User talk:Bradford44/Archive 2

Wikiproject Sumo

Some people from Wikiproject Japan think that Wikiproject Sumo should be a task force under Wikiproject Japan. Could you go to the Wikiproject Proposal page and give us your opinion. Thanks! XinJeisan 18:14, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

GA Review

Thank you for reviewing the Leander Paes article for GA status. Appreciate it. Cheers Vinwe 02:09, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Unreferenced tag

I notice you've added an 'unreferenced tag' to Bushido. While I'm by no means a fan of that article, the fact is that the principal author has quite vociferously resisted attempts to edit the article on the grounds that everything in it is based on solid sources.

Perhaps it would be useful if you added a note on the discussion page stating why you added the 'unreferenced' tag.

Bathrobe 06:25, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Hey dude - That new box of yours

Hope ya didnt mind me implementing it into the articles concerned. :-). Oh, by the way. What is your opinion on Isshin-ryu kusarigamajutsu? I know you had (have) some thoughts about the lineage and when it was actually founded. My own opinion is to put it in the 15th century category until we can hear some form of definitive (qualified) yay or nay. What do you think? Fred26 19:29, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Sounds fair enough. Fred26 07:20, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Kukishin ryu

I was asking Fred about the Box with a list of Ko-ryu schools and I figured I should ask you this question as the creator. Should the Kukishin school really be shown with this very early date? My apologies if this is something that people have gone over to death already. I'm still of the understanding that the Kashima Shinto ryu and Katori Shinto Ryu are the schools who arguably have the longest veriable lineage. - I'm not making an assertion here but merely trying to gather new information from you. : ) Thanks, matt--Mateo2006 20:30, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Kinomichi

Hi! You put an info box back in the article kinomichi, which I recently removed, and put a navigation box at the bottom. Do you argue that kinomichi is indeed a martial art, or did you not check the page talk before adding the boxes? // habj 16:16, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

grappling

Just seen & replied, hope it seems more constructive than critical. Might be worth taking to WPMA. --Nate1481(^t/_c) 15:22, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

sumo first section ref tag

Hi, I have referenced the first section of the sumo article. I will look at other issues when I get time. Thanks Malnova 20:29, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

improper wiki-link to a talk page

Hi, I've been looking through wikki guide lines about linking to talk pages. The only mention I found was at Wikipedia:Only_make_links_that_are_relevant_to_the_context where they showed the technique. I thought it was a good way to "take it to the talk page to reach consensus". It certainly does not belong on a high quality page but it seems useful to promote discussion. jmcw 22:21, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

sumo article

I have done some work adding a reference or two (and plan to work with others using the mark up you suggested). I have also extensively restructured the sumo article (after years the way it was), putting the sections in more logical order, creating new sections and subsections, and deleting extraneous info repeated in other articles. I wouldn't mind another assessment when you have time. Thanks. Malnova 21:06, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Hello again, I have fixed the dead link early in the sumo article and another user and I have added more refs thru the sumo article. When you get some time, would you mind checking it out and reassessing us for the removal of that last no cite tag? Thanks a lot. Malnova 19:49, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Seitei iaido

Hello Brad, I've noticed your work re external links and adding references, in particular on the pages that I've contributed to, kendo and iaido. As a result I removed the kendo links and have started to add references to the kendo and iaido articles. I have also reverted your recent edit of the list of seitei gata, where the names are a translation from the Japanese. The reason is that those names of the kata are the names as in the AJKF English seitei iaido manual. I've added some coments on the iaido talk page as well, that you may wish to look at. I'm happy to discuss this further. Regards.

