User talk:Janggeom

Welcome!

Hello, Janggeom, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• Introduction
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date.

If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome!  —

κaτaʟaveno^T_C 15:05, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Hello Katalaveno, and thank you for the warm welcome. I don't know how much or how regularly I will be contributing to Wikipedia, but will hopefully have a positive effect on any article I work on. Janggeom 16:41, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:RIT(A)-Logo.png

Thanks for uploading Image:RIT(A)-Logo.png. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 21:09, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Image renamed and revised.

Rhee Taekwon-Do

Thanks for getting the bits I missed. --Nate1481(^t/_c) 16:23, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

I feel the article is ready to be taken through promotion steps - I left comments on the talk page. Good luck and let me know if you need help with the steps.Peter Rehse 13:01, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks communicated to Nate1481 and PRehse on the Rhee Taekwon-Do discussion page.

Greetings from WikiProject Korea!

Thank you for your recent contributions to one of Wikipedia's Korea-related articles. Given the interest you've expressed by your edits, have you considered joining WikiProject Korea? It's a group dedicated to improving the overall quality of all Korea-related articles. If you would like to join, simply add your name to the list of participants.

If you have any questions, don't hesitate to ask at the project talk page. We look forward to working with you in the future! PC78 19:15, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your kind invitation to join the WP Korea project; much appreciated. My main focus is on martial arts articles, but if I start working more on Korean articles later, I would be honoured to join. In the meantime, I will continue contributing to Korean articles as I am able. Janggeom 03:05, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Karate

Welcome to the karate article! Good work at removing fat from the text. The Korean section had references because there have been many edit wars over the relation of Korea and Japan. The references were there to prevent future edit wars - that is why almost every sentence was referenced. jmcw 08:06, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your recent welcome, Jmcw37. I removed the Wikipedia citations from the Karate article because it is my understanding that Wikipedia articles should not be used as references. I appreciate the comment about the edit wars; hopefully that kind of behaviour will be minimised once the Karate article is thoroughly revised and appropriately documented with regard to sources. Janggeom 14:42, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

I made a note about naming conventions on the karate talk page. The wiki standard distinguishes between names before 1868 and after 1868. jmcw 13:16, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your note about the Wikipedia guidelines for Japanese names (surname-first name for pre-Meiji, otherwise first name-surname). Janggeom 14:59, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Redirects

Just a piece of advice: when you create a redirect, there must not be a space between "#" and "REDIRECT"; i.e. it's "#REDIRECT [[Target]]", not # REDIRECT [[Target]]. - Mike Rosoft 08:23, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your note about the syntax for redirects; just a typing error on my part. Janggeom 08:26, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Hello

You revert this.[1] I think you are korean, so please read this. [2]Template:Ko ITF 태권도인들은 최홍희를 태권도의 창시자라고 주저 없이 말한다. ‘창시(創始)’의 사전적 의미는 ‘처음 시작함’인데, 이는 최홍희가 태권도를 처음으로 시작했다는 말이다. 하지만 다르게 평가하는 사람도 적지 않다.

태권도 역사를 오랜 기간 연구한 한 교수는 “최홍희 총재는 태권도 창시자가 아니라 작명자다. ‘태권도’가 1955년 그의 제안에 의해 작명된 것은 부인할 수 없는 사실이지만, 그가 태권도를 창시했다는 근거 자료는 어디에도 찾아 볼 수 없다”며 “50~60년대 태권도협회 임원으로 활동했던 원로들조차 그를 태권도 창시자라고 말하지 않는다”고 주장했다. Manacpowers (talk) 04:06, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

You are welcome to assume what you wish … but you could be doing yourself a disservice. Janggeom (talk) 15:15, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Martial arts Barnstar

		The Martial Arts Barnstar
		Ryt 007 | Talk

Hello Ryt 007, thank you for the WPMA Barnstar; that is kind of you. Janggeom (talk) 00:55, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Noting for the record: awarded 23 July 2009, not 24 July 2009. Upon checking, I discovered a problem in the WPMA Barnstar template ({{date}} was used instead of {{subst:today}}) and corrected it. Janggeom (talk) 01:41, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

seconded! Thanks for fixing that it's just another reason why you are an outstanding contributor. Great work on clean in up all the articles I came here to add this and realised Ryt 007 had beat me to it! I had done some editin on Wong Shun Leung before giving up & it is really good to see it as a balanced readable article. --Nate1481 08:41, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your positive feedback and generous comments, Nate1481. Janggeom (talk) 23:39, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Recent death tag

