Talk:Shintō Musō-ryū

The Isshin-ryu "headmaster"-reference

I finally found the original reference to Kaminoda sensei being the "recognised headmaster" of Isshin-ryu. Its found on the Northern Virginia Jodokai which belongs to Kaminoda Senseis organisation. "We follow the teachings of Kaminoda Sensei of the Nihon Jodokai in Tokyo. He is Menkyo Kaidan, hachidan hanshi, chief instructor at the Zoshokan temple dojo in Tokyo and the recognized headmaster of Isshin Ryu kusarigamajutsu". I used that site as a reference in the early versions of this article before I got more solid sources. In retrospect perhaps using a Kaminoda Sensei dojo-website for reference regarding this particular matter was a bit unwise. I'll not re-include the "recognised headmaster" part in the article based on this alone, and it seems there are no other sources. Fred26 09:54, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps you could email them for clarification. I will be back in Tokyo next week and I could ask Kaminoda directly. I am sure he could clear that up and possibly give some more information on the general status of Isshin ryu. So far he has always been approachable on these mattersYnambu 13:45, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

If Kaminoda Tsnemori is not "the" headmaster of Isshin Ryu kusarigamajutsu, he is certainly "a" successor to that position. I was present when he received a menkyo in Isshin Ryu kusarigamajutsu from Shimizu Sensei at the Rembukan in early 1978. In fact, Shimizu Takaji awarded menkyo in that system to several of his disciples, namely: Nakajima Asayoshi (deceased 1976), Hamachi Koichi (deceased 1985), Hiroi Tsunetsugu (I'm not sure if Hiroi is deceased or not but I don't believe he is "active" at this time) and, of course Kaminoda Tsunemori. This list does not include other disciples of Shiraishi Hanjiro in Fukuoka who most likely passed the system on to their various disciples such as Otofuji Ichizo. In investigating these matters we need to remember that there have been several lines of Shindo Muso Ryu over the centuries...and still are today. Consequently, there has been no single headmaster of this system since, most likely, the late 1600s. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marishiten (talk • contribs) 20:28, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Shiraiishi"headmaster"-reference

I noted the change from official Headmaster to unofficial on the photo of Shiraiishi. What's the source and authority on deciding the title of headmaster of SMR. Io date nobody I have interviewed doubts Shimizu as headmaster in all aspects. I think, like the Isshin ryu headmaster thing, it all reads a bit murky. It's a important subject that deserves clarification.Ynambu 13:09, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Yes you are right it should be discussed.

What makes an official headmaster? A valid question. Otake Risuke of Katori Shinto-ryu is the officially appointed headmaster of KSR. He was appointed the headmaster by the heridetary legal owner and properiator of the ryu: Soke Yasusada Iizasa. If other people claim to teach Katori without permission from the Soke then they are not teaching Katori Shinto-ryu period. This is a genuine no-doubt "headmaster".

The situation in Shinto Muso-ryu is very different. In SMR now there is no single designated owner or authority and there havent been since the days of Muso Gonnosuke and the 3 men that followed him. After the first split and onwards the various lineages of the same ryu existed side by side and the lineages even "inter-married" (for lack of better word). So there was no excommunication of factions that didnt comply to any owners commands, for there was no owner.

An unofficial headmaster in Shinto Muso-ryu, if modeled on Shimizu Takaji, seems to be a man with exceptional skill in the art, combining with pioneering selfless efforts to spread the art both nationaly and internationaly and keeping strong connections with other masters both within and outside the art, (the former which were prolly his own students anyways). He held a great natural authority that was not given to him but earned, for there never was a single governing body of a single unified SMR to present it to him. Otofuji, though Shimizus junior, doesnt seem to have imitated and introduced Shimizus Jodo in Fukuoka, so a unified front doesnt seem to have been the case either eventhough there was cooperation. Shimizu seems to have had the power of a headmaster and even been referred as such late in his life by others (news-papers, budo-orgs), but his power was not complete and still not official within the collective SMR-communitive. For instance, Shimizu created and adopted the Gohon-no-midare kata series into his teachings but this wasn't a universal adoption. Had Otake Risuke decided to introduce a new training-method then you can be sure the people in the main Dojo would have adapted accordingly.

