Talk:List of breakdance moves

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is part of WikiProject Hip hop, an ongoing effort to improve articles related to hip hop culture and hip hop music. The goal of the project is to bring this article, along with all others to featured status. If you have any questions, concerns or wish to participate you can visit the main project page here.
List This article has been rated as list-Class on the Project's quality scale.
(If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)

List of breakdance moves

Contents

[edit] Fake Moves

Double airflare and Omega bomb are fake moves and it would be better to delete them. it:Utente:Salvatore_Ingala

Don't be so sure, I'm willing to bet someone will pull a double airflare in the near future. I've already seen one-handed elbow airflares.

Maybe, but I think it isn't probable. Until there are no videoclips confirming that, it is a fake move. it:Utente:Salvatore_Ingala

I agree, until the move has actually been accomplished, it should not be listed as it is only theoretical until accomplished. Furthermore, the move should be done on flat ground as well. Omega Bomb has been accomplished but only on plyo, on flat ground no one can even come close. Therefore, it is just not very appropriate to list moves like that. Jamesters 06:43, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Contributions

i feel like helping clean this article up. I recently changed the definition of a Gainer. it used to be "The way you do this is that you run forward (not too fast). Try to imagine yourself kicking a soccer ball on the right leg, launch your hands and legs and your body up, and then grab your legs. Once you grab your legs you end up tucking your legs to your chest. The more you tuck your body the higher you get. All momentum comes from your legs. When you are in mid air, try to imagine yourself as if you are doing a backflip by grabbing your legs, that's it." but I felt that definition was not very accurate for quite a few reasons. I'll list a couple reasons. It says, "Imagine yourself kicking a soccer ball on your right leg" this suggests that you can only jump with your left leg, and that of course is not true. It also says, "all momentum comes from your legs" that's also not true because your arms help contribute to momentum as well. It says, "The more you tuck, the higher you get." Nope, it only makes the appearance of getting higher, but how tightly you tuck makes no difference on how much height you get. I also felt this definition of a Gainer was more like a short tutorial. It's not a big deal, but I think the definitions are more supposed to be to define the move. Anyways, here's the definition I put: "Technically, a gainer is a Back Flip in which you gain forward distance with. There are a few various ways this can be done but the most common (and likely the most impressive) way to do this is as follows: you jog forward, not too fast or it will take away from the jump (25% of max speed is generally a manageable speed to jog with that has an impressive effect on the gainer). Then, you jump off one leg while your other leg is swung to help give you momentum. You, of course, also swing your arms to help give you momentum with the jump. Tucking your knees to your chest after jumping is practically mandatory with a Gainer (though there are exceptions)." Welp, I'll try to get around to cleaning up some more sections of this article as well. Jamesters 06:43, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

Nice, but people, try leaving your signatures: "~~~~" Thechamelon 11:15, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

sorry those last 2 comments were both mine, i didn't know how to leave a sig tho but i do now, and i edited the last 2 so a sig is on them. Jamesters 06:43, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

ok I made a definition for the previously undefined Back Layout and it is as follows: "This is a variation of a Back Flip. It is a Back Flip in which the knees do not bend. I'll try to put it more simply, your legs stay straight throughout the whole Back Flip, there is no tucking invovled whatsoever. Furthermore, your legs do not come towards your chest otherwise it would be considered a Back Pike which is another variation. To do a Back layout, you must arch during the flip in order for the unbent legs to come around. Although, the legs should not come whipping around otherwise it would be a Back Whip, which is another Back Flip variation. I know, I know, this sounds confusing, but even thoguh the variations of a back Flip may seem so small, they make a big difference, therefore a Back Layout should not be confused with a Back Pike nor a Back Whip. Recap: With a Back Pike, your unbent legs come towards your chest. With a Back Whip, your legs whip around powerfully, rather than just coming around smoothly and naturally. That's how a Back Pike and Back Whip differ from a Back Layout."

Although, I'm wondering if this definition overdefines it? I jsut wanted to be specific, but anyways, maybe a seperate definition should also be given for Back Pike and Back Whip as will. In fact if I did defitions for those 2 moves, then I would be able to shorten Back Layout's definition drastically simply by saying at the end, "Not to be confused with Back Pike nor Back Whip, see definitions for those 2 moves to understand why."

