User talk:Bradford44/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Bradford44. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Welcome!

Hello, Bradford44, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! - CrazyRussian talk/email 10:24, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

hi there

Welcome to the wikipedia aikido page. as you're probably well aware, there are 'insert topic here' geeks hovering over the changes on just about every page, and I couldn't help but notice your changes. Editing wikipedia is easy, editing wikipedia well, so that you 'harmonize' with what others have written, is an art form, much like aikido. I have to say though, that I don't think that this text:

At the most literal level, "aikido" could refer to two opponents' individual energy joining together in conflict. At another level, it could refer to the functional manner in which aikidoka are trained to resolve conflict; by joining their energy with that of their opponent in order to control and redirect it. At a philosophical level, the founder believed that aikido was a way to reconcile all of the differences of the world, so in that sense "aikido" could mean "the way to unite the universal spirit." In the context of aikido, the character "ai" is frequently interpreted to imply that any meeting or union would be "harmonious." This leads to the interpretation "the way of spiritual harmony," or "the art of peace."

adds anything to what was already there. I'm not saying what was written before was grand and wonderful, i didn't write that either, so no favoritism here. I definitely think that this paragraph detracts from a clear understanding of aikido, which is admittedly hard to define. Also, please note that the full details of Ueshiba's enlightenment experience are on his wiki page, if you want to add all the 'legend has it...'etc. things, go ahead. My way of looking at that is, why bother? Should we edit the paul bunyon and greek mythology sections to include lots of 'some believed that zeus..." I mean, people aren't morons, they don't need you to tell them what facts are and aren't, especially since no human is actually capable of knowing or verifying what is 100% true about ANYTHING.

Just wanted to warn you before Prhese or I changed it back. I'm also having trouble understanding how you are putting so much emphasis on the etymology of 'aikido' when you have such a low level of japanese knowledge and ability yourself?Wwilson 1 17:40, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Hi - I've given Wayne a bit of grief over basically the same thing. It is very difficult trying to divest personal beliefs about what aikido is or isn't - whats true about the aikido you practice and what is generally true about aikido. This is true for me, Wayne and you. Wayne is much more into the spiritual than I am or at least in a different way - hence we have butted heads a number of times. Firstly with the general argument I think he is right - at least about too much emphasis. He also has I think a bit more background in Japanese having lived here - I have the suspicion its better than my own (ok mine is pretty poor). Yes I can see how his last paragraph was a little harshly worded but personally I would just let it slide. Wayme by the way can be convinced by good argument - I've managed.

The attack in the picture was a tsuki to the throat. Hanmi taisabaki to the side slapping the blade away with the leading hand while the lagging arm goes back, up and over. This is accompanied by a very hard body check. It is the third technique of Shodokan's tachi dori sequence in the Koyu goshin no kata.Peter Rehse 05:00, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Tenkan

Me again - could you have another look at the taisabaki article. The six basic steps may be in your aikido but not generally. Also tenkan is not unique to aikido - its a term also used in judo. If I am not mistaken the original entry was by a judoka.Peter Rehse 04:48, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

PerfectPeter Rehse 00:04, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Japanese martial arts

I have to say I am really impressed by your efforts on the article. I expected it to take much longer to flesh out. Thanks. Peter Rehse 01:49, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

No sweat about the jujutsu portion - I always write more and trim later even in real life. One of the things I really like about Wikipedia is its organic nature much like my martial arts training. I like to let things take their natural course within reasonable constraints and in the beginning those constraints are pretty loose. I am just please that the article is growing in a good way - I'm prepared to wait for perfection. In about an hour I'm running a 5 hour training aikido training session - I wish I had more time to work on articles but generally I'm almost forced to do a touch here and there - cheering from the sidelines.Peter Rehse 02:13, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Happy New Year - did you see the comments on the Aikido peer review?Peter Rehse 00:38, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Dojo-cho

Lots of these titles have a lot of shimmy room but I think dojo-cho fits perfectly. Dojo-cho and chief instructor don't have to be the same person. In my group I am considered both but imagine if you will a person that owns a dojo (mats, changing room, even runs the karate classes) wants to introduce an aikido program and managaes to get a good instructor. Well the latter would be the Chief Instructor of Aikido and the other remains dojo-cho. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by PRehse (talk • contribs) 00:23, 29 January 2007 (UTC).

Maniwa Nen-ryū

This school is mentioned a number of times in text - I figure it must be important but I don't know anything about it. If you have an idea could you create at least a stub.Peter Rehse 09:53, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

You are a God - thanks.Peter Rehse 00:08, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Jigoro Kano article

Greetings Bradford44! I don't think we've had the pleasure to exchange messages before.

Thanks for the tips on the Kano article which was once again in terrible shape due to copywrite infringement but I've been working on it the last couple of days and will continue to do so.

