Talk:Wing Chun/Archive 2

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

Article Appearance[edit]

I am tempted to drop the article down to Start class mainly because of the lack 2of sources but also because of the appearance. It is just messy. The pronounciation box interferes with the Table of contents and the wiki-tables (although I can see what was attempted) are just ugly. As it is I've added a cleanup tag.Peter Rehse 09:58, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done it for the MA project as it needs lots of work form our perspective. --Nate1481( t/c) 11:02, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I moved the pronounciation box - better but still not pretty.Peter Rehse 11:17, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Auto-review[edit]

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

  • Please expand the lead to conform with guidelines at Wikipedia:Lead. The article should have an appropriate number of paragraphs as is shown on WP:LEAD, and should adequately summarize the article.[?]
  • Consider adding more links to the article; per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (links) and Wikipedia:Build the web, create links to relevant articles.[?]
  • If there is not a free use image in the top right corner of the article, please try to find and include one.[?]
  • Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (numbers), there should be a non-breaking space -   between a number and the unit of measurement. For example, instead of 13 feet, use 13 feet, which when you are editing the page, should look like: 13 feet.[?]
  • Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (headings), headings generally do not start with articles ('the', 'a(n)'). For example, if there was a section called ==The Biography==, it should be changed to ==Biography==.[?]
  • Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (headings), headings generally should not repeat the title of the article. For example, if the article was Ferdinand Magellan, instead of using the heading ==Magellan's journey==, use ==Journey==.[?]
  • Please reorder/rename the last few sections to follow guidelines at Wikipedia:Guide to layout.[?]
  • Per WP:WIAFA, this article's table of contents (ToC) may be too long- consider shrinking it down by merging short sections or using a proper system of daughter pages as per Wikipedia:Summary style.[?]
  • There are a few occurrences of weasel words in this article- please observe WP:AWT. Certain phrases should specify exactly who supports, considers, believes, etc., such a view.
    • it has been
    • correctly
    • might be weasel words, and should be provided with proper citations (if they already do, or are not weasel terms, please strike this comment).[?]
  • Watch for redundancies that make the article too wordy instead of being crisp and concise. (You may wish to try Tony1's redundancy exercises.)
    • While additive terms like “also”, “in addition”, “additionally”, “moreover”, and “furthermore” may sometimes be useful, overusing them when they aren't necessary can instead detract from the brilliancy of the article. This article has 20 additive terms, a bit too much.
    • Vague terms of size often are unnecessary and redundant - “some”, “a variety/number/majority of”, “several”, “a few”, “many”, “any”, and “all”. For example, “All pigs are pink, so we thought of a number of ways to turn them green.”
  • The script has spotted the following contractions: don't, isn't, isn't, don't, if these are outside of quotations, they should be expanded.
  • As done in WP:FOOTNOTE, footnotes usually are located right after a punctuation mark (as recommended by the CMS, but not mandatory), such that there is no space in between. For example, the sun is larger than the moon [2]. is usually written as the sun is larger than the moon.[2][?]
  • Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.[?]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, Nate1481( t/c) 11:04, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Redundancy?[edit]

The article says "The Three Great Southern Martial Art Schools of the South" - Isn't this redundant? Applejuicefool 19:31, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wing Chun is a striking art.[edit]

At least, I'm pretty sure that is the majority view.

I think we can include darts, chin na and other bits and pieces, but I believe the majority treat wing chun as a striking art, not some hybrid (which if you read the page, implies MMA/JKD spirit).

[1] WP:DUE

I'm changing the box to say "striking" only. I don't think this is unreasonable. Rpf 15:30, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree, because we "control" to strike. Most would consider it as a striking and "trapping" art. And then, everyone does kicks as well. Which is why the original box was actually more accurate. Nate's the one who put up "Hybrid" as a compromise, which I also agree doesn't sound right. I'm going to include the others back in, except the chi na, since its not as common across the board. --Marty Goldberg 17:46, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wing Tsun old man[edit]

Wing Chun(詠春) is a South kungfu, created in Foshan, should be cantonese speaking.(詠)Wing only means "Chant',it does not mean 'forever',Ok.

