Template:Korean requires
|hangul=
parameter.
Copyright problem
This article is a copy of [1]. It is against the copyright law. So I rewrote it. 15:54, 1 March 2006 Michael Friedrich
- "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 [2] and is against Wikipedia:List of guidelines#Guidelines. Michael Friedrich 08:47 24/04/2006
- 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. — AKADriver ☎ 19:33, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
- 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.Michael Friedrich 11:01 28/04/2006
About Kendo-kumdo problems
Unfortunately Korean kumdo organizations are telling us that Japan has developped ancient Korean traditional fencing to modern international sport only,so the origin of Kendo is Korean kumdo. But it is not true. Korean Kumdo is a new martial arts which is based on Japanese Kendo and has short history. Please see following websites.
Please be careful not to be tricked by claims from Korean kumdo. Yappakoredesho 00:22, May 22, 2005 (UTC)
In Response to Yappakoredesho
I respect your opinions on the issue of the "identity" crisis that the martial arts form, Kumdo and Kendo, is suffering from. Some people could say Kumdo is from Corea, and Kendo is from Japan, but there's too much similarity with the two arts that it causes something like this to occur.
Upon researching the Japanese culture to gain a better understanding of their train of thought and their culture, I have noticed that Japan was mostly succumbed to territorial warfare among clans long ago, before the Unification of Japan. From looking at the atlas and ancient trading records, I came to the conclusion that the trade circle, or trade route was as follows: China->Corea->Japan->Corea->China and so on. Notice tat I spell Corea with a "C" and not a "K", for a more historical accuracy.
Anyways, now, concerning the arts of Kumdo/Kendo. I've been training in the art of Kumdo for 9 years, and still continue to do so. In ancient times, Corea, when it was under the names of Gyo-Ryo(고려), Shilla (실아), and Chosun (조선) eras, you can tell that the country of present-day Corea suffered from not only its 'civil' war attempts, but from numerous invasions from other nations, such as Japan. From using the power of logic, it can be said that Japanese who invaded and occupied Corea could have learned many things, like Udo (유도) and Kumdo (검도). However, when Japan brought it back to their country, "edited" the martial art to gain uniqueness to the country of Japan.
Basically, What I'm saying is that the basic of Kumdo/Kendo, while started in Corea, had evolved to the present day Kumdo/Kendo that we know today. It is hard for us to say which is right and which is wrong, due to the facts that: 1: Corea's History thats being taught by the schools are an edited version, mainly from Japanese and other foreign nations that occupied Corea 2: In the end, we can't make a final decision now, because opinions can change, simply presenting a check with a large sum of money. In that case, Japan would win due to its numerous economical advantage, and the true art will be unknown.
This is just a brief summery, although I am going to edit in a URL, explaining my full reason why I believe that Kumdo/Kendo's deepest roots starts in Corea. If there's any comments or "civilized" arguments, please feel free to e-mail me at Kumdo0770@hotmail.com with the Subject Kumdo/Kendo.
Unfortunately, my reasonings could be told off easily. Remember, When Japan had its success in holding Corea, it is known by word of mouth in the generations that Japan has changed our history. I mean, how could a nomadic people around 10,000 years ago be mysteriously be farmers 5000 years after that, without any catalysts. Corea is a very sad country...not sad in the terms of mockery, but sad in the emotion. Corea, being the by-pass country between China and Japan, had to suffer through wars that didn't necessarily concern them. And because of that, Corea never could stand a strong, firm, and True hold in its history. Well...thats it for now
Thanks guys for listening to my reasoning.
Kumdo0770 00:57, 30 December 2005 (UTC)Kumdo0770
In Response to Kumdo0770
The assertions you are making are outright lies. The Korean Cultural Minister is on record as stating that Koreans have been historically superstitous about sharp-edged objects including weapons. Also, why do Kumdo practioners rip off the Japanese hakama?
I appreciate your critical mind, and don't doubt the validity of some of your ideas (being a student of Kumdo in Korea at the moment, and a casual foreign observer of Korean culture), but these web links are straight-up simplistic propaganda, of the kind that you seem to be decrying.
For example:
Recently "Korean boom" takes place mainly in young people in Japan. Korean TV dramas are often broadcasted now. But it is not possible to establish real friendship between Japan and Korea as long as Korean people are invading Japanese culture. Japanese people are not responsibe for this problems.
Is this a joke? Do you claim do be objective with statements such as this? It's highly offensive to me that someone would provide external links such as these on a website purpoted to be an "encyclopedia". Perhaps what you spout would be better suited on a hate-propaganda website.
Mr. Yappakoredesho I find that you really don't like koreans, Kumdo may have not been originated from Japan but it doesn't mean you must defend it in such a hostile way.
Hey Yappakoresho
You're really showing your character, Yappakoredesho. I think you forget that the ultimate purpose of kumdo/kendo is to become a better person. Maybe you should work on that aspect of your kumdo.
Haha, good point. And no, nobody is telling Japan Kumdo invented kendo. Kumdo and Kendo are similar, but some of the moves and style is a bit different, though not much.
indeed, charicter development is the main purpose of both, and since terminologies are also differnt they shoud be different articles, if you wish have a seperate article about what came first the chicken or the egg. Don't even try it again.