As for the use of Japanese characters in an introduction I'd didn't see anything suggesting that Japanese characters were more suitable for the body of the article rather than the introduction but perhaps I'm missing the relevant quote there. Thus far where I've been tempted to use the chracters at all to translate an important term I have just done so in the instance of the term's first use.

Any suggestions for how to handle them here?

I felt I would use them as the meaning of 'Kodokan' is translated slightly inaccurately in far more instances than it is accurately, if I just changed the English I thought I was sure to challenged. Translating the characters I thought would make their interpretation clearer.

Thoughts?--Mateo2006 21:17, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Greetings Bradford,

Thanks for the feedback. I think that the suggestions you put forward make perfect sense and I'll do my best to implement them into the final form. I could see that your ideas would make for a smoother read.

I envision working on this one bit by bit over the next week when I can squeeze time in.

Thanks--Mateo2006 21:46, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Aikido Styles

Hi Brad - I think the blurb on Aikido styles should be as short as possible. Way back it was multiple lines for multiple groups and it looked real ugly. I tried fro a time to keep them limited to one line but settled for two. Perhaps a stub for Tendoryu Aikido would be more appropriate.Peter Rehse 04:49, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Oh yeah - any opinions about my comments on the peer review page.Peter Rehse 04:50, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Aikido has been submitted to FAC. Lets take it that final mile.Peter Rehse 02:27, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Founder of Isshin-ryu kusarigamajutsu

Hey :-). I noticed yer article Nen-ryu states that Nen Ami Jion did NOT foundIsshin-ryu kusarigamajutsu. And on the latter article it says otherwise. The whole discussion seems very complex and its hard to prove anything it seems. The Bugei Ryuha Daijiten states, that nen Ami Jion is the originator of Isshin-ryu, and of course although the Bugei Ryuha Daijiten isnt infallible, it is confusing nonetheless for readers if we have multiple entries on multiple articles stating different opinions of the foundation of Isshin-ryu. I have no other info than that of the BRD and what the SMR-tradition teaches regarding Isshin-ryu. So I suggest we modify our respective entries to be as neutral as possible and not deal in absolutes. We refrain from stating it WAS or WASN'T created by Nen Ami Jion. Fred26 10:32, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Looks good to me. :-) Fred26 10:44, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Aikido and Katana

Yes Aikido should be A-class but I was loath to promote because I think the higher one goes the more removed the promoter should be from the editing process. In any case - come what may I was going to pop it up to A-class at the end of FA-review although it could have been done after the peer review. OK I promoted it - it has definately progressed substantially since the GA review.

As for the Katana article if you think it is not GA material by all means put it up for review. The instructions are obtained by clicking review in the GA box. Be interesting to see what happens. Peter Rehse 00:59, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks and a question

Thanks for your kind words about the Emerson article...by all means vote on it if you get a chance! Is it ok for me to promote it to A Class? I did a significant amount of work on that article?--Mike Searson 19:57, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Peer Review and Delisting

For peer review please take a look at Wikipedia:Peer review. The entry can now be found here Wikipedia:Peer review/Kashima Shinden Jikishinkage-ryū/archive1, I'll leave it to you to monitor. I've also delisted Sumo and Katakana. With respect to a martial arts peer review project I think it is enough to list articles in the Template:Mabox and of course remove them after a month or so of the last comment. I think there is real benefit to having a broader peer review then just martial artists.Peter Rehse 07:54, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Rating KSJR

Thanks for the work onKashima Shinden Jikishinkage-ryu , please have a look at the latest discussion on Talk:Kashima_Shinden_Jikishinkage-ryū SvGeloven 13:44, 11 March 2007 (CET)

Just curious. Is anything being done with respect to the peer review.Peter Rehse 10:41, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

That's the point I did add it as you requested and made some comments - just click on the highlighted peer review in the previous line.Peter Rehse 05:23, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Aikido Photos

Jun - the owner of aikiweb has privately said that if there are any pictures in the aikiweb gallery that the Aikido article could use I should let him know. I think we are looking for action shots that clearly show technique and look good at the same time. Could you take a look and let ME know of any that strike your fancy and then I will give him a list early next week.Peter Rehse 00:59, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

The Bo Page

Would these links be good for the Bo page? http://www.martialarm.com/weapons/weapons-bo-staff.html http://ejmas.com/jmanly/articles/2003/jmanlyart_wolfcosta_0203.htm PLease let me know. Neptunekh 15:31, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Could you help me write this article?

Hello,

I was wondering if you would be willing to help me write either Seikichi_Iha or Shorin-ryu_Shido-kan.Tkjazzer 21:48, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Japanese expertise

For your information, Happy B has also modified the Dan rank page rank list. As I am not very well versed in Japanese I have left the changes. Please could you look at them.

Rednaxela 17:31, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Info boxes

Bradford, I loved the additions of info boxes you've done to some of the articles that I have also contributed to. Really improves the 'at a glance' information and look of the articles. Best--Mateo2006 16:47, 27 May 2007 (UTC)