After Shimizus death, Otofuji Sensei, in the position of the last surviving senior student of Shirashi Hanjiro also held a natural authority, but from everything I've heard and read he couldnt take over Shimizus previous role and influence. Actually you could ask Kaminoda Sensei yourself about that time just after Shimizus death and Otofujis manouverings. Kaminoda was at the "front-lines" when all this happened so to speak so he could probably tell you alot more than me about that.

All this seems to be what Shiraishi was also: He held great authority, cooperated with other master, not only with other Jo-practitioners but with the Budo-world such as Jigoro Kano and he made efforts to spread the art by sending off his students to teach in Tokyo and prolly elsewhere too. We musn't forget that it's equally true both now and before there werent a single Shinto Muso-ryu, but more than one. Uchida Ryogoro, who was Shiraishis senior by 5 years and had recieved a Menkyo in the "Haruyoshi"-line under Hirano Kichizo before Shiraishi, had taught SMR-jo in Tokyo long before Shimizu set up shop there. Uchida also influenced Fukuoka (Shiraishi) by introducing the Sutteki-jutsu (Uchida ryu tanjojutsu) there which Shiraishi adopted into his own SMR. Shiraishi may have been the boss of his own Shinto Muso-ryu and leading in spreading it, but his SMR wasnt the only one around as explained.

Speaking of Uchida, his lineage doesn't seem to have made much impact unfortunetly, though Nakyama Hakudo did transmit an incomplete and different version of the SMR Uchida taught him. Not sure if Uchida-linneage has survived outside Nakayamas group.

In short, I believe that unofficial headmaster is the best we can do at this point for both Shimizu and Shiraishi. This doesn't diminish their status or their importance. Sorry for long post. Fred26 09:04, 25 June 2007 (UT

Nice post. I'll think on it this week and do a bit more research at the diet library. I'm going to Kaminoda Dojo in Shibuya on Saturday but I think its best if I write to him beforehand to see how much he's willing to talk about. I know some areas are sort of touchy. I have written to Matsui asking for an appointment when he has time.

Next subject - I wonder then who can we say was the last *OFFICIAL* headmaster and just how that position was decided? Ynambu 11:11, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

I would recommend you ask Kaminoda sensei about this as he has the earliest known densho scroll of SMR: the "True Path" (Shintō) Musō Ryū Bōjutsu dentō". Fred26 12:02, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Oh, in regards to your Isshin-ryu headmaster inquiry. I believe that this falls under the same condition as the SMR-headmaster question: Everyone with a Menkyo in SMR and Isshin-ryu is technically an independent master with no single authority (as it is right now anyways in the SMR-community). I dont know for sure, but since Kaminoda Sensei holds in his possession many of the SMR (and prolly Isshin-ryu)-documents than perhaps he feels he holds the legacy of Isshin-ryu more firmly than others and thus warrants a special "headmaster"-title of Isshin-ryu. You dont have to quote me on that though. As you wisely said some things are still touchy to bring up. Fred26 12:02, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

By the way, you have my compliments that you take time to actually meet with Sensei(Matsui and Kaminoda) to verify/check information. Its a far cry from other people I've talked to such as in the whole "Nishioka Tsuneo doesn't have a valid menkyo according to Matsui, Kaminoda and Hiroi-argument several months back. Its good to see people with good intentions rather than just to smear other people. Fred26 12:20, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Kata - About the number of -

You have written 'Sixty-four is the number of jo-kata taught by the groups that follow the teachings of Shimizu Takaji'

