Talk:Shotokan/Archive 2

Is Kenpo a karate style?

If it were up to me I would remove kenpo from the list of "big" karate styles. I have never seen it included before. AFAIK, the big 5 are shoto, wado, shito, goju and kyokushin. Anyone else agree? Shinji nishizono 23:14, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Anyone? Could I get some feedback on this issue? Shinji nishizono 12:52, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

i generaly see it as a big 4 not including kyokushin. and you get a different list if you refer to okinawa karate Goju-Ryu, Shorin-Ryu, Uechi-Ryu, and Isshin-Ryu. but i havnt realy got a relible source for this. i think this is how it is listed on the wado page. some people refere to kenpo as the japanese way of saying chines martial arts aka kung fu. i think that is how it is listed on the kenpo wiki page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.103.167.130 (talk) 18:21, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

I may be totally wrong but I have always understood kempo to mean the unarmed combat indigenous to Japan before the introduction of Okinawan te, as used by the Japanese military in the early 20th century. It seems to have become an alternative generic term for karate in general. --Ninja Shewolf (talk) 12:40, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Elvis and Shotokan

"Some of [Elvis'] signature stage moves are stylized Shotokan postures." This seems like it would make a great picture, best I could find with a quick google search was this - http://liquidblue.com/index.cfm/fuseaction/stickers.detail/stickers/elvis_presley/CODE/RETEPKPS/KARATE_POSE.html - Robogymnast 19:52, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Although Elvis did train in shotokan, most of his training was in Ed Parker's Kenpo. I'm not sure you should include this in the shotokan article for that reason.Shinji nishizono 22:32, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Please do not include Elvis in any Shotokan article he has nothing to do with it other than being a famous practicioner so list him in that section but don't make any sort of paragraph section about him supposedly training Shotokan. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.134.14.19 (talk) 17:34, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Large Additions

Fantastic. I'm still reading it over, but so far whomever the responsible parties are have my thanks. 207.161.3.28 03:52, 24 July 2006 (UTC)Matt

Jin Kazama

Even though it correctly states that Jin Kazama utilises Mishima Style Fighting Karate in Tekken 3, maybe it should be noted that Jin can be seen (partially) performing Tekki Shodan in one of the Tekken 3 intro sequences. 87.51.226.214 10:54, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Linkspam

I just cleaned out about 12 links from the External Links section. Several of these look legit at first but some turn out to be web pages for local dojos, which is not appropriate. Others don't seem to have any significant information that would be of use. This needs to be done frequently here; spam does tend to accumulate. Mangojuice^talk 13:52, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

I removed the links to the ISKF and to something called martialarm.com (which seems to exist mostly as advertising for martial arts supplies). In my reading of the Wikipedia external links guidelines, the ISKF link is not suitable for the article, as it proscribes "links to sites that primarily exist to sell products or services." The ISKF website, aside from advertising 2 dubious claims on the front page, is little more than a limited dojo list. One dubious claim is that Mr. Funakoshi authored the dojo kun. All evidence indicates that it was authored by Mr. Nakayama in the 1950s. The second questionable claim is that the ISKF has 50,000 members. As a member of the ISKF for more than 9 years, it's my best guess that the ISKF is comprised of less than 300 clubs (including college clubs). Even assuming a membership of 100 students per club, this would give them less than 30K members. The true membership numbers are probably much lower. Since every other link to a Shotokan karate organization (even those with far greater memberships than the ISKF, and websites that include much more information) was removed, I suppose the ISKF link should be too.

I added back the link to 24fightingchickens.com. It meets every requirement for inclusion in the Wikipedia external links guidelines, has been online for more than 10 years and has gained a reputation as the most comprehensive Shotokan information site on the web, doesn't promote a parochial point of view (as most other Shotokan websites are prone to do) since it allows free discussion of every article by anyone who cares to participate, includes not only a thorough digest of all the English-language research in the Shotokan curriculum but a fair amount of original research by a recognized authority on Shotokan (who speaks Japanese and lived and trained in Japan for 2 years). Jayess

Thanks, your work was more attentive than mine. Basically, we should not link to shotokan sites that are selling anything, but only to ones that legitimately provide information we can't get into on Wikipedia. Mangojuice^talk 17:49, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

