Talk:Goshin Jujitsu

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Martial arts Portal
This page is part of the Wikipedia Martial arts Project.

Please use these guidelines and suggestions to help improve this article
if you think something is missing, please help us improve them!

You may also wish to read the project's Notability guide.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Articles for deletion This article was nominated for deletion on 14 November 2007. The result of the discussion was No concensus.

Should there really be a techniques list here? It's good that you have a lot of material, but I think that a technique-by-technique rundown may be too much. Why not just have general subsections on technique types? Joe routt 04:24, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Where was it founded and by whom.Peter Rehse 07:06, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Shorten and merge?

I think the step by step instructions are too much. Can this article be shortened and merged? {or just shortened?). We need comments from more knowledgeable Jujitsu editor perhaps. --Stormbay (talk) 18:48, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Response from the Author

I object to the assertion that 'step by step' instructions are listed. Citing techniques are not 'step by step' instructions, and the specific citations of techniques, in my opinion, are an important and specific differentator between systems. Aikido has no punches, for example (and as far as I'm aware, no kicks). Karate has punches but no throws. Judo has throws and sweeps, but no throws. And because Judo is a sport, is it inappropriate to cite specific rules? I will obtain comments on this article from other experts, but a lot of people that I know read this and found it informative. And this article specifically avoids problematic areas of other Wiki articles about claims that any single person invented the system, etc. This is a street-oriented style that is widely practiced (i.e., not specific to a single school) particularly in the Midwest United States and in the UK, and although it has a great many similarities to other systems, it also represents a distinct application and purpose.

I also strongly object to the assertion on the delete discussion that this article is only there to promote a 'new' fighting style. This article makes no such claims of being new, and in fact, this style has been taught by this specific name in Cleveland since 1976 (for example). However - That type of information was deliberately left out of the article to avoid potshots like this. While specific schools will have their own lineage, there really isn't a single creator of this system, so to speak, that I'm aware of. --Hillcrestama (talk) 19:00, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

As the originator of the article, could you provide the main sources for your material? Also, you should expect that serious editing of this article will occur as part of the usual process. --Stormbay (talk) 04:35, 28 February 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Another Response from the Author

Guys, this is unfair in several repsects. Yesterday the issue was 'notability' and, per the discussion on deletion, a baseless accusation was made on the claim of false-invention. The article intended to describe how a Goshin Jujitsu system trains, and why it is different from other Jujitsu-based systems such as Aikido or Aiki Jujitsu without making it seem like the article was, in-turn, trying to bash the other systems. So yesterday I added a comment at the top that there is no single creator of Goshin Jujisu (unlike Judo, for example).

Somebody asked for 'expert' comment, I added a reference to the AJJIF website (in proper wiki format) which is the governing body for traditional and combat Jujitsu showing accreditation for the people that originally reviewed this article even before it was posted on Wikipedia. And then this article was slapped with another warning about 'sources.' I would like to know exactly who the wiki-administrators think is a verifiable source for this subject.

I understood from the initial submission that the article may be edited. And I will attempt gather more sources. And attempt to describe the key differences between other Jujitsu and Jujitsu-based systems.

--Hillcrestama (talk) 12:26, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Further editing

The work by Nate1481 has made a positive impact on the article. I think sections 2,3,4, are too detailed and need to be shortened and also edited for tone. Third party sources attesting to the importance of the subject matter are still needed to deal with the notability tag. An expert inside Wikipedia might be able to provide some direction there. Any thoughts? --Stormbay (talk) 23:34, 28 February 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Lots of Citations Added By Author

Regarding third party citations, I added citations for schools & lineage at the top (for each country and region listed) as uncontestable proof that this is not a self-invented and 'new' system and is a system taught by in at least 3 countries, as well as nearly all the other citation-requests in the article. I'd like to state that I strongly support Wikipedia's effort to increase verifiability, but I'd also like to know that there is a path to the end of the notability issue. I have received a lot of positive comments on this article from Goshin/Aiki Jujitsu practitioners, and I want to make sure that a decision on notability isn't being made by somebody that decides it's not notable just because "they haven't heard of it." --Hillcrestama (talk) 10:34, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

'hey haven't heard of it' is true of many things but the point of notability is that if you want to find out about it you can. The biggest current problem is sourcing is mostly from the styles website, (hence the primary sources tag) other then sources related to the style (e.g. written by a practitioner) some mention in a book or magazine woudl be a good start. --Nate1481(t/c) 12:12, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Further Updates

I have addressed every citation request in the article, and removed 2 quotes and changed them to references, and added further intra-wiki links. In the spirit of verifiability, I would appreciate Wikipedia administrators to cite their credentials and expertise so that they can be verified. This article has information credited to sources recognized by the AJJIF, for example. For people interested in Jujitsu, this is more than a good start (e.g., more happens in the world than is written about in Black Belt magazine). I am, however, just the webmaster and I don't get paid for any of this. --Hillcrestama (talk) 12:30, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Lots more, BB is an example of a source that covers marital arts and people have usually heard of, I could have said Fighters only or Martial Arts Illustrated My first art was with the World Ju-Jitsu Federation, there is no article on them and they also would probably be notable, but finding any sourcing that's not from a club is a pain. Especially on history, most of which I know thorough word of mouth or from unreliable sources, so I didn't right one. Some source from anywhere, a mention in a documentary, a biography of someone who studied it or an article newspaper (ideally nations al or regional but local would be better than nothing) would help. Using the site as sources for direct quotes is fine but things like claims of who has used it need secondary sources. I have re-written part one paragraph to show how you can phrase things less contentiously. --Nate1481(t/c) 14:59, 3 March 2008 (UTC)