Actually no, because if you are 'following teachings of Shimizu Takaji' you will be doing 'Gohon no Midare' which adds 5 more kata to the Fukuoka 64 (omote 12, chudan 13, Ran ai 2, Kage 14, Samidare 6, okuden 12 & gokui 5)

Did you mean 'Sixty-four is the number of jo-kata taught by the groups that follow the teachings of Otofuji Ichizo' Ynambu 11:57, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Yes and no. "64" kata is a very old entry in this article and I havent given it much thought lately. The number of kata is dependant on how we count and there is several ways printed. Technically there are 13 kihon but the last is counted just 1 time as it is a left/right variation (in some sources I've seen). Kage has technically 14 kata but 2 of them are variations so some state Kage as a 12 kata series. Unfortuntely I was caught off-guard by all that when I first entered the "64" and the other kata-number related entries. I'll go through it tonight after practice. Sharp eyes by the way. Fred26 14:10, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

"Technically there are 13 kihon" - You don't mean 'kihon' there right - Let's not get confused here - we are not talking about kihon at all. There is documentation on the 64 kata being equal to omote 12, chudan 13, Ran ai 2, Kage 14, Samidare 6, okuden 12 & gokui 5 - variations are included. Ynambu 15:27, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

I think you misunderstood what I was trying to say: People count the kata differently and I used kihon as an example of that. The original confused "64 kata" I wrote long ago was based on various sources who count the kata differently and this didnt exactly help. If you want an example: This Jodo-group count 12 omote 12 chudan 2 ranai 12 kage 6 Samidare 5 gohon no midare 12 okuden and 5 gokui, a total of 66 in this particular case. I've read 62 total kata in another online source though I cant remember the link to it. So picking what source to follow can be tricky when even Matsui himself states that Kage has 13 kata eventhough some count it as 14. Pascal Kreiger puts it in his book "Samidare comprises 5 kata plus one variation" which one can interpret as it being 5 kata in samidare. Is there 12 kata plus one variation in Chudan or is it simply 13 kata? It's a mess and the examples above was what I had to work with when the original "64" figure first came up to me. It will be fixed one way or another, trust me on that. *edit* Oops, I wasnt logged in when I signed this post. Fred26 19:11, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Ok Sorry I understand. I have been up all night so my reading and comprehension skills are greatly dimished. I'll do more research later this week. I am going by the count given in the Jodo Kyohan but as I don't have it here it might be a good start out question for Kaminoda on Saturday. Thanks for making the archive BTW. Ynambu 19:52, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Its no prob. Sometimes my head gets so tired I cant even spell or compose a full sentence. I'm gonna go through the (more) reliable sources I have and see if I can find a definitive way of counting the whole shebang. From the looks of it right it seems every group has different ways of counting, including Kaminoda Sensei. Shouldnt be no problem though with a bit of work. Fred26 21:28, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

I visited Kaminoda Dojo Saturday and came away with a lot of written notes which I will work on this week. I had planned to record everything but couldn't get my very new Sony recorder to work (I bought it in akihabara one hour before going to the dojo - not a good idea) anyway I was invited back on Thursday for some sort of grading. I did confirm the 64 kata count as being that which I mentioned previously. Also these past few days I have been in email communication with Mr. Jon Bluming who studied together with Mr. Draeger around 1959-1960. He has been very helpful. Ynambu 12:00, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

The one and only Jon BLumming :-) [1]. I'll rig something up with the counting of the kata and explaining the fact that different groups & senseis seem to count them differently. It's good that you took notes from Kaminoda, though I'm not sure how we can actually quote "notes from interview with Kaminoda". Fred26 12:57, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Well actually Mr. Bluming wrote back very quickly and offered any information he had. I was vey impressed by his gracious manner and willingness to help. He told me he started in 1959 and took 3rd dan Jodo and Iaido in 1961 at the same time as Mr. Draeger and 4th dan in 1966. He must be one of the very first at such a level at that time. Re: the kata count Well as Mr. Kaminoda merely said his count was the same as was written in the Jodo Kyohan I suggest we use that as the reference (he did write the book it after all - sorta dumb of me to ask really) Ynambu 14:34, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

