Jump to content

Talk:Modern Arnis

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

Photos

[edit]

Does it strike anyone else as odd that of the four pictures in the article there is not one of Professor? It seems like the founder of the art should warrant a photo. 142.36.222.24 (talk) 23:25, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Date of Founding of Modern Arnis

[edit]

In Archive 3 there was some discussion of when the art can be said to have been founded, or at least when it began to be developed. An earlier version of the page had said after WWII, which, while correct, was a bit misleading as R.P. was still a child when WWII ended. Suggestions of dates in the 1950s and 1960s have been made. Any thoughts? When exactly did the move to Bacolod occur? Is that the start? JJL 14:56, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tuhon?

[edit]

Who was given the title Tuhon by the Professor? JJL 02:52, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lakan and Dayang not Tagalog

[edit]

The words for male and female in Tagalog are "lalake" and "babae", respectively. Can anyone provide information as to which Philippine language the words Lakan and Dayang are from? --Edward Sandstig 22:47, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Instructors

[edit]

Instructors being deleted from Site for what true reason?

There are many who have been with The Professor for countless years and to have instructors removed from the site for political reasons or reasons stated as not being "players" is against what the Professor taught and wanted. Before you simply delete names, take a moment and award respect to those who have indeed carried his love of the art on and then and only then will his memory be honored. It is not a financial thing, it is a respect thing. We all have our ability because of Remy A Presas and all owe The Professor much for bringing this art into our lives. Lets continue to spread the art without political infighting and useless edits to decide "who is who". Is that we he would have wanted?

Thank you.......Real Traditions

Pleas could you pride some evidence of their notability that is from a reliable source. They were removed as there is currently no reason given that they are personally notable to be included in an encyclopaedia. Respect for them isnot a reason --Nate1481( t/c) 12:24, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Based upon what exactly? to whom should these people conform to you based upon your request? Which Modern Arnis organization would like this and which organization is making the edits to this page? There are many branches of Modern Arnis now, many different people many different websites etc. All unified under the memory of the Professor.

To remove a person from this site and then request that they supply information to ...who? Is a questionable act in itself. There should be no infighting at all....only passing the traditions. What if the information is not to "your" liking? then you "invalidate" someone who has been with the Professor for 30+ years?? but never chose to get involved with the politics, only the system itself? Dont miss the chance to grow and be humble..

There are some out there who simply have been doing what they have been doing in the background for many years, dont disgrace the memory of a good man by playing around with ego based combat via a wikipedia site, that is not why we are here. I know some on the list that were deleted...do they have to answer to who ever is deleting them to validate themselves to whoever is playing the "God" of editing?

If you look at some of the names that were deleted, they are indeed valid and some are a part of MARPPIO and listed on the Modern Arnis.com website.....is that validation enough?

This site is also not a place where politics comes into play and names are deleted for that reason.......that is not what Remy would have wanted. It is not a social site, it is a site that shows who has been with the Professor for many,many years.....


Thank you.......Real Traditions

Maybe this can help: http://www.modernarnis.com/school.html


Thank you.......Real Traditions


I have no like or dislike of any of them, I have removed them as in my view there is not reson to list students or instructors of an art unless they are notable see WP:Notability
I have left those who have an article on wiki as I use that as a rule of thumb for notability, it's not perfect, but it is a good place to start I have also looked @ the articles & some seem questionable so may be deleted but that is for discussion there. P.S. Did you read WP:not#Wikipedia is not a blog, webspace provider, social networking, or memorial site? --Nate1481( t/c) 14:12, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Have you read :" Wikipedia is not a battleground".....You have removed them as in "your" view?? Who are "you" to do so? You have missed the point, you have no right to delete anyone other than your own personal need to or desire to do so to create problems. I provided you a link to validate ( not that I needed to) why not look again..http://www.modernarnis.com/school.html.

Thank you.......Real Traditions

Yes I have.
That site is a primary source, so not evidence of notability, I am not disputing they are who you say but why would any one not directly involved with the organisation need a list of names? If they don't then to list them fall under a conflict of interest The point of an encyclopaedia is to provide key information on topics of broad interest, i.e. those that are 'notable', that an individual reached a high level in a martial art or is an instructor dose not make them notable, if the wiki was to include everyone who has trained with someone else for 30 years there would be thousands of names .
If I think it dose not improve the encyclopaedia I have the right to delete it. You have so far not presented any reason why they should be listed other then "someone who has been with the Professor for 30+ years" which is also, as yet is unverified
I am not trying to deliberately annoy you but I don't see why a list of names improves the article?--Nate1481( t/c) 15:06, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]



Have you provided me with your authority to delete people from this site? Who exactly are you and who do represent? Who are you to delete anyone anyway? . This type of behavior is foolish and will only lead to constant revisions over and over..all was fine until additional instructor names were deleted for purely personal reasons by outside parties..nothing else. Why are you doing so?

What is a reliable source to you? Wikipedia States:

"Further information: Wikipedia:Verifiability and Wikipedia:Neutral point of view Reliable sources are authors or publications regarded as trustworthy or authoritative in relation to the subject at hand."

Are you now saying that you know more than Remy A Presas own son? His website states who are a part of his organization and that link was provided to "aid you with instructors being valid"..is that not a publication? This is foolish and will only continue to go back and forth, just leave things alone and spend time on training, not personal attacks on people.

This does nothing for Professor Presas memory....just leave things alone.


Thank you.......Real Traditions

I am an editor here so have the right to delete anything that dose not improve it, you do not own this article why dose a list of names improve it?