The name of this article: Kumdo, Geomdo, or Komdo
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. Wikipedia 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.
The page should be moved and re-directs created. -DoctorW 19:27, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
My rewrite
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.
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 ~~~~)? --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 23:38, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
- 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. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 11:09, 19 November 2005 (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 Kendo page.Please be fair.Nobu Sho 22:09, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
Deletion
Can we delete all the debating that took place? Eugenius 02:18, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
- No. If this page gets too large, we can move some of the older stuff to an archive page. However, strait up deleting the discussion would violate the guidelines and policies here on Wikipedia. --nihon 02:52, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
- It's also pretty obvious that the argument isn't over, since someone at 221.189.200.6 keeps adding a link to the "WHY DOES KUMDO TELL A LIE?" web site. The article goes out of its way to point out that the modern version is virtually identical to Kendo, and provide reasons why this occured. Links to blatant attack websites aren't necessary to further this point.
- Other points... while referring to the sport as Geomdo would be more appropriate, it is most commonly known in English as Kumdo. This is Wikipedia convention for words of Korean origin that have become pervasive in their nonstandard romanization. Considering even the Korean Kumdo Association uses that romanization, the article should stay (but Geomdo should redirect to it). If you want to find more examples of "ㅓ" romanized as "u", open up any Korean restaurant menu...
- I'm going to add an NPOV tag to the article since it still seems like there are issues that need to be addressed. AKADriver 14:59, 8 March 2006 (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. AKADriver 16:44, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
Dear Appleby
There is no difference between jokdo and shinai, hogu and bogu. Shinai and Bogu are invented by Naganuma Sirozaemon Kunisato (長沼四郎左衛門国郷 1688-1767) in Japan in 18th century. It is no good to refer to jokdo and hogu as if they are Korean invention. There's no need to refer to them in this article since they are referred to in the Kendo article.
It is true that "warriors were regarded as lower-class through Korean history and other martial arts besides traditional Korean archery were little practised, and mostly lost. Now there are only two remaining documents that refers to Korean martial arts." See this article and this article.
Korea Kumdo Association admits that there's no difference between Kendo and Kumdo so that "there is some dispute as to what extent Kumdo is related to ancient Korean martial arts and to what extent it has borrowed from Kendo" should not be here. "검도의 명칭은 한자로 “劍道”라고 쓰며, 읽는 것은 일본에서는 “겐도”라고 읽고, 중국에서는 “젠따우”, 한국에서는“검도”라고 읽습니다. 그러나 같은 내용이지요. 펜싱의 경우도 프랑스에서는 “Fencing”이라 하지만 이태리에서는“Scherma”라고 하는데 다 마찬가지 이유입니다. (Kumdo is written "剣道" in Chinese character and pronounced "Kendo" in Japanese, "Chentau" in Chinese and "Kumdo" in Korean but there's no difference. That is the same as that fencing is called "Fencing" in French and "Scherma" in Italian.)" by 서병윤(So Byong Yung) KKA managing director.
Korea is a member of International Kendo Federation and Kumdo players participate in Kendo tournaments. These facts mean that the difference between Kendo and Kumdo is so small that it is meaning less to distinguish them. Do you say 야구(野球) is a different sport from baseball? Is calcio different from soccer? --Michael Friedrich
- i left the content about martial arts being degraded during joseon, just made it more concise. describing rules/terminology common to two sports is not claiming invention, just describing rules/terminology of the article topic. kka is not the only organization in kumdo/gumdo/komdo. other practitioners, probably the majority, view kumdo as related & derived from kendo, but not identidal like yagu/baseball. i relied on korean-language encyclopedias such as britannica korea [3] & [4] [5] for the consensus view in korea, not individual quotes. of course even these encyclopedias may not be npov, but they are useful references in making this article npov. Appleby 16:06, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
- I was the one who wrote the content about martial arts being degraded during joseon. What you did was only copied it and pasted it. You don't really know about this issue. I also write the fact that Joseon Dynasty denied its existence and that there're only two remaining article about Korean martial arts. You are neglecting these facts and adopted the one that is convenient to you. Do you call it fairness? It is true that the dynasty denied its existence.
- If Kumdo was different from Kendo, why do Kumdo players participate in Kendo tournaments? Uniforms used for Kumdo and ones for Kendo are exactlly alike and there's no doubt they are from Japanese Samurai style. Kumdo is not as different from Kendo as American football is from rugby. The difference between them is as small as yagu and baseball. Even KKA admits this fact. Why do you not admit it? And yout article is just a copy of http://www.kumdo.com/ushwarangkwan/index.php?module=htmlpages&func=display&pid=7 From these facts, I am sure that you don't really know what Kendo and Kumdo are and you are just retailing Korean point of view made by those who don't really know Kumdo and Kendo. It has to be rewrite because of the copy right law too.--Michael Friedrich
- as the article says, kka is just one of many orgainzations. & it's just not true that the military was degraded throught korean history. & describing the rules of baseball & using the terminology "ball" does not mean baseball invented these without precedents, it's just a matter of describing what baseball is. the article already says komdo is the korean equivalent of kendo, so it's not like i'm spouting some nationalistic propaganda, i'm just trying to make the article seem more like a professional encyclopedia article. the three links i provided are the three most widely accepted encyclopedias in korea, including britannica korea. & even then, i didn't just write what they wrote, i already assumed they contain some degree of korean pov. but if what you write conflicts with all three of the most comprehensive general reference work article on this topic, obviously your wording can't be considered npov either. i think i tried to keep things minimalistic, without relying on claims on either side, conclusory remarks or personal opinions. Appleby 04:13, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
- What you do when you edit this article is just change it back to former version. Do you call it fair? I am trying to edit it adopting your phrases in order to maintain its fairness.