I have been reading this article with much interrest, as I am practising jodo for some time now, and was wondering why the 3 tokushu kata are never counted, not only in this article but I didn't find them anywhere on the net. According to my teacher who was in Japan in the late 60's Shimizu Sensei left out 1 of the 3, so I have been teached only 2 Oishi2002 10:40, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

The Kanji database is finished

I have finished the Kanji database of SMR terms. It currently has 4,600 characters all cross referenced. It was harder than I thought. I have all the kata names listed for all the ryu ha and all the techniques within the kata for the ryu ha. About half are pretty universal to all teachers and groups (Kihon waza etc) but some techniques and kata just about have a different name or Kanji or if same Kanji then different reading for every group. Makes your head spin because just when you think you have a 'standard' universal reading and you put it into 'Google Japan' whoops up pops another SMR group with another set of readings. Anyway it's done and now I'm taking a few weeks off to go to Izu for holidays. Have a nice summer guys. Ynambu 14:44, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Say hello to Anjin-san for me :-). Fred26 17:51, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Didn't see Anjin but nearly fried to death in the Summer heat. Feels almost good to back in Tokyo. Ynambu 15:10, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

26th and 27th headmaster

I have be translating some Japanese jodo websites. This website http://homepage3.nifty.com/aijokai-tomita/sub1.html writes that after Shimizu died Hamachi became the 26th headmaster and after he died Nishioka became 26th headmaster (this is confusing I think) and that now the son of Hamachi is the 27th Shinto Muso ryu headmaster. Is this information accurate? Gusta Novak 17:52, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Well as noone seems to think this is wrong I will change the article to show this new headmaster then. I think this is very new news.Gusta Novak 09:12, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Shinto Muso-ryu today does not have a single recognised headmaster. Please note "recognised". The various groups are independant of each other and no single organisation under a single leader exists. Some people proclaim Otofuji as the 26th. In other words there are multiple claims but none are universially recognised as there is no single Jodo-org to recognise the claim. The article should remain as it is in this regard. Fred26 09:47, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

My question is then which authority can say there is no headmaster or there is a headmaster. It could be that you are wrong to say there is no headmaster (please I am not saying you are wrong but just discussing the matter) What auhority can we go to that shows either yes or no. Gusta Novak 10:51, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

You seem to be under the impression that there HAS to be a single organisation or authority. There are many orgs. There is no single authority to say who is a headmaster. There is no single organisation with the authority and permission by the entire Shinto Muso-ryu community to name a single headmaster. Kendo has a single organisation with a single "council of elders" (so to speak) to implement changes into their system. SMR-Jodo has no such org or single individual and has not had one for 300 years or so. Shimizu Takaji was referred to as a headmaster mostly by the media but he was not formally appointed as such by his peers in Jodo. He had a strong influence in Jodo, and he was Jodos leading personality and face outwards for much of the 20th century, not to mention he was a senior surviving student of Shiraishi Hanjiro, but there was never a formal japanese ceremony within Shinto Muso-ryu were he was given this task, or any sort of headmastership. When he died other people tried to fill his shoes and take on the title as next headmaster but failed.

