Talk:Destreza

Iberian, rather than 'Spanish'?

While the spanish authors of Destreza (Carranza and Pacheco) are earlier, and better researched, there is a considerable amount of portuguese Destreza authors (Thomas Luiz, Diogo Gómes de Figueiredo and many anonnymous) and treatises too. The authority there would be Manuel Valle Ortiz and his «Nueva bibliografía...», at www.ageaeditora.com, but in any case: shouldn't this school of fencing be labelled as «iberian» rather than «spanish»? Particularly since it was created in the times of the Iberian Union: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iberian_Union — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gatonegro (talk • contribs) 18:52, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Comments

I found this line at the end of this article and it strikes me as a line that should NEVER EVER be at the end of a Wikipedia article:

For more information see the Destreza Translation and Research Project (DTRP) website maintained by Mary and Puck Curtis: http://www.destreza.us/

If another site on the net has more information, you take that information, reword it if necesary and add it to the article... you do NOT tell people to go to 'this or that website' for more information, because that completely defeats the purpose of Wikipedia as an online encyclopedia and instead relegates it to the role of a link database or search enginge.

So could someone (and do not tell me to do it, since I know too little about the subject or that site to write a proper article) determine whether that site has any information that can be added to this article to improve it? Robrecht 01:44, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

We do keep external links, loads of articles have them. They're useful. You say that it "completely defeats the purpose of Wikipedia as an online encyclopedia and instead relegates it to the role of a link database or search enginge". We're after free knowledge here, and external links can aid this. --Dangherous 22:20, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Additionally, the material on that site is not under a license which would permit its use in Wikipedia; simply rewording that material would still violate the copyright on it, so a link to the site seems to me an appropriate way to make that information known to Wikipedia readers. Ubernostrum 02:40, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

I agree that the article needs to be fleshed out. The link is not adequate and the article is not complete.--Ma'ath'a'yü (aka: Proofing) 19:59, 29 May 2006 (UTC)^{Talk | @}

Update: I added the {{fencing-stub}} to the page. Also, I didn't find that link of much use. The linked site referred to earlier seems rather devoid of useful content. It seems that the article may have started as a left-handed add for the link. Still, it is a viable article topic and should be pursued but I question whether that link should remain. Anyone else care to offer an opinion on the matter? --Ma'ath'a'yü (aka: Proofing) 09:21, 30 May 2006 (UTC)^{Talk | @}

Please do not copy and paste material directly from another website. Doing so may be a copyvio. Isopropyl 12:05, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Another Source

I personally do not have much experience with wikipedia so I feel that the acutal article is better suited for someone else to write but in the effort of making this more complete I have found what I think is a good source that may add to this article. Its from the Martinez Academy of Arms which holds classes as classical and historical fencing and has videos on Destreza. The link is http://www.martinez-destreza.com/ . If you click the articles link the Demystifical of the Spanish School explains this topic in detail. I hope this helps. sorry didn't read the article external links its already there. Abangyarudo 04:26, 4 December 2007 (UTC)