Talk:List of Chinese martial arts

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is part of WikiProject China, a project to improve all China-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other China-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome.
List	This page is a List and does not require a rating on the quality scale.
More information about this article... NA This page is not an article and does not require a rating on the importance scale.

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.	Chinese Manual of Style - Naming conventions Japanese Manual of Style Korean Manual of Style - Naming conventions Biographies Manual of Style
List	This page has been rated as List-Class on the quality scale.

I will try to make this list comprehensive. In general, in order to be included in this list, I would like have the name with the chinese equivalent, it has some external reference and is still being taught. All suggestions welcome.

[edit] Wing Chun

Since this looks like a potential revert war, I figured I'd bring it up here. It sometimes seems trendy for systems to go around calling themselves Neija. Without arguing the merits of the term itself (which is relatively new; most "internal" systems long predate their classification as such), most Chinese systems have Neija aspects, as to many non-Chinese arts. However, most of those arts, despite having strong internal components, are not widely classified as Internal systems. Wing Chun is one such system - there's little doubt that it has a strong internal component, but common convention classifies it as an external system because of its strong external component. -Erik Harris 13:20, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

In that case we will just put it under the alphabetical listing. -- mh 14:38, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] only arts with Wikipedia entry "permitted" on list?

Please share the Wikipedia policy or your reasoning behind deleting arts that have no Wikipedia entry.SmithBlue 16:04, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Probably worth your time to read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Revert before replying. SmithBlue 16:14, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

I think it might because some martial arts forms are non-notable? There are going to be a lot of damage and overlaps if the list is not well-maintained. In the case of I Liq Chuan, one can argue that it stems from a "recent family art". --mh 19:02, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

The heading for non-notable states "This proposal was rejected by the community....You may still find this an essay worth reading." On reading the essay I find nothing that appears to provide reason for deleting a "recent family art". If anyone has another line of reasoning for the deletion of a "recent family art" please share it and the process by which I Liq Chuan was declared a "recent family art". Please relate also why you think it over-rides Wikipedia:Help:RevertingSmithBlue 01:31, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Actually, I googled "I Liq Chuan". Anyway, you have to ask the guy who reverted your edit. --mh 05:03, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Not a Wikipedia guideline, but a WikiProject Martial Arts guideline. See Wikipedia:WikiProject Martial Arts#Lists of martial arts. I believe at one point, I was linking to this in my edit summaries, but it seemed like a lot of effort for little use. -Erik Harris 14:54, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

So "WikiProject Martial Arts guideline", while not even mentioned on the article page is enough in your mind to override Wikipedia:Help:Reverting and the concerns about the effect of reverting raised in it? I suggest you read Wikipedia:Help:Reverting and find a better way of contributing to the maintenance of this list. You could start by including a link to Wikipedia:WikiProject Martial Arts#Lists of martial arts and making clear that entries to the list must conform to those guidlines. SmithBlue 00:55, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

You're right, I didn't realize that the banner was not added to this talk page. Thanks for pointing this out. -Erik Harris 14:19, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

The list has a mixture of Chinese, Hanyu Pinyin, Cantonese text - is there a better way to classify that and prevent repetitions? --mh 06:53, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Listing Founders/Head of System with style

For discussion: Most martial arts are recognized as much by their current grand masters or founders as they are by their name. For example, Jeet Kune Do is inseparable from Bruce Lee. The Wikipedia:WikiProject_Martial_Arts suggests that the founder be listed. My specific concern, of course, is that Fu Jow Pai is often referred to in magazines as "Wai Hong's Fu Jow Pai" and that his name should appear next to the entry. To do this, however, would mean some agreement from other editors of this article; he's probably better known than the system. Either we should begin listing founders or current heads of systems, or they should be removed entirely (including Bruce). JScribner 04:22, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Jeet Kune Do should not list Bruce Lee as founder next to it. I have removed his name to fit with the format applied to all other arts. While JKD may be inseperable from Bruce Lee and Fu Jow Pai from Wai Hong (I'm not particularly familiar with Fu Jow Pai), no art on this page states significant practitioners. I have also removed Lee's name from next to the Wing Chun, as it does not belong there either. (RookZERO 18:35, 6 June 2007 (UTC))

• This was a request for discussion and opinions, not unilateral action. Martial arts are inherently different from other arts, the format of other arts may not be appropriate here. In addition, it may be appropriate to list F/HS for all martial arts on this list, or to create a parallel list based on their names. JScribner 18:58, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

I'd say, if the founder was not a matter of debate - and has a separate article - then list them, I'm not sure how many this will add (mostly modern arts I suspect). Current system heads probably belong only in the article, since they'll change over time and it is easier to maintain that in the article. Approximate date of origin is a good one to put in too, though that then leads to sorting by date and may cause "my art is older than your art" edit wars to put them in the "correct order". -- Medains 21:14, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

I've had a think and changed my mind :) - it would be okay to add these details, but doesn't add much value to the list. -- Medains 21:41, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Ask for edit protection Wing Tsun Old Man

• since Wing Tsun(a traditional Chinese words '詠春'with copy right) and Shaolin Weng Chun Kuen are completely kungfu from two family. It should be claerly seperated. The Wing Chun pages will better be deleted or claimed clearly about that.--Koonleg50 (talk) 09:04, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Once again, Wing Tsun is part of the Wing Chun branch as a whole. Nobody is confusing it with Jee Shim Weng Chun or White Crane Weng Chun. As you have been warned before the last time you were blocked, you have provided no valid references, have been pushing your WP:OR, and have not achieved consensus. Now you're threatening to delete more material based on your WP:OR on a "shaolin weng chun", which further reflects negatively. --Marty Goldberg (talk) 09:08, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

What happened to the Chinese characters that were there before? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rossen4 (talk • contribs) 10:10, 13 January 2008 (UTC)