• I agree that the link to all the dojos should be removed (although a page listing karate organizations would not be out of the question I suppose) I think that 50,000 is a reasonable number for ISKF membership. I think there are many more than 300 clubs. There might be about 300 in the US, but there are also many clubs overseas, in the strangest ares. Trinidad for example, has many more dojos than you would expect. (I think its 6 on the ISKF website, but the list is not complete by any means). I have cleaned out linkspam several times already. Would it be possible to get the link section only, under semi-protection?RogueNinja 16:38, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

• • There is no feature currently for semiprotecting (or full-protecting) parts of articles: it's all or nothing. Nope, we just have to watch carefully and revert additions. I'm somewhat of the opinion that we don't need external links at all here -- thoughts? Mangojuice^talk 18:20, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

• • • I concur. There is really no need for external hyperlinks. RogueNinja 22:36, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

If "All evidence indicates that it (the Dojo Kun) was authored by Mr. Nakayama in the 1950s." Someone may want to edit the Dojo Kun entry in Wikipedia, it states that the Dojo Kun may go back to the 18th century. [1]68.84.19.118 01:18, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Dojo Kun

It is notable to mention that many dojos recite the Dojo Kun (usually in Japanese and English) during closing lineup. This is often led by the sempai, who will say a line and the rest of the students will repeat it in unison. I'm not too familiar with Wikipedia so if anyone cares to add this (and has the time to look up the proper spellings of the Japanese phrases) go right ahead.

_Dojo Kun_

Seek perfection of character!

Be faithful!

Endeavor!

Respect others!

Refrain from violent behaviour!

At out dojos we use "Endeavor to excell" I'll try and get the Japanese for the page 142.161.176.198 22:44, 19 July 2006 (UTC)Matt

---

The current version of the dojo kun (shown below) is not to my knowledge correct.

  1. Hitotsu, jinkaku kansei ni tsutomuro koto.
     First, seek perfection of character.
  2. Hitotsu, makoto no michi wo mamoru koto.
     First, defend the path of truth.
  3. Hitotsu, doryoku no seishin o yashinau koto.
     First, strive to excel.
  4. Hitotsu, reigi o omonzuru koto.
     First, be courteous.
  5. Hitotsu, kekki no yu o imashimuru koto.
     First, refrain from violence.

The dojo kun should read;

   1. Exert oneself in the perfection of character
   2. Be faithful and sincere
   3. Cultivate the spirit of pereverance
   4. Respect propriety
   5. Refrain from impetuous and violent behaviour

This is the kun my dojo has always used and the version used by the JKAS (see [2])

It seems to me that the different dojo kun are different translations of the same Japanese. Has anyone got an authoritative translation e.g. from a book by Gichin Funakoshi?? simonthebold 09:39, 4 September 2006 (UTC) $Insertformulahere$

Here is the authorative translation. It is taught this way by my teacher, Shihan Van Weenen, and is published this way in his books. It reads:

Hitotsu! Jinkaku, kansei ni, tsutomuru koto!

One! To strive for the perfection of character!

Hitotsu! Makoto no, michi o, mamaru koto!

One! to defend the paths of truth

Hitotsu! Doryoku no, seishin o, yashinau koto!

One! To foster the spirit of effort!

Hitotsu Reigi o, omonzuru koto!

One! To honour the principles of etiquette

Hitotsu! Kekki no, yu o, imashimuru koto!

One! To guard against impetuous courage!

Claudio Shodan 11:50, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Hirokazu Kanazawa and Teruyuki Okazaki are two living masters who were students of Master Funakoshi himself. I have met both and they both recite the dojokun as:

Seek perfection of character

Be faithful

Endeavour

Respect others

Refrain from violent behaviour

I see masters Kanazawa and Okazaki as living sources of the definitive meaning of the dojokun from its primary proponent (that is, Master Funakoshi). Should not the above be the standard and taken as correct and exact?