Please do not add the {{recentdeath}} tag to people who died more than one week ago [3]. The tag is only supposed to be used for one week. Thanks, WWGB (talk) 14:27, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your note; I had not been aware of that Wikipedia policy previously. Janggeom (talk) 15:18, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

And don't use it indiscriminately too all recent deaths. The template instructions says that it "should only be used when many editors (perhaps a hundred or more) are editing the article on the same day. Do not use it merely to tag the article of a recently deceased person." Rettetast (talk) 10:50, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your note. I had been using the tag following what I perceived to be normal usage, but having now read through the template in detail, I can see that that was not a good model to follow. Janggeom (talk) 12:14, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Cai_li_fo

Janggeom, thank you for reviewing the article, Cai_li_fo. Could you please explain your tags stating that there are not citations and the information is not verifiable. There are over 22 references throughout the article including some of the top most historians on the subject. Are you looking for a reference for each paragraph? If so, those references are already in the reference list. Is it possible to use existing sources to reference in multiple locations within the article? If so, how is that accomplished? Thank you. Clftruthseeking (talk) 22:07, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your message, Clftruthseeking. Essentially, any time there is a significant amount of text or a significant statement made, there should be an in-line reference using the <ref> and </ref> code, otherwise someone could be adding 'information' that cannot be verified. Note that the tags I added each refer to one section, not the whole article. The tags are not saying that the article (as a whole) has no references or has poor references, just that certain sections need more references. If those references are already in the reference list, it is easy to use them more than once (across multiple locations) in the same article. Here is how to do it:

• You need to give a name to the reference the first time you cite it in the article, using <ref name="Ref1">the reference</ref>.
• Any time after that, you can use <ref name="Ref1"/> and an extra link to the same reference will appear.
• One thing you have to be careful about, of course, is that you do not give two different references the same ref name.

You might like to try the procedure above on the article; be sure to edit the entire article when you try this the first time (not just a section), so that when you preview your changes, it will show the updated reference list. If you are unsure about anything, feel welcome to post here again. Incidentally, for the description line for edits in an article, the four tildes (~~~~) do not work as a sign off; you only need to sign off on comments you post on discussion pages. Trust this all helps. Janggeom (talk) 00:52, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks again. Yes this is good information. Originally I thought the refs at the beginning of the article would be sufficient but now see the importance of utilizing them throughout. Instructions on naming the ref is very helpful.Clftruthseeking (talk) 00:06, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your note; good to know the information has been of help. All the best for your work on improving the article. I think that with sufficient referencing and a bit of copy-editing, it should be ready for assessment for C class. Janggeom (talk) 01:21, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the suggestion to become a participant of the WikiProject Martial Arts. It is an honor.Clftruthseeking (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 05:26, 14 January 2010 (UTC).

Still working on Jeong Yim page

Hi Janggeom,

I created the Cai Li Fo page and also created the Jeong Yim page. The Jeong Yim page is still a work in progress and I need to spend time putting in all the references and page numbers.

The historic information on the current Cai Li Fo wiki is referenced, validated, and accepted by the majority of all Choy Li Fut schools as well as martial arts historians and practitioners. I put in the history of how all the various Choy Li Fut branches started; and referenced and validated that information. (Of course I am still working providing more on that too) Because of it's balanced and neutral standpoint, it has seemingly been accepted by the majority of Choy Li Fut fanatics.

In the past, when various users tried to create a Choy Li Fut wiki page, they wrote it from a biased historical perspective of various branches, most of which were limited in scope and historically incorrect. Because of the limitations, it was often destroyed or vandalized by Choy Li Fut fanatics who questioned that information.

There is a Hung Sing Choy Li Fut group who wishes to revise history by trying to say that Choy Li Fut was created by Jeong Yim. Even within this group, there is Buk Sing Choy Li Fut revisionists who say that one of Jeong Yim's student's, Tam Sam (Tarm Sarm) is the true founder of what Choy Li Fut is as practiced today. They are fanatics - they don't necessarily disagree with the information the new wiki page, just certain parts of history and its outcome.

That is why I created the Jeong Yim page. Those groups can put in there version of history there and not vandalize the main Cai Li Fo page.

In order to appease the Hung Sing and Buksing groups, I created the Jeong Yim page and presented some of their viewpoints. He was a real person who seriously affected the history and development of Choy Li Fut but there is little written historic records about him. For the Hung Sing and Buksing Choy Li Fut revisionists, I put in their versions of history in the Jeong Yim page which differ from the accepted norm.