- I believe the difference between Kumdo and Kendo is so small that it is meaningless to distinguish them just like football and calcio are the same thing. If they are different, please explain the difference. But what I, as a Kendo player, cannot stand is the fact that Kumdo is acting as if it is the original form of Kendo in other countries, espacially in the US. Some believe that Korean fencing is the original form of Japanese swordsmanship or samurai's tradition but it historically cannot be true. If Brazilians said "Football originated in South America", all the Scottish would feel just like I do. But please understand I am not writing the article passionately.
- You and I are both trying to make this article more suitable for wikipedia but our thoughts can never be the same. OK. I understand. I have just rewrite this arctile. I believe this version is the fairest. I left the description about "Qi" as it was, deleted the fact that Joseon Dynasty denied Korean fencing's existence, and left the fact that warriors were regarded as lower-class through Korean history istead. I deleted the part saying the Kendo and Kumdo is "similar" or "the same" and put description saying "the rules and gears are almost the same as those of Kendo". I believe this is the fairest way. Do you not agree? --Michael Friedrich
i appreciate that we are both working towards a compromise for a better article. i've made substantial changes to adapt your wording as well.
neither your belief nor mine belongs in the article. whatever your feelings about people who claim kendo came from kumdo, this article says nothing of the sort, so please let go of your emotions. the rules are already in the body, insisting on that wording in the introduction just seems like you're trying to make a point, instead of write a better article. it is not true that warriors were considered lower class throughout korean history, although it is true during parts of goryo and much of joseon. & i do not understand your deletion of links to major kumdo websites in the kumdo article, nor your deletion of the category & korean interwiki link. i don't want to be unreasonable or revert war, i think we can work it out, but i believe your latest edits make the article more pov. Appleby 05:27, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
- I don't believe my edit made the article more pov. Kendo practitioners cannot accept the explanation that Kumdo is a different sport from Kendo. Kumdo practitioners cannot accept the explanation that Kumdo is the same as Kendo. In order to maintain fairness, I concluded those description should not be here. If you intend to keep writing "Kumdo is similar to Kendo", I believe you have to write their difference as well.
- The reason why I delete the links to Kumdo site is that make the article fair. If those links are to be here, what about the link to these two?[6] [7] I believe Kumdo practitioners cannot accept these two. But Kendo players don't believe Kumdo organizations' claims either. In order to make it fair, I thought it is the best to delete all the links. But I've just returned them.
- The reason why I delete the korean interwiki link is that it is linked to from "Kendo" article. This article is now useless because of protection too. But I've just returned the link.
- I also changed "throgh Korean history" into "during Goryo Dynasty and Joseon Dynasty" adopting your claim. Now I believe this article is very fair. Do you not agree?
- But I have to learn one thing. What is the difference between Kendo and Kumdo? I believe you know the difference since you keep saying they are different and that "there is some dispute as to what extent Kumdo is related to ancient Korean martial arts and to what extent it has borrowed from Kendo". I couldn't find any difference between Kendo and Kumdo when I saw a Kumdo match. Please tell me. Thank you. --Michael Friedrich 06:08, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
- You are right, even though there are some minor difference in rules and manners. They just don't want to consider that they are owing anything from Japan. Because in their view of world, Japanese must be their student in any area of culture. --Ypacaraí 02:33, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
- generally, i'm not here to discuss my personal views, but i just try to apply reference sources to wikipedia policy. to discuss personal views, i'm sure there are appropriate chat or discussion boards, but that's not why i'm here. for example, for the external links, instead of expressing my views, i followed WP:EL:
- What should be linked to
- 1. Articles about any organization, person, or other entity should link to their official site, if they have one.
- ...
- 4. On articles with multiple Points of View, a link to sites dedicated to each, with a detailed explanation of each link. The number of links dedicated to one POV should not overwhelm the number dedicated to any other. One should attempt to add comments to these links informing the reader of their point of view. If one point of view dominates informed opinion, that should be represented first.
- ...
- Links to normally avoid
- 1. Any site that contains factually inaccurate material or unverified original research, unless it is the official site of the article's subject or it is a notable proponent of a point of view in an article with multiple points of view. (See WP:RS for further information on this guideline.)
- ...
- please do not delete links that fall under "should" category #1. & could you find examples of "should" #4 that are not "avoid" #1? the authors of those personal japanese geocities homepages do not look like "notable proponents". thanks. Appleby 04:07, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
- Dear Appleby. You have not answered my question yet. What is the difference between Kendo and Kumdo? I believe you know it since you keep saying they are not identical. When I saw a Kumdo match I could not find any difference. I don't even understand why KKA belongs to International Kendo Federation and Kumdo fighters participate in Kendo tournaments if Kendo and Kumdo are different sports. I must say it is very foolish to keep saying they are different without knowing their difference.