User:Drmadskills 03:14, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

First, Funakoshi was not a proponent of the Dojo Kun. All indications are that the Dojo Kun was written by a bureaucrat at the JKA, sometime in the 1950s. There is plenty of info on the net concerning this topic. Here is a link to a discussion about the Dojo Kun, its creation, its relevence to our Karate practice, and the pitfalls inherent in its (mis)use: http://karatethejapaneseway.com/karate_underground/viewtopic.php?t=7790 The Dojo Kun has been repeatedly dismissed by countless Shotokan praticioners as a creation of the JKA under Nakayama, and not relevant to Karate practice in general.

Second, the Dojo Kun is not used by every Shotokan organization, it is a mainly a JKA thing.

Third, that so-called "definitive translation" is the one used by the ISKF (Okazaki's organization, to which I belong) and is a mis-translation of the JKA's Japanese-language Dojo Kun which expresses sentiments that are quite different than those listed above.

I don't think the Shotokan article needs to emphasize the Dojo Kun, because I don't think it can do justice to the debate surrounding it. Jayess (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 04:55, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Designation of karate as "superior Japanese martial art"

Referring to the "common terms" section, I would appreciate an explanation for why the translation of the characters that represent karate was changed to "superior japanese martial arts". Here is a well-regarded article that explains the commonly-accepted translation of the word: What is Karate

Sorry

I didnt mean to delete most of the article, and I didnt even realize thats what happened. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by RogueNinja (talk • contribs) 18:18, 3 December 2006 (UTC).

It's ok :)69.125.21.252 19:47, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Enpi

Someone (I dont know how to move page), should move this to empi. eNpi is an elbow strike, eMpi is the correct name of the kata. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by RogueNinja (talk • contribs) 18:22, 3 December 2006 (UTC).

Fixed.Peter Rehse 01:32, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

There is no distinction between the "em" and "en" sound in spoken Japanese. "Empi" and "Enpi" are exactly the same word. The choice of written character is what distinguishes the word for elbow from the word for swallow. Shinji nishizono 22:34, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

I suggest the articles Enpi and Empi be merged.Peter Rehse 04:09, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Article Promotion and some changes

• Promoted the article to a B class
• fixed a few broken links
• conversion to inline references (wikipedia does not like external links embedded in the article)
• ensuring that links are referenced only once.
• external links trimmed
• see also trimmed
• The section on rank system was too long (kyu grade belt colors are trivial)

I didn't change but I also think Common terms is a bit long but could be kept (perhaps changing it to common terms specific to Shotokan karate).

Hope this helpsPeter Rehse 01:18, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Common Terms

Shouldn't this section belong to karate? Kihon is called kihon in every school of karate. Lelkesa 15:38, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

should "Kihon waza 基本 Basics" be changed to "Kihon waza 基本 Basics technique" kihon meaning basic waza meaning technique —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.103.167.130 (talk) 16:36, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Major Styles of Karate

Hello, I have created a template with the seven major Karate styles, and added it to the page. I hope that is okay, I would suggest the last statement in the introductory paragraph be removed since the information is in the template. Regards, Grahamwild 14:49, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

17th precept

This precept really seems strange to me: it sounds like when you are used to them, postures become natural, but from what I know it should be more like when you are used to them, you can use a more natural stance but still control your muscles.

Is it a translation mistake?

---

My opinion: Since I don't speak Japanese, I'm not sure how accurate the translation is. However, it's obvious that it's a terribly-worded sentence. Whoever performed this translation of the kun obviously wasn't completely literate in the English language.

The commonly-accepted meaning of this precept goes something like this: Beginners are expected to practice their karate from well-defined stances (what the translator calls postures). Experienced karate practicioners are not expected to perform from the deep stances that are taught to beginners. Indeed, it would be ridiculous to expect someone to try to fight or spar while rooted in a deep zenkutsu-dachi or other beginner's stance. For experienced practicioners, the stances are simply their position at the moment they finish a committed technique. For example, after a strong stepping punch, the experienced practicioner may momentarily slide into a deep front stance; but it's not an affectation, it is a natural finish to the movement. Likewise, an expert who is moving to the side will probably end up in a position that approximates the side stance, even though that same expert would never consciously assume a deep kiba-dachi in anything other than a training situation.

