references as you actually claimed "Do" from JKD was Japanese, this is your own personal idea and it's kinda misleading us. If you are familiar with Cantonese and well involved in the Chinese martial arts community for years, can you please explain why would it be called Jeet kune do 截拳道 and why there are plenty of Chinese characters alongside the JKD emblem? Thanks. Solidsoul (talk) 09:14, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inclusion of Jeet kune do 

message: Hi everyone! A few days ago, an IP added  to the top of this article.  This template now requires a  parameter (just like  does).  Could someone please add the appropriate reason or remove the template?
Thanks!  GoingBatty (talk) 16:40, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup-remainder template now requires reason parameter 

message: Has there ever been an article about this internal martial art in Wikipedia? It is not a very obscure art, and there's plenty of material about it in the web, so I don't think it can be deemed "non-notable". I am surprised no one has written an article about it, especially with the plethora of rather obscure ones listed in this here article.  Any comments? Any takers for writing an article on I Liq Quan?  Bruno talk 17:29, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Anyone? Bruno talk 20:51, 12 October 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  Well, I stand corrected.  There is indeed an effort going on to publish this article, but it's running into creation issues.  Anybody knowledgeable care to help the author(s)? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:I_Liq_Chuan  Bruno talk 18:11, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

text:  I haven't got a lot of experience, but I think I understand the arguments, and I've been meaning to get into helping Wikipedia, so I'll have a go. Iislucas (talk) 15:15, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  I Liq Quan 

message: An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Hop Gar. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so.  buidhe 19:08, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Hop Gar" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]