Anyone got an opinion about this? I want somone's approval. Come on now peopel we got to come together to make this article professional! :) Jamesters 06:58, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

I think I'll go ahead and do it soon even without anyone's officil approval, it seems like a good idea in my opinion. Anyways, in other news, I'm trying to organize the Power Moves section into categories that way it's well, better organized. I hope you guy's find it a good idea. Jamesters 07:56, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

Jamesters, I think you should do bigger edits at one time, than do many smaller edits. Remember that other people are looking at the watchlist to see what have been done the last days. It's very difficult and inconveinient to look at all the minor edits. Some of them may even be unseen. Same goes to this talkpage; regardless of the "less-formal-tone" on talkpages, keep the notes on-subject. Just a tip.. :) Thechamelon 18:28, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

haha, sorry I'm kinda new at wiki. Anyways, ya I actually learned a lot defining moves, I found there was quite a bit I did not know. Also, I'm somewhat of a perfectionist I guess you could say, that's the reason I would make small edits (and somewhat pointless I'll admit). Anyways, it seems someone made this waaaaayyy better since I last updated. I'm guessing you thechameleon did all that. I kind of have other projects I am workign on in life which is the reason I stopped making updates for a little while. This seriously looks so much nicer though, I'm gonna give it a more thorough look over when I get a chance. Jamesters

[edit] "Mini-" Moves

I took out the definition of "Miniflare" which is a single rotation of Flare. For ome reason this definition was in there, but there was no definition for Turn Table which is a single rotation of a Windmill. I'm not saying that Turn Table should have been definined, I'm just saying I don't think it's necessary to give names for a single rotation of a Flare or Windmill. If you do that then you've got to give a definition for a single rotation of a Halo, Airflare, Headspin, and so forth. I find it unnecessary and that's why I took out "Miniflare" from the list of moves. I know it kinda seems like I'm taking on this project on my own, but if anyone has anything to comment, feel free. Jamesters 18:35, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

Hi, Jamesters! Hmm, you bring a good question. I'm not sure if we should drop the familiar terms to get order and system, or not. What about adding "miniflares" under flare? "Flares are done like this... ... a miniflare is a single rotation of...." Seems okey? About you taking this project on your own; doesn't opset me (I started the page..) and I think everyone is happy with anyone who contrributes. Unless someone object, keep on, we may be watching even if it doesn't show... ;) Thechamelon 14:56, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

haha ya I mean of course anyone is free to contribute, it just kinda seems like I'm the only one that is, which is no problem. But ya, I may put in some of the more familiar terms even if I don't agree with them, I guess I'm just not focusing on that right now. Right now, I guess I'm mostly working on organizing the Power Moves section. But I'll be sure to list any important updates I make and I'll be checking this discussion in case anyone else adds stuff. Jamesters 22:02, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

I'm currently working on giving good definitions for the Swipe section. by the way if I don't update anything for a while it's simply because I've got other things I'm doing in life. Jamesters 22:13, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

All right I added a "Flips" section. Instead of having a defintion for Back Tuck, Pike, and Layout, as well as Front Tuck, Pike, and Layout, I thought it would be better to just define Tuck, Pike, and Layout. It just seems simpler that way to me. Also, I gave a simple definition for Front Flip and Back Flip, it is short but sweet because it defines what they are perfectly. But I'm wondering if it'd actually be better to give a little more detailed description. I'm not sure. I also thoguht it would be cool if sometime we'd be able to give video clips for moves, that'd be awesome! Although, it may be too complicated to work on doing right now until this article gets real clan and organized. Anyways, I'll try to work on the Flips section some more. Jamesters

There I pretty much completed the Flip section I think. There are sooooo many different types of flips but I only included ones that are commonly done by breakers. Tricksters often do a wide variety more types of flips but it just would be too complicated to include them all because you just don't see breakers do a lot of those moves and a lot of them are just slight variations. I mean, I saw a guy do Double Back Flips on flat ground so ya, it's possible that breaker could bust Double Backs some day, but some flips are just too uncommon amongst breakers to include them in my opinion. Anyways, the Flips section is kind of unorganized too right now. Anyways, I've got stuff to do, I'll likely check back up on this project in a few days. Jamesters
Arj! I attempted to organize the Flips section. It is in better order than it was, but I still feel like it needs some work. Oh well, I'm off to bed for now. Jamesters

I removed some of the moves from the "Definition still needed" section. Some I removed because they have now been defined and 3 I removed because I'm not quite sure about them and I'll explain why. They are: Belly Mill, Laydown 540, and One Handed Cart Wheel.