Infobox change on Gōjū-ryū

I just noticed that you changed the infobox template on Gōjū-ryū from {{Infobox martial art}} to {{Infobox martial art school}}. I've always thought of Gōjū-ryū as a style of karate, and not a single dojo. My understanding is that {{Infobox martial art school}} should be used when there is a single school (aka dojo) that teaches different types of martial arts. That template allows for the listing of many arts taught, which is its main feature. I think Gōjū-ryū, along with all of the articles listed in {{karate schools}} should have {{Infobox martial art}}. --Scott Alter 15:35, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

To further clarify, I think {{Infobox martial art school}} should be used to describe the place where martial arts are practiced (where is the dojo, what arts are practiced there, when it was founded, who runs the dojo (headmaster), etc). {{Infobox martial art}} should be used to describe the art itself (who is the grandmaster, where did the art originate, famous practitioners worldwide, etc). If the art is only practiced in one place, then either template would be appropriate. If it is a worldwide art, then {{Infobox martial art}} would be appropriate to describe the art, with {{Infobox martial art school}} used to describe notable schools that practice the art. --Scott Alter 16:01, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Tatsumi-ryū

What's the deal with this article only having edits approved of by Liam Keeley? That sounds like an impressive conflict of interest to me. --健次(derumi)^talk 07:44, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for the recent work and your thoughts on this article. I was a bit out of my element (no real background in martial arts knowledge), but things just didn't look right. Hopefully everything is in the clear now. --健次(derumi)^talk 18:37, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Daito-ryu references

I have made significant additions in references to the Daito-ryu article. To be honest I thought that the 8-10 refs before were sufficient, but the intro, which I didn't write, lacked them entirely. This is common in many articles I visit so I didn't think to add them there earlier. Regardless I have added them to the intro and throughout. Hope it seems more sound. --Mateo2006 02:28, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Nav box

No problem, I guessed someone woud tweek it after I'd been there. I had fiddled with the columns several times & was still not quiet happy so no problems there, the 'see also' was because I was originally going to put it @ the bottom till I realised you could put it at the top, makes sense there with out see also.

I think the 'with' makes is sound better but not a big deal, "With an unknown, or of no single origin" would be a full sentence, "Unknown or of no single origin" could work too but it just an opinion. --Nate1481( ^t/_c) 15:15, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

The Niten Ichi-ryu problems

Greetings. What do you know about Hyoho Niten Ichi-ryu? And more specifically, are you familiar with the delicate sitation regarding the main school and a rival-branch that might erupt into a edit-war? Fred26 16:20, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

It is already a problem. The Gosho-ha article states its headmaster is actually the leader of the entire HNIR. It is not. Gosho-ha is a branch, the main school is led by Iwami Toshio Gensho the 11th headmaster. This is a clear violation as the main branch is NOT led by this Gosho-ha shihan.

The Gosho-ha article is written mainly by a representative of the Niten Institute in Brazil who has several axes to grind with the Main line. Do a search on E-budo forums for the Niten Institute and you'll see several of the arguments they've had with the main branch. Fred26 08:04, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Takeda

Bradford, in the edits you made changing first names to family names, in the case of Takeda there is the risk of confusion between Sokaku and Tokimune, both of whom are discussed on the page. I agree that most will properly follow correctly by the context but thought the other method of using first names clearer. Thoughts?--Mateo2006 22:09, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough. Thanks for the feedback.--Mateo2006 18:43, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Disambigation-class problems

Hi Brad. I've realized that this problem exists since Nate1481 only partially reverted the changed I made. The link to the template category is also incorrect. I do not want to make any changes until we have reached consensus. I made some more comments at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Martial Arts#Unassessed category deleted, so you can add in your opinions. Also, what are your implementation plans for User:Bradford44/Infobox kata test? It looks ready to go. And something else to consider would be naming it "Infobox martial art form," so that it could potentially include Hyung and Aka (Burmese) (see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Martial Arts/archive 5#Template for karate kata in case you forgot about it). --Scott Alter 23:22, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject "Definitions"

We need to notable practitioners from the same style, ideally school & teacher, MMA fighters would be the easiest to do, can't think of any other obvious ones, unless you want to get into the '_ing _un' liniage wars... --Nate1481( ^t/_c) 12:50, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Asssesments

