Talk:Hokushin Ittō-ryū

Edits to Article

Article content

Bakilas Jellyfish82 Edits to the page giving links to the OFFICIAL Nihon Kobudo Kyokai (National Japanese Budo Association) are being removed and replaced on the Hokushin Itto Ryu and the Article's image cannot even be changed without "permission" to the watchers of the page. There is obviously editing bias going on here and the biased party is claiming that it has to be someone other than them and they are reacting by calling any and all edits vandalism. There are sections which were edited to reflect the communications with Markus Losch (AKA Ryonosuke) and facts are being left out intentionally.

I suggest that if Markus insists on stating that he is an adult, adopted foster child that he provides some kind of proof that he is a citizen of Japan or at least is listed on Otsuka's Kosoeki Tohon as his son. As far as I know, he is not nor has he ever been listed on anyone's Koseki Tohon other than the one his wife created for him (if at all) listed him as her relative, as he is not a citizen of Japan. If that is the rule of law in Japan, than it should be the same on Wikipedia.

Also it needs to be noted that Chiba's school was dead and unpracticed before Otsuka approached him. He was not active and the school was left untouched since at least the 1940's. Additionally, there is no other reason not to include the links to the Nihon Kobudo Kyokai website or the Tobukan. Unless this page is geared to make other lines of the school look dead, and drive students looking for training into Markus Losch's hands (which I suspect, nay KNOW to be the case,) which is why all authentic, actively passed lineages are left off the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 14.132.3.250 (talk • contribs)

[Reply:]

User 14.132.3.250 First of all, it is not up to them prooving if he is a Japanese citizen or not. This is nowhere the topic. Neither on Wikipedia nor on their Websites as it seems. I cannot seem that he claims to be Japanese anywhere. If he changed his name legally in any country, the new name becomes his official one all over the world. And if the previous Soke allowed him to use his name, that is perfectly fine to change it and use the new name. I don't really get where you take all your informations from. Are you a former member of that school? Or where do you take your infromations from?

About the Chiba-line being dead, where is your proof for that? It is clearly stated on their official websites that the Chiba-family was not active in teaching for quite some wile. But that is the same in many schools and doesn't mean it is dead (that would mean the family line is dead). Take the Tenshin Shoden Katori Shinto-ryu as an example. The Izaza family is even longer inactive than the Chiba-family. But they still have the authority over the school. If they choose to give the school out of their family to another person, that is perfectly fine as well. And as far as I understand the Chiba-family has contact with all lines and chose Mr. Otsuka a Menkyo-Kaiden ranked person as the successor of the main-line. So where is your problem with that and on which sources are your statements like "he recreated the school","he purchased the title from the Chiba-family", etc. based upon? For me your edits look clearly like defamation and personal hatred towards Mr. Ryunosuke Otsuka.

Please feel free to share the links of the Nihon Kobudo Kyokai as well as links to the other Hokushin Itto-ryu lines homepages. Grammar corrections are also welcome. But please refrain from deleting pictures, or any other kind of vandalism and defamation. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jellyfish82 (talk • contribs)

[Reply:]

There is no indication of hatred towards anyone. You believe that and you are externalizing so that you can win the argument in the face of basic facts. This indicates that you are not backing your edits with facts, but on feelings. That being said, despite your feelings the burden of proof lies in your corner, as I am completely willing to remove any mention of Markus Losch or Otsuka from this page as a concession. Furthermore, in light of your straw man argument, I cannot possibly be able to prove something that does not exist, but only that it does exist. If Markus is going to claim that he is an adopted child of a Japanese citizen, then it is up to him to prove otherwise. I am not responsible, not is anyone else, of that. It should at least be mentioned that he changed his name without any proof of his adoption, that is to say if he is going to assume the identity of a Japanese citizen and not something that he identifies with. The Chiba line was unpracticed under the current Chiba family member. As is well known and there is no existent dojo prior to Markus and Otsuka.

