Jump to content

Talk:Japanese sword: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
MBK004 (talk | contribs)
MILHIST B-Class checklist per WP:MHA-BCAD
No edit summary
Line 16: Line 16:
{{archivebox|auto=long}}
{{archivebox|auto=long}}
__TOC__
__TOC__



==Nodachi lenght==
Quote:
Nodachi: 80 to 90 cm
End of quotation.

Isn`t the nodachi above 90 cm in all cases? From what I know, there isn`t a single sword, classified as a nodachi, that is under 91 cm. 80-90 cm is what most will call a Oukatana, or a bigger-than-usual katana, but still one. The nodachi is longer and thicker, right?



== I-beam ==
== I-beam ==
Line 22: Line 32:


:There aren't any samurai anymore (outside of wannabes). Do you have a reference for this? I'm pretty skeptical about spring steel being able to slice through a real I-beam. ···[[User:Nihonjoe|<font color="green">日本穣</font>]]<sup>[[Help:Japanese|?]] · <small>[[User talk:Nihonjoe|Talk to Nihonjoe]]</sup></small> 02:39, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
:There aren't any samurai anymore (outside of wannabes). Do you have a reference for this? I'm pretty skeptical about spring steel being able to slice through a real I-beam. ···[[User:Nihonjoe|<font color="green">日本穣</font>]]<sup>[[Help:Japanese|?]] · <small>[[User talk:Nihonjoe|Talk to Nihonjoe]]</sup></small> 02:39, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
:: You need a source on this, cause it sound impossible (and is) <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/24.119.210.17|24.119.210.17]] ([[User talk:24.119.210.17|talk]]) 20:07, 9 February 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:: You need a source on this, cause it sound impossible (and is) <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsign ed]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/24.119.210.17|24.119.210.17]] ([[User talk:24.119.210.17|talk]]) 20:07, 9 February 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:::I don't think ''Ripley's believe it or not'' is a [[WP:RS|reliable source]], althought it would be [[WP:V|verifiable]]. [[User:Mythsearcher|MythSearcher]]<sup>[[User talk:Mythsearcher|talk]]</sup> 20:30, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
:::I don't think ''Ripley's believe it or not'' is a [[WP:RS|reliable source]], althought it would be [[WP:V|verifiable]]. [[User:Mythsearcher|MythSearcher]]<sup>[[User talk:Mythsearcher|talk]]</sup> 20:30, 9 February 2008 (UTC)



Revision as of 13:36, 6 May 2008

Former good articleJapanese sword was one of the good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. 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
February 26, 2005Featured article candidateNot promoted
August 13, 2006Good article nomineeListed
March 10, 2007Good article reassessmentDelisted
Current status: Delisted good article


Nodachi lenght

Quote: Nodachi: 80 to 90 cm End of quotation.

Isn`t the nodachi above 90 cm in all cases? From what I know, there isn`t a single sword, classified as a nodachi, that is under 91 cm. 80-90 cm is what most will call a Oukatana, or a bigger-than-usual katana, but still one. The nodachi is longer and thicker, right?


I-beam

On Ripley's believe it or not a samurai was able to slice through halve an I-beam, should we add this? -Babelious 15:41, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There aren't any samurai anymore (outside of wannabes). Do you have a reference for this? I'm pretty skeptical about spring steel being able to slice through a real I-beam. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 02:39, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You need a source on this, cause it sound impossible (and is) —Preceding unsign ed comment added by 24.119.210.17 (talk) 20:07, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think Ripley's believe it or not is a reliable source, althought it would be verifiable. MythSearchertalk 20:30, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sections to add

We need to add much more detail about katanas if this is to gain good article status again. I propose some additional sections

* Manufacturing of Katanas or Construction or How Katanas are Made
* Legalities (such as which countries prohibit use or ownership)
* Use in Martial Arts (e.g. training)

Drmadskills (talk) 02:53, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A couple other sections we should add

* History
* Legalities
* Anatomy

Drmadskills (talk) 02:58, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

History section needed

This article strongly needs a discussion of the history of the katana. I don't have the knowledge to do it myself. (The reason I came to this article was to get an overview of the history.) --JHP (talk) 22:12, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What the hell? Why are the katana article and the Japanese sword articles pointing to the same discussion page?! How do we specifically discuss the katana article? --JHP (talk) 22:18, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've fixed that. You can go to Talk:Katana to discuss whatever you want to discuss. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 23:07, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Domo Arigato Gozaimasu. --JHP (talk) 23:50, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I noticed that you recent edits included changing the history section to katana, while it would be within the scope of this article, it seems like it fits into the Katana article as well. Would it be a good idea to duplicate some of that info to the katana article as a start of help improving it since it got little history section in it? MythSearchertalk 09:04, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]