So, while the stances are "for" beginners (and, by extension, beginners have no say in the matter of whether they will employ the deep stances - i.e. it's not their place to argue about it, they have to do it if they want the training), it is assumed that experts will not use the stances except whenever it is natural.

In short, this precept is a way of scolding beginners who complain that they shouldn't have to stick to deep stances because the more experienced practicioners use more effective stances. It puts the newbies in their place - it's like telling a beginning baseball player to always catch the ball with two hands (even though they see major leaguers snatch-catching the ball with just a single hand).Jayess 10:40, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Time Line

The article states: "Funakoshi was the man who 'officially' brought karate from Okinawa to mainland Japan, although Kenwa Mabuni, Motobu Choki and other Okinawans were actively teaching karate in Japan prior to this point."

The SKA website says that Funakoshi gave a demo in 1916. "Master Funakoshi was the first expert to introduce karate-do to mainland Japan. In 1916 he gave a demonstration to the Butokuden in Kyoto, Japan, which at that time was the official center of all martial arts." [3] I am guessing it was only the center of Japanese martial arts.

The Wikipedia article on Mabuni, says that he did not travel to Japan until 1917. [4] And, Choki didn't move to Japan until 1921.[5][6] So should the article read: Funakoshi was the man who 'officially' brought karate from Okinawa to mainland Japan, although Kenwa Mabuni, Motobu Choki and other Okinawans were actively teaching karate in Japan prior to this point. Of course there should be a reference to who those Okinawans were. --68.84.19.118 21:37, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Page move?

Just wondering what the rationale was for the page move. I was aware that only a very small minority (or less) of Shotokan practitioners actually refer to their school/style as Shotokan-ryu. Am I mistaken? Can anyone point to some resources where it is called Shotokan-ryu? The name "Shotokan" is also widely published in English without macrons, which would be an argument for changing it back. Bradford44 19:13, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

This renaming is pretentious and probably against the guidelines laid down in WP:MOS-JA - Jayess 22:42, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Come to think of it, I'm pretty sure that whoever made the change never actually read the Shotokan article. If they had, they would know that "Shotokan Karate" is the accepted name of style. Mr. Funakoshi called what he did "karate". His students built him a training hall called the "shotokan". Other martial artists called Funakoshi's students' style "shotokan karate" as a way of saying they practiced 'the karate done at the shotokan'. - Jayess 23:02, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Specific instance of dejargonization

In the 'Kumite' section: "At intermediate level (usually above 5th kyu), karateka are expected to learn 'ippon kumite' (one step sparring). Though it is only one step, it is more advanced because it involves a greater variety of attacks and blocks. It also requires the defender to execute a minor counter in a timely fashion. Minor counters can be almost anything, including strikes, grapples and take-downs.

The next level of kumite is the 'jiyu ippon kumite' (freestyle one step sparring)(Tsutomu Ohshima actually says in his book "Notes on Training" that jiyu ippon kumite is the most realistic practice in Shotokan Karate, and that it is more realistic than jiyu kumite). This is almost the same as ippon kumite but requires the karateka to be in motion. Practice in this is beneficial in improving jiyu kumite (freestyle sparring) skills, and also provides an opportunity for practicing major counters (as opposed to minor counters)."

A distinction between major and minor counters is never spelled out, beyond the terrifically vague 'almost anything' definition of a minor counter. Giving one would improve the article measurably. -Toptomcat 07:57, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Article improvement

I have started copy-editing this article, and aim to help make this a good English article (appropriate for a reader with no knowledge of Japanese, giving priority to English terms where available, etc.). I will check on references as I am able, but a critical revision of this article by someone more knowledgeable about Shotokan-ryu would be good. Janggeom 03:25, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Reversion?

I had nothing to do with adding it, but why was the American Shotokan Karate Association addition reverted? Or the corrections of some grammatical errors elsewhere? There is no justification recorded for this reversion, so I am temporarily putting it back the way it was. If someone disagrees, feel free to comment... 18.224.0.110 elmo —Preceding comment was added at 06:43, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

What happened to the section on Kenkojuku?

Just curious what happened to the section on Kenkojuku Karate Association, an official Shotokan school? I could not find any comments as to why the section was deleted (but, to be fair, I'm relatively new to wikipedia).