If this is your demand of proof, please do so from a third party (which I am) and not from what Markus is writing or selling. Perhaps I should contact the Nihon Kobudo Shokai and get an official statement from them? Or Ozawa shihan? That can be arranged. 14.132.3.250 (talk) 08:34, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

[Reply:]

The school was unpracticed under the current family member is exactly what they state. Same as in many other Ryūha. It has nothing to do with recreation of a school. For example if Izaza of the TSKSR would name Mr. Sugino Soke of the school, then he would become it. Without "recreating" or "reestablishing" anything. Same for the HIR.

They state on their website that he is the foster son of Mr. Otsuka Yoichiro. Which citizenship he has and if he changed it or not is not mentioned anywhere.

You are an unknown user on Wikipedia who defames people and writes in an aggressive way against certain people. This is why I assume that you are biased and not a neutral third party as you claim. -UNSIGNED- [Reply]

I was not practiced. Period. Dead line other than documents. The school was recreated. Unless you care to show where it was practiced. Which you cannot. Because it was not being practiced. Please show me documents outside a statement made on a website owned by the person claiming to be a foster son whether they are actually an adopted son and thus a Japanese citizen. That is not proof. Thus, the arguments you have are unfortunately conjecture and moot; please concede to edit the page to show otherwise. As you said, the burden of proof is clearly on them. I am OK with removing Markus from the Wikipedia entry until it is shown. Good luck with that scramble to get something that does not exist. Maybe "spiritually adopted" would be true? 14.132.3.250 (talk) 12:05, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

[Reply:]

The only thing which could be provided as prove that can be provided against them would be from the Chiba-family which apparently chose not to name Mr. Ozawa or Mr. Konishi as successor, but Mr. Otsuka. As you stated that you are an outside person, which means, where did you get all your inside information of HIR from? If you have an statement of Mr. Ozawa that would of course be helpful. But still it would be the statement of two parties (Chiba family and Otsuka family) against one other party. However I highly doubt that Mr. Ozawa has any problems with them as it seems that they are not in an unfriendly relation towards each other.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Jellyfish82 (talk • contribs)

[Reply]

Jellyfish82 I think you are confused to the point I was trying to make. Again: "The Chiba line was unpracticed under the current Chiba family member. As is well known and there is no existent dojo prior to Markus and Otsuka. <---- Perhaps I should contact the Nihon Kobudo Shokai and get an official statement from them? Or Ozawa shihan? That can be arranged. " That is one complete thought: whether or not the Chiba family were practicing. They were not. Again, I can get information if you would like, unless you want to concede that point and realize that the school is recreated by Otsuka and Markus based on what he learned from Otsuka's last teacher and documents. That is fine. Admitting that you do not know outside of Markus Losch is fine too. Just admit that, then concede that this information is biased and coming from one source, not a third party that you demand I provide (which is odd that you ask that I prove something, being a third party...which makes you....)

Then it should be okay to change head the image to Ozawa shihan, instead of Markus? After all he is senior to him and a member of the Nihon Kobudo Kyokai. There is no reason that Markus should be the centerfold for a school that he is clearly not the senior in. Unless you want to concede that this is clearly not an issue related to the article and create a new page just for him and remove it from this one. I am in agreement with that.

14.132.3.250 (talk) 13:44, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

In either case I believe that changing the header image to the FOUNDER of the school, NOT Markus Losch, is better. Unless you want to concede that this Wikipedia article is entirely about Markus Losch, which is proven by the INABILITY to change the leading image of Hokushin Itto ryu to THE FOUNDER of the school, echoing the Japanese page. Which, incidentally, this should echo. Go ahead and hop over there and see if it echos this page. Tell me if that reads the same to you. 14.132.3.250 (talk) 12:05, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

Jellyfish82 Just concede that if I remove the image of Markus Losch it will do damage to him, because this Wikipedia article serves as a catalyst for his legitimacy and for him to direct students to his dojo. The attitude displayed by you removing my last edit. Just be honest here, enough games. There is no damage by putting Ozawa Shihan on the front page. Shihan in this case is just as high as the term "soke," which is colloquial unless Markus Losch decided to change his name to Chiba. The senior member of the school should be represented, as it should be done; not the junior. There is no harm that stating that Markus Losch is Junior to Ozawa Shihan by his lifetime plus 20 years or more. I am going to remove the photo again for said reasons. I do not want an edit war, there is no purpose unless you are attempting to promote Markus Losch (hint: You are.)Just admit that you are attempting to promote this page from one point of view, not a fair and unbiased one. My edits rae being called vandalism for attempting to put out more points of view.

