Talk:Toyama-ryū

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Toyama-ryū 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

standing position

Only being yonkyu I won't edit the page, but the claim that "all techniques are practised from a standing position", repeated both here and in the mention of Toyama-ryu under Iaido, does not match my experience. (other user that did not sign post...)

I read that paperback book many years ago describing the style, and applied it to other prior training. From the book, and military application, upright position or standing could be said to be emphasized? Maybe thats the right word. The explanation of the motion and angle of attack of the blade really helped me a lot. Rwwff 07:06, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It is correct to say that all Toyama-ryu (Nakamura-ryu Batto-do specifically) techniques are executed from a standing position.Dsunlin (talk) 22:57, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Edit concerning Japan China war history

The use of "why .... is allowed" seems more than just a little wierd. Maybe "it is fair to question why the perpetuation and celebration of the traditions of the Toyama Military academy are allowed" should rather say something like "...academy are popular." or maybe "...academy are socially acceptable." I'm certainly sensitive to the feelings of the one who added the line, but I think your point gets lost on most English speakers, drawing the focus not to the immoral practice that occured, but rather on the immoral implication that someone might have the authority to disallow something like this.

Honestly speaking, I think that last sentence badly hurts your cause no matter how you glue it together. Tell some untold number of English speakers they shouldn't be allowed to do something, they'll find a way to go do it as soon as possible, and in the most public and obnoxious way possible. It should probably be deleted, leaving your reference link, and the Although popular sales literature for the schools that teach Toyama Ryu often cite the style as a type of kenjutsu, the flat footed cutting of targets calls to mind the tied up and defeated nature of the intended targets of the Toyama Ryu. part. Maybe expand it a bit to "...Toyama-Ryu's application of tameshigiri" since the style does teach how to meet an incoming blade without damaging your own edge. Obviously a bound prisoner about to be killed would not be swinging a sword. Rwwff 07:06, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV

This article has serious lack-of-NPOV issues. It verges on saying "This martial art is exclusively for dismembering helpless victims." My limited understanding is that it is, more or less, a simplified, brisk form of iai taught to ensure that officers could actually use their swords if need be. If there's a serious body of literature that suggests it really was taught just so they'd know how to cut up prisoners for show, a subsection should be added to explain this theory. I've never studied Toyama-ryu, so I won't presume to edit the article, but this really should be taken care of. --GenkiNeko 21:41, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You are correct. I removed the tag after cleaning out the offending sentences. None of them were based on fact. Toyama-ryu was originally designed to teach military officers to use the swords they were to carry. It is less complicated as some forms of kenjutsu and generally speaking it tends to be minimilist reflecting the time expected to be used for practice. The fact that some officers went on to use the knowledge in carrying out unspeakable acts is really besides the point. These acts reflected the time and society rather than the school itself. Hey even aikido, judo and kendo count war-criminals in their ranks.Peter Rehse 04:02, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Peter. You know, I might back away from my earlier reservations; I'll look up some info from, say, Shinkendo sites and see if I can contribute a bit. --GenkiNeko 15:46, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you both for fixing this thing up. Its gone from a usenet quality rant and ramble to something useful to someone asking the question "what is.,." Rwwff 09:29, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Removed non-NPOV statement by user 144.15.13.228. There are a number of individuals who resent Toyama-ryu for reasons unknown who may attempt to post derogatory statements. This article and related topics should be watched for future attempts at slander. B. Frieman 00:32, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Shinkendo?

Should there not be a link to the article on Shinkendo, since this is AFAIK a modification of Toyama-ryu?Dsunlin (talk) 23:14, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

information CONTAINED FROM THE TOYAMA RYU WEBSITE

The information that is on the ZNTIR site is the same information that is sourced from "Gunto no Soho and Tameshigiri", a leaflet published by Kaiko-sha in November 1940. Written by Tanaka Hisakazu, the Principal of the Toyama Military Academy. This information is not copyrighted. I will ass this source as a reference. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amadus73 (talk • contribs) 21:19, 21 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That may indeed be so, Amadus73. To be sure one way or the other, I believe we'd need to know when Tanaka Hisakazu died (unless the leaflet was written as part of his official duties and published as an official document). What is or was Kaiko-Sha? We'd also need to know who made the translation into English, and when. Meanwhile I'm afraid I have removed the content (see below). Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:03, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright problem removed

Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: https://web.archive.org/web/20130222174309/http://toyamaryuiaido.jp/toyamaryu_en.html. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)

For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, providing it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:03, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Toyama Army Academy?

There's no separate article for Rikugan Toyama Gakko. Category:Defunct_Japanese_military_academies

The Army War College (Japan) was in Minato, Tokyo.
The Imperial Japanese Army Academy doesn't appear to have been in Tokyo at all, and is the predecessor for Camp Zama, at least according to its article.
Was it Tokyo Shinbu Gakko?

Edit: No, the Imperial Japanese Army Academy was in Ichigaya which may have been called Toyama back in the day. That's probably it.

Kortoso (talk) 21:49, 3 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]