| Revision as of 03:09, 29 August 2008 editMichael Friedrich~enwiki (talk | contribs)1,151 edits →Identity Politics← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 07:05, 24 December 2024 edit undoMoritoriko (talk | contribs)417 edits →Kumdo vs Keomdo: new sectionTag: New topic | ||
| (220 intermediate revisions by 40 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{Talk header}} | |||
| ⚫ | {{WikiProject Korea |
||
| {{ |
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=Start|1= | ||
| {{WikiProject Martial arts}} | |||
| ⚫ | {{WikiProject Korea|importance=mid}} | ||
| }} | |||
| {{high-traffic|date=23 August 2008|site=2channel|url=http://society6.2ch.net/test/read.cgi/korea/1218372119/|page=talk}} | |||
| {{high-traffic|date=24 October 2008|site=2channel|url=http://mobile.seisyun.net/cgi/read.cgi/society6/society6_korea_1218372119/ |page=talk}} | |||
| {{archive box|search=yes| | |||
| * ]}} | |||
| : Hi, Folks: I have been doing a bit of editing on this article as I found the English as bit stilted. I hope the result flows a bit better. I will also be doing a bit to add some pictures, contribute citations and expand the terminology. I could use some oversight here since Korean is not my native language. Best Wishes. --] (]) 23:17, 9 March 2013 (UTC) | |||
| == |
== External links modified == | ||
| This article is a copy of . It is against the copyright law. So I rewrote it. 15:54, 1 March 2006 Michael Friedrich | |||
| Hello fellow Wikipedians, | |||
| :"''The present form, combining inner strength (gi), the absolute and unbounded swing of the sword (geom), and the use of one's lower back and body (che) is a recent development, and is known as "kikomchae". In tournaments one does not receive a point when striking the opponent unless the blow is accompanied by all three components of kikomchae.''" This is still a copy of and is against ]. ] 08:47 24/04/2006 | |||
| I have just modified one external link on ]. Please take a moment to review ]. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit ] for additional information. I made the following changes: | |||
| :Removing wholesale isn't rewriting. I'll restore that lost information, but phrased in my own words and relating it to ki-ken-tai-ichi. — ] ] 19:33, 27 April 2006 (UTC) | |||
| *Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061101171309/http://www.kendo-world.com/articles/web/korea/index.php to http://www.kendo-world.com/articles/web/korea/index.php | |||
| When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs. | |||
| ::Sorry but I think you misunderstood. I rewrote the whole article on the 1st of March and removed the copied sentence on the 24th of April. Thanks.] 11:01 28/04/2006 | |||
| {{sourcecheck|checked=false|needhelp=}} | |||
| == The name of this article: Kumdo, Geomdo, or Komdo == | |||
| Cheers.—] <span style="color:green;font-family:Rockwell">(])</span> 09:22, 13 December 2017 (UTC) | |||
| As of 1987, there were 32 Romanization proposals published in English articles according to an academic source that I have lost since. Not one of those 32 Romanization proposals included a rendering of "u" for the vowel in "검." This rendering is what has been called the American-enlisted-man's-back-of-the-envelope Romanization as a slap against the ignorance of international spelling conventions that is reflected. Misplaced Pages guidelines indicate a preference for the Revised Romanization or the McCune-Reischauer Romanization. Without getting into the shortcomings of the Revised Romanization - such as its rendering of this vowel as a historical mistake based on an erroneous assumption about a French spelling (reported in an academic journal edited by David McCann) - it is very clear that the rendering "Kumdo" cannot be used, even if it is favored by certain Korean Komdo teachers in the U.S. who have no knowledge of these issues and give an "off the top of the head" rendering based on phonology idiosyncratic to American English. | |||
| == What is the exact point of existence of this page? == | |||
| The page should be moved and re-directs created. -]]]]] 19:27, 15 November 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Kumdo is complitely just a kendo of japanese by korean pronunciation and very little minor change like flag of color is different or clothes is little different or so. It is ridiculous. Kumdo is clearly nothing but a kendo in Korea. | |||
| == My rewrite == | |||
| Even Haidung Gumdo is not a korean ancient swordmanship or so at all. It is just a wrong. | |||