- Why I kept deleting the links to the Kumdo sites is just as I said above. But I don't believe it to be fair to delete only the Japanese geocities websites. Kendo fighters do not believe what the Kumdo organizations says. Those organizations even say that Kendo is originated from Korea or that Korean fencing is the original form of Kendo. I have seen any reliable evidence that proves these claims. The Japanese Geocities sites are personal but it does not mean that they are groundless and that the sites of Kumdo Organizations are reliable. I even think the Kumdo Organization sites are also full of POV, since they are organized to support their POV. In order to maintain fairness, I believe it is the best to delete them all. --Michael Friedrich 13:08, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
if they are identical, please feel free to propose a merger. as far as external links, though, according to the wikipedia guideline quoted above, "articles about any organization, person, or other entity should link to their official site," which explains the external links i added/restored. note that these links are appropriate even if, arguendo, the site contains "factually inaccurate material or unverified original research." on the other hand, your links are not from any "notable proponents," and dripping with unverified original research. this guideline is also consistent with WP:NOR, WP:V, & WP:NPOV policies. Appleby 17:21, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
- Tell me one thing. Did you keep saying they are not identical without knowing what is the difference between them, only swallowing Kumdo's claim? If so, that is the biggest problem about Kumdo. --Michael Friedrich 17:21, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
MERGER
For the reason you can see in "Dear Appleby", I propose a merger between Kendo and Kumdo since they are identical. Both of the KKA and WKA admits there's no difference between them. I propose having Kumdo merged into Kendo and making a new section, "Kendo in Korea (Kumdo)", on the Kendo article. cf.Yudo (the Korean name of Judo) is merged into Judo. Michael Friedrich 03:44, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose. While your arguments for the equivalence of the two terms may be solid (I am not in a position to judge), this page alone shows that the matter is highly controversial. Accordingly, Wikipedia should cover the controversy, even if there is little else that makes kumdo unique. Also, I doubt whether information on the sport's history in Korea would be welcomed into Kendo. -- Visviva 04:32, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose. The modern sports are nearly identical, but as Visviva says, it would be a disservice to the pre-occupation versions of Kumdo which were different, and an equal disservice to Kendo to include the information on the history of Korean sword-based martial arts which might further confuse the reader into believing that Kendo is of Korean or Chinese origin. Japanese baseball is a poor analogy - there was no baseball-like sport in Japan before 1872 (and there is a separate article on Japanese baseball!). A better analogy would be to the Mongolian alphabet. Today it's nothing but a form of Cyrillic, but historically it was something unique. AKADriver 20:30, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
- Agree. Japanese baseball refers to Japanese professional baseball and long enough. But as for Kumdo, it is enough to make a new section on the Kendo article. --Robert Houdini
- Oppose. the word "kumdo" encompasses various korean schools with different philosophies and histories. we need more details in this article, not a reduction to a subsection. Appleby 18:01, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
- Agree Kendo and Kumdo are actually same. The difference is language only.Yappakoredesho 14:47, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
- Agree Unlike Kendo, original history does not exist in Kumdo. Kumdo added change to the fine portion of Kendo for a while merely, and has deceived contents.Ponsaku 5:38, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose Well, this is a straw poll anyway, but merging Kumdo to Kendo is like merching American football to Rugby and baseball to Criquet. Anyway, to merge/move contents, you need overwhelming majority I believe. Deiaemeth 03:58, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
- Agree Kumdo and Kendo are alike too much.The difference is language only.So I think Kumdo means kendo.--Tomorrow0622 05:18, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
- AgreeKumdo is just Korean pronunciation of Kendo. Hskf4 10:46, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
- Answer to Visviva. If this Kumdo article refered to the unique situation of Kendo(Kumdo) in Korea in detail, it would be worth existing. Japanese baseball refers to the situation of baseball that is unique to Japan. It is also too long to be merged into baseball. But this Kumdo article does not refers to any spaciality of Kumdo. "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 fact is not unique to Kumdo but explains "Kendo". This article is surely refers to "Korean fencing", but as I explain below, it is nothing to do with Kumdo. This article is also shourt enough to be merged into Kendo. Since Kendo and Kumdo is the same sport (KKA and WKA admit it), I propose having Kumdo merged into Kendo in Other Countries.
- Answer to AKADriver. There're no ducuments that refer to "the pre-occupation versions of Kumdo". Before influenced by Japan Korea had no sport called Kumdo. There might have existed something called "Korean fencing" but it is completely different from Kumdo as this article says "martial arts other than traditional Korean archery were little practised or mostly lost". Kendo is based on Samurai swordsmanship that dates back to the 12th century. I hear that the South American countries had some ceremony that resembles football but nobody would say it is "the pre-occupation versions of football". Football started in Europe.
