Jump to content

Talk:Original masters of taekwondo

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

Article creation

[edit]

I created this article on 21 February 2009, and will add to it as I am able. Janggeom (talk) 15:26, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments arising from Enni84's edits:

  • Unreferenced tag – I assume that the issue being raised here is of reliable references, rather than the assertion that there are no references provided (which would clearly be inaccurate). I readily recognise that this is, to the best of my knowledge, a limitation of the current tag system in that there is no tag for indicating "better references needed" ... but if anyone has a better knowledge of tags or if there has been some misinterpretation, I welcome the opportunity to expand my knowledge or to gain clarification.
  • Taekwon-Do/Taekwondo spelling in "Korea Taekwon-Do Association" – WP:WPMA note 9.5 on spelling indicates that for articles within this project's scope, the organisation's way of spelling its own name prevails over other conventions. In the 1960s, to the best of my knowledge, "Taekwon-Do" was the official spelling in English, so the organisation's name at the time is reflected accurately in the article. The general issue of the spelling of "taekwondo" (taekwon-do, tae kwon-do, tae kwon do, tae-kwon-do) is a contentious issue, but I welcome discussion if it will help improve the article.

Thank you. Janggeom (talk) 06:48, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for moving the article, Parsecboy. Janggeom (talk) 13:30, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No problem! Parsecboy (talk) 19:46, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

reversions re KW

[edit]

Both quotes -- "technically at war" and "no diplomatic ties" are NOT quotes from Choi or any other named person. It is inaccurate to use put the words in quotes if they (Choi or the others who left) did not say them. In the first reference (Toro) the words "technically at war" are not used. The second quote came from a summary of CK Choi's professional background/history and the source does not tell us Choi said "no diplomatic ties". WP:QUOTES says: "As an editor, it is your responsibility to read the source of the quotation thoroughly to prevent misrepresentation."

Also, using these terms about war and diplomacy do not fit into our article about the Original Masters. It is best to leave this political POV out of the article.

Next, the North and South are not at war -- the United Nations Command (Korea) signed the armistice and all ROK forces were under the authority of the UNC when the armistice was signed. (True, President Rhee objected but he could not change the fact that the cease-fire was in effect. Also true that lots of border clashes and other incidents have occurred over the years. Again, these are topics for historians, diplomats, soldiers, and the like, not for martial arts experts.)

Finally, we get into trouble when we say "technically at war." If we ask 'and so?' what is the answer? Should people not travel to or trade with nK if there is a technical state of war? If so, then how did the unified team of Koreans at the Olympics get along? (Another example is Argentina and the UK. They were at war over the Falklands. They never signed a peace agreement. Are they technically at war? In one sense, yes. But that sense does not mean anything in practical terms.

