Jump to content

Talk:Dan (rank)

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

Page move

[edit]

I added a paragraph and moved the page from dan (martial arts), since dan ranks are often used in non-martial art context. I am not sure which name is the best one for the page, but it should not include anything martial art/budo related. / Habj 11:43, 24 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

7th dan

[edit]

Is there a reason why the 7th dan is not listed but integrated into the 6th dan "also: shichidan"? Aurora sword 09:19, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

yeah..., I screwed it up... I'm fixing it now, thanks :P Bradford44 15:12, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

15th Dan

[edit]

Doesnt Bujinkan has 15 Dan grades? Thought 11 - 15 are little bit different than 1-10. Korppi76 12:22, 10 November 2006 (UTC)okikoke[reply]

According to its wikipedia entry it does, but their website is very sparse on information. I don't know about anyone else, but my martial arts experience leads me to conclude that having more than ten dan ranks is extremely rare and unorthadox. And usually 10th dan is reserved only for the style head, or awarded posthumously. Until you mentioned Bujinkan, I had never heard of anyone other than American instructors with inflated egos awarding or claiming ranks higher than 10th dan. My preference would be to leave the list at ten, since they are most often used. On the other hand, if anyone really wants to list 11 through 15, I believe they would be:

History

[edit]

Currently the history section is only for martial arts. But dan ranks were used much further back for other arts (e.g., I think they were already in use in the 17th century for go). Maybe someone who knows about this can improve the history section. --Zundark 14:42, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The remarks made about Go history and its establishment of dan rankings, especially regarding Dosaku, are completely false. For this reason, there can be no correct references (there must be some incorrect reference since the person who wrote this entry probably didn't simply invent it). Finally, the English in this entry is poor. ilan 00:50, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Move

[edit]

The article was moved (undiscussed) and is now incorrect, a basic cut & paste merge with Kyu dan rankhas confused thins further, Dan and kyu ranks are NOt exclusive to martial arts all though most common there out side japan, and not all arts use them confusing this futher, I am going to move to [[Dan (rank)] as the best title --Nate1481(t/c) 08:45, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Moved & the cut & paste of Kyu reverted it now needs expanding to cover more on Go, and use of ranking sin other areas in Japan. --Nate1481(t/c) 09:08, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Details on the usage in go are already in the go ranks and ratings article. Perhaps a short section should be written on this which refers to that as its main article? HermanHiddema (talk) 10:06, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It only needs a summary for go I agree, but currently their is only the mention in the lead. --Nate1481(t/c) 10:17, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ten Korean dan translates as "what" dan?

[edit]

gu dan is ninth, it doesn't say what posthumous 10th is called but has the Korean character, just not transliterated. 65.102.7.165 (talk) 02:02, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Jhoon Goo Ree, 10th dan

[edit]

Jhoon Goo Rhee is ranked 10th dan, but taekwondo only has 9 and, seldom, 10 ranks. From article:

Usually the dan ranks do not go past ninth dan, although on some occasions in some organizations a tenth dan (십단) has been issued. According to Kukkiwon, they have only ever issued six official 10th Dan to deceased people, and two living persons, (Un Yong Kim and Sang Kee Paik) who were considered to have made a great contribution to Tae kwon do.[citation needed]

Should his name be added there? There's also some kind of reference: http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/special/2009/11/178_17108.html --Jargon ๏̯͡๏) 10:42, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, conversation here. --Jargon ๏̯͡๏) 15:31, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Jhoon Rhee holds 10th Dan from his own organization, not from any Taekwondo body in Korea, where he learned old style Tae Kwon Do (Tang Soo Do Chung Do Kwan). In Korea, 10th Dan is not issued until after death. Honorary Dan of all levels have been issued, but they are not official, but Jhoon Rhee was never issued honorary Dan as he is an actual practitioner.

Sang Kee Paik on the other hand is registered (as of 11/5/2010) with Kukkiwon as a 9th Dan. He was never in a position to voted to the 10th Dan level. Whoever is writing him in as such is insulting him, please stop. Al Cole, Mastercole@aol.com Masteralcole (talk) 10:03, 13 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mass noun?