• Hi and thanks for your contributions to articles on karate and shotokan. Please, try to establish notability of kenkojuku according to the guidelines first. Then, prove the importance of this style - there are many offsprings and variations of shotokan, and Wikipedia cannot list them all. When these facts are confirmed by external sources, surely your edits will not be reverted. best, Pundit|utter 15:30, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

• In addition to asserting notabiity, we dont have the room in any article on wikipedia to write about every derviative style. RogueNinja_talk 16:49, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Too many organisations

Surely there are too many Shotokan organisations in the world to all go on this page. Should they each have their own page in the List of Karate Organisations and Category:Karate organizations? I also see that while I have been away the biography page for Enoeda Keinosuke, the "Tiger of Shotokan", has disapeared. Why? Can we get it Back?--Ninja Shewolf (talk) 14:58, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

You can try to reorganize info on organizations into subsections. Was info on Enoeda keinosuke a part of this article? perhaps he deserves a separate entry? Be sure to ascertain notability by external sources though. Pundit|utter 15:32, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

• I was thinking of splitting the article just a few days ago. Be bold and go for it! I agree that Enoeda Sensei is notable enough to have his own article, and I know that there are a plethora of sources that will talk about him. RogueNinja_talk 16:47, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Embedded Lists

The embedded lists that I imagine are being referred to at the top of the article are those on the terms used in Shotokan. We we create another page, List of shotokan terms. This would not have to be a shotokan only term list, but those that are used in shotokan.

Are the dojo kun and niju kun considered lists? Should there be a page for the niju kun?

Drmadskills (talk) 13:53, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Four Original Styles

Shotokan Karate is not one of the four original styles...and neither are the other three mentioned. Shuri-te, Naha-Te, Tomari-Te and Uechi-Ryu are the four original Karate styles as per http://www.wonder-okinawa.jp/023/eng/014/index.html 99.253.62.109 (talk) 16:57, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

local federations

I would like to suggest moving the information about national federations to separate articles, and leaving only the internationally operating organizations. Otherwise we'll end up with 100+ federations being listed. Any objections? Pundit|utter 01:15, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

I removed all the smaller ones, and put the larger ones in their own sub article. It is here RogueNinja_talk 02:28, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Good idea, the article should be about the generic art and mention the original ryu then link to the list, we may need to do something similar on jujutsu soon. --Nate1481(^t/_c) 08:56, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Descendant

wada ryu is listed as a desendent of shotokan karate. wadaryu is one of the origina japanese karate styles. this is quoted on the shotokan page 81.103.167.130 (talk) 20:08, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Removing Accurate Information

The other day, I spent a good amount of time making fixes and citing sources of information from my own website for the Shotokan page, and someone removed everything that I added.

I have been in Shotokan martial arts for 8 years and I have plenty liable sources of information on my website, given to me by different martial arts instructors. I am re-adding my information and if it is removed again then there is going to be a huge problem. I can understand some things being removed, but every piece of text that I updated was removed and I am not happy about this. I am trying to contribute and fix inaccurate information on the Shotokan page, as there is alot of information that is incorrect and someone put everything back to the way it was. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kumitekid (talk • contribs) 20:41, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Your website, even if it is accurate, is not a suitable reference for wikipedia. Do not link it to this page. Printed sources written by experts are preferred. Gishin Funikoshi has his own page with that sort of information on it. The coloured belt system you included is only one of many variants.--Ninja Shewolf (talk) 09:25, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

I agreed to Kumitekid. To the Ninja Shewolf, If you want to change and write the opinion, press edit page button and write in there. What you Ninja Shewolf doing is removing whole of suitable information if you don't like even just "one letter". --Kotodooka (talk) 09:26, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

More history please, less JKA-specific information

I did a bit of rewriting of the introduction, but it would be great if this article had a lot more about the history of the development of Shotokan-style karate. I think there's a fascinating story to be told about Gichin & Gigo, the rise of the university clubs, the effect of World War II, and the controversies/schisms after Gichin's death. I only know the rough outline of this story, though, so it would be great if someone with more knowledge could work on this, or if we could research it as a group. As it stands, the article has too much JKA-specific information about kata, etc., which aren't representative of Shotokan in general.Noamz (talk) 06:52, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Edits by Kotodooka