The great Peter and Brad tag team continues. Here in China there are words that cause sites to be blocked. I got all but one article assessed - could you take care of the one starting with Q? Peter Rehse 03:30, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Well keep them down to 15 or so and I am happy to do an assessment. Running a lab at the Chinese Academy of Sciences but only until something else comes through. Maybe another month. I'm the kick start guy. The lab was working but they needed a bit more focus and my expertise. At least thats the idea.Peter Rehse 04:05, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Me again - somehow the Bando talk page is blocked. I wanted to upgrade it from Stub to Start. Much obliged if you could do it for me. I am going to resubmit Aikido for featured article soon but when I do I want to get our friends (ie those in favour）notified so that it starts out in a good way.Peter Rehse 07:14, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Daito-ryu Photos

MATT:Great work on the Daito-ryu article recently. Especially the 'box'.

I was just going to put a picture of Choi in when you beat me to it as I was about to paste it. A picture of Kenji Tomiki, Okuyama Ryuho or Doshin So might be interesting and appropriate I would think but they don't exist in Wiki at the moment.--Mateo2006 17:58, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

MATT:I added a bit to the Sagawa section you might want to give a last minute read over.

Two things come to mind as weaknesses in the article.

i) It bothers me that I have never heard of Tenshin-ryū, Senso-ryū, and Shindo-ryū as aikijujutsu systems (mentioned in the last sentence of the article).

ii) I'm wondering if Tokimune Takeda's contributions have to be restated in the Tokimune Section even though they are outlined in the main section on the art. My instinct was not to reintroduce them out of the 'boredom factor' but we had some problems with not having sections stand alone in the promotion of the judo article.

I quite like how the definition of aikijujutsu turned out in the end and having a quoted segment on 'aiki' gives the reader a good conception of what 'aiki' meant to the creators of Daito-ryu specifically. - I just thought that I'd include what I thought were the strengths of the article in addition to the weaknesses. : )

Best--Mateo2006 18:59, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Bradford, I realized as I read through the article further that you must be following the correct procedure for requesting correct kanji/nihongo by writing out the terms again in brackets and so ceased with my deletions! : ) Sorry about that.--Mateo2006 02:30, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Daitō-ryū Aiki-jūjutsu Has Been Promoted To Good Article

Congratulations, the article Daitō-ryū Aiki-jūjutsu has been promoted to good article. Thanks for all your hard work and contributions to Wikipedia. -Weston.pace 16:58, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Kudos

Good work. I'm 100% sure the article wouldn't have made it to this grading without your substantial input.--Mateo2006 19:13, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

6 GA status articles

Was one of them Kano? I did a lot of the initial work on that, then Joe Svinth took it to a whole different level and your prompts, adjustments and advice helped to get it to the status, I think. This is kind of what I mean. I enjoy writing text but I don't have the know how or sometimes the inclination to put the necessary polish on them.

I know it is not your area but I've been working on a few other articles that could use some tweaking. If you could take a look at them I'd really appreciate that as well. I wrote the Shogen Okabayashi and Choi Yong Sool articles and was quite happy with them (The rules for Korean name order are different than for Japanese.), I'm afraid they won't make the grade, though. The hapkido article is very problematic as their are so many cooks in the pot all trying to press their POV or do self promotion there. Any advice you could give on these would really be appreciated by me. Thanks.--Mateo2006 00:58, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

What's up with the Daito-ryu page? Has it beed demoted or was it too hastily promoted? Just curious as the status of the page seems changing.--Mateo2006 15:38, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Aikido

Hi I just resubmitted the Aikido article for Featured article status. Hopefully we can get over the hump this time.Peter Rehse 08:30, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Asahi Newspaper Office

No worries on the Osaka versus Tokyo office thing. I doubt very much whether the current Asahi office in Osaka is on the original site anyway. It certainly is not the same building. : ) Still, pictures are nice to have!