  • Since Yong Chun is bring from Fujian,The full name is Yong Chun White Crane.Here Yong(永) means 'Forever',it does not mean 'chant'.
  • Actually, they are different style of kungfu.Maybe Some guys want to make money by useing the name of 'Wing Chun', they confuse the other with Yong Chun,or 'Shaolin what what', or 'Chisin what what'.Ask thoese guys who is their Sifu and Sijo.--Koonleg50 (talk) 01:29, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
A) This is an encyclopedia. Terms are used in the more common Mandarin as well as Cantonese. Both sets of characters are pronounced Yong Chun in mandarin.--Koonleg50 (talk) 03:14, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • sure,but you said 'both',one is 詠;the other is 永.They have different meaning.
B) The article is about wing chun, not white crane. Nobody here is confusing the two.
    • Sorry, you are wrong. You are talking about two styles and two family.Wing Chun and Weng Chun. They have different content.--Koonleg50 (talk) 03:14, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
C) In wing chun history, sifu's have used both characters.
    • Sorry, Wing Chun Man will not change the family name, Only Weng Chun man will do that.--Koonleg50 (talk) 03:14, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
D) The section you keep altering is referenced. It is against policy to alter a referenced section like you continue to try and do based on WP:OR. You can certainly provide counter references, but do not continue to alter referenced sections based on personal opinion. --Marty Goldberg (talk) 02:38, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • It is upto you. All the reference are from a single source of a advertising web page, the History is wrong. The Chinese Wiki pages have already pointed out.----Koonleg50 (talk) 03:14, 2 January 2008 (UTC)Koonleg50 (talk) 03:07, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    • It is not personal opinion.Wing Chun is a English name for '詠春', Do anyone disagree that?
      • Than who had used '永春' to replace '詠春'?
      • '詠春'is a complete set of kungfu ,the name had used by Leung Jan?
      • What is (永春)'Yong Chun'? Who is founder, passed to who.And Who is your sifu? Any connection to Leung Jan's family tree? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Koonleg50 (talk • contribs) 05:45, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
A) Once again, without verifiable references, it constitutes your personal opinion and is subject to WP:OR.
B) Numerous people historically used '永春', including Chan Yiu-Min (Chan Wah Shun's son), Lui Yiu-Chai, Lai MiuHin, (All students of Chan Wah Shun), as well as Chu Chong-Man, Lai Hip-Chi, DaiFaMin Kam, Pan Nam, etc. etc.
C) Yong Chun is a pronunciation of characters, not a "system". Both '永春' and'詠春' are pronounced "Yong Chun" in Mandarin.
D) Someone's sifu has no bearing on editing on Wikipedia. You don't even have to be a wing chun practitioner to edit here. What you do have to have are valid references, and the ability to follow established editing and content policies. That includes *not* removing references and referenced sections. --Marty Goldberg (talk) 06:01, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]


      • This page is Wing Chun, not (永春).If you are 永春 man, please open other page,and mark down the History, Don't change the kungfu's family name.--Koonleg50 (talk) 06:23, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]


That's correct, this page is for information on Wing Chun as a whole, not a place for your personal views and opinions on what is or is not wing chun or rewriting history on word useage. Likewise, its not a place for "永春 men", its an encyclopedia. You're the one that's coming in and trying to change referenced sections and make accusations. Just because you're unfamiliar with something does not mean people are "changing a family name". I've provided references where both have been used in the family and by whom. I've also tried to reach compromises with you by working to include your concerns and reword them so that they follow WP:NPOV. You have provided zero references to date, just editing wars, accusations, and claims. --Marty Goldberg (talk) 06:24, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Answer for the following web page:-

B) Numerous people historically used '永春', including 1Chan Yiu-Min (Chan Wah Shun's son), 2Lui Yiu-Chai, 3Lai MiuHin, (All students of Chan Wah Shun), as well as 4Chu Chong-Man, 5Lai Hip-Chi, 6DaiFaMin Kam, 7Pan Nam, etc. etc.
C) Yong Chun is a pronunciation of characters, not a "system". Both '永春'

All pages are come from [2]