| The article as I found it was a horrible mess; the English was often too obscure to be understandable, and there was a lot of rather obvious PoV material. I've tried to rewrite it so as to retain everything that was relevant, NPoV, and understandable. I hope that at least it gives a decent starting point for future (constructive) edits. | |||
| It was founded at 1983 and originated in japanese kenjutsu with little minor change. They are basically using japanese katana sword and Hakama uniforms and add of chinese kang fu move without much meaning in it. Haidung gumdo was saying that Haidong Gumdo attributes its history to Balhae/Parhae as opposed to Koryo and ancient Korean samrang went japan and became japanese samurai or such lies over and over again. There is no written historical records on the swordsmanship of Balhae kingdom. Haedong Gumdo’s origin is in modern history post Korean War of 1983. And it is copy of kendo add showily kicking to make it look like unique. ] (]) 20:35, 25 December 2022 (UTC) | |||
| :Speaking to you and to future readers: | |||
| Incidentally, in some of the discussion above I couldn't really make out what was going on, as no-one was signing or indenting their edits. the impression was of a private argument being carried out in public. Could editors please sign their comments (with <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>)? --] (]) 23:38, 16 November 2005 (UTC) | |||
| :What does the scholarly consensus say? Without inferring things yourself I mean. Like do the majority of international (non-Japanese and non-Korean) scholars explicitly say that Kumdo is not distinct from Kendo? If so, then you're right and this article should potentially be renamed "Kendo in Korea" or something similar. But if you're not going to do that research, don't bother with the claim. Original research is not allowed on Misplaced Pages. ] (]) 03:50, 17 August 2023 (UTC) | |||
| ::As even Japanese[REDACTED] has a seperate article for kendo and kumdo I think there is enough difference as well as differences in history in the 70+ years since occupation ended for them to have their own pages. ] (]) 06:44, 24 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == Kumdo vs Keomdo == | |||
| :If the anonymous editors continue to insist on reverting the article to what is clearly a PoV state, especially without having the courtesy to discuss the issues here, they're heading for being blocked from editing and/or the protection of the article. --] (]) 11:09, 19 November 2005 (UTC) | |||
| I am changing the article back to using kumdo as the default spelling of the Korean term as that is the title of the article and the far more common version used in English. I recognize that this does not match the official preferred romanization rules but there are plenty of words from other languages used in English that don't match the current rules but are used because they have been used with that spelling for so long. Searching for the term Keomdo leads to results about "Kumdo" or "Komodo" because it is used so rarely. If you are not happy with this change, please discuss it here before reverting. Thank you. ] (]) 07:05, 24 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == About removing the photo == | |||
| I've removed the photo("Image:Kendo.JPG|thumb|300px|Komdo") from this page because it has only been copied from the ] page.Please be fair.] 22:09, 29 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| == Frequent non-NPOV edits from anonymous user(s) == | |||
| The frequent edits from 220.105.x.x and 221.189.x.x IPs adding the link to "WHY DOES KUMDO TELL A LIE?" are getting ridiculous. Will the real slim shady please stand up and explain why you keep adding a link to a clearly biased source? The article already states that modern Kumdo is derivative of Kendo forms brought to Korea during the occupation. Citing a source which unabashedly attacks Kumdo, and Koreans in general, does not add to the quality of the article. Unless someone can come up with a good reason to keep it, I'm going to revert the edit again or possibly ask for mediation. ] 16:44, 14 March 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == Why I reverted this section == | |||
| :A part of information on the net of ] and the apprenticeship of ] insist on the lie when Kumdo is an origin of the kendo. | |||
| :When the evidence of their insistences was verified in Japan, a lot of counterfeits were admitted, and the South Korea origin theory was denied completely. | |||
| :Moreover, the plagiarism problem of this kendo was taken up in the Japanese kendo league (), and fixed as an international fact that it was a Japanese origin. | |||
| There are some major problems here, namely: | |||