I am turned into a straw man and labeled as a "vandal." This wikipedia entry does not need to serve as a promotion for Markus Losch. Ozawa shihan is not fairly represented and any edits I make are removed because this is serving one point of view only. 

14.132.3.250 (talk) 13:46, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

[Reply]

14.132.3.250 Where is the school recreated if it is headed by a Menkyo-Kaiden licensed teacher? It is just the linage we are talking about here. And they perfectly state that the last Chiba-family head did not practice. Same as you and the Wiki article. So there shouldn't be a problem. There is nothing to be recreated if someone is a Menkyo-Kaiden of the school we are talking here. And I really don't want to annoy you, but in many schools it is the same. See the Tenshin Shoden Katori Shinto-Ryu, Yagyu Shinkage-Ryu Hyoho, Ono-ha Itto-Ryu, etc. In many of those schools the Soke line was interrupted as one or a couple of members did not practice. However as in Hokushin Itto-Ryu Hyoho the schools teachings were or still are transmitted via Shihan lines. Some then restored the main line by teaching a member of the founders family or some were named successor of the main line, like in this particular case. If you want to change this article, then you have to change all other Koryu articles as well. Or create a page about succession in Koryu. However this is as everything in Japan case by case.

The Nihon Kobudo Kyokai has nothing to say when it comes to succession in Koryu. That is only up to the founders family. To nobody else. Not to me you, or any Shihan of another line. If their statements wouldn't be true, the Chiba family or Mr. Ozawa surely would have taken legal steps against them. And as I said before, please provide a statement by Mr. Ozawa. Just keeping on to defame them is not appropriate. Critical statements like yours have to be prooved according to Wiki rules. And nobody else complains about this article.

About the "adoption" I searched in the records, who wrote it, and it seems that it was you who did it back in summer 2015. "You even wrote on my page in the past agreeable edit Kudos." No word about adoption has been made before that. You can look everything up in the records. The term foster son has not to include legal adoption in any way. But why do you care? He never stated that he is Japanese. He only changed his name after his teacher requested to do so. It has nothing to do with you or me, it is just between them.

I ask again, where do you take your knowledge from? Not some rumours, but serious facts in form of books, documents etc. Please provide this. Many third party sources, other Ryūha etc. list them as Soke line on their homepages. That is third parties (some of them also in the Nihon Kobudo Kyokai or Nihon Kobudo Shinkokai). Not a troll account on Wikipedia.

For the picture, as the 7th Soke named by his teacher and the Chiba-family together, he surely is the highest representative in this art. Some online troll defaming him doesn't change that fact. The founders image is included in the article and doesn't need to be on top.

Also their homepage and Wikipedia list all other lines. There is no advertising done here. All those reasons lead to your posts being redone over and over again. And if you try to defame people, anonymously online, make sure your IP address is hidden. Mr. living in Mie-ken, Kuwana. I bet they know who you are.

Mr. Ozawa is fairly represented in this article as the head of his branch. No harm is done towards him. Feel free to edit his section in a proper and polite way.

Finally, please keep the line of discussion. Don't edit through someones answer. Jellyfish82 (talk) 14:09, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

[Reply:]

Jellyfish82 I have itemized your post and answered accordingly below. Please read and try not to think that this is an attack on you or Markus Losch.