The only way for a headmaster to be appointed today would require the involvement of all the branches and individual group-leaders of the entire Shinto Muso-ryu community. Even if such an organisation were to be founded here and now there are lots of technical differences between the groups and to conform to a sort of standard teaching would be extremely difficult to implement. As it is today there are individual groups in various sizes under one or more Menkyo Kaidens. In some cases they work together with other groups, such as the European Jodo Federation and the Sei Ryu Kai, but thats as far as it goes. If someone wishes to proclaim himself the next headmaster of Shinto Muso-ryu then thats their choice, but it wouldnt be one grounded with firm grasp of the reality of the situation. Fred26 12:45, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

I read the indicated website. Nothing much too it. Yes, it does say that Nishioka and-or Hamachi are the 26-27th headmasters but it's obviously just somebody's over-enthusiastic opinion. 15:09, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Auto-review

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

• Please expand the lead to conform with guidelines at Wikipedia:Lead. The article should have an appropriate number of paragraphs as is shown on WP:LEAD, and should adequately summarize the article.^[?]
• Consider adding more links to the article; per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (links) and Wikipedia:Build the web, create links to relevant articles.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates), months and days of the week generally should not be linked. Years, decades, and centuries can be linked if they provide context for the article.^[?]
• If there is not a free use image in the top right corner of the article, please try to find and include one.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (numbers), there should be a non-breaking space -   between a number and the unit of measurement. For example, instead of 90 cm, use 90 cm, which when you are editing the page, should look like: 90 cm.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (numbers), when doing conversions, please use standard abbreviations: for example, miles -> mi, kilometers squared -> km², and pounds -> lb.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (numbers), please spell out source units of measurements in text; for example, the Moon is 380,000 kilometres (240,000 mi) from Earth.^[?] Specifically, an example is 90 cm.
• Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (headings), headings generally should not repeat the title of the article. For example, if the article was Ferdinand Magellan, instead of using the heading ==Magellan's journey==, use ==Journey==.^[?]
• Please reorder/rename the last few sections to follow guidelines at Wikipedia:Guide to layout.^[?]
• Per WP:WIAFA, this article's table of contents (ToC) may be too long- consider shrinking it down by merging short sections or using a proper system of daughter pages as per Wikipedia:Summary style.^[?]
• Please make the spelling of English words consistent with either American or British spelling, depending upon the subject of the article. Examples include: honor (A) (British: honour), armour (B) (American: armor), behaviour (B) (American: behavior), meter (A) (British: metre), sabre (B) (American: saber), defense (A) (British: defence), organise (B) (American: organize), isation (B) (American: ization).
• Watch for redundancies that make the article too wordy instead of being crisp and concise. (You may wish to try Tony1's redundancy exercises.)
  • Vague terms of size often are unnecessary and redundant - “some”, “a variety/number/majority of”, “several”, “a few”, “many”, “any”, and “all”. For example, “All pigs are pink, so we thought of a number of ways to turn them green.”
• As done in WP:FOOTNOTE, footnotes usually are located right after a punctuation mark (as recommended by the CMS, but not mandatory), such that there is no space in between. For example, the sun is larger than the moon [2]. is usually written as the sun is larger than the moon.[2]^[?]
• Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.^[?]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, Nate1481( ^t/_c) 11:32, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Hello again all

Right..Long story short. I'm on a wikibreak and I have been on one since August. The reasons for that are many, but the main one was that I had way to much stuff to deal with (and still have), both in real life and on wikipedia. It wasnt a question of simply scaling down the wikipedia but rather to either do it full time or not at all. I chose the latter.

I'm not back fulltime just yet. When I do my main goal will be to finish adding & editing the "organisations" sections of both the main article and "History of Shinto muso ryu". I will also seriously reconsider the value and future of the "grades in (insert organisation here)" section. I'm also considering removing and integrating the "Notable Shintō Musō-ryū practitioners" into the text. Exceptions would be people that cannot be mentioned in the same way as, for instance, Otofuji Ichizo. Pascal Krieger can be mentioned in the "organisations" section and his entry in the "notable practitioners" can be removed afterwards and so on.

After I'm done with the above I will have reached the end, at least as far as my own level of Shinto Muso-ryu knowledge is concerned. Afterwards the main deal for me will be to clean up the article and make sure it holds to wikipedia standards. I cannot take on any more responsibilities on wikpiedia after that due to my need of focusing my energies elsewhere.

