Talk:Guandao

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Guandao article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Martial arts

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Martial arts. Please use these guidelines and suggestions to help improve this article. If you think something is missing, please help us improve them!Martial artsWikipedia:WikiProject Martial artsTemplate:WikiProject Martial artsMartial arts articles

China Low‑importance

	China portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject China, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of China related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChinaWikipedia:WikiProject ChinaTemplate:WikiProject ChinaChina-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Military history: Technology / Weaponry / Asian / Chinese

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion not met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Military science, technology, and theory task force
	Weaponry task force
	Asian military history task force
	Chinese military history task force

Move

Should we move this to Guan dao or keep it Kwan dao? A Google search is pretty even between the two. Either way, it makes no sense to keep the article under Kwan dao and have the first line refer to it as Guan dao so I changed that. Mgmei 18:23, 10 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Green Dragon Crescent Blade

User 69.231.246.224 changed the text "Green Dragon Crescent Blade" to "Blue Moon Dragon". I posted the following on their talk page:

Hi there. :-) I note that you've replaced all references to "Green Dragon Crescent Blade" with "Blue Dragon" (specifically on pages Guan Yu, Green Dragon Crescent Blade, and Guan dao). I wondered what your motivation is for this? I ask this in particular since the page Green Dragon Crescent Blade does reference the alternative name in the second paragraph: "It is also sometimes referred to as Blue Dragon...". Further the Chinese characters "青龍偃月刀" mentioned in the Guan dao article (in the first paragraph of the History section) do actually mean "Green Dragon Crescent Blade". Finally, in replacing the name with "Blue Dragon" you have removed all of the links to the page Green Dragon Crescent Blade. I thought I'd ask you first rather than undoing your changes without talking to you.

Stelio 23:12, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Having not heard anything from them, I have now restored the text to "Green Dragon Crescent Blade". Stelio 19:08, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

was this written by a student of kung fu or wushu

because if you study the kung fu patterns, and it is irrelavent what style, you will understand it has no true usage as different styles emphasise different usages and also the tassles or flags are there to blind opponents mid fight as they come across the eye they disorientate the opponent and allow an opening to attack

Disparity

On the Guan Yu page it says:

"Also according to folklore, Guan Yu's weapon was a guandao named Blue Dragon Crescent Blade, which resembled a halberd and was said to weigh 82 jin (41 kilograms using today's standards)."

On the Guan Do page it says:

"Guan Yu's guan dao was called "Green Dragon Crescent Blade" (青龍偃月刀) which weighed 82 Chinese jin (estimated 49 kg.)"

Which is correct?

According to the conversion page at http://www.convert-me.com/en/convert/weight/cjin.html

82 jin = 41 kilograms or 90.39 pounds

one jin = five hundred grams

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.22.214.148 (talk) 23:09, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What kind of reasoning leads one to believe that the veil on the end of the shaft is useless just because Europeans never used it? That's such a Eurocentric viewpoint.

It is sometimes confuse because "青" can be green, blue or black, depends on what is the item which carries the color. However, because the weapon itself is unique and u cannot really determine the exact color with "common sense", most of the people stick with the usual meaning of the word, and assume it is green. ChowHui (talk) 04:53, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Guan Yu's guan dao"?

This sentence feels really awkward because "guan dao" simply means "Guan's Blade"; thus this sentence will be interpreted as "Guan's Guan's Blade". Other sentences encounter similar problems as well. I'm not an expert and don't no much about how this term is established in the English fields, but wouldn't it be more relevant if we convert the term into the proper wording "yanyue dao" or "crescent blade" on this page? --Doncot (talk) 14:50, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"偃月刀"

In reference to "In Chinese it is properly called a 偃月刀 yǎnyuèdāo..."

As far as I and several of my Chinese relatives are aware, "偃月" is not a Chinese term, but a Japanese one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.84.8.87 (talk) 18:58, 23 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Ming soldiers wielding pikes and guandaos.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 14:37, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]