So, I am still working on the Jeong Yim page. I can't always spend a lot of time on it, but I don't want it to be deleted or destroyed either. Sometimes I get burned out on figuring out the best way to present the material, reference and validate it, as well as trying to make it neutral as well as presenting the various points of view.

I am so tired right now, I hope this talk section makes some sense. Huo Xin (talk) 05:59, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Hello Huo Xin, thank you for your note about the Jeung Yim article. Please note that placement of a notability tag on an article is not a threat of sudden deletion; it simply indicates that the article's notability may be questioned, and the main implication is that the article needs to establish the subject's notability more clearly. In my comment when I placed the notability tag, I suggested that rephrasing the paragraph might be an option. While it might be true that a subject is not well documented, putting emphasis on this in the article's lead section will naturally lead other Wikipedia contributors to ask why the article is there (since notability is a key requirement for all Wikipedia articles). One suggestion I might make to you is that it is better to start small and build up from there; better to have less information, but to have it reliably sourced, than to put in a whole lot of information without reliable sources—you might know (or believe) the information to be accurate, but without reliable sources, others have no way of knowing (and so they will be more likely to challenge or remove it). Trust this helps. Janggeom (talk) 07:19, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

HELP! with Lama Pai article

After an experience with the Chan Tai San article, many associated with the "tibetan martial arts" agreed in the interests of the articles on the subject it was best to not turn every article into a long list of "me, yes me, I am part of it" or just old blatant self promotion. Now, after several edits and re-edits and polite requests, we have a fellow apparently from Mexico who can't seem to help himself. Might we get a moderator or moderator action on this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nysanda (talk • contribs) 00:43, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Hello Nysanda, thank you for your note. I would have been happy to help in discussion, but I see that Gwen Gale has protected the article, so it looks as if this has been sorted out for now. Janggeom (talk) 13:17, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Your assistance Janggeom, or that or another member of WikiProject Martial arts would really be appreciated. I see you have helped here before, perhaps being a mediator of sorts will help resolve the continual reverting of the article without anyone being banned especially when Nysanda has done so much good work. Insinr8 (talk) 05:57, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Daniel J. Callaghan

I noticed you have been doing a lot of good work on this article. I have been going through and reviewing the status of all the Medal of Honor recipient articles and noticed this was rated as a stub but meets the criteria for B so I reassessed it as such. I realy think that it meets the criteria for Good article, with some minor tweaking. Not sure what your plans are but if you need help with it please let me know. If your not interested in GA I understand, just let me know and I can take care of it. --Kumioko (talk) 21:05, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your note and your reassessment of the article, Kumioko. Feel welcome to make recommendations on the article's discussion page, and I will see what I can do. You might also be interested to look at the article on William M. Callaghan, which I also rewrote, and was what led me to the Daniel J. Callaghan article originally. Janggeom (talk) 05:25, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

notability question

Hello Janggeom! I am responsible for maintaining this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academy_of_arms

I don't know very much about Wikipedia, so it's difficult for me to maintain this article correctly. I noticed that you recently added a "notability" tag to the article. Thank you for expressing your concern about the article. I was wondering if you could offer some advice?

I read the FAQ but I'm still not sure how to make the article more "notable". The school is a non-profit and the instructors volunteer their time for free, so there is no commercial motive for the article. The school has been written about by two major newspapers, one of which is amongst the biggest in the US. The school is an educational organization, one of the few places in California where students can learn historical German fencing. The article, though small, also contains links to other wiki articles, improving the connectedness of the wiki.

So I am trying. :) Do you have any other suggestions on what I can do? Your help is appreciated! I don't want the article to be deleted. Thanks, Janggeom.