Fred26 (talk) 22:37, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Neutral photos

Please edit the photos to remove the 'jodojo' marking or let's put in more neutral photos. Thanks Ynambu (talk) 09:19, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Waited one month. I will go ahead and edit the jodojo markings out. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ynambu (talk • contribs) 09:09, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

If you feel driven to perform what is basically unnecessary surgery (so to speak) then by all means. Dont replace any of them though. The markings are allowed by wiki-standards and doesnt violate any POV-rules. Fred26 (talk) 11:27, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

I feel the photos are fine. I don't think it matters if they have brands. It's like a copyright, more or less. You have to get permission from the source (photographer, website, dojo), under GNU and POV. ;-0 pain in the rear! Mekugi (talk) 11:44, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Unnecessary Why do you think that? - For readers of Japanese it's just like having 'eat at joes' written on photos included in a restaurant guide. Its this kind of bias that is driving contributors away from Wikipedia. Having Jodojo is not a neutral POV. It's advertising. Ynambu (talk) 09:23, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

When you first raised the question I asked the OP's (a month ago) if the markings violated any rules and they said "its no big problem". The wiki-admins aside, I am, however, currently in an email convo with the uploader about the photos & licensing and I'll mention the markings and the possbility to upload un-marked photos. (I do believe that I'll remove a few of the photos like the Shimizu & Nishioka photo.)

By the way, I think its interesting that you claim this sort of thing is "driving contributors away". To be honest I think its mostly you who are taken aback by these photos since you know the source. In any case, I'm sure that Citizendium will allow photos from a collection that meets with your approval once you "move" the article over there like you said.

Fred26 (talk) 13:29, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Ok. We agree to find a way to post unmarked photos. I will not edit any photos. By the way what I think it's interesting is that that I waited one month with no comments and it was only when I said I would remove jodojo that you guys jumped in. And I think I have a better solution than Citizendium Ynambu (talk) 10:50, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

I can see your point and in one sense I agree with you. They should just be photos for the page itself- wihout brands. In another sense I disagree, namely about pulling the brands off without permission (because they aren't ours to do so with). That being said, these are probably the only photos around that are demonstrative of the art that we can use here wihout posting our own. I have a ton of photos Shinto Muso Ryu renshi, but I am not going to release them to the public, know what I mean? They are mine and I am a greedy cuss :-). If you have some photos, that are yours or you have permission to use, I think it is agreeable to talk about putting them up. However, since the photos on here are not ours and are "donated" for use, then we should not be pulling the brands (watermarks) off them for that purpose. What do you think Fred?

Mekugi (talk) 12:32, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

"the tanjo should not be confused with the hanbo"

Well, I'm confused. Is there a difference between the hanbo and the (modern) tanjo, or not? If the point is that Meiji tanjojutsu wasn't derived from earlier hanbojutsu, we should say that. If the point is that the original tanjo (unlike the hanbo) was tapered -- but they're now, as objects, indistinguishable -- we should make that clear. (And do we know for a fact that the hanbo wasn't tapered? I've seen a lot of tapered bo, albeit generally in kung fu schools. I'd like to see a reference here. --Chronodm (talk) 17:02, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Krieger's Way of the Stick (p. 411) says that the Jôdô tanjo was derived from the European walking stick, and the art (first called sutekki-jutsu = "stick" art) was developed by Uchida Ryôgorô in the 1850s. --Idler.de 19:00, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Addendum: The article is not quite correct in this regard. The tanjo as used in (and sold by) Nishioka Sensei's Tokyo dojo is still similar to a 19th century gentleman's walking stick: It has a handle end which is slightly rounded with a diameter of approx. 27 mm and has a uniform taper down to 20 mm at the bottom end. However, it sports neither a handle/grip nor a ferrule. However, there is a 5 mm bore through the tanjo (about 15,5 cm from the top) which might be used to affix a tassel or a securing cord. A uniform stick (like a shortened jo) may be used instead; such a "hanbō"-type tanjo would have a slightly different balance, but this would not really be essential for the kata. Greetz - Idler.de 12:16, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

GA Reassessment

This discussion is transcluded from Talk:Shintō Musō-ryū/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.

