On 6/16/06, John Lee johnleemk@gawab.com wrote:

To answer your general question about doing the right thing, the answer is "Yes, despite whatever the 'new generation' might think". To refer to your specific case, the decision was correct. I don't see how lightsaber combat is an unencyclopedic topic. Rather fanboyish? Yes. But encyclopedic? Hell yes.

What a weird article. It mixes star wars world and real world in a very confusing way, following "Jedi Master Yoda mastered this style to perfection and uses it often when in battle with many foes." with "In the deleted scenes of Revenge of the Sith, General Grevious kills Shaak Ti with a Trakata technique." The article would certainly be improved if it focused much more on the real world, and when these supposed techniques appear in which films or books.

I do not find an article about purported lightsaber techniques particularly encyclopaedic, because it documents something which does not actually exist. An article which documents which techniques appear in which films is much more encyclopaedic, as it tells us something more about the real world.

Look at this: "Unlike most martial arts involving a weapon, lightsaber combat is an art that is utilized before the weapon is ever drawn and ignited. This is due to the philosophy that a Jedi must only draw his weapon as a final recourse." - comparing "lightsaber combat" to a real martial art is almost insulting. This could probably be rewritten in an appropriate way.

Another good one: "NOTE: In real life, the name may have been derived from the Japanese verb ataru, which means "to hit", "to strike."" - at the very end of a long paragraph, the begrudging admission that real life actually exists.

Well...another reason for me to stay away from fanboy articles, I hate them. This article deserves to exist, but boy could it be redone. And, you know, they could cite at least *one* source, just to make us happy.

Steve

On 6/16/06, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:

It is a legit subject. The article can be cleaned up with the liberal use of machete editing. It would be nice to have something explaining why the fighting styles are mostly rather stupid but I can live without that.

-- geni

Well, there used to be an interview with [[Nick Gillard]] (the choreographer for the prequels) which was quoted in the article, in which he pointed out that the martial arts was quite deliberately flashy and totally impractical. That the sort of thing you were thinking of?

~maru

Alphax (Wikipedia email) wrote:

Articles on fictional subjects should include as much detail about the real-world aspects as possible, and make a clear distinction between fact and fiction.

Well said! If those specific words aren't already in some guideline somewhere, would anyone here oppose their inclusion?

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Guide_to_writing_better_articles#Chec... . I seem to recall a similar guideline on its own page, but I can't find it at the moment.

Nathaniel

On 6/19/06, Steve Bennett stevagewp@gmail.com wrote:

On 6/19/06, Ilmari Karonen nospam@vyznev.net wrote:

...

Alphax (Wikipedia email) wrote:

...

Articles on fictional subjects should include as much detail about the real-world aspects as possible, and make a clear distinction between fact and fiction.

Well said! If those specific words aren't already in some guideline somewhere, would anyone here oppose their inclusion?

'''Support''' ~~~~

Steve _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l