Here's something interesting http://www.asahi.com/shimbun/honsya/e/e-history.html... but no early photos--Mateo2006 15:58, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

MA template

I agree entirely, thought it might be an idea originally but this has given breadth, I'd suggests putting it as a drive on the project as those are the lead articles. --Nate1481( ^t/_c)

jutsu

Hello. Even now the jutsu article is perhaps better deleted, but it's markedly different from what it was when you (very understandably) sent it to AfD. Take a look at it, and consider adding a relevant comment to the AfD. -- Hoary 07:32, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Problems

This is good fun. All the tags were removed by an administrator and she put them right back. Now she is threatening to modify my user page. See my talk.Peter Rehse 16:00, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps "she" wants you to hold to your own intentions (to help clean up the errors and misunderstandings in martial arts) and write correctly that Dojo-cho means Head of Dojo unless you prefer to write that you are just Cho (Head)? At least to match both languages? :) Jennylen 18:18, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Greetings. You forgot to sign your message addressed to me at Peter Rehse's talk page, please sign when possible, thank you. About its content, all that you are saying is that you support the owner of the page and stand by him, nothing else. Dojo-cho is still Head of the Dojo and not simply Head and his Dojo is a dojo and following ethics he should avoid to have it confused with a style . If he is a responsible and ethical editor as I believe he is, in spite of some careless disregard for others knowledge, he will understand this. Jennylen 18:31, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Contradict flag on Qi

Howdy Bradford44, you think the contradict flag can be removed now?

Cause of death of ueshiba sensei

I left the info you required at the talk page of the Ueshiba article, I did not included it in the article but you can do it if you want to. Jennylen 20:38, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Left you some tips in the Ueshiba cause of death talk, use if you want, is just a comment Jennylen 18:37, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

References Clean up

Greetings, Bradford44! I made a few modifications in the references of the article Gosho Ha Hyoho Niten Ichi Ryu. Please, could you check if it's ok now?--NitenBr 12:52, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Daitō-ryū Aiki-jūjutsu

Thanks for fixing that, I looked over saw lots similar & those the same, will teach me to look closer. --Nate1481( ^t/_c) 14:36, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

No problem ;) Bradford44 14:37, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Defensive Art

Its funny that - in one paragraph Ueshiba says there is no attack in Aikido and in the following he says there is no reactive techniques (go no sen). I read that as attack and defense are the same. http://www.aikidojournal.com/article?articleID=98 I agree with you completely - besides what is an offensive grappling art.Peter Rehse 15:47, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

propose ja: 弓術, ja:笠懸 and ja:犬追物 to be translate

Hello, I'm Japanese Wikipedian 福太郎(Fukutaro).

This time, I propose translated 弓術 (Kyujutsu), 笠懸 (Kasagake) and 犬追物 (Inuoumono) into English to Japanese speaker and I wish Budo-ka (understands Budo mind person). So I tried proposee translat myself, but not understood "how to".

• Kyujutsu is Historic Japanese Archery, and history of Japanese traditional Budo Kyudo. Japanese Archery: Kyudo in present age is similar to Kyujutsu, however diferent than Kyujutsu.
• Yabusame, Kasagake and Inuoumono is Japanese traditional horseback archery. Yabusame and Inuoumono and Kasagake were generic named to "Kisya-Mitsumono".
• Yabusame is ceremony, Inuoumono is dog shooting, Kasagke is game. But that horseback archery is almost traditional ceremony. The diferences is history, rules, styles....

I'll grad if your cooperation. If you have some opinions, advice, complaints, give me comments to my talk or here without reserve. You'll may be in a bad for my words, I'm sory to poor English.

Djiannさま、初めまして。日本のWikipedian、福太郎 (Fukutaro)と申します。

今回は日本語版弓術 (Kyujutsu)、笠懸 (Kasagake)、犬追物 (Inuoumono)の英語訳をお願いしたく参りました。一度自分でproposee translatを出そうとしたのですが、やり方がいまいち解らず断念、日本語が出来、なおかつ武士道精神を理解する武道家のWikipedianを探してやってきました。

• KyujutsuはKyudoの歴史そのものですが、しかし歴史上のKyujutsuと現在のKyudoとは違いが多く、日本語wikiでは独立記事にしてあります。
• 流鏑馬 (Yabusame)、笠懸 (kasagake)、犬追物 (Inuoumono)は日本の伝統的な騎射 (horseback archery) ですが、Kamakura periodにはこれらを総称して『騎射三物 (Kisya-mitsumono)』と呼ばれていました。それぞれに歴史、起源、作法(rule)、その他諸々(etc...)特徴があります。
• Yabusameは儀式を重んじ格式が高く、Kasagakeは遊戯的(a game)、競技的(a match)性格が強く、Inuoumonoは犬を射る競技ですが、どれも儀式として行われています（現在はInuoumonoのみ行われておりません）。

不躾 (bad manners) 、拙い英語に気分を害されたかも知れませんが、英語に不慣れなため何とぞご容赦ください。ご意見、アドバイス、苦情等ありましたら遠慮なくお申し付け下さい。ご協力頂ければ幸いです。 --福太郎(Fukutaro)/talk 16:10, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Article Promotion

It depends on the article and subject material. Something like maai does not have to be that long and involved. Basically if the grammer is ok, it is referenced reasonably well, has at least one nice picture then B class should be considered. For Start class it is usually missing one of those elements. With respect to the maai article - I thought it was a bit heavy on the kendo view but generally speaking the concept was adequetly explained. This was my reading of the quidelines especially if you read right across the table.Peter Rehse 03:42, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

No sweat - a little bit of cross-chat is always good.Peter Rehse 15:24, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

I need a tag

That can be put on a user talk page that's a bit more direct then the 5 pillars of wikipedia. Basically the guy is cutting and pasting over the top self promotion from his web site onto an existing page - its had to be reverted a couple of times. More than spam (although he's been doing that too) - I need something that talks about copyvio, npov and verifiability.Peter Rehse 10:14, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

OK maybe I found one Nothanks-web|pg=|url= but there must be a list of these and something better.Peter Rehse 11:00, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Jujutsu pronunciations

Some edits were made on the the jujutsu page with regard to pronunciations, it was change to

Jujutsu (柔術, jūjutsu -- pronounced "jyoo-jits"?) [It should be noted that incorrect pronunciations of "joo-jit-soo" are sometimes used.]

Just wondered if you could have a look in as I'm fairly sure that this is wrong but figured you would probably know. Edit were reverted for other reasons but just wanted to check this, thanks! --Nate1481( ^t/_c) 09:17, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for that --Nate1481( ^t/_c) 13:10, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

style description of jujutsu

Multiple people, including myself, have voiced disagreement in having jujutsu labeled as "primarily grappling". I have given my reasoning in the jujutsu talk page and changed the style descriptor. Would like to get your opinion. User5802 23:04, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Help stop Afd

The Andy Sherry article is under attack and is likely to be deleted. Please help by posting your views on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andy Sherry. simonthebold 16:51, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Sosuishi ryu, Kukishin ryu and the Hepburn Curse

Would you mind popping over to Sosuishi ryu and Kukishin Ryu and add the proper WP:MOS-JP to the title names? It's bugging me!!! They should read Sōsuishi-ryū and Kukishin-ryū. Kudos! Mekugi 15:07, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the Hepburn changes. Much oblidged! Mekugi 16:32, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Kukishin-ryu