This article has been reviewed as part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force in an effort to ensure all listed Good articles continue to meet the Good article criteria. At first glance the article does not seem to meet these criteria. The content is too filled with lists rather than prose, and does not follow WP:MOS. There is a fair amount of refs, but large parts are also unreferenced. The article relies too heavily on two sources. These seem to be books, but there are no page numbers, which makes the refs rather unhelpful.

If anyone wants to undertake a revision of the article, I will provide a more thorough review. I will wait for seven days, if anyone has started a thorough revision of the article by then, I will extend the waiting period, so the article can remain listed as a Good article. Otherwise, it will be delisted (such a decision may be challenged through WP:GAR). If improved after it has been delisted, it may be nominated at WP:GAN. Feel free to drop a message on my talk page if you have any questions, and many thanks for all the hard work that has gone into this article thus far. Lampman (talk) 19:23, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Since no significant improvements have been made to the article over the last week, I will now delist it. Lampman (talk) 17:11, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Vadalisim

The user Sakiyama, Akatsuki (Don Oberhurl) has been inserting bogus and false entries since June. This has just been brought to my notice by two senior members of Shindo Muso Ryu. I have reverted to the last certified entry. Milegiven719 (talk) 17:55, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

What the bloody hell? Quote from former edit:

Sakiyama, Keitoku refused to instruct Hanjiro as it was Kuroda, Nagamasa's wishes that only a familial lineage ever be taught his family's Art Nagamas felt that the Ashigaru did not have the education or nobility to fully understand the intricasies of the art. (He was profetic in that Takagi Shimizu, an Ashigaru heir, further dilluted Hajiro's art until it bear little, if any, ressemblance to the original art. Hanjiro's student, Shimizu Takegi, developed what is referred to as Shindo Muso Ryu Jodo, along the lines of the All Japan Kendo Federation. While enjoyable and easy for the masses to learn, Jodo is not the same as the original Jojutsu of the Kuroda han. No different that the development of Judo, Kendo and Jodo from Jujutsu, Kenjutsu, and Jojutsu, respectively, the 'way' or facsimile of a warring art is a more intellectual, pastime than a Koryu fighting method.

I have no idea who this Keitoku Sakiyama is, but kodus to you Milegiven719 for keeping an eye out. :Tell me, which two senior members of SMR did you confer with? :) 83.253.32.171 (talk) 21:14, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

File:Tsukidome.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Tsukidome.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests February 2012 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Tsukidome.jpg) This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 12:46, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Notable people

Having read through the article, I have some questions:

Should Pascal Krieger also be listed amongst the notable people? BTW, didn't he receive a menkyo from Nishioka sensei?

Also, at this time, while the article mentions ZNKR Jodo section as one of the largest organizations of Jo practitioners, no one from that group is mentioned as notable. Should either Namitome Shigenori (Fukuoka) or Furukawa Shunya (Tokyo), past and present heads of ZNKR Jodo section, listed as notable?

Lastly, article now refers to All-Japan Jodo Federation as a branch of ZNKR. Having never heard of such an organization (and hearing instead of All Japan Kendo Federaton, Jodo section), I did a quick search for 全日本杖道連盟. Result of the search is not exactly convincing me that this group is at all related to ZNKR. Any objections if I were to reword it as "All Japan Kendo Federation, Jodo section" instead? Urokugaeshi (talk) 10:20, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I agree Pascal Kreiger should be in Notable people. Yes, He received Menkyo from Nishioka. Also agree with Namitome and Furukawa. These days it's called ZNKR Jodo and ZNKR Iaido. Don't know about ZNJF. Ynambu (talk) 16:19, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

I am a student of Pascal and without a 'golden' reliable citation, I would feel a conflict of interest in editing this article. I personally believe that he should be mentioned as notable and I think that [2] could be useful to determine who is 'notable'. [3] has information on ZNKR. jmcw (talk) 20:37, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

Well, I am NOT a student of Pascal Krieger, so I went ahead and added him, linking to his official bio on EJF site.