[edit]

Is dan (and duan) a mass noun? I understood these words to be mass nouns, but I notice that they are not treated as such in the article.--ZincBelief (talk) 16:25, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Japanese does not differentiate between count and mass nouns, so you can treat dan as a count noun or as a mass noun.--TheLightmaster (talk) 22:24, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Reorganizing/rewording of the "lead"

[edit]

Hi,

I reorganized the lead section of this article and rephrased some of the wording. I think it reads better now than before, but am really interested in any suggestions others may have. Please let me know what you think and if it's OK now as is or should be reverted back to what it was before. Thanks in advance - Marchjuly (talk) 02:00, 27 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

History - colored belts/progression of colors.

[edit]

Hi,

Two questions regarding the last sentence The basic progression of the colors and tip colors (e.g., white → yellow → green → blue → brown → black) facilitated dyeing the same belt in History.

  1. Is the progression of colors correct as given? I believe it might be a little different for Judo. The US Judo Association (USJA) gives the following on its website: white →yellow→orange→green→blue→purple→brown→black. This is how I remember it from my youth, but maybe different organizations and different martial arts use different colors or follow a slightly different progression. If that's the case (and it appears to be so according to Rank in Judo, then maybe it should be reworded as follows: Although the basic progression of colors and tip colors is white → yellow → green → blue → brown → black, the actual colors and progression may slightly vary both according to martial art and organizing body..
  2. Not sure what is meant by facilitated dyeing the same belt. Is this supposed to mean facilitated dyeing the (entire) belt the same (color) ? If the purpose of the above is to emphasize moving from dyeing only the tips of belts to dyeing the entire belt, then I think it should be written as such. My experience is that common practice in the US is to either dye a white belt (the entire belt and not just the tips) the desired color yourself, or to purchase one already that has already been dyed.

Any feedback or suggestions regarding this? Thanks in advance - Marchjuly (talk) 04:51, 27 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Colored belts and about Kyu grades and are really not relevant to this article. Best to avoid the confusion by just deleting the sentence.Peter Rehse (talk) 10:10, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@PRehse: Thanks Peter. I just was asking for clarification. I didn't add that information and don't have a preference as to whether it stays.

I am just a little curious as to why you deleted the interwiki (red) links I added. They just indicated that no English Wikipedia pages existed for those shogi related topics and led to their respective Japanese Wikipedia articles for reference. Perhaps some editor will see the redlink and decide to create an English page for one of them. Once such an English page has been created, the link automatically will lead to that page, instead of leading to its Japanese Wikipedia page. - Marchjuly (talk) 10:59, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It was based on the probability that an article would be written which I judged to be low - there should be few if any redlinks in mature articles. Please revert if you have a different opinion - I am probably too obsessed with astetics.Peter Rehse (talk) 11:06, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the speedy reply Peter. I understand your reasoning, and although I would like to create those pages myself, I cannot say if I will get around to doing so. I can't argue that those links are an improvement in terms of content, but I don't really see any harm either. Suppose English pages for those topics did exist. Do you feel it would be inappropriate to wikilink to them? I certainly don't want to overlink, so there's no really rush to change them back. Perhaps others will join discussion and give their opinion. Thanks again for the feedback. - Marchjuly (talk) 11:26, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
If the articles existed yes they should be linked - that is the true strength of wikipedia. Conversely, when articles are deleted for lack of notability the resultant redlinks should be removed. I think it is entirely appropriate that redlinks are put in place when there is a good chance the article will be written but even so (just an opinion) very few people see a redlink and say Gee I should right an article about that'.Peter Rehse (talk) 11:45, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Dan (rank). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:00, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Dan (rank). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:19, 3 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Go and Shogi are spelled uppercase.

[edit]

The main article on Go does so, why not the "Dan" article? Sorry for being a stickler to the rules, but lower case is just plain wrong. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.47.20.42 (talk) 06:45, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Italicize?

[edit]

i think "dan" may need to be italicized as per MOS:FOREIGNITALIC; it doesn't seem to be in english language dictionaries toobigtokale (talk) 03:33, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Dan_(rank)&oldid=1218762300"