Where is the school recreated if it is headed by a Menkyo-Kaiden licensed teacher? It is just the linage we are talking about here. And they perfectly state that the last Chiba-family head did not practice. Same as you and the Wiki article. So there shouldn't be a problem. There is nothing to be recreated if someone is a Menkyo-Kaiden of the school we are talking here. And I really don't want to annoy you, but in many schools it is the same. See the Tenshin Shoden Katori Shinto-Ryu, Yagyu Shinkage-Ryu Hyoho, Ono-ha Itto-Ryu, etc. In many of those schools the Soke line was interrupted as one or a couple of members did not practice. However as in Hokushin Itto-Ryu Hyoho the schools teachings were or still are transmitted via Shihan lines. Some then restored the main line by teaching a member of the founders family or some were named successor of the main line, like in this particular case. If you want to change this article, then you have to change all other Koryu articles as well. Or create a page about succession in Koryu. However this is as everything in Japan case by case. 

I see you concede to my point and agree. I suggest the article is therefore edited that way, as I tried to do before you falsely cried "vandal" to garner support from the busy administrators.

The Nihon Kobudo Kyokai has nothing to say when it comes to succession in Koryu. That is only up to the founders family. To nobody else. Not to me you, or any Shihan of another line. If their statements wouldn't be true, the Chiba family or Mr. Ozawa surely would have taken legal steps against them. And as I said before, please provide a statement by Mr. Ozawa. Just keeping on to defame them is not appropriate. Critical statements like yours have to be prooved according to Wiki rules. And nobody else complains about this article. 

Again, you are missing my original point. The question was if Chiba was practicing or not. Please resist the urge to make this about your opinions. Just because no one else complains means nothing. If one writes and article on dogs and someone puts "cats are better" in the middle, or posts a picture of a cat wearing a dog suit in the article, and no one complains, that has nothing to do with the accuracy of the article. Please focus on that or concede.

About the "adoption" I searched in the records, who wrote it, and it seems that it was you who did it back in summer 2015. "You even wrote on my page in the past agreeable edit Kudos." No word about adoption has been made before that. You can look everything up in the records. The term foster son has not to include legal adoption in any way. But why do you care? He never stated that he is Japanese. He only changed his name after his teacher requested to do so. It has nothing to do with you or me, it is just between them. 

That was in 2015; this is 2017. Go ahead and provide citation on that or remove it. It needed to be cited then, it has not been cited, and I cannot prove something does not exist. The burden of proof is not one me, as I am not the one making the claim. The fact is, two years have passed and still no citation. It needs to be removed.

I ask again, where do you take your knowledge from? Not some rumours, but serious facts in form of books, documents etc. Please provide this. Many third party sources, other Ryūha etc. list them as Soke line on their homepages. That is third parties (some of them also in the Nihon Kobudo Kyokai or Nihon Kobudo Shinkokai). Not a troll account on Wikipedia.

I concede to your point and say that if it is not in a book, academically cited then it needs to be removed. Not on a personal website or from "what someone says." I agree that everything on this page that is not corresponding to citation within an academically cited source needs to be removed. This is EXACTLY the information I am debating with you: where is the current article's information coming from? From whom? Markus Losch, that is who. It is biased, which is what you are admitting to here, and you need to concede that the part that is not academically cited is in fact originating un-cited academically by Markus Losch, unless you want to let other points of view in, which would then be equally valid. But no, you won't allow that and have started an edit war. Incidentally foster is used inaccurately and misleadingly as that means bring up (a child that is not one's own by birth). Markus is not Japanese, he was not legally adopted, he is not a Japanese citizen. There is no shame in stating that, nor is it an insult,. If there is there, then that is a serious identity crisis that needs to be addressed professionally at a mental institution,

For the picture, as the 7th Soke named by his teacher and the Chiba-family together, he surely is the highest representative in this art. Some online troll defaming him doesn't change that fact. The founders image is included in the article and doesn't need to be on top.

No, that is not true. It is delusional and part of a cult-like worship of personality, but nowhere near true. Then the senior exponent of the school should be on top. The longest practicing member. Especially one that represents the school in the Nihon Kobudo Kyokai and the Shinkokai. They have earned it over a lifetime and deserve it. Ozawa Shihan is that person. None of those things are Markus Losch in the least, and no one should particularly care how grand he is to you nor is it an insult to anyone to simply speak the truth and ask that citation or proof be given (unless there is a motive behind your words, which there is). Markus is not the senior regardless of his "lofty" artist and craftsman's title, Ozawa shihan is not Markus' subordinate and this should be represented here or anywhere, and this Wikipedia article's purpose should not be to solely direct students into Markus' dojo nor solidify his claims as legitimacy. The entire purpose for the image being on the top of the page is to promote hubris and egosim or some kind of unwarranted worship of Markus Losch. That is wrong, you know it is, and I am calling you out on it. Concede to that simple truth and rest your tongue!