I've added in Namitome s. as well, since he was a former section head of ZNKR, made more for unifying Jo in Japan then pretty much anyone else (because of him Fukuoka and Tokyo talk to each-other) and is still active in Fukuoka. No, I don't have credible sources for the talk to each-other bit, other then personal conversations with top ZNKR Jo sensei. While I, personally, believe that Namitome s. was issued a menkyo, I will confirm that.

Lastly, I am a little bit leery of [4], mostly because I see technical inaccuracies in the write up about ZNKR Seitei Jo, which tell me that maintainer of that page is not up to date on ZNKR Seitei (points made used to be correct, but since jo is fluid and dynamic, they are no-longer). Quick perusal of that site came up with no contact information or indication of affiliation either, so the bias is unknown.

Oh, and one more thing. Any objections to reorganizing the notable people based on alphabetic last name (keeping traditional Japanese name order)?

IN other words, change current list of:

• Namitome Shigenori
• Nishioka Tsuneo
• Pascal Krieger
• Phil Relnick
• Steven Bellamy

etc,

to read

• Bellamy, Steven
• Krieger, Pascal
• Namitome Shigenori
• Nishioka Tsuneo
• Relnick, Phil

etc?

Urokugaeshi (talk) 00:26, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Good that you added Pascal and mentioned his calligraphy!

I agree that an alphabetic ordering makes more sense: there is not enough reliable information to attempt sempai/kohai or student/teacher ordering.

Concerning contact info for shindomusoryu.com, I see the site owner as Andrea Henson (andreahenson@gmail.com)[5] and I see Dan Pearson (dan@shindomusoryu.org) at the bottom of the 'About Us' page.[6] jmcw (talk) 13:10, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Andrea Hensen has retired from editing shindomusoryu,com. Dan Pearson has no connection with the website (you are confusing shindomusoryu.COM with shindomusoryu.ORG - look carefully). Andrea passed the website on to another person now in Florida. I know his email address. Also the notable people list has a standard format. The new entries do not conform to that format, please edit it so that each new entry follow the standard format (for example we only put dates after the name when they have died) Namitome should have the words Japanese Menkyo SMR after his name etc. Ynambu (talk) 12:00, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

If you actually click on the link I supplied, you will find Dan Pearson email address at the bottom of the page. Do you have a link to the description of the standard notable people list format? Thanks! jmcw (talk) 13:10, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Ynambu, I changed the notable people list as per your suggestions, so hopefully it's (more) correct now. If you have a link to standard notable people format, could you please share, and if not, maybe describe how it should be? Thank you!

19:19, 18 November 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Urokugaeshi (talk • contribs)

Japanese names

In the article there is a photograph with the caption that reads Nishioka Tsuneo and Katsuhiko Arai demonstrating Kazari.... I am 99% certain that Arai is the last name, and thus for consistency the caption should read Nishioka Tsuneo and Arai Katsuhiko.... Anyone with first hand knowledge can confirm? Urokugaeshi (talk) 00:21, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Yes Arai is the last name. Ynambu (talk) 11:56, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Changed, so both names are now consistent.

Urokugaeshi (talk) 18:53, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

I have updated the article with to Wikipedia's MOS:JAPAN#Names of modern figures usage. jmcw (talk) 14:55, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Shintō Musō-ryū. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20050915015044/http://hem.passagen.se:80/carlberg/jodokai.htm to http://hem.passagen.se/carlberg/jodokai.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 02:30, 13 February 2016 (UTC)