Talk:Cardistry

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Extreme card manipulation[edit]

I suggest people look at the discussion pages of WikiProject Magic . There is a possibly spurious entry on extreme card manipulating which arguable should be subsumed by Flourish:

== Extreme card manipulation ==

Someone, obviously insider, wrote an article about it. Is it considered magic, or not? How should it be classified? Samohyl Jan 11:38, 17 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This stuff is plainly just a branch of flourishes. Just the fact that the author/s need to refer to flourishes is enough for me. You can do flourishes for many reasons - and some Western vaudeville artists just did card flourishes in the first half of the 20th century. There are all sorta geeky, ossessional sub-categories of ANYTHING. Wiki should not allow folks to self-publicise by cornering off a small piece of something and then describing it as a category all of its own - and then conferring some badge of legitimacy to whoever is associated with the new category. Anyhows, the so-called extreme manipulators are only labelling what is already out there - magicians for hundreds of years have been into this muscular thing of showing off their skills at high speed charlier cuts and passes, how many decks they can use simultaneously, how fast they can close a fan one-handed. We should amalgamate these guys into the flourish section and be done - no naming of the guys [you bet there are no girls!] who stuck a flag on it. Speaking of which the flourish section needs expansion. Selfpublicitysucks 23:23, 25 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]


Hey! I just did a google and hilariously found webtalk which completely subverts the 'Extreme' logic. The stub article tries to make a distinction between magicians and extreme manipulators. However, one of the apparent masters of the genre has gone on record as saying he is a magician. This must be a nail in the coffin for those wanting a separate section. Here is the webtalk, highlighting the names cited as Extreme Manipulation masters[1] Selfpublicitysucks 23:40, 25 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]


Should we take action? Selfpublicitysucks 23:55, 25 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

What action do you have in mind? Samohyl Jan 09:54, 29 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
nuclear war should be appropriate --Slashme 12:06, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

AfD on XCM / extreme card manipulation[edit]

I have put up XCM or extreme card manipulation up for deletion. In the light of the discussion on the delete page I am making changes to flourish which are in keeping with the balance of the discussion. Grroin 00:34, 23 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Cleanup[edit]

This is nothing but a list of unsourced types of card flourish with very few links to articles. I would suggest either giving brief descriptions of the individual flourishes, or removing those without articles. --GraemeL (talk) 14:23, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I absolutely agree. Only the well known or published should be listed. But I am not an expert, if you are please go ahead. Samohyl Jan 17:41, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunatly, I'm not. :-/ --GraemeL (talk) 17:49, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think it would be more useful to instead of listing a random number of flourishes (which obviously people have gone in to include their own moves so they'd show up in Wikipedia), it would be nice to simply list the different categories of known moves, maybe highlighting one or two commonly known ones for each. This would give a much better explanation for what a flourish is. I don't think the point of the article is to say that there are 1000's of flourishes. --67.68.49.12 12:28, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This has become a list with no real reason for existing. As noted above, very few on this list even have articles. I will begin to clean it up, first by removing the list of flourishers as none of them seem to have articles. IrishGuy talk 19:03, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If we want to include a list of flourishes, we can start with the ones listed on this thread from r/cardistry. They are already broken down by category and include short descriptions for the categories. Although this is from Reddit, the contributors are key figures in cardistry and can be verified. For instance, the person that made the post is Eliot Slevin, the first place winner of ICO Season 1. Aliu139 (talk) 23:16, 22 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

What about writing?[edit]

Came here looking for information on flourishes such as those added to the ends of signatures, and found nothing on the subject whatsoever... 71.198.127.97 06:12, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Non card flourishes[edit]

Came here looking for flourishes on anything, like swordplay, maybe notes could be added? --86.16.123.192 22:33, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal: Disambiguation Page[edit]

There's certainly enough material out there to make a wikipedia article on Card Flourishing. However, yes... A flourish doesn't necessarily mean a card flourish. As has been suggested in the discussion, flourishes such as those used when signing your name with a pen (note the signature of John Hancock) or those used in swordplay. I think a disambiguation page would be appropriate, as well as a clean-up involving card flourishing (the interest that brought me here in the first place).

I don't think that "Florysche" which directs you to "Association for Renaissance Martial Arts" is appropriate for a merger. However, I do believe it's more than appropriate for a disambiguation.

Other thoughts? Thanks!

--Protocoldroid (talk) 15:41, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I moved this article to 'card flourish' so the article flourish is now a redirect and available to be mad a disambiguation page. RJFJR (talk) 20:03, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Excellent move *thumbs up* --Protocoldroid (talk) 22:36, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Added References[edit]

Note on photograph: This was moved from the card magic article. More photographs for our selection would be favorable. I looked up the flourish here and gave reference for the term only. This reference is not in defense of the photograph, but, an explanation thereof.