- As you comment, some may believe "Kendo is of Korean or Chinese origin.". But it cannot be true. "Army Account of Military Arts and Science", the only document referring to "Korean fencing", was written in 1621 by a Chinese man. At that time Japanese swordsmanship had already come to completion. And the word "Kendo" was invented in the early 20th century in Japan, referring to "Judo". There's no document that uses the word "Kumdo" before the Japanese occupation of Korea. It is even "cultural terrorism" acting as is Kumdo is the origin of Kendo. In order to prevent misunderstanding, I propose having Kumdo merged into Kendo in Other Countries.Michael Friedrich 08:43, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
- Still opposed on the grounds that the history of Korean fencing or swordsmanship would thus disappear from wikipedia. Kumdo proper did not exist before Kendo, but it's clear that people are today using the word Kumdo to describe more than just the modern sport that coined the term. The Haidong Gumdo crowd are particularly guilty of that. Is this cultural terrorism? Maybe; reflect it in the article, just be prepared to back it up with sources. AKADriver 17:27, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
- There will be no problem if Korean martial arts refers to the Korean fencing. The information about Korea fencing looks as if it is Kumdo's own history that devides Kumdo from Kendo, but actually it only refers to "Korean fencing", not Kumdo. Korean fencing and Kumdo are differnt since "martial arts other than traditional Korean archery were little practised or mostly lost."
- What I call cultural terrorism is to say Kumdo is the original form of Kendo, which is not the case.
- As for the Haidong Gumdo, it may be a new form of Kumdo and refers to the Korean fencing (I don't know much about it). Please feel free to refer to it in "Kendo in Other Countries:Korea". As for general "Kumdo", which is referred to in this article, is not different from Kendo. WKA and KKA admits this fact. Maybe the biggest reason why you're opposed to a merger is that you don't want the "Korean fencing" to disappear from wikipedia. Then, if the whole article
- "According to the Army Account of Military Arts and Science (Hanzi: 武備志; Pinyin: Wǔ Bèi Zhì), a Ming dynasty strategy book written in 1621 by Chi Ji Kwang (茅元儀?), Korean fencing (朝鮮勢法; Cháoxiǎn shìfǎ) was a martial art that had reached Korea through Chinese martial artists. However, warriors were regarded as secondary to scholars during parts of the Goryeo Dynasty and much of the Joseon Dynasty, and martial arts other than traditional Korean archery were little practised or mostly lost. Now there are only two remaining documents that refers to ancient Korean martial arts.
- Kendo was introduced to Korea during the Japanese rule, and thereafter, it became popular under the name of "kumdo", using slightly different gear and terminology. The rules and the gears are almost the same as those of kendo.
- Kumdo practitioners in Korea now number over 400,000. There are over 200 kumdo organisations in Korea (though the Korean Kumdo Association is a member of the Korean Sports Federation, and claims to be the only official body)
- There are broadly three schools of modern kumdo
- World Kumdo Federation and its affiliate Korea Kumdo Federation; Korea Traditional Komdo Association.
- World Kumdo Association, Korean Kumdo Association, and Hwarang Komdo.
- Haidong Gumdo, founded by members who seceded from the KKA." is taken to Kendo, is there still a problem? I don't think so.Michael Friedrich 18:06, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
- None of that stuff has anything to do with Kendo, and would most likely be quickly excised from the Kendo article for being off-topic. It would be inappropriate to put it all in the Kendo article. It either belongs here, or in some other article specific to Korean martial arts. AKADriver 20:01, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
- "None of that stuff has anything to do with Kendo." Yes. Korean fencing has nothing to do with Japanese Kendo. If you're right, you admit that Korean fencing has nothing to do with Kumdo either because "there are no differences between Japanese Kendo and Korean Kum Do."(quoted from [8]) The reference to Korean fencing should be moved to Korean martial arts. But do you also say these sentences have nothing to do with Kendo either? "Kendo was introduced to Korea during the Japanese rule, and thereafter, it became popular under the name of "kumdo", using slightly different gear and terminology. The rules and the gears are almost the same as those of kendo.Kumdo practitioners in Korea now number over 400,000. There are over 200 kumdo organisations in Korea (though the Korean Kumdo Association is a member of the Korean Sports Federation, and claims to be the only official body)." If you say so, I must say your talk is nonsence. Now I don't find any reason why you are opposed to a merger.Michael Friedrich 11:27, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
- None of that stuff has anything to do with Kendo, and would most likely be quickly excised from the Kendo article for being off-topic. It would be inappropriate to put it all in the Kendo article. It either belongs here, or in some other article specific to Korean martial arts. AKADriver 20:01, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
- Still opposed on the grounds that the history of Korean fencing or swordsmanship would thus disappear from wikipedia. Kumdo proper did not exist before Kendo, but it's clear that people are today using the word Kumdo to describe more than just the modern sport that coined the term. The Haidong Gumdo crowd are particularly guilty of that. Is this cultural terrorism? Maybe; reflect it in the article, just be prepared to back it up with sources. AKADriver 17:27, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
- Answer to Appleby. Can you explain any of "different philosophies and histories of various korean schools"? I waited someone to add some information about those "different philosophies and histories" to thins article but nobody did. I propose a reduction of Kumdo into the subsection, Kendo in Other Countries again since there's no difference between Kendo and Kumdo. It is OK to make new article and separate Kumdo from Kendo when it become long enough and have its own information, not Kendo history or Kendo philosophy. There's no need for Kendo and Kumdo to be separated since they are exactly the same. And please don't remove the tag. As for now, 3, including me, are for the merger and 3, including you, are against it. This talk is not over yet. Michael Friedrich 15:39, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
- still opposed. i see besides the 3 votes, richard below and discussions above certainly do not evidence any consensus for a merger. i'll leave the tag, though. Appleby 16:47, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
- Those discussions are left untouched for a long time. Isn't it OK to think those talks are over and have nothing to do with this discussion?