Also their homepage and Wikipedia list all other lines. There is no advertising done here. All those reasons lead to your posts being redone over and over again. And if you try to defame people, anonymously online, make sure your IP address is hidden. Mr. living in Mie-ken, Kuwana. I bet they know who you are. Mr. Ozawa is fairly represented in this article as the head of his branch. No harm is done towards him. Feel free to edit his section in a proper and polite way.Finally, please keep the line of discussion. Don't edit through someones answer.

Again, missing the point. This gives proof and shows that this is, IN FACT a representation of Markus Losch's website, and it is clearly devised to promote him. This is admitting that this information is on his personal, from a commercial (.com) website. Congratulations for telling the truth, that is not easy. None of the edits I made previously were impolite and I will not concede to that in any way. You know better. I am not hiding, in fact getting an account from Wikipedia would be hiding. I am not defaming anyone by merely stating the truth, unless they have something wrong with them mentally, emotionally or the person you are alleging to are seriously troubled by admitting the truth and not to a pre-arranged rhetoric. Or perhaps they are too fragile? Ether one, I am not sure who "they" are, but I am certain I do not care. Your point is moot and works against you since I am NOT hiding behind a VPN nor behind a Wikipedia account. I am actually showing you who I am and not hiding behind a FAKE name (wait isn't that what you are doing? Or is your real name Jellyfish?) I am not sure what you mean by "edit through someone's answer" as this page and the article is to be edited through answers, as they have always been. Again, hold your tongue. Intimidation and anger will do nothing for you; edit the article fairly and accurately and stop using it to promote Markus Losch.

14.132.3.250 (talk) 15:49, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

[Reply:]

I have just done a couple of edits which should be ok for you. Like this both lines are included in a better way. I also will now include all homepage links so every line can be found easily. It was never my intention to argue, but I dislike when people are discredited on Wikipedia. Neither they nor you should have a problem with the edits done. Hope this is ok for you. Jellyfish82 (talk) 16:11, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

Top Picture

There is no reason to have Markus Losch's picture as the headline. This Wikipedia article is not about him and he does not represent the school as the senior member in Japan (or anywhere else but in his group). As it stands, this article has been used as an advertisement for him and his claims, and because of that his photo should not be used as representing an article about the school. 14.132.3.250 (talk) 06:47, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

[Reply:]

He is the 7th generation Sōke of the Hokushin Ittō-Ryū Hyōhō and the 6th generation Sōke is also on that picture. They are currently the highest representatives of this particular Ryūha if you like it or not. This article is about his school and it is not for any person who seems to have personal problems with Mr. Ōtsuka to delete this fact. The school "Hokushin Ittō-Ryū Hyōhō" belongs by law to him in Japan and abroad. It seems like that the Ozawa-ha also recognizes him in this way, as the recent meeting of them and Mr. Ōtsuka Ryūnosuke at their Dōjō in Mito clearly shows. If you put any other side lines picture under the schools name, it is not appropriate as they legally don't belong to the Hokushin Ittō-Ryū Hyōhō. They are side lines with their own names. If you want to write for the Tobukan, you can feel free to write on their part of the page.