I tried to flesh out the definition and used Tarr's book to try to back it up. I requested the "fact" flag on the terms "cardistry" and "extreme card manipulation" because A. I'm quite curious to know where these terms originated (I know they're in general use as jargon), and B. this will make the article more legitimate.

--Protocoldroid (talk) 14:39, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm reverting the changes made after these references were added for these reasons:
A. No sources were cited, and the definition I improved used a source.
B. The whole definition was made bold, and compromised the visual style of the page, which follows wiki guidelines.
C. The POV is skewed, we all know there's a debate amongst pure flourishing artists and magicians, especially if you read decknique/theory11/handlordz. So let's keep that debate away from this article, and use references.

However, I encourage the author to return with references. Thank you!

--Protocoldroid (talk) 12:08, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The image has now been removed, due to it being used for self promotion by another wikipedia editor. I'm keeping the reference here in case I cite the book again. Do not use this page for self promotion, please see the talk under Wikiproject Magic about notability and self promotion guide lines.

--Protocoldroid (talk) 03:01, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merge proposal[edit]

Cardistry#General cardistry categories appears to be nothing but a list of flourishes, which overlaps and is functionally redundant to Card flourish#Terminology. The former should merge into the latter, and the cardistry article should be developed to cover the various schools of cardistry instead of duplicating the function of the flourishes article, which in turn should be more developed to cover more of the different flourishes. If anything in the cardistry list isn't actually a flourish but some other cardistry move, it should stay there (in a more appropriately named section) with a pointer to this article for names and definitions of the flourishes (e.g. * Flourishes of various sorts ''(see [[Card flourish]] for a detailed list)'', and limit itself to only non-flourish cardistry moves as other list entries. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 10:53, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm in agreement, good call! Also good edits, thanks SMC. I'm going to put a fact tag back on XCM, I'm really hoping for the betterment of this article that someone can find some good references surrounding that topic, i'd like to see it defined and dated. As far as I know, OR / anecdotally -- XCM is a brand name that De'Vo uses to sell his material surrounding flourishing. --Protocoldroid (talk) 02:39, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merger proposal[edit]

Card flourisher doesn't appear to add much substantive content that isn't already on this page, and could easily be merged? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Annelid (talk • contribs) 20:02, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Card Flourish merge with Card Manipuation[edit]

I propose that Card Flourish should be merged with Card Manipulation. Card Flourishes is a subset of card manipulation. The termn "flourishes" was created by magicians and only used by magicians when doing moves with their magic. Pure card manipulation is just "Card Manipulation." The title published in 8 magazines and several television shows for practioners using only card manipulation as an indepdendent artform is Extreme Card Manipulation (XCM). But both are forms or subsets of card manipulation. Drlmagicman (talk) 10:05, 16 February 2009 (UTC)DR. Magic[reply]

Why a redirect from "Flurish"?[edit]

There is a musical act from Los Angeles called "Flurish" and an article cannot be created due to a redirect for the word to this article about card flourishes.

Is is possible to remove this redirect?

Can anyone help as I am a newbie?

www.flurish.net

Cpacilio (talk) 20:18, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 15 January 2016[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved. Unopposed for over a week. History swap performed in order to preserve the old history at the target title. Jenks24 (talk) 09:13, 25 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Card flourish → Cardistry – I suggest moving this page per WP:COMMONNAME and WP:RECOGNIZABLE. "Card flourish" is a phrase used to refer to a magicians simple flourishes whereas "Cardistry" refers to the independent performance art. Academic sources such as Wilson, Mark (1975). Mark Wilson's Complete Course In Magic. Running Press. ISBN 0-89471-623-9 (page 149, 153) and Kenner, Chris (1992). Totally Out of Control. Kaufman & Greenberg. ASIN B000J40RDW (page 125, 126) support this. Journalistic sources such as Vanity Fair and Wired also use the term "Cardistry" so as not mistake it for simply card flourishes. Furthermore, other articles on Wikipedia related to the art form (History of cardistry for example) use the proper name to avoid confusion, so obviously this article should as well. Best! Jonas Vinther • (Click here to collect your prize!) 23:09, 15 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Wiktionary[edit]

"Cardistry" does not exist there. I don't contribute there, but somebody who does might want to give it a go. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 17:12, 2 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. If need be, I'll do it after the GA-review. Jonas Vinther • (Click here to collect your prize!) 15:29, 3 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It's done! Your welcome. Doctor Papa Jones • (Click here to collect your prize!) 00:05, 15 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks 7&6=thirteen (☎) 15:50, 15 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned references in Cardistry[edit]

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Cardistry's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "wired":

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 00:38, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 09:21, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 12:08, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education assignment: Public Writing C1[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 8 September 2022 and 21 December 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Editoratlarge55 (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Editoratlarge55 (talk) 17:30, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Cardistry&oldid=1200637859"