- You have not answered my question in the discussion above. "Did you keep saying kendo and kumdo are different without knowing their difference?"
- As you're still opposed, please say something about my explanation above. I don't find any reason why Kumdo has to be treated specially although Kendo in Chili, Kendo in France, Kendo in Germany, Kendo in Italy, Kendo in South America and in other countries are just referred to in "Kendo in Other Countries". I need to know why you oppose a merger in order to discuss it. If you cannot reply properly, I will be assured that there's no certain reason to oppose the merger.Michael Friedrich 17:39, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
- Kumdo is different from just being "Kendo in Korea" because while it is functionally identical, it has been infused with its own mythology and exclusively uses native terminology. Furthermore, there are a notable number of people who practice Kendo/Kumdo outside of Korea, using the name and other terminology of Kumdo, not Kendo. The Kumdo organizations linked from this article have chapters worldwide. AKADriver 20:17, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
- What is Kumdo's own mythology? If this Kumdo article refers to it, it worth existing. But what is it?
- Use of native terminology means nothing. I've said a lot of times that "Japan has its own baseball terminology and baseball is called Yakyu. But Yakyu is exactly the same as baseball." (Of cource, wikipedia has the article of Japanese baseball, but it refers to "Japanese professional baseball" and to long to be merged into Baseball.)
- "There are a notable number of people who practice Kendo/Kumdo outside of Korea, using the name and other terminology of Kumdo, not Kendo." That is exactly what I call cultural terrorism! Treating Kendo as if it is Korean martial arts, even though there's no difference! That is what the Japanese are angry at and why we are trying to merge this article into Kendo. Those who don't know much about Kendo would think that it is a Korean martial art, which is not the case. What would you think if Japanese introduced kimchi to other countries with Japanese terminology, treating as if it is Japanese cuisine? I believe you would be indignant.Michael Friedrich 12:06, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
- See the Haidong Gumdo and Samurang articles for examples of unique mythology. The majority of it is revisionist history (or "cultural terrorism" as you call it), but it's still a mythology that doesn't exist in (and is opposed by) the Kendo community, making Kumdo at least partially unique.
- Exclusive use of unique, native terminology means everything. While much of it is sino-korean cognates with on'yomi Kendo terms, some of it is completely unique, and to practitioners it is not considered interchangeable. It would be absurd to say "ki-ken-tai-ichi" in a Kumdo competition. Japanese baseball may be officially termed yakyū, but I've heard besubōru used interchangeably (in fact, that's what I learned in Japanese language classes).
- Listen, we're all able to gather that you don't like the fact that people - not just Koreans - practice a sport they call Kumdo without giving respect to Kendo. But it exists, it's verifiable, and it's notable. AKADriver 16:09, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
- I was surprised about this fact. I studied about Haidong Gumdo and Samurang. Haidong Gumdo and Samurang surely have their own mythology. Yes, its only a myth. According to the KKA website, the existence of Samurang was denied in a trial. The history and belief of Haidong Gumdo and Samurang are forgery. It is the biggest problem of Kumdo that "some practice a sport they call Kumdo without giving respect to Kendo". If this Kumdo article refers to that fact, I have to accepet the existence of the article. Is it OK to add this sentence to the article? "Some believe and claim Kumdo or Korean fencing is the origin of Japanese Kendo and swordmanship, but there is no evidence of the claim and it is historically not the case." Actually, I added this sentence before but someone kept deleting it.
- By the way, in Japanese, the word "besubōru(ベースボール)" is rarely used. The Japanese always call the sport yakyū. They use besubōru only when they exagerate the difference between the Japanese-style strategy of baseball and the American-style strategy. The terminology, however, are interchangeable (pitcher->tōshu, catcher->hoshu and etc.)Michael Friedrich 04:08, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
- Someone is adding a really foolish sentence to this article. "Kumdo is a traditional martial art of fencing, known as the origin of Zapanese kendo" This is the biggest problem of Kumdo and what Kendo players call the "cultural terrorism".Michael Friedrich 08:37, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
- Kumdo is different from just being "Kendo in Korea" because while it is functionally identical, it has been infused with its own mythology and exclusively uses native terminology. Furthermore, there are a notable number of people who practice Kendo/Kumdo outside of Korea, using the name and other terminology of Kumdo, not Kendo. The Kumdo organizations linked from this article have chapters worldwide. AKADriver 20:17, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Consensus is a good read. Deiaemeth 04:00, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
For the record, I still oppose the merger, and believe that this article needs (verifiable, NPOV) expansion rather than merging. -- Visviva 08:59, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
- Please separate Kumdo from Kendo when it has expansion if there's something to add to this article. As for now, it has not enough information about Kumdo's own story. It does not need to be separated, at least NOW.Michael Friedrich 12:07, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
- So let's leave it here so people can expand it. Remember, Wikipedia is not a paper encyclopedia. We're not killing trees by leaving this article intact, just a few egos. AKADriver 15:52, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
- Wikipedia:Merging and moving pages There are several good reasons to merge a page: "There are two or more pages on exactly the same subject." "There are two or more pages on related subjects that have a large overlap." "there doesn't need to be a separate entry for every concept in the universe." "If a short article requires the background material or context from a broader article in order for readers to understand it." Michael Friedrich 16:31, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
- So let's leave it here so people can expand it. Remember, Wikipedia is not a paper encyclopedia. We're not killing trees by leaving this article intact, just a few egos. AKADriver 15:52, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
- Exactly the same subject: nope, there are separate organizations for each. The names, while cognate, are not interchangeable.