If you like thise facts or not doesn't matter for Wikipedia. But as your postings are clearly directed against Mr. Ōtsuka, one can clearly see that there is a personal agenda behind it. This causes defamation and is a crime here in Japan or anywhere else in the world. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jellyfish82 (talk • contribs) 11:06, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

[Reply:]

Quite fascinating this story here. But to me it seems someone doesn't understand the basic legal issue here. If the name Hokushin Ittō-Ryū Hyōhō is a registered trademark there is really no point to show a picture of a person who does not hold this trademark. It could even be argued that, if the picture of this person stays there, this person may lay claim to that name. And this is clearly not possible and could even lead to legal charges. Therefore Mr. Ozawa probably wouldn't be too fond of the fact that his picture is used in such a way here. Actually I quickly checked and the name Hokushin Ittō-Ryū Hyōhō is indeed registered in Japan and other countries as mentioned by Jellyfish82. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sakuradamon (talk • contribs) 12:07, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

[Reply:]

Then this article is a lie, because if he registered a trademark that means only the specific name and all the lineages from this are not applicable to him. Markus and his senior clearly had a falling out with his teacher and then went to a man who did not practice, bought the entitlement from him, then "inherited" the school after changing his name and not being legally adopted nor a citizen of Japan. This needs another website and I suggest you create one (as I have before) and keep this out of the historical school of Hokushin Itto Ryu as it exists in Japan. Please leave this page and commercially promote your nonsense elsewhere. Clearly a violation of Wikipedia rules. You JUST admitted this, like a fool, and need to realize that you are not special and everyone has to follow the rules. 14.132.3.250 (talk) 03:24, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

[Reply:]

I am new on Wikipedia so: 1st: please give me some support and 2nd: I was watching this discussion for a longer time and am more than unhappy about what’s happening here. I am living in Japan already a few years and am involved in the whole koryu-scene here. According to my own research and informations provided on the other Hokushin Itto Ryu pages here and on the internet I created the polish page to this article. I also know the 6th Soke of the named school personally.

And to be honest I am really shocked about what I am reading here! Some of the stuff are really heavy assaults! I really would like to know where do you get your informations from.

Regarding to what you have steated: - The 6th Soke of the school went to a man who did not practice(aka 5th Soke), bought the entitlement from him and resurected a dead school… If so, then please provide a prove for it! Because for what I know the story is completely different! Besides if he did so (according to a very strict japanese law system) he wouldn’t be able to inherit the school. - Then your claim about the resurection. If you know only a little about the japanese Koryu you would know that even if the main(family)line is not practicing the school by themselves, as long as they live, the sokeship stays in the family and the school is not considered dead. Best example ist he Katori Shinto Ryu. The family line is not beeing practicing the school for 3 generations and the ryu-ha is preserved only in form of it’s side branches, which are teaching under sokes authority. - Then the „problem“ with the trademark. What about all the other koryu which have a registered trademark on their school names? Just to name a few: Jigen-Ryū Hyōhō, Yagyu Shinkage-ryu Hyoho, Hyoho Taisha-ryu, Hyoho Niten Ichi-Ryu, Suio-ryu Iai-Kenpo. - And the issue with the 7th soke not being legally adopted nor a citizen of Japan – What’s the point in here? No one NEEDS to be a japanese citizen nor be a officially adopted in order to inherit the school. - And least but not last on the list: „ ...promote your nonsense elsewhere.” – It is a clear defamation and insult! 150.31.3.142 (talk) 16:14, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

[Reply:]

It was a really long read through all the edits and the talks. First of all, this is absolutely absurd, borderline within comedy and drama. Vandalizing such an important site as Wikipedia with misleading informations without any proof or source, should be labeled as crime. Beside that: The reason of these actions (the vandalism), from an outside eye, comes from the feelings of jealousy, anger and resentments of "14.132.3.250" (the writer and last editor of the page "Hokushin Ittō Ryū Hyōhō). We can clearly read through his lines, who's always aiming NOT to inform, but to defame the people and school involved, that X's focusing only on points that don't have a direct connection with the history or the style of the School. So, what's the point in that? Wikipedia is a place of informations, not a place where to vent ones anger and bad feeling towards someone or something. Basically, he is completely out of contests.

I won't no longer remark the facts that many people here fully explained (the REGISTERED TRADEMARK in JAPAN AND EUROPE, the relationship between the Chiba Family and both Ōtsuka Sensei's, the equality and the detailed and PROVED information of the previous page (before these vandalism edits).)