  • Belly Mill, isn't that the same as a Superman Windmill or maybe a Forearm Windmill? I could be wrong though, I'll try to find out.
  • Laydown 540, I'm almost certain that it is the same as a Corkscrew but for some reason it was given a different name by certain bboys. Maybe it would be nice to include this name next to Corkscrew.
  • One Handed Cart Wheel, is it really necessary to define this? That would be like defining a One Footed Back Flip. All a One Footed Back Flip is a Back Flip done off of one foot, while a One Handed Cart Wheel is a Cart Wheel done with one hand.

If anyone has any input about that, feel free to say. Jamesters

I filled in the rest of the Swipes section. We practically have all the moves defined now. There are like 9 moves at the bottom that need to be defiend supposedly. I actually would not be able to define those moves, but after that this article simply needs a bit more organization and then it probably won't need the sign telling it to be cleaned up anymore. Jamesters

[edit] Article Format

In case you didn't know, the "Show preview" button a the bottom of the page lets you do minor changes one-by-one or step back and look at the changes without making an actual save. It could help cut down on your the number of edits. I changed the article's format pretty dramatically when I wikified it a week or so ago; I shouldn't do that again, but I will continue revising many descriptions so that they are understandable and follow the form:

  • Move How-to description. Points of interest.
    • Related move

Draeco 20:19, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Proposed New Format

OK, so I'm having a change of heart. Since the article is called "List of breakdance moves," it seems that a description of the move should come first along with points of interest, then a how-to description secondarily. I'd like to hear everyone's opinion before I actually make such a large change. The format would be something like: Draeco 00:49, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

  • Windmill Description of a windmill.
How-to How to perform a windmill.
  • Belly Mill Quick explanation of the variant.

[edit] Proposed Wiki-listing

  • Actually, I think this list should be more of a wiki-list (meaning less text, and links to articles listed in the list.) This only works if the listed words have enough information to function as independent articles. I did actually start this list, but I admit it wasn't that great an idea... Moreover, if we split this "multi-article" we can place more info (how-to, desc, links, etc.) on the different techniques. (In the start, we should maybe group minor techniques? Such as "Windmill", "Flare", etc. Someone agreee? Thechamelon 21:07, 18 November 2005 (UTC)
  • Support That's a fantastic idea. Draeco 17:53, 19 November 2005 (UTC)
  • How exactly should we name the offshoot articles? I think Breakdance basic moves and Breakdance power moves would be a good start, as Thechamelon said. (Maybe breakdancing instead of Breakdance?) We almost have enough to make Flares, Mills, etc full articles. I personally have been wanting to write more but have held back because the article already was so big. Draeco 03:05, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
  • Hmm, just remember that after a while, we have to split basic/power moves anyway.. We can save time and effort by splitting into flares/mills/etc., right away. I do agree about the change of this article's name. (I'm not an expert in English, but "Breakdancing" sounds like the act of breaking, not the phenomenon "Breakdance"). However, wouldn't we then have to change [Breakdancing] -> [Breakdance]? Thechamelon 16:12, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
  • OK, I think "breakdancing" is the appropriate choice by that logic, and I agree. So how should we name all of the subsidiary articles? Here's a proposal:

Breakdancing

List of Breakdancing Moves (We should keep this article, maybe/not move to "List of breakdancing moves" just to keep the terminology consistent)
Breakdancing basic moves
6-step
etc
Breakdancing power moves
Flare (breakdancing move)
Windmill (breakdancing move)
Swipe (breakdancing move)
1990 (breakdancing move)
etc

I think each of the titles above should have their own article, even though power and basic moves articles might necessarily be somewhat shorter and more vague. I would also try to keep the format consistent across all move articles, say perhaps with a short intro, "Description," "Step-by-step," "Variations," and "External Links" sections. Everybody monitoring this page please opine, we're about to make a big change, and special thanks for all your input Thechamelon. Draeco 22:38, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

  • I totally agree with you Draeco, except that I think it will be unessecary to have Breakdancing power moves. It's enough with mention it on the separate articles "This technique is considered a power move." Furthermore, it will also be listed in the List of Breakdance moves as a power move, in the same system as you have proposed. What do others here have to say? (P.s. Excuse my weak English grammar... It's a time ago since I had English in school... (Norwegian)) Thechamelon 19:24, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Video Clips?

