Shinbudo was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 22 September 2013 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Gendai budō. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here. |
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Gendai budō article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I'm led to wonder how accurate this is. I've heard it claimed that the opposite is, in a way, true: that koryu is more about individual instruction, as opposed to the large-scale class instruction that is common in gendai budo. -- GenkiNeko 04:04, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
Peter made some formatting changes that I'd like to change back so that the article will be consistent with WP:MOS-JP, but wanted to post them here so we can discuss it first.
1. There is a list of martial arts styles under the heading "Scope and Tradition" that include
Accoding to the manual of style, all non-loanwords should be italicized. Now, I can accept that aikido, judo, karate, and kendo are all loanwords, but would argue that all of the rest of the above should be italizized.
2. (Still under the heading "Scope and Tradition") According to the manual of style, Japanese born prior to the first year of Meiji (1868), should be written with their family name first. As such (because he was born in 1860), it should be "Kanō Jigorō", and not "Jigorō Kanō."
Well with respect to 1 - if it is linked no need for italics (suspenders and belt) and 2 - Jigaro Kano is known for what he did in the modern era - the name is consistent with the Judo and biogrphical articles. Peter Rehse 01:04, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
You are correct. I've reverted this article - I'll keep it in mind when checking others. Peter Rehse 00:15, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
The Japanese usually consider nine specified arts gendai budo, those that are members of Nippon Budo Kyogikai. Sumo is one of these nine. I don't find a reference atm and so I don't change in the article, but compare what it says in the article sumo: "The Japanese consider sumo a gendai budō (a modern Japanese martial art), though the sport has a history spanning many centuries." Considering sumo a gendai budo is hardly wrong. Rather, we should understand that the concept was coined at a specific time and to the Japanese reflects the "modern" arts of the time, i.e. those that don't belong to the old samurai warrior culture. Compare the concept "modernism" in arts etc. // habj ( talk) 05:41, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
I think the reference for the Criticism section is terrible: "Critics believed that something had been lost in classical budo, that reliance on kata and repetitive practice in training produced shallow technique."
The author of this reference seems unfamiliar with koryu: for example, Kashima Shin-ryū and Shindō Musō-ryū both use kata and kihon as their primary training.
I propose to eliminate the entire Criticism section. jmcw ( talk) 14:08, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
I edited the beginning paragraph as I believe Judo is not a martial art. Judo was developed for physical fitness from jujitsu but made 'safe'. Would welcome discussion.
I looked and could find nothing from Shinbudo that enhances and can be merged into this article. Any difference seems to support a particular WP:POV. I will leave this a couple of days but suggest a simple Redirect. Peter Rehse ( talk) 13:13, 22 September 2013 (UTC)