| * While my Japanese is probably worse than the author's English and no insult is intended, we should probably discourage people from indiscriminately adding poorly machine-translated content like this unless they have some new revelation. | |||
| * As of now, this whole controversy has been done to death by people who are native or fluent in English. This specific legal battle mentioned is documented in clear English at ]. | |||
| * NPOV doesn't mean presenting every view (See: ]). To this outsider and to anyone reading the version of this article (minus the quoted section) it is very clear that Kumdo began as a local variant of Kendo. It's also very clear to me that only a minority of ultra-nationalist Koreans believe the opposite. Please, please, understand that by giving lip service to this so-called controversy you are only lending legitimacy to these otherwise obscure claims. | |||
| I have gone back through the history of this article and, past the original badly-written and short-lived version from 2004 (which only described ] rather than the entire Kumdo family), every revision since has presented the facts as they are. You are not presenting NPOV. You are manufacturing a controversy that, at least as far as this article is concerned, doesn't seem to exist. — ] ] 16:59, 23 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ==Identity Politics== | |||
| Is it appropriate to write an encycropedia article based on identity politics? I accept that origin of Tekkondo is disputed. However, what is the point of writing an article which try to insuniate that Komdo is a Korean when Komodo side even admit that Komdo is Kendo? Because I don't care to engage in edit dispute about "turth", I propose to delete anything which is not sourced properly to verifiable sources. ] | |||
| ==4.23.83.100's edit== | |||
| I don't believe is unreasonable. | |||
| *First, kumdo is the ]n equivalent of ]ese ] without doubt. If it is not so, why KKA is a member of IKF? Simply saying '''"Kumdo is a modern ] of ] in ]."''' is not enough. | |||
| *4.23.83.100 changed '''"This belief is not commonly held outside Korea"''' into '''"This belief is not commonly held in Japan,"''' but the former sentence was made after a long discussion (see "Merger", which was somehow deleted). | |||
| *'''"the Japanese invasion of Korea in the early 1900's merged Kumdo with Japans version ]."''' | |||
| ::This is not the case. The word kumdo was not used befor Japanese kendo was introduced in Korea. Korean fencing, which Koreans believe to existed in ancient Korea, was not called kumdo. So, "merged Kumdo with Japans version ]" is not true. Besides, if it is true that kumdo was merged into kendo, Korean kumdo should have been more different from kendo, which was not mixed with kumdo. But as 4.23.83.100's also admits that "1945 Kumdo was an equivalent of ]ese ]", kumdo and kendo was very identical during Japanese occupation. In other words, Korean fencing was not merged into kendo but it was completely ignored. It is more true that after 1945 Koreans merged Korean fencing into kendo and made it kumdo. | |||
| *"'''The reason for this was in 1910, Japan outlawed all Korean martial arts and either absorbed the Korean martial art or tried to eradicate it.'''" | |||
| ::Do you have any information sources for this sentence? It may be true that Japanese occupation caused disappearance of some traditional Korean cultures. But as for "Japan outlawed all Korean martial arts" "absorbed the Korean martial art" "tried to eradicate it", I've never seen any reliable sources. | |||
| *"'''In the aftermath of the Japanese ] and outlaw of traditional Korean martial arts, the 1945 Kumdo was an equivalent of ]ese ].'''" | |||
| ::] is not an organization which can outlaw anything. Do you have any reliable sources for this information? | |||
| *"'''Up until the the occupation in 1910, kumdo developed in parallel with kendo.'''" | |||
| ::There's no reliable source for this either. As I said before, there was no such a thing "kumdo" before Japanese occupation even though there may have been something like Korean fencing. This sentence is also contradictory to the sentences "Later in Korea, warriors were regarded as secondary to scholars during parts of the ] Dynasty (908-1392) and much of the ], due to the heavy influence of Confucianism, martial arts other than traditional Korean archery were little practised except by members of the military. As a result, the popularity of certain martial arts waned without many successors to carry on its traditions. Today, there are only two remaining documents that refer to ancient Korean martial arts". | |||
| *"'''1910 Japanese ] and the outlaw of Korean martial arts'''" | |||