Hello, I have followed the latest improvements at the Kukishin Ryu article. I am quite missing what is the problem with the citations, seems to me as those are following policies and using appropiate templates, could you be more specific and point out where is exactly the problem? You can reply here if you want to, I keep watch until you do Thank you Heltzen◩ 10:06, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Certainly, "citationstyle" refers to the fact that not all of the sources are properly cited: one is missing a date and an isbn number, another uses the wrong format for citing a website. See WP:CIT for a list of templates. "Refimprove" is there because the article needs more references before it is fully sourced - several paragraphs or sections remain that have no references (I prefer this to tagging dozens of individual sentences with {{cn}}). Finally, the generalized "cleanup" tag is there mostly because the article as a whole needs some copyediting for style, grammar, and consistency with WP:MOS-JP. Another issue is that the sections don't flow together as well as they could. Please note also that the only reason I tagged the article at all was because it is now good enough to be B-class, and I wanted to give it a little push towards GA. Let me know if I can help further. Bradford44 13:19, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, very kind of you to provide the full explanation. I can only help with the citations style I believe, would you be so kind to indicate exactly which is mising what so I can help on those and from there I will see what else I can help with? I saw so muh effort from the author that it made me think that he is at full hands with all and perhaps a little help here and there will provide some relief. Which ISBN is missing? Which date is missing? Which has the wrong format?, I am missing it(I couldn't see it, books seem to have the book template and journals the journal template, couldn't see which is the wrong one). This reply probably pertains to the article' talk page, so you can respond either here or there at your convenience Thank you Heltzen◩ 06:27, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm working on it, it's no big deal. It needs a lot of work....that's a fact. I used the APA citation for website references, (actually, the Publication Manual, which may not be appropriate for Wikipedia). At any rate, if anyone is reading this, just be cool. It's good to get outside review on this so I (we) can improve it. It's on stall until this weekend when I can get around to cleaning it up more. Mekugi 16:28, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

I see someone else has helped with the isbn, so my previous question is outdated Thank you Heltzen◩ 05:47, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar time!

Totally deserving...you know that:

		The Martial Arts Barnstar
		For excellence in editing in the WikiProject Martial arts project.

Many Thanks..and of course kudos all around to your fine contributions.

Mekugi 13:53, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Tō'on-ryū

I have done some cleaning in Tō'on-ryū - could you take a look at the spelling when you have a chance? My source material does not have diacritic marks. Thanks! jmcw 11:20, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the help!

Thanks for reverting that vandal on the Emerson page. They've been going nuts since Sunday, when it was on the main page.--Mike Searson 13:36, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Edit war

I seem to be having to deal with two editors making reverts and unconstructive edits at Radionics. The article was enhanced by Jennylen with suitable citations and content. This was later reverted various times to a practically empty page with no justification. I reverted the edits and warned to no effect, they continue doing it. Could you please as an administrator block those editors or protect the page as it was in the last constructive edit by JennyLen? This will be most helpful. Then they can discuss changes in the article's talk page or do edits constructively Thank you ℒibrarian2 15:58, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

I agree, exponential inmaturity. It seems to me as a real injustice to leave all that arbitrary delete, I was seeing that the editor took first one POV and edited and sourced in a very solid way and then she started to do the same with the contrary POV when they came over with the reverts war. I was observing and I was wondering how far could have she gone because I never saw an editor making that in a systematic well organized way as she was doing, I am sure she should have arrived to a good NPOV article with sources in both sides. If I knew any administrator who could solve that I could have liked to help but I don't know more than a handfull of editors. I also saw that one of the POV editors has gone after other articles related and deleted them restoring after to a point that was not the point of deletion. Well, good editors are few and the other kind ...they are out there... as people says, a shame though...Thanks for giving a look anyway ℒibrarian2 17:23, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Ernest Emerson FAR

I have started a featured article review for Ernest Emerson at Wikipedia:Featured article review/Ernest Emerson. Your contribution would be appreciated.--Nydas^(Talk) 17:23, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

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) 18:10, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

regarding Jujutsu:

you wrote: "Hi, rather than revert all your hard work myself, I thought I'd let you know that terms in articles should only be linked the first time they appear (exceptions exist for multiple linking in navboxes or infoboxes). So you may want to give jujutsu another look. Sorry, Bradford44 17:44, 5 October 2007 (UTC): "

Really? I did not know that. Thx for the heads up. Can you give me a point of reference in wikipedia's policy guidelines? User5802 17:52, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Just doing some research on this, I can't find any reference in wikipedia's policy on multiple linking in an article. Perhaps this is something that needs to be mentioned to the editors of the help section? Looking at some of the sports featured articles in wikipedia, it seems unclear as to whether anybody is conforming to this activity or not...

