From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former good article nomineeTaekwondo was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
November 18, 2005 Peer reviewReviewed
September 20, 2006 Good article nomineeNot listed
Current status: Former good article nominee

Taekwondo

Voice



P 98.58.104.9 ( talk) 15:46, 3 March 2023 (UTC) reply

me too toobigtokale ( talk) 22:04, 16 August 2023 (UTC) reply

==

Significant edits

I made some significant edits, sorry if I stepped on any toes, I know I deleted a lot. Some reminders:

  • Don't add information without sources
    • If you use multiple pages from a source, indicate which page number you used. See how the article Cleopatra does it for reference.
  • "Taekwondo" shouldn't always be capitalized, see WP:WPMA Proper names of individual schools of martial arts should be capitalized e.g., "Kashima Shinden Jikishinkage-ryū" or "Shotokan". Broad types of martial arts should not be capitalized e.g., "kenjutsu", or "karate" (see above for definition of 'art' vs 'school').
  • Romanized terms that haven't yet become accepted words in English (e.g. hogu) should be italicized (preferrably wrapped in the Transliteration template), as per MOS:FOREIGNITALIC. "Taekwondo" is considered an acceptable english term because it's in dictionaries (apparently)
  • Non-english text (e.g. 호구) should be wrapped in appropriate language template (here, usually Template:Korean)
  • Try to only link when you think it'll be useful to the reader (generally once or twice per article). Don't link every noun or subject, we end up overhighlighting.

Much of what I deleted was either unsourced or out of scope with the article. Please feel free to discuss if you disagree with choices I made and feel free to add stuff back yourself. Thanks. toobigtokale ( talk) 00:37, 17 August 2023 (UTC) reply

Infobox image

Can we find an alternative infobox image? It's a great image but tragically has that blurry thing in the lower left corner. I think a good candidate would have a simple background, so it's immediately clear what the subject is.

After scrolling through several hundred pics, all I can find is this. It's decent but I don't like the blue background for some reason. [1] toobigtokale ( talk) 02:01, 16 October 2023 (UTC) reply

Something like these: [2] [3]. These are copyrighted though, and there's small things about both that aren't ideal. toobigtokale ( talk) 02:43, 16 October 2023 (UTC) reply