Talk:Kumdo
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
WikiProject Korea invites you to join in improving Wikipedia articles related to Korea.
|
 |
 |
This page is part of the Wikipedia Martial Arts Project.
Please help ensure that it follows those guidelines as much as is reasonable; |
|
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. |
Contents |
[edit] Copyright problem
This article is a copy of [1]. It is against the copyright law. So I rewrote it. 15:54, 1 March 2006 Michael Friedrich
- "The present form, combining inner strength (gi), the absolute and unbounded swing of the sword (geom), and the use of one's lower back and body (che) is a recent development, and is known as "kikomchae". In tournaments one does not receive a point when striking the opponent unless the blow is accompanied by all three components of kikomchae." This is still a copy of [2] and is against Wikipedia:List of guidelines#Guidelines. Michael Friedrich 08:47 24/04/2006
- Removing wholesale isn't rewriting. I'll restore that lost information, but phrased in my own words and relating it to ki-ken-tai-ichi. — AKADriver ☎ 19:33, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
-
- Sorry but I think you misunderstood. I rewrote the whole article on the 1st of March and removed the copied sentence on the 24th of April. Thanks.Michael Friedrich 11:01 28/04/2006
[edit] The name of this article: Kumdo, Geomdo, or Komdo
As of 1987, there were 32 Romanization proposals published in English articles according to an academic source that I have lost since. Not one of those 32 Romanization proposals included a rendering of "u" for the vowel in "검." This rendering is what has been called the American-enlisted-man's-back-of-the-envelope Romanization as a slap against the ignorance of international spelling conventions that is reflected. Wikipedia guidelines indicate a preference for the Revised Romanization or the McCune-Reischauer Romanization. Without getting into the shortcomings of the Revised Romanization - such as its rendering of this vowel as a historical mistake based on an erroneous assumption about a French spelling (reported in an academic journal edited by David McCann) - it is very clear that the rendering "Kumdo" cannot be used, even if it is favored by certain Korean Komdo teachers in the U.S. who have no knowledge of these issues and give an "off the top of the head" rendering based on phonology idiosyncratic to American English.
The page should be moved and re-directs created. -DoctorW 19:27, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
[edit] My rewrite
The article as I found it was a horrible mess; the English was often too obscure to be understandable, and there was a lot of rather obvious PoV material. I've tried to rewrite it so as to retain everything that was relevant, NPoV, and understandable. I hope that at least it gives a decent starting point for future (constructive) edits.
Incidentally, in some of the discussion above I couldn't really make out what was going on, as no-one was signing or indenting their edits. the impression was of a private argument being carried out in public. Could editors please sign their comments (with ~~~~)? --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 23:38, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
- If the anonymous editors continue to insist on reverting the article to what is clearly a PoV state, especially without having the courtesy to discuss the issues here, they're heading for being blocked from editing and/or the protection of the article. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 11:09, 19 November 2005 (UTC)
[edit] About removing the photo
I've removed the photo("Image:Kendo.JPG|thumb|300px|Komdo") from this page because it has only been copied from the Kendo page.Please be fair.Nobu Sho 22:09, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Frequent non-NPOV edits from anonymous user(s)
The frequent edits from 220.105.x.x and 221.189.x.x IPs adding the link to "WHY DOES KUMDO TELL A LIE?" are getting ridiculous. Will the real slim shady please stand up and explain why you keep adding a link to a clearly biased source? The article already states that modern Kumdo is derivative of Kendo forms brought to Korea during the occupation. Citing a source which unabashedly attacks Kumdo, and Koreans in general, does not add to the quality of the article. Unless someone can come up with a good reason to keep it, I'm going to revert the edit again or possibly ask for mediation. AKADriver 16:44, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Why I reverted this section
- A part of information on the net of South Korea and the apprenticeship of Kumdo insist on the lie when Kumdo is an origin of the kendo.
- When the evidence of their insistences was verified in Japan, a lot of counterfeits were admitted, and the South Korea origin theory was denied completely.
- Moreover, the plagiarism problem of this kendo was taken up in the Japanese kendo league ( International_Kendo_Federation), and fixed as an international fact that it was a Japanese origin. [3]
There are some major problems here, namely:
- While my Japanese is probably worse than the author's English and no insult is intended, we should probably discourage people from indiscriminately adding poorly machine-translated content like this unless they have some new revelation.
- As of now, this whole controversy has been done to death by people who are native or fluent in English. This specific legal battle mentioned is documented in clear English at Haidong Gumdo#Legal controversy.
- NPOV doesn't mean presenting every view (See: WP:NPOV#Undue weight). To this outsider and to anyone reading the version of this article (minus the quoted section) it is very clear that Kumdo began as a local variant of Kendo. It's also very clear to me that only a minority of ultra-nationalist Koreans believe the opposite. Please, please, understand that by giving lip service to this so-called controversy you are only lending legitimacy to these otherwise obscure claims.
I have gone back through the history of this article and, past the original badly-written and short-lived version from 2004 (which only described Haidong Gumdo rather than the entire Kumdo family), every revision since has presented the facts as they are. You are not presenting NPOV. You are manufacturing a controversy that, at least as far as this article is concerned, doesn't seem to exist. — AKADriver ☎ 16:59, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Identity Politics
Is it appropriate to write an encycropedia article based on identity politics? I accept that origin of Tekkondo is disputed. However, what is the point of writing an article which try to insuniate that Komdo is a Korean when Komodo side even admit that Komdo is Kendo? Because I don't care to engage in edit dispute about "turth", I propose to delete anything which is not sourced properly to verifiable sources. Vapour