Hey what's a site I can upload video clips on for free? I can provide video clips that give an example of the corresponding move so that people can click that link and see what the move looks like, that way they don't have to go just by definition alone. I'm kinda busy with work right now, but I think in January I'll have a lot of time and I could provide clips of me doing practically every move in the flips section as well as some others elsewhere.

Is this a good idea? and if so, what's a good site to upload to?

Jamesters

Eh, don't think videoclips is regular here on wikipedia. Have you seen it on any other article? Videoclips bring many new problems with codec, file format, size, motive, etc... But Jamesters? Look at this discussion page (compared to other discussion pages). :) If you are a little unsure of something, you can learn something from the community portal, wiki manuals and see what others do. For instance, your "update" over is a little unecessary...Hope you understand :) Thechamelon 22:10, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

Thechamelon, those problems would be issues if the vids were actually part of the article, but Wikipedia doesn't really do video clips imbedded in the page. We could definitely link to outside sources as Jamesters suggests; there is precedent for that even in the general Breakdancing article. Such links usually go in an "external links" or "See also" section, but if we were going to link for every major move, we could perhaps put something in each sub-section (though I know of no precedent for that). It's much more common to imbed images, and I've thought about doing that for some time. The freezes in particular lend themselves well to pix, but the power moves...not so much. Draeco 00:25, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Mission vs. encyclopedia

People, please remember that Wikipedia is not a How-To-Book. Every reference to techniques should be completely neutral. Meaning that there shoudn't say "Then, place your legs on top of your head."... Secondly, please keep your own art presented objectively without placing this art in a particularly bright light... Just remember Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not Thechamelon 16:42, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Flips

Someone has put a lot of work into the flips section (User:Jamesters I believe), and that is greatly appreciated, but I don't think it deserves such an exhaustive discussion here. In fact, the very first line of the section states that "in bboying it is a single, non-foundational facet" (italics mine). I think we should move the entire flips section to an article of its own like List of flips or Types of flips or List of flip types, etc. We definitely don't want to lose all of that information, and we should still reference the moved article with a few lines and a link, probably under the other moves section. Draeco 18:52, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Hmm, yes. We can't call it Flips (dance) since many other arts and sports use these. I do not like List of flips/types since there are 3-4 sentences on each move. What about Flip (with an disambiguation-link)? I'm not familiar with other uses of this word in the English language, but if there are no other uses of it, it should be moved under that headline I think. Also, what about Suicide (dance), Kick (not Kick (dance)), Freeze (dance) and maybe Spin (dance)?
I would argue for Flip (gymnastics) because it seems a gymnastics move first and foremost. Breakers happen to incorporate them like many other gymnastics moves, but they aren't anywhere near a foundational breakdancing move like the flare (also borrowed from gymnastics), whereas they are pretty essential to gymnastics....As for those other article names, I think they are a good idea, but I see us approaching a major change here, where we move this whole page to a more appropriate heading like "Breakdancing moves" and write a new "List of breakdance moves" article that is purely list-format and links (like a list really should be). I actually think this would be best. Draeco 19:50, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
Agree on Flips (gymnastics) though some of the flips are not done in the sport (can of cource be fixed by having a subtitle Breakdance flips.) I disagree on the list-moving. Remember that some of the moves does not need a separate article (and hence, link). A clean list would only be possible and needed when there are enough information on every move on the list. Don't use any effort on that now. It IS a goal for me too, but we are only two... We can't make that huge changes together with the already ongoing separation. :) Thechamelon 20:19, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
Yes, even though I wrote most of that, I thought the same thing to myself that it is probably a bit more than necessary. Now there is a page called "tricking moves" that deals with flips and kicks, however it is not well established at this point. Maybe the flip definitions I've given here can also be added there and it can be linked to this. Although, once the "tricking moves" page becomes more developed it might be too exhaustive of a list itself to be linked to in this article. I mean, there would be numerous tricks not popularly associated with breakdancing and someone wanting to know of popular flips and kicks used among breakdancers would get lost in such a list. Haha, I really don't know what to do because of course you don't want to try to define every single type of flip because there would be too many that are rather unrelated with breakdancing, so you'd likely just want to name the more popular ones amongst breakdancers. So I think the list I provided may have even been a bit much but pretty close to a happy medium overall I think.
So you guys are thinking it needs its own page though right? Hmmm, I don't know if it'd be appropriate to link to "tricking moves", maybe it'd be best to create brand new pages associated with the styles of breakdancing. Fopr instance, if this page was renamed "breakdancing moves" then there could be another page named "breakdancing power moves" which this article would link to. So then there could be a "breakdancing flip moves" article as well so that we'd be able to define just the flips that are more associated with breakdancing there. We could create an extremely organized, professional, and easy to use system like this maybe. Um, what do you guys think? haha. Jamesters