| ::As I said before, Editing Agency of Korean History is not an organization which can outlaw anything. Do you have any reliable sources for this information? | |||
| *"'''The impact of the ] and the outlaw of Korean martial arts by Japan was to create a system where the rules and the equipment of Kumdo are almost the same as those of ].'''" "'''The impact of Japans ] and outlaw of Korean culture is still felt today, as you can tell from above'''" Do you have any reliable sources for "Japan outlawing Korean martial arts"? | |||
| 4.23.83.100's edit is not the truth but it is only what s/he believes to be true. There's no reliable source for his/her edit.--] (]) 03:09, 29 August 2008 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 07:05, 24 December 2024
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Kumdo article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
| Archives: 1 |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||
 | On 23 August 2008, this talk page was linked from 2channel, a high-traffic website. (Traffic) All prior and subsequent edits to the article are noted in its revision history. |
| On 24 October 2008, this talk page was linked from 2channel, a high-traffic website. (Traffic) All prior and subsequent edits to the article are noted in its revision history. |
 Archives |
- Hi, Folks: I have been doing a bit of editing on this article as I found the English as bit stilted. I hope the result flows a bit better. I will also be doing a bit to add some pictures, contribute citations and expand the terminology. I could use some oversight here since Korean is not my native language. Best Wishes. --Bruce W Sims (talk) 23:17, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Kumdo. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061101171309/http://www.kendo-world.com/articles/web/korea/index.php to http://www.kendo-world.com/articles/web/korea/index.php
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:22, 13 December 2017 (UTC)
What is the exact point of existence of this page?
Kumdo is complitely just a kendo of japanese by korean pronunciation and very little minor change like flag of color is different or clothes is little different or so. It is ridiculous. Kumdo is clearly nothing but a kendo in Korea.
Even Haidung Gumdo is not a korean ancient swordmanship or so at all. It is just a wrong.
It was founded at 1983 and originated in japanese kenjutsu with little minor change. They are basically using japanese katana sword and Hakama uniforms and add of chinese kang fu move without much meaning in it. Haidung gumdo was saying that Haidong Gumdo attributes its history to Balhae/Parhae as opposed to Koryo and ancient Korean samrang went japan and became japanese samurai or such lies over and over again. There is no written historical records on the swordsmanship of Balhae kingdom. Haedong Gumdo’s origin is in modern history post Korean War of 1983. And it is copy of kendo add showily kicking to make it look like unique. 133.106.198.25 (talk) 20:35, 25 December 2022 (UTC)
- Speaking to you and to future readers:
- What does the scholarly consensus say? Without inferring things yourself I mean. Like do the majority of international (non-Japanese and non-Korean) scholars explicitly say that Kumdo is not distinct from Kendo? If so, then you're right and this article should potentially be renamed "Kendo in Korea" or something similar. But if you're not going to do that research, don't bother with the claim. Original research is not allowed on Misplaced Pages. toobigtokale (talk) 03:50, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
- As even Japanese[REDACTED] has a seperate article for kendo and kumdo I think there is enough difference as well as differences in history in the 70+ years since occupation ended for them to have their own pages. Moritoriko (talk) 06:44, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
Kumdo vs Keomdo
I am changing the article back to using kumdo as the default spelling of the Korean term as that is the title of the article and the far more common version used in English. I recognize that this does not match the official preferred romanization rules but there are plenty of words from other languages used in English that don't match the current rules but are used because they have been used with that spelling for so long. Searching for the term Keomdo leads to results about "Kumdo" or "Komodo" because it is used so rarely. If you are not happy with this change, please discuss it here before reverting. Thank you. Moritoriko (talk) 07:05, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
Categories: