Talk:Jian

message: Why don't we move this to Jiàn?  This word is not seriously used in English, so usage isn't an issue — just correctness, and "jian" without the tone mark is not fully correct Hanyu pinyin.  Chameleon 22:36, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds like a good idea. Fyrius 20:53, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

text: Adding the diacritical mark does make typing in the correct name a bit difficult for most users; this is not a problem for those who are only browsing, but it will lead to an inordinate number of redirects which only the knowledgeable few will be able to fix.  Redirects aren't bad, but they are messy.  I'd prefer to keep most diacritical names at a non-diacritical location, however technically incorrect that may be.  -- Visviva 06:05, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: And the word is used by English speaking wushu enthusiasts and martial artists, usually without the accent mark. Not a huge community, but the most likely to search the word. --Fire Star 06:10, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: page name

message: The extra information on tassels use was moved to the Use section as it was about use, as opposed to construction; reinserting this into the Parts section led to directly redundant material (please read comments). Also, I toned down the wording as the additions assumed the truth of one particular interpretation of the tassel's function (an interpretation that is by no means unanimous) and made unjustifiably broad statements about xingyi and Yang taiji. Ergative rlt 18:36, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redundant information 

message: The flexbility of the blade also makes it a poor defensive tool against heavier weapons because it is virtually impossible to effectively block with it: blocking with the flat of the blade as one would normally do with a sword would merely allow a weapon to bend it and pass through while blocking with the edge of the sword would severely damage the blade. This flexibility also makes it difficult to handle offensively since an attack must compensate for any fluctuations in the blade from sudden movements.
Despite these flaws, in the hands of an extremely agile practitioner, the jian makes for an extremely effective weapon, allowing for a wide variety of attacks, including swipes as well as stabs. This sets it apart from its European counterpart, the rapier, which is primarily only used for stabbing and has a much more limited capability.
Are there sources for the above?  I own a modern jian based upon historical models; Functional jian are not "flexible" in the way that jian shown in movies such as Crouching Tiger often are.  Similarly, jian that are "whippy" such as those often used in wushu or even purchasable for lightweight training tools for jian forms in e.g. taijiquan are not the same as historical quality weapons.   While the above is correct in that blocking with an edge is undesirable, a jian doesn't just bend over or out of the way.  They are quite sturdy.  What is meant by "flexibility" in the quoted passage?
The forms I have studied show blocking on the thickest part of the blade, which is near to the guard.  A dao (sword) blow, as powerful as it is is not going to flex a realistic jian "out of the way".  A good sword is of course somewhat flexible, but for the purposes of resilience.  This is the purpose of the inserted edge or differential hardening techniques.  The edge is hard enough to stay relatively sharpened, while the spine is resilient enough to accept blows without being overly fragile.  
Further, "having to compensate for any fluctuations in the blade ..."  Historically accurate jian do not 'wobble' or whip about when you are swinging them, even with considerable (read: cutting) force.  If they did, it seems like they would be almost useless as weapons.  They can experience fluctuation when cutting a reasonably thick or hard target, but so does any sword.  Jian can cut as well as dao... See Google video search for "GRTC" to show examples of cutting of bamboo and soaked mats with both jian and dao.  Cutting with my own jian has resonance vibration if the cut is off the ideal line, but the jian does not get remotely out of control.
 
With respect to "swipes as well as stabs" -- these are not particularly academic terms.  More appropriate would be "cuts as well as thrusts", as this keeps with general sword nomenclature.   I would also like to see evidence of the rapier as the "counterpart" to the jian.  Given that the jian is closer in looks and length to a "typical" European medieval two edged sword than to a rapier.
Overall, perhaps the "Use" section needs expanding and differentiating between functional and historical variants of the weapon, plus a section for other modern variations used in wushu demonstrations or as non-functional 'sword placeholders' for learning martial arts forms. I think it would be well to be careful of making assumptions based upon what is seen in film, what is taught in some martial arts schools, and what is available as "Genuine Chinese Swords" in marketplaces vs what is historically observed.   
For an example reference, see "Chinese Swordsmanship, the Yang Family Taiji Jian Tradition" by Scott M Rodell.
Dan Fleet 05:00, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Although I concur with regards to the issue of jian not being whippy of flexible in traditional design I have to take slight disagreement with the comment that jian could cut as well as dao.  The jian and the dao are different tools and perform different jobs.  The hilt-concentrated weight, taper and sharp point, along with differential sharpening which was a common (though not universal) feature of the jian made it best for stabbing.  The tip-concentrated weight and curve of the dao made it best for chopping.  Although both blades can be seen as having cutting as a secondary function I feel from both personal experience and theoretical knowlege that the dao is slightly better for cutting than the jian. Simonm223 (talk) 15:48, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Another feature of the jian is that it is (was) used a lot for drawing cuts, making contact with the opponent and drawing backwards (or sometimes pushing forwards) for a slice similar to the way a scalpel slices, to cut tendons, veins, etc. just below the surface of joints. Of course I don't have a source for this yet, unfortunately, it was oral instruction in sword class... ;-) --Bradeos Graphon Βραδέως Γράφων (talk) 14:40, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Drawing cuts are used with both Jian and Dao.  Although I also suffer from the preponderance of the oral tradition in Chinese sword tradition I can confirm this statement. Simonm223 (talk) 17:22, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Accuracy/Sources in the "Use" section 

message: I propose we rename this article Jian {sword} and have other uses of the (common) Chinese morpheme jian, including this one, listed on a disambiguation page. --Fire Star 火星 23:37, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That's what Wiktionary is for. If you do this, you will find you run out of content after probably the second page. ALTON .ıl 03:36, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Renaming article 

message: The introduction says that an average Jian is 70 cm (28 in) and 700-900g (1.5-2 lb). How could a metal sword more than 2 feet long weigh just 2 pounds? -- kenb215 talk 04:25, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Some wushu swords are very thin so that they swish when forms are done quickly. Our nickname for them is "tinfoil weapons". Traditional weapons are much heavier. --Bradeos Graphon (talk) 04:43, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

text: Not only are these dimensions and weights correct - and for traditional swords, not wushu props - they are quite unremarkable. Swords in general weigh far less than what popular culture suggests. Ergative rlt (talk) 07:22, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. There are some da and bagua dao that are much heavier, but the weights given in this article seem about right. --Bradeos Graphon (talk) 14:11, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

text:  Again, agreed, even very large swords may weigh only 2.5-4 kgs.  The average jian is not a very large sword.  1.5 - 2 lbs is within the realm of the feasable although I'd say that a functional jian of average length is more likely 2.5 lbs. Simonm223 (talk) 13:58, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sword weight 

message: I've never seen anything in any of the listed sources, or in any other source, about rear-facing guards being ceremonial and forward-facing ones being for combat blades - in fact Adam Hsu actually states the opposite. Also, note that in Rodell's Chinese Swordsmanship all of the antique swords have rear-facing guards. Ergative rlt (talk) 01:15, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Guards 

message: While the added image looks nice, a quick look at it, its source, and those for others uploaded by the editor suggest that, while uploaded in good faith, the images may be unusable. As such, I'm reverting to the previous clearly usable image until the status of this new one can be figured out. Ergative rlt (talk) 00:30, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image again 

message: We need more citations, mates. Also, that removal image of the sword of goujian really hurts the nice article's historical touch. Articles and paragraphs are also lacking in massive credibility.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.193.31.155 (talk) 18:33, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Information with no Citation 