Lazfin (talk) 03:58, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Hello Lazfin, thank you for your note about Academy of Arms. Notability is not about an article, but the subject of the article. In brief, if a subject is notable (by Wikipedia's definition) then a Wikipedia article on it is justified; if a subject is not notable, any Wikipedia article on it will most likely be deleted. If you have not done so already, you should probably read Wikipedia's guide on notability. Assuming that the Academy of Arms is a notable subject, the easiest way you can establish that is by adding reliable, independent references to the article, such as references to newspaper or magazine articles (or better, scholarly works) on the subject. I hope this suggestion helps. Janggeom (talk) 04:25, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Hi Janggeom, our article does list two newspaper sources. Someone recently marked them as dubious. The LA Times came out and made a video of our sword practice. After a certain period of time, they no longer host videos in their site unless you have paid access. So we kept a free copy of it on our site. The video has the LA Times logo and one of their popular reporters doing the story. It obviously isn't faked. Our group is a non-profit run by volunteers so there is no profit motive. There are very few places out there where people can study historical fencing and we just want people to know about this educational opportunity! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lazfin (talk • contribs) 23:43, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Hello Lazfin, thank you for your recent note. Two newspaper articles (in and of themselves) do not necessarily make a subject notable. If you have not yet done so, please read Wikipedia's guide on notability, which I provided a link to previously. Whether your group is non-profit or not, and whether it provides a good educational opportunity or not, is not relevant (as far as Wikipedia policies are concerned) to whether the subject of an article is notable or not. If you have not already received a welcome message, please take a look through the links of the welcome message I will post below (using a standard template); these will be a great help to you in understanding what Wikipedia is (and is not), and what kinds of articles are acceptable (in terms of notability and other issues) on Wikipedia. I hope this information helps. Janggeom (talk) 05:09, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Rapido Realismo Kali

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Rapido Realismo Kali. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rapido Realismo Kali. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:10, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Shodokan Aikido

Mind discussing what cleanup you think is necessary on the talkpage? It seems reasonably well-structured to me. I'll grant you the unsourced tag; I'll see about adding some references this weekend (I have a few books on the subject, and I think I have a copy of the official shiai rulebook hiding somewhere). — Gwalla | Talk 18:00, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your note, Gwalla; always good to hear from someone who is interested in helping improve Wikipedia, and in this case, who has relevant knowledge or expertise where I do not (Aikido). I will post comments on the article's talk page. Janggeom (talk) 23:55, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

James Rossant

Could you please check citations/references added to James Rossant? Saw your name on the article history. Many thanks - Aboudaqn —Preceding undated comment added 17:46, 17 February 2010 (UTC).

On 23 December 2009, I was browsing through Wikipedia and came across the James Rossant article. I saw that it had no references provided, so I added the 'unreferenced' tag. According to the article's log, you added references on 17 February 2010. One day later, another user apparently removed the tag. If you were asking me to remove the tag, that is actually something you can do yourself, once you have added some references—even if you are the article's creator, as in this case. If you were asking me something else, please clarify. Thanks for your note. Janggeom (talk) 00:05, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Sticky bar

Hello Nate, I was looking at the WPMA article review page that you kindly set up, and noticed that there are a lot of double spaces (and some triple spaces) throughout the page. My first thought was that you might have a sticky spacebar on your keyboard. I'm not sure if this will have any effect on links (it does not appear to have an effect, from what I've seen so far), but I thought I'd let you know just in case this becomes a technical issue later on. Thanks. Janggeom (talk) 02:40, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

A bit odd, i'll see if it clears up thanks!--Nate^t/_c 08:50, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

List of taekwondo grandmasters

Outstanding work on List of taekwondo grandmasters. TJRC (talk) 21:48, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Hello TJRC, after what seems to be a phase of people complaining about martial arts articles in general, or about me in particular (I was accused of vandalising an article, amongst other things), your note came as a pleasant surprise. Thank you. Janggeom (talk) 00:22, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Although I had voted for merge on this article, I think you are doing great work. jmcw (talk) 00:59, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your note, jmcw; I appreciate it. While I am writing to you, I would like to applaud your constructive work in WPMA recently. If you feel like doing some critical review or collaborative work, please feel welcome to take a look at some of the karate articles I've been working on recently. I would value your input if you have the time and inclination. Thanks. Janggeom (talk) 02:24, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Gunji Koizumi

Janggeom, thank you for rewriting the article, Gunji Koizumi

I think you have done a excellent job of making my original rough draft very readable.

I wrote the original back in 2006, but have since had health problems (heart attack and stroke) and was unable to finish it. I had received a barrage of incomprehensible messages from various critics, and had given up contributing to Wikipedia. It became more trouble than it was worth.

By the way I was a student of Koizumi at the Budokwai in the 1950's.

Regards Oldfarm (talk) 17:06, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Hello Oldfarm, thank you for your kind comments regarding the Gunji Koizumi article. I am sorry to hear about your health problems. If you have any troubles with critical feedback or image use, as I see from some messages above, feel welcome to ask me if you think I can be of help. I also ran into some of these issues when I first started contributing to Wikipedia. Thanks again for your note. Janggeom (talk) 00:44, 1 March 2010 (UTC)