- United States has All United States Kendo Federation, UK has The British Kendo Association, Malaysia has Malaysia Kendo Association and Korean has KKA. All the 44 countries have their own organizations. But they are playing the same sport. The existence of separate organization means nothing. Is it true that the names are not interchangeable? Shinai=Jukdo, Bogu=Hogu. Tell me those uninterchangeable terminologies. Michael Friedrich 04:38, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
- Try using Kumdo terms at a Kendo tournament or vice-versa. They mean the same thing, but they are used exclusive to one another. And yes, separate organizations mean everything, when there are Kumdo organizations that call themselves Kumdo organizations outside Korea. AKADriver 13:38, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
- Related subjects with a large overlap: Related, yes; overlap, no. This article should cover only Kumdo's unique terminology and mythology; related background information on the history of Korean fencing; and where Kumdo practitioners have taken it since 1945.
- If Kumdo has its background in Korean fencing, why do WKA and KKA say there's no difference between Kendo and Kumdo? Is that mean Kendo is originated from Korean fencing? It is only a forged myth. If this article refers to the myth as forgery, there's no reason for me to oppose its existence because the reason I proposed a merger is to prevent the misunderstanding that Kumdo is a Korean sport which is different from Kendo and that Kumdo is the origin of Kendo.Michael Friedrich 04:38, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
- There is no misunderstanding. The article makes it clear that what you are asserting is true. AKADriver 13:38, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
- "every concept in the universe": this is a suggestion to merge non-notable subjects into related notable ones; things like, there doesn't need to be an article for every Star Trek minor character (though it seems like there are). Kumdo has multiple professional organizations devoted to it and has appeared in print; therefore it meets notability guidelines.
- "Short article, context from a broader article": This is possibly the closest to being appropriate to this situation, but I think reciprocal links between Kumdo and Kendo are sufficient to these ends. This article is not all that short; it's not a stub.
AKADriver 16:41, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
- If this arcticle is not a stub, it should be more information. The information about Kendo in South America is as long as Kumdo but it is only a section in Kendo. "in order for readers to understand it", I want the article to clearly say that the claim that Kumdo or Korean fencing is the origin of Kendo is only a myth.Michael Friedrich 04:38, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
- So edit it to say that, just be careful how you phrase it. I wish the article did do a better job, but merging is not the answer, and every time anyone has tried to add anything about the controversy, they've never been able to resist using POV-charged terms like "forgery", "terrorism", etc.; or citing extremely biased sources. AKADriver 13:38, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
- What do you think? "Some practice Kumdo without giving respect to Kendo, and believe and claim Kumdo or Korean fencing is the origin of Japanese Kendo and its swordmanship, but that is historically not the case." I don't think this is POV. Perfectly neutral and true. Don't you think so? As long as this sentence exist in this article, I won't propose a merger again. Michael Friedrich 13:57, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
- So edit it to say that, just be careful how you phrase it. I wish the article did do a better job, but merging is not the answer, and every time anyone has tried to add anything about the controversy, they've never been able to resist using POV-charged terms like "forgery", "terrorism", etc.; or citing extremely biased sources. AKADriver 13:38, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
- Answer to Deiaemeth. I already answered this question several times. American football is "an American sport" based on Rugby. It has different rules and gears from rugby. Baseball is "an American sport" based on Criquet. I don't know if you have ever seen a Criquet match, but it is very different from baseball. Taekwondo is "a Korean sport" based on Karate. Taekwondo has a lot of kich techniques that Karate does not have. But what about Kumdo? Can you find any as big difference between Kendo and Kumdo as between American football and Rugby or between baseball and cricket? I strongly doubt it. Michael Friedrich 13:03, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
- Useful links to know Korean martial arts and history fabrications.Hskf411:17, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
Korea - The Black Ships of Kendo http://www.kendo-world.com/articles/web/korea/index.php Problems in the Identity and Philosophy of T'aegwondo and Their Historical Causes http://winstonstableford.com/identity.html
solution
Thanks to AKADriver's good writing, this talk is over. Thank you very much. Michael Friedrich 07:28 28 April 2006 (UTC)
kendo and kumdo
Hello, while kendo and kumdo have many similarities they still differ a bit. For example, the terminology is generally in japanese for kendo and in korean for kumdo. I have seen korean kumdo players placed as shinpan at tournaments that are supposd to be run according to IKF shiai regulations. That's OK, but they then use different (korean kumdo) words for the pronouncements. That is not OK as it's confusing to all and the IKF rules for pronouncements are japanese. I think that they should remain separate, but link to each other. The kumdo people can tell their story and the kendo people likewise.