Could you please explain the reasons for your proposed changes? Do you dispute that Okinawan karate was influenced by Chinese martial arts? (There are many sources that say that it was, including the ones referenced in this article.) Also, do you dispute that Kenwa Mabuni and Chōki Motobu (in addition to Funakoshi) taught karate on mainland Japan during the early 20th century? Noamz (talk) 02:06, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

To elaborate, you made four changes to the article without much explanation:

1. Removing Chinese martial arts as an ancestor of Shotokan
2. Removing the references to Kenwa Mabuni and Chōki Motobu
3. Changing "mainland Japan" to "Honshū" in several places
4. Adding a citation related to the rank system

The information you removed in (1) and (2) is well-sourced, so I strongly disagree with those edits. (3) is a stylistic point, but this is the English Wikipedia, and I think most readers would have an easier time understanding Mainland Japan (which excludes Okinawa) than Honshu. (4) I am not sure about -- I think the factcheck is asking for a reference showing that Funakoshi introduced a rank system in the 20s, rather than questioning the fact that Kano Jigoro introduced the judo rank system (which is explained in that article). Again, I would appreciate a response to these comments. Noamz (talk) 23:16, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

• As of (1), Diffenetly Kotodooka is right. Noamz is just confusing the difference between the word of "Shotokan Style" and simple word "Karate". It dosen't mean "Shotokan style" is a direct descendent of Chinese martial arts. In the firstplace, Karate is Okinawan martial arts. Same as Kung Fu's first root is Indian Monk but you never put the ancester information that "Indian martial arts" to Sanshou or any after developed Kung Fu different "Style". Kanga Sakukawa (佐久川 寛賀) is the founder of Karate as known as "Shurite"(首里手), and he isn't the founder of "Shotokan Style".

• (3) No problem. Because actually Funakoshi went to Tokyo = Honshu and it is more suitable. You are using Japan as if another country, it makes people confused, because Okinawa is Japan. Like saying "Shanghai martial arts are brought to China".

• I think you can change the (2) and (4). 114.48.157.43 (talk) 02:44, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

To the Noamz, thanks for your respond unlike some vandalism lover. And To the Annoymous, thanks for helping us to make better arguement.

The reason of I removed information (1) is exactly what Annoymous said. Shotokan is the name of "Style". And it is not same meaning of simple word "Karate". Okinawan karate is the Okinawan martial arts which is fusion of Okinawan martial arts and Chinese martial arts, but still, Karate is Okinawan Martial arts. And Shotokan founded after the Okinawan Karate by different Master. So the roots of Shotokan is just Okinawan Martial arts. About Kenwa Mabuni and Chōki Motobu, they are not exactly the founder of Shotokan Karate, but it's ok if you want put their name, write in there then you don't have to revert. The best fit word of (3) is, "Honshu" or "Mainland Japan". Not "mainland Japan". You should lead the link to Honshu or Mainland Japan. --Kotodooka (talk) 10:21, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

destructive anonymous editing

Can someone familiar with the WP policies explain what should be done about the recent flurry of anonymous destructive editing (low-quality, unsourced opinion)? I've reverted the article to the 22 April version before the edits, but should further action be taken? Noamz (talk) 09:18, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

I have brought this to the attention of WPMA on the group's discussion page; I expect a few of us will help keep an eye on this article for the time being. If the behaviour continues, we might have to ask for the page to be protected. Janggeom (talk) 09:52, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Belts

Can someone explain better in the article the order of the levels? I couldn't figure out if a 1st dan was higher or a 5th dan. Also, the list of belts only goes up to 5th dan, but later the article mentions a 7th dan belt-holder. Can someone fix this confusion please? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.83.85.139 (talk) 15:44, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

1st dan (shodan) is the lowest level of black belt, rising to about 5th dan (godan) on technical merit. Grades higher than this are more of an honourary nature, awarded only to senior instructors for their long term contributions to the art.--Charles (talk) 16:44, 3 June 2010 (UTC)