I will just remark one point. Wikipedia is a site where whoever wants inform himself on the internet SURELY will surf and visits (being the second or first choice that google gives after a search). Therefore, Wikipedia MUST be FULLY protected and supervised, to avoid such people give misleading and wrong information to the mass. Even more serious is, if those people damage and defame a hundreds years old tradition and the people related to it with absolutely baseless and unproved statements.

Leaving the moral part aside, violate a registered trademark is of course an illegal act, as for defaming someone on the internet. But i am not the person who has to judge from this point of view.

Talking about the picture: The picture that now is heading the page (below the Shūsaku's one)is representing the Leader of the Ozawa-Ha Hokushin Into Ryu and two students of the so said Ryūha: As far as I know, the Ozawa-ha has no connections with the Chiba family, it's just a side line of the Hokushin Ittō Ryū Hyōhō(founded by Chiba Shūsaku Narimasa in the 20s of the 19th century). On the other side, the previous picture was showing both of the Ōtsuka Sensei (Ōtsuka Ryūnosuke Masatomo, the 7th generation Soke of the Hokushin Ittō Ryū Hyōhō, the line founded by Chiba Sadakichi Masamichi, younger brother of Shūsaku, and Founder of the Chiba Dojo, and Ōtsuka Yoichiro Masanori, 6th generation Soke appointed by the 5th generation Soke, Chiba Hiroshi Masatane) have strong and deep bounds with the Chiba family (there are many photos that show them in company of the 5th Soke Chiba Hiroshi and his niece.) If anyone can judge which photo is more appropriate to be in a such important and relevant page as wikipedia, i doubt someone would chose a picture of a side branch line despite a picture showing the 6th and 7th generation Soke of the Main Line (which is the line that descend by the founder of the school).

For the things said above, I kindly ask the admins and moderators of the page to stop this useless and senseless vandalism and to let people be informed correctly without misleading and infected informations.

Thank you.

Simple noun capitalization

There is no reason to capitalize simple nouns because they are foreign words. This is a simple grammar rule about nouns. If it is not a proper name or title, it does not need capitalization.14.132.3.250 (talk) 09:14, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

I agree, which is why I removed the capitalization. Which you then undid. Bakilas (talk) 10:16, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

Full protection for 1 day

I have fully protected the page for 1 day while I read through talk page discussions, revision history and user contributions. There appears to be evidence of abuse of multiple accounts, which makes it more difficult to get to the core of the issue. As this is turning into a longstanding content dispute, I hope we can work together toward an acceptable stable version. Alex Shih^Talk 04:27, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

From the initial reading, I think WP:UNDUE is one of the main applicable policies here. Alex Shih^Talk 04:40, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Points for cleanup

I won't (and can't) comment on the claims about COI, vandalism, morality and such. Just some factual points for cleaning up the article.

Minor points:

To better inform future readers, i'd advise either internal links for unexplained terms or, if those are unavailable, explanations. e.g. kiri-otoshi (no wikipedia entry, explanation required) or tsuki-waza (Tsuki and Waza)

The line "(This Dojo is not to be mistaken with the Edo-Genbukan)" seems to be unnecessary, as a confusion between Otaru-Genbukan and Edo-Genbukan seems unlikely to me.

Major points:

Chiba-Dojo (Revived)

The term revival denotes a very specific form of historic occurence in regards to koryu. In the Keiko Shokon, which is already cited as a scource for this article, Ellis Amdur defines revival as follows: "1) REVIVAL - this would be when a licensed instructor, starts teaching again, a portion of the ryu which he is fully trained that, for some reason, was abandoned. And then, later, when a dedicated young individual comes along, he starts teaching again what he knows" (taken from a forum post, written by Mr. Amdur, as the book is currently not in my possession) [http://www.e-budo.com/forum/showthread.php?20099-oldest-extinct-koryu&s=aab30039d616df331f59fd68fae6aeac&p=200984#post200984 Text by Ellis Amdur, in Keiko Shokon (Editor: Diane Skoss)] This indicates to me, that for "Revived" to be the correct lable, a disruption of teaching in the art as a whole has to