- What you are saying doesn't make any sence. You're saying all the difference between them is just their derminology, aren't you? That does NOT make them different. In Japan, baseball is called "yakyu", base is "rui", batter is "dasha", runner is "sosha" and so on. But nobody says yakyu is a different sport from baseball. Can you tell me the difference between Kendo and Kumdo, except their terminology? If an American said "cricket is based on baseball." everybody would regard him foolish. What about Kumdo? Is it OK for kumdo players to tell their story? It doesn't make any sence. Since there's no difference between them, I believe it is the best to merge Kumdo into Kendo, and make a new section "Korean Kendo(Kumdo)" on the Kendo article.--Michael Friedrich 04:18 29/03/2006(UTC)
- Hello Michael, I wrote "while kendo and kumdo have many similarities they still differ a bit. For example..." and used the pronouncment as one example. I did not write that is the only difference. I am no expert, but I have been doing kendo since you were four years old and have seen a bit of kendo and kumdo in that time. I've trained with kumdo 7th dans and korean champions, so I have a little experience. These pages are obviously edited by kendo and kumdo people, not by experts and we all put our own perspective or bias in what we contribute. Kumdo and kendo have many similarities, but have their roots in different societies. They are like different brands of a similar product and should be separate entries but link to each other.
- Richard.
- Sorry for forgetting to leave an answer. I don't get what you suggest by saying "They are like different brands of a similar product". Would you please show me an example? The only difference between Kendo and Kumdo is their names. If this Kumdo article referred to something that separate Kumdo from Kendo, it would be worth existing but there's no such description. The information about Korea fencing looks as if it is Kumdo's own history that devides Kumdo from Kendo, but actually it only refers to "Korean fencing", not Kumdo. Korean fencing and Kumdo are differnt since "martial arts other than traditional Korean archery were little practised or mostly lost." The history of Korean fencing should be referred to in Korean martial arts article, not in Kumdo. I can't find any problem in having Kumdo merged into Kendo in Other Countries. "Kendo in Australia", "Kendo in Europe", and "Kendo in Chile" are only ones of sections of "Kendo in Other Countries". Why does Kumdo need to have its own page? That will cause a misunderstanding. Some may think Kumdo is different from Kendo, which is not the case. In order to prevent misunderstanding and confusion, I propose having Kumdo merged into Kendo.Michael Friedrich 16:20 20/04/2006(UTC)
CAN WE JUST STOP
HEY EVERYONE. CAN WE PLEASE JUST DROP THE DEBATE OF KENDO AND KUMDO, IT'S POINTLESS. PEOPLE DOING KUMDO ARE SAYING THAT THEY DID NOT MAKE THE IDEA SO WHATS THE POINT? Soccer and football. Rugby and American Football. MLB and international baseball leagues. In all of the following sports each one has slight differences, but in the end, THEY'RE ALL THE SAME. So please can we stop... thank you. 24.23.180.24 04:33, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
I agree that this is 'much-ado about nothing', but comparing rugby to american football is a bad example. As an American that detests American football, I think you are giving rugby a bad name. ;)
srry bout that 24.23.180.24 06:23, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
This is complete nonsense to argue that Kendo whis is Kumdo in the modern korean language has its origins in Korea. It is well known historically that Korea has been influenced both by China and Japan. Kendo was introduced to korea during the japanese ocupation. I would recomend people to really do some serious research and if they don't want to so let them be. To say that the moon is made up of cheese while science proves the contrary is crazy. It does not matter how much you try to convince people otherwise even if they end up believing it, the moon will never made up of cheeese. Unsigned comment by 130.63.100.139.
- I don't understand at all what 130.63.100.139 wants to say. His(Her?) English is so poor that I cannot read. Can I just delete this comment?Michael Friedrich 08:46, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
- Please assume good faith - just because you think another editor may not be proficient in English does not constitute grounds for deleting his comments. Deleting other people's comments from the talk board constitutes vandalism. Also, if you're going to start accusing other people of having "poor English", let me remind you how many times you accused other editors of bandalism ...
But I'll add that his post is indeed very confusing and hard to understand. Deiaemeth 09:02, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
bandalism:just mistyping.(B and V are next to each other.) Sorry. I meant Vandalism. Thanks. Michael Friedrich 09:02, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
Kmud is a lie of origin of the kendo.
Please do not delete the international fact (International Kendo Federation admitted) that I had added. Please present the evidence that can be verified if you hope for the deletion. Receive the evidence on that and receive the verification of International Kendo Federation. Delete it on that. It is judged that most things called the evidence of the current state and South Korea are fabrication and the distortions. --Sanchaman 16:31, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
Why I reverted this section
- A part of information on the net of South Korea and the apprenticeship of Kumdo 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 (International_Kendo_Federation), and fixed as an international fact that it was a Japanese origin. [9]
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 Haidong Gumdo#Legal controversy.
- NPOV doesn't mean presenting every view (See: WP:NPOV#Undue weight). 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 Haidong Gumdo 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. — AKADriver ☎ 16:59, 23 May 2006 (UTC)