[edit] Toprock

I don't agree with this article's definition of toprocking. From my experience toprocking is actually a unique dance style, and a substyle to breaking, with moves featuring lots of bouncy and fast footwork inspired by other dance styles such as uprocking, tap dancing and various latin- and african dance styles. Today, many people mix toprocking with original uprock moves, and sometimes incorporate styles such as new school hip hop, and in rare occassions funk styles such as popping and locking. However, in terms of moves, there's still a distinction between toprocking and uprocking and an even clearer distinction between toprocking and the many other upright street dance styles out there that have their own history and feel, such as popping, locking and krumping. Though such styles can of course be mixed with toprocking (or any other dance style for that matter) I would not say that they are toprocking, and I would only consider toprocking unique to breakdancing.

This discussion actually involves Template:Breakdancing_moves and pieces of the breakdance article as well.

- Wintran 02:21, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Well, you make a good argument and I can't really add anything meaningful since I'm more of a powerhead who knows very little about toprock. If you think we should remove those dance styles from the Template:Breakdancing moves, that works for me. Draeco 21:43, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
Ok, I removed the dance styles section from Template:Breakdancing moves and as a replacement created a new template called Template:Street dance with links to the street dance styles mentioned in this article, including breakdancing. Feel free to check it out. I also shortened the toprock section in this article as it doesn't need to be filled with a list of all other street dance styles. Hopefully this will address the issue in the section below ("Stop fronting like breaking is everything") as well. Wintran 23:34, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Stop fronting like breaking is everything

I think y'all have done a disrespect to many of the moves in this scheme called "breakdancing moves". Many of these evolved outside of the bboy circles and have thier own history. However, they are cerainly connected in the sense that most came from disenfranchised youth getting down, so I suggest changing the name to "street dancing". I ain't gonna change it cause y'all have put alot of work into this, but if y'all really respect these dances, you'd make the change.

Which moves did you have in mind? Certainly breakdance moves and styles come from many different sources, as your comment suggests, but they have been incorporated into the wider breakdance movement over time. This article (in my mind at least) attempts to describe some of the most widely-know moves employed in the breakdancing movement as it is described in the Breakdancing main article. That article describes a breakdancing that is still alive and evolving, and is not confined to only the earliest or "purest" form of breakdancing. Even less should this list/article be confined. Having said all of that, I agree with you on some minor moves like Butterfly kick, which I personally have never seen even once in a battle, and do not consider to be a common breakdance move. However, I haven't challenged it out of respect for others' contributions, and because I think the list still needs to move toward being more comprehensive before we start parsing out superfluous content. Draeco 14:17, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
I'm also unsure of what he means, but he might be referring to Template:Breakdancing moves and the "Dance styles" section. If so I agree with him that these dance styles (popping, locking, krumping etc) should not be called breakdancing moves. They can of course be practiced by breakdancers, and sometimes combined with toprocking to create a more spectacular show, but they're not really a part of breakdancing. I would rather call them related dances than refer to them as substyles or moves of breakdancing. Sorry if I'm repeating myself from my comment above on the toprock section. -Wintran 15:16, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Multiple page move

The above pagemoves have been requested here. Please comment below.
Several days later, nobody seems to care, so I'll start moving. - Draeco 03:22, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../l/i/s/Talk%7EList_of_breakdance_moves_bf03.html"