The following are some examples:

Formula One, the term Formula Two

Gliding, the term wing

Scotland national football team, the term England

Not trying to fight you on this just trying to determine what wikipedia's policies and the general consensus are. User5802 18:25, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Got your message, good correspondence. I believe limiting the linkage to once per section may be good. User5802 00:12, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Hello :-)

Ok i stoped entering Buza because it really is a stub, but Russian All-Round Fighting is not a stub so it should stay. And in the template Martial arts by country of origin please kets call it Russia and not USSR. Why? Because it wasn't formed in the USSR like in the Russian SFSR, so it should be Russia. Simply writing USSR instead of Russia is the same thing as deleting all European country names and simply writing "European Union". And all those martial arts on their web-sites perfer to call themselves Russian styles. PocketMoon 12:03, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Russian All-Round Fighting is a hybrid martial art. Shure it includes elements from other schools, but it has alot of it's own, and it's own rules. I wouldn't say it was recently created. It was formed in 1998, that's already almost 10 years. Anyway, what do you say if we turn it into a one section: USSR/Russia? PocketMoon 13:40, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

appreciated the information

that you included in the jujutsu article regarding evolution of the term "jujutsu", very interesting User5802 12:13, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, there will be more too come soon. Bradford44 00:03, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

for creating the martial art group page with '{{martialartsproject}}') I'm still trying to learn the ropes on exactly how the templates work User5802 20:02, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

What are your thoughts on the Template:Infobox_koryu? Do you still feel it serves a purpose and has some advantages over the Template:Infobox_martial_art_group? User5802 20:08, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Trivia vs. Lists

You recently placed a trivia box notice on the article Kunoichi. After reading Wikipedia:Trivia sections#What this guideline is not and Wikipedia:Lists, I don't believe the section you are labeling is trivia is actually trivia at all but instead a list of various sources related to the topic in question. Please review the links provided. Artemisboy 22:01, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

MA notability

Cheers for the copy edit, what do you think of what we have so far? --Nate1481( ^t/_c) 08:36, 23 October 2007 (UTC)\\

Kendo

Hi Brad, sorry for the delay, I just saw your comments on my talk page. Sorry but I don't really understand what you are referring to by "One concern is that its borderline copyvio". If you mean the concept and purposes of kendo by the AJKF, I don't know how to express what the recognised governing body states without repeating their statement. Comments welcome.Kendo 66 07:34, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Yoshin

Ah ok my bad - there was only one in the list of Koryu. I evaluated and categorized the article, I suggested the disambiguation page be changed to reflect the other school and maybe a note in each article to refer to the other schools.Peter Rehse 08:23, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

USAF Shihan

Could you take a look at the talk page.Peter Rehse 17:29, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Sosuishi ryu questions answered

I posted the answers on the talk page of SSR. The English references are kinda wrong.... Check it out! Mekugi 08:30, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Ikeda page

Can I ask why you removed the nihongo template from Hiroshi Ikeda? WP:MOS-JP recommends use of the template. Djiann 18:30, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

I've looked at the rest of the MOS-JP page and I don't see where it says you shouldn't use the template for names of people. It's true the examples they give don't use the template, but I don't think that counts as a recommendation as such. Djiann 21:16, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Kyusho Jitsu Page Edits

Hi Brad, I think your recent edits to the K-J page are good ones, and I'd like to suggest another. I'm offering this idea to you acknowldeging your superior experience as a "Wikipedian..."