  • 1. Chan Yiu-Min died in 1932. the page is not written by him.
  • 2. Lui yiu-Chai died before 2nd war.
  • 3. Lai Miu-Hin is a key point.Her father Lai Sam Hing(黎三興) is a Hung Kuen Sifu [Wing Chun in Wiki ChineseShe was a Hung Kuen Sifu before the marriage.After marriage, Yiu-Min go back to Foshan,left she in ShanTak.Until 1932, Yiu-Min brought his 3 sons and daughter to Guangxi,his wife then went to Foshan to teach Hung Kuen.
  • 4. Chu Chong-Man's kungfu in the page call Weng Chun (i.e 永春)
  • 5. Lai Hip-Chi is a Wing Chun Man, he had no student.
  • 6. DaiFaMin Kam's kungfu in the page call Weng Chun.
    • The information is wrong.
      • DaiFaMin Kam is the Canton opera actor after 1870.(the Cantonese opera had been banned since 1854,because Lee Man Mou's revolution in Foshan.)
      • While Wong Wah Po had retired before 1854 in Foshan.He teaches Leung Jan in this period.
    • i.e Wong Wah Po and DaiFaMin Kam are not kungfu brother.
      • Fung siu-Ching is a boby in 1850. (he died in around 1920. He was 73 years old.
  • 7. In this page,The chinese words under the name Pan Nam is (永春) and the content including Fu Mei Seung Do and Ng Jee Mui Fa Hei Gung.This is no the content of Wing Chun.
      • Furthermore, Pan Nam said Weng Chun is created by Yee Chan Uun Siu(一塵奄主), No one will believe that.Every one want to know who told Mr.Pan.
    • All the pages are made in resent years by a single souce,seems to be the students of Pan Nam,He is the first one in Foshan teach (his own style)Wing Chun after banned for nearly 40 years. they mixed Lok Kam Weng Chun(永), Lai Miu-Hin's Hung Kuen with Pan Nam,s Wing Chun.It is not the Leung Jan,s Style,so they want to change the name to Weng Chun(永春).--Koonleg50 (talk) 10:39, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]


A) The fact the pages I provided in this discussion are from one source are irrelevant. Sources for all information are included, and you can contact the author of that reference site (a published author on wing chun history). When people died are also irrelevant, every wing chun notable talked about is long dead.
B) Lai Miu-Hin's father being a hung gar sifu also has no bearing. Many of the sifu were sifu's or practitioners in other arts before their study of wing chun. There's no point to bringing that up, other than to try and imply this somehow has some bearing on why they were using those characters for their wing chun. That constitutes WP:OR once again.
C) As the main reference states, the engilsh phonetic spelling of "Weng Chun" is simply being used to differentiate the characters for non-chinese speaking people. I.e. people that are are used to reading only english. It denotes nothing else that you're implying, and is not being used to state a different art. When a different art is being discussed, the full art is mentioned (i.e. Jee Shim Weng Chun). Judging by your writing style, I can tell you're not a native english speaker/writer. So I can understand why you're getting confused by these conventions.
D) Your claims about Dai Fa Min Kam as well as Pan Nam's students being wrong are just that, claims. They go against what people in those actual lineages record and have publicly stated as their history. They fall under WP:OR without valid references. Likewise, Wikipedia can not reference itself. Pointing to the chinese wikipedia page is not a reference.
E) Not all wing chun comes through Leung Jan, so its surprising you want to keep holding that up as the only possible pedigree. --Marty Goldberg (talk) 14:55, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • Wing Chun is first known because of Leung Jan. Before that times, you should use 'Red Boat Weng Chun','Weng Chun','Hung Kuen' or other else.Wing Chun have only one family, so one family name.--Koonleg50 (talk) 03:25, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'n sorry, but that's not true. Where is your reference that Wing Chun first became known because of Leung Jan? Documentation of wing chun notables begin around the taiping rebellion. Not all lineages go through Leung Jan either, please stop trying to push your opinion as the defacto standard here, it still constitutes WP:OR. --Marty Goldberg (talk) 05:28, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

They are from different souces.--Koonleg50 (talk) 09:55, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • More,The times Leung Jan learns from Wong Wah Po ---1854
    • Fung Siu Ching learns from Lok Kam---after 1870
    • Shaolin Weng Chun; Chu Chung to Tang Yick---1960
    • Gi-Sin What What; 2007.

Do you want more information about Leung Jan?--Koonleg50 (talk) 09:55, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm quite familar with Leung Jan, thank you. And the links you gave didn't give any information to support what you've been pushing for, not did it say anything different from what I've been saying. You gave a link to two people's school sites (which is no more verifiable than the hundreds of other school sites on the web, each with their own take), a link to an article by Yip Chun (which I've seen in English before, but thank you), a picture of Leung Jan's house (which while a wonderful picture, does has nothing to do with this conversation), a Wushu page that simply repeats the same contested Yimm Wing Chun history, and a dead link. And once again, you have not provided a reference for those dates - other people record different dates as well. Here's a link that further explains the spread of the art off the red boat during the time of the Taiping rebellion. --Marty Goldberg (talk) 17:15, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think Marty Goldberg has done a great job is explaining the editorial policies of this page. We are all here to make sure information in this encyclopedia are correct and relevant.
--Ottawakungfu (talk) 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Wing_Chun/Archive_2&oldid=1137326983"