"Reliable sources are authors or publications regarded as trustworthy or authoritative in relation to the subject at hand. Reliable publications are those with an established structure for fact-checking and editorial oversight. The reliability of a source depends on the context: a world-renowned mathematician is not a reliable source about biology. In general, an article should use the most reliable and appropriate published sources to cover all majority and significant-minority published views, in line with Wikipedia:Neutral point of view."

Next time quote the whole thing, what is the editorial oversight? is he neutral on the subject? how dose this impove the encyclopaedia & not just promote the individuals listed without an independent source --Nate1481( t/c) 15:43, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

p.s. I have no personal reason I don't know any of them & have never trained in arnis of any form, could you also point out the "personal attacks" please? --Nate1481( t/c) 15:47, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]



Are you promoting the remaining instructors listed as being the only sources for instruction then? seems quite one sided....if you are indeed an editor, doesnt that also involve research then to validate information before you simply delete it? or are you editing with bias? If you are saying that historical fact of a family members continuation of his fathers legacy and the people that support that group is not valid, then I would say that you have an agenda on this page to delete text based upon a very biased approach. If Wikipedia's role is to report facts, then the facts are the people were listed have a long term history of training in the Modern Arnis system under Professor Presas. You being an editor should research any and all items before you simply delete them ( if you are an editor). All was fine until for some reason, an urgent desire to edit the Modern Arnis page and delete names was the most important thing that could be done.....why is that? If you list schools on the page, dont those schools have instructors? are they then not valid? You seem to be playing a game of words...

If you do not know of the history of art then how can you make edits on something you know nothing about. To delete names without knowledge is a personal attack on the relationship(s) of the parties listed and the work that they all had with the Late Grandmaster. None of the people that you suddenly decided to delete are newcomers in the art and when discussing the art itself, they are indeed as much a part of the art as any other listed party. No one is treating this board as anything other than the truth, for someone to edit without knowledge of the truth..leads to this current confusion. Any of the names listed can be validated through Google ( those who come up, will then be valid ..no?) Under burden of evidence in wikipedia it states: Do not leave unsourced information in articles for too long, or at all in the case of information about living people. Jimmy Wales, founder of Wikipedia, has said of this: "I can NOT emphasize this enough. There seems to be a terrible bias among some editors that some sort of random speculative 'I heard it somewhere' pseudo information is to be tagged with a 'needs a cite' tag. Wrong. It should be removed, aggressively, unless it can be sourced. This is true of all information, but it is particularly true of negative information about living persons.

So why not do some proper editing and research the names before you delete them?


Thank you.......Real Traditions

The onus for providing proof of notability lies on the one adding the names. Some of the names listed were well-known, but for some while every passing Modern Arnis person has added his or her own instructor. Some of those listed no longer even teach Modern Arnis. The list had grown very unwieldy and unencyclopedic. That doesn't mean that no more names can be added, but they should be of notable individuals. JJL 17:44, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Real Traditions, you seem to keep missing the point, this is not a place to memorialise people for there hard work of anything else it it an encyclopaedia. Lists of instructors are NOT helpful so someone wanting to know about arnis. If an instructors is more widely known so is notable then the reason for this should be stated clearly or a link to the article on them should be made. Why are any of these people more notable than Mr. Smith who trains down there road? What have they done, to do with or not to do with, the art that makes them of interest?
"If Wikipedia's role is to report facts" - It's not
"No one is treating this board as anything other than the truth," The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth.'
The reason I have not researched them is because I wouldn't know where to start, you haven't and apparently do, if you care about this topic go and look for the information reference it (see WP:cite for how) as I initially asked. That way the names have some useful information attached to them. --Nate1481( t/c) 08:41, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion forums

[edit]

I'm aware of the general rule. The two fora listed here were started by a Modern Arnis Datu and have been regularly frequented by many of the major players representing all the major orgs. The MartialTalk [1] site was the main organizing point for the Modern Arnis cross-organizational event held in Buffalo, for example. The FMATalk [2] site is centered around its Modern Arnis forum. In the current instructors list, 2 of the 3 instructors listed post regularly on both sites, as do many of the people on the longer lists. The archives of these sites are a key resource for the art, and anyone with more questions after reading this article could go there and get answers from heads of several organizations (such as Tim Hartman and Dan Anderson) and senior reps. of all the others. So, while such links are "generally" to be avoided, I think these are exceptions to that. JJL 17:50, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]


MartialTalk holds significant discussion history concerning GM Presas's death, successors and the art it self dating back to August 2001. Numerous key people have and continue to participate there, including members of the Presas family, 5 of the 6 Datus, several of the Senior Masters, and members of all of the Modern Arnis organizations. It continues to list upcoming events and other news involving Modern Arnis, from credible verified sources as does FMATalk. As active sources, both should be included here as resources for those wishing to find more information.--Bob Hubbard 19:09, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough, you may want to include a commented rational to save future removals --Nate1481( t/c) 08:39, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reversion

[edit]

I left the removal of the promotional links and the deletion of "Modern Arnis" from the subheadings but hadn't noticed the spacing changes. Modern Arnis is the proper name of a specific art and not a description of modern FMAs in general. JJL 

(talk) 15:24, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Removed section

[edit]

I have removed a section that seemed out of place as well as generally just repeating information already in the article with a nationalist slant. I started out by intending to fix some of the poor writing in this section but decided it didn't really add anything to the article anyway. 96.54.212.224 (talk) 18:03, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Modern Arnis. 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) 08:22, 3 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Modern_Arnis&oldid=1202687620"