Under the section: George Dillman and Popular Skepticism includes comments on other K-J organizations. The very title of the section implies controversy, so I propose that we create another section on the page titled: Other Kyusho Jitsu Organizations, or something similar. I don't think it's fair to associate other organizations with Dillman and the related controversy .... the other organizations -- Kyusho International included -- should be judged on their own merits or lack thereof. Guilt by association is not fair.

For what its worth, i know that Evan Pantazi (the founder of KI) studied under Dillman, but he also studied under others. In fact, his karate ranks are primarily from other less controversial karate masters .... Nick Cerio for one. My point is simply that having studied under Dillman (or anyone else) does not in and of itself validate or invalidate one's ability, art, or beliefs.

Personally, I know that Evan believes much of the Chi related stuff that George believes ..... I think it's a bunch of hooey, but my opinion does not count in Wikipedia. While I think it is crap, the article itself should be as fair as possible.

Any of this make sense? Thanks ---- Scanegi (talk) 18:44, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Kukishin Ryu

I did a little chopping on the Kukishin Ryu article. The lineage you had was nice and it took a lot of time, but it was for Hontai Yoshin Ryu and their connection to Kukishin ryu. Sorry to hack it out, but there is a big difference. Their founder was one of the Shihan of Kukishin Ryu, not the ryuso (creator) of Kukishin Ryu which they claim (and can do so by all means). Sorry about that.

Also, I added some information on the talk page. If you feel that more references are needed to the kanji and name, I have them. Mekugi (talk) 13:00, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Kuki Kanji and verification

Yes, it has been independantly verified. It's in the book "Kukishinden Zensho" as well as some others. A reference to the book there might be appropriate. Mekugi (talk) 16:58, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Happy Eating!

File:Pie.jpeg

♠♦♣♥ has given you a fresh pie! Pies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a piping hot pie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Bon appetit!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:GivePie}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Invite

Century Tower

As a current or past contributor to a related article, I thought I'd let you know about WikiProject University of Florida, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of University of Florida. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks and related articles. Thanks!

Barnsensu

		WikiProject Japan Barnsensu Award
		I hereby award this barnsensu to you for your excellent efforts in improving Japan-related articles, especially those related to martial arts. Thanks for all your hard work! ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 01:13, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Sekiguchi Ryu and Sekiguchi Shin Shin ryu

Hi! I noticed that you have being doing a lot of editing on the Sekiguchi Ryu page, one thing I noticed is that you put a comment on there about the "Shin Shin Branch". This confused me, so I thought I would ask: You do know that Sekiguchi Ryu and Sekiguchi Shin Shin Ryu are the same school, one being an abbreviated name...correct?

Thanks! Mekugi (talk) 07:39, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

That's a good reason, but here is the kicker. These aren't branches of the same school...they are totally different schools with different founders and lineages. There were three bearing the name phonetic name, a quick peek in the Bugeiryuha Daijiten "clears it up" fast (or at least as much as possible). There are NUMEROUS schools bearing the name Sekiguchi ryu as well...it seems that more detail might be needed on a single, Sekiguchi page and perhaps moving the Sekiguchi Shinshin Ryu to another page with the same name.

Mekugi (talk) 07:58, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Sosuishi ryu page: Futagami Hannosuke Masaaki or Masanori?

Well, it was right there in front of my nose all the time. The Shadanhoujin Sekiryukan has it on their website as well. Funny...I missed it before!! :) Check it out! http://www16.ocn.ne.jp/~sekiryu/edouzyou.html Mekugi (talk) 15:10, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Kote-kitai

The Isshin-ryū article has a number of words based on -kitai ( kote-kitai, karada-kitai, ashi-kitai and fukubu-kitai ). I cannot find kitai in my Japanese dictionary. Could you give an opinion? Is this a mis-spelling? Thanks! jmcw (talk) 17:36, 3 February 2008 (UTC)