Jump to content

Talk:Chain weapon

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 200.142.100.230 (talk) at 19:37, 11 September 2006 (This anonymous disagrees.). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

The various chain weapons should all be linked to and/or referenced on this page, but they should not be merged into this page. TonyTheTiger 01:12, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merge: disagree

Moved comments from article to talk page. -- Gogo Dodo 03:10, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The text of this article indicates significant differences between these weapons which would be better treated by the dedicated articles (which also need some attention). What about making this a disambiguation page? "Chain weapon" is a rather generic term and could include the European Flail (weapon), not just weapons of Asia. There is a category called "Flail Weapons" that this page is already listed on... does anyone feel that a subcategory of this called "Chain Weapons" is needed? Otherwise, just link each chain weapon article (pardon the pun) with the existing "Flail Weapons" category. Bezapt 06:48, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I concur with the above. The weapons are distinct from one another and merit individual pages just as do all the various pole-arms and swords on Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.66.88.48 (talkcontribs)
I have to also disagree with merging. Most pages that reference a large variety of items or subjects only give a brief description, and do not go into much detail as separate pages do. I say list them and link to a more descriptive page of their own. Also, chain weapon isn't a really good descriptive term, since some do not always use chain. - Hellmark 20:31, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The meteor hammer should be given its own page simple because it's something out of Kill Bill, and many people will look it up because of Kill Bill.

Agreed, just because it's fairly rare doesn't mean it should be swallowed up. In fact, quite the opposite, one of the strengths of Wikipedia is that one can find detailed info on obscure topics. Why not just merge all the different films into one thread marked "film"? It's far more accurate and user friendly like this. Meteor is also becoming more popular as a skill toy for performance arts, and this means that a lot of those interested in poi/staff/club spinning are going to want to find out specific information about meteors.


Disagree. Strongly. Someone seems intent on merging as many chain weapons as they can into a single article. Why don't they stop being lazy and write something about those weapons in this article -- then use Main Article links at the start of each section. Thus each weapon can maintain a full article devoted to it, while this article can compare and contrast their methods of construction and usage; all of which are sufficiently different as to be individual weapons in their own right. There are actually enough of these weapons that they could even warrant their own category. In chinese martial arts, they're (rather ironically) termed 'soft weapons'. --80.6.88.221 08:53, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]


disagree. it woudl seem to make more sence referenced in meteor hammer. -unjust

--- I disagree with the proposed merging; instead, this article should be extinguished and/or turned into a reference point for these weapons (similar to a Disambiguation page). Chain weapons are the same only on the surface; each culture [which at one point in time employed these weapons] has developed its own style.