Again, I re-wrote the portion of the article in a NPOV manner. There is hostility between the North & South. People from both the South & North have died in the various clashes. But this is a taekwondo article, not a war article.--S. Rich (talk) 17:06, 30 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello S. Rich, thank you for your note. I have three points in response to your comments:
  • Your main point of contention appears to be based on your interpretation that the sentence is saying that Choi (and I assume you mean H. H. Choi here) spoke the words reproduced in quotation marks. Consider the example sentence: "Columbus sailed across the Atlantic Ocean when such an endeavour was considered 'foolish' or 'suicidal.'" It is clear that the words in quotation marks do not reflect what Columbus himself said or thought; they reflect what others said or thought, and simply serve to provide a context for his decision or action. Likewise with the sentence you mentioned. In any case, the discerning reader will note that the references clearly indicate that Choi himself did not speak the words in quotation marks.
  • The words "technically at war" appear on page 104, centre column, in the seventh line of text from the bottom of the page in the reference provided (Gillis, 2003).
  • Both the quotations cited are directly relevant to the situation at hand (i.e., H. H. Choi's decision to initiate relationships with North Korea, and the effect this had on several of the men mentioned in the article). They are not general quotations about the political situation between North Korea and South Korea.
I had thought that it was very clear that Choi did not speak the words in quotation marks, but perhaps it was not clear enough; I will add some text to try to make it clearer. Thanks again for your note. Janggeom (talk) 14:37, 31 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This still does not work. In the Columbus example, adding the quotes leaves open the question of [who?] said 'foolish' or 'suicidal'. It also means POV is part of the edit -- Columbus did not think it was foolish or suicidal, otherwise he would not have done it. So someone else's personal opinion is at play. The second problem is that Gillis is not a WP:RS in terms of the Korean War. The third problem is "WTA" is vague. The reader cannnot tell what reference WTA points to. (And is WTA a reliable source with regard to the Korean War?) Also, if the words are in quotes, we need to know who said the words -- did Choi say them? If he did, then fine. But we need to see where he said them. Finally, as I mentioned before, this article is about taekwondo and not South-North politics. We only need to describe or reference the actual hostile attitude of the two sides into the sentence so the reader has context. Describing the "technical state of war" does not do that. Using this vague, value-laden POV phrase only muddies the water. Thanks again.--S. Rich (talk) 14:57, 31 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again, S. Rich. Your reply does not indicate to me that you have given my comments serious consideration. In particular, your decision to criticise my example sentence for a lack of references indicates, to me, that you have missed the point. I provided the example sentence (and accompanying explanation) to demonstrate the sentence structure mirrored in the sentence in the article that you were concerned with. In addition: (1) you appear to have disregarded an accusation you made, which I have disproved; and (2) there is a basic logical inconsistency between how you have edited the article and your attack on the Gillis and WTA references. Put together, all of these points lead me to believe that further discussion is not going to be profitable for either of us. Your main concern seems to be neutrality; one hopefully constructive suggestion is for you to add relevant text (or quotations), appropriately referenced, to present a different point of view regarding the relationship between North Korea and South Korea in the context of the article. Janggeom (talk) 11:58, 1 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

These issues are minor -- my point was that we do not know who was using the quoted text. Choi or the others? At least you've provided some more information, which I can accept. I've moved the page numbers into the inline citation so that the sentences flow easier. Anyone reading this article will be doing so because of their interest in TKD and less because of the war. So I shall leave it at that. Thanks.--S. Rich (talk) 14:13, 1 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Original masters of taekwondo. 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) 16:29, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 10 external links on Original masters of taekwondo. 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) 01:49, 8 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

the whole kim jong-chan section seems not very well written

[edit]

or maybe copy-pasted from somewhere? whoever actually wrote it, the english is very,,,, not great. --Bumpf said this! ooh clicky clicky! [insert witty meta-text on wiki-sigs here] 00:32, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Status of affiliations

[edit]

Does the "Affiliation" column in the table under the "Relationship with HH Choi" section describe the affiliation of the grandmasters themselves or their dojangs? If it's the latter, many of the descriptions are outdated. In particular:

Kong Young-il's dojang seems to be independent, with no mention of the ITF on its website.

Kim Jong-chan seems to be personally involved in one of the ITFs, but his dojang doesn't seem to be affiliated with anywhere.

Park Jong-soo's dojang seems to have closed down after he passed away (the website is no longer available). How should this be reflected in the table? Fjhforever (talk) 16:15, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I updated Kong Young-il's affiliation to "independent".
Han Cha-kyo's website, strangely, doesn't mention any dojangs. He doesn't seem to be affiliated with any particular ITF; instead he seems to be trying to reunify the 3 of them and promoting more Taekwondoists Fjhforever (talk) 17:00, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I meant Choi Chang-keun, not Han Cha-kyo Fjhforever (talk) 17:01, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Currently the only Grandmaster that is clearly affiliated to the ITF is Rhee Ki-ha. Fjhforever (talk) 17:20, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Original_masters_of_taekwondo&oldid=1205597542"