message: As the current pop culture list is going the way of many on Wikipedia — i.e. filled with many entries of dubious notability and relevance — I'm going to start pruning it. For something to stay, I feel that it should meet at least one, and preferably more, of the following criteria: be significant from a historical, cultural, or artistic perspective; be widely known or easily accessed; give a realistic depiction of the jian or its use; or give a good general example of how the jian is used in various forms of popular culture, as opposed to being simply an instance of such use. Something that passes: depictions of jian in the hands of Immortals. Something that fails: The Office — that a jian appears in an episode tells us nothing about the sword itself or its place in pop culture. Ergative rlt (talk) 04:29, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleaning up Pop Culture 

message: This article seems out of order but still interestingly informative and well written. Still, things like "Parts of the jian" "Materials" and maybe even "Historical Use" seems like a poor header for the information that follows them. I suggest one of us reorder them and rename them to fit the article's needs. This article also needs a massive load of citations but other than that the article still looks nice, in a sense that it is appealing to the eyes. I suggest we also take examples from other similar articles like Katana or even the Japanese sword article, tho the latre is a bit of a stretch since Chinese Swords needs ridiculous reformatting and editing but we should still take note on how the articles are done and try to do the same things here.--71.193.54.222 (talk) 01:05, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Order in Articles 

message: Isn't the Chi Xiao a short version of the Jian (see http://www1.sinosword.com/ProductShow/?p=Han-dynasty-ancient-Jian-sword ) Mention in article.
91.182.136.18 (talk) 10:05, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Chi Xiao

message: http://i.imgur.com/tmcOVuf.jpg
I noticed this strangely appearing at the top of the page. Its filename is "Michigan state police.gif" but it links to the AR-15 gun article, and I couldn't seem to find where it was in the wikitext to delete it. Could someone remove it if possible? Thanks. Airbag190 (talk) 01:35, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I did a copy and paste of the article and now that odd image link has been removed. alagahd (talk) 02:46, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

text: But, oddly, the history of the page doesn't show my save. alagahd (talk) 02:48, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Out-of-place image/link? 

message: The reason for Jian tassels is actually pretty fraught in what passes for scholars on the subject. The most mainstream suggestions are that they were originally functional lanyards that became decorative over time or that they were decorative elements coming out of sword dance that found their way into more practical martial arts over time. Like a lot of CMA stuff much is oral tradition and will be difficult to cite to Wikipedia standards. However, a good starting place would be Kung Fu Magazine. Specifically try the September / October 2004, January / February 2005, and maybe July / August 2012 - the first two were both "sword special issues" and the third had a few good articles on sword history IIRC. My copies are mostly either lost or boxed in storage so I'll not be able to pull the precise quote - but it gives you somewhere to start anyway. Simonm223 (talk) 21:21, 2 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the pointers. If they started as lanyards, then I would imagine there must be public domain artworks depicting them that can be displayed on Wikipedia. That's why this portrait is so useful, because it clearly shows that at least some military daos had such lanyards. So maybe it was indeed the same with jians. --Difference engine (talk) 00:49, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Possibly, but if I understand Wikipedia an WP:RS magazine articles might be a better source than a description of a picture, which might be considered WP:OR - that said, awesome picture. Simonm223 (talk) 17:37, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, certainly. Any pictures would just be for illustrative purposes, not presented as evidence in and of themselves. I hate articles about historical technologies or artifacts that don't have any appropriate pictures to illustrate them. --Difference engine (talk) 00:54, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tassels 

message: The reason why I added edits related to Vietnam is because the Chinese has introduced the jian when Vietnam was under Chinese influence and if you look up Vietnamese on Google, you will notice there are similarities. SpinnerLaserz (talk) 00:58, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: As I keep telling you multiple times, if you want to create articles for Vietnamese weapons, create separate respective articles signifying the Vietnamese weapons. No one is stopping you from creating them. What I object to is that you stop inserting content and haphazardly renaming articles related to Vietnamese related weapons into articles related to Chinese weapons. SimeonManier (talk) 03:46, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vietnam 

message: A discussion is taking place to address the redirect :Chien. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 July 28#Chien until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  Joseph2302 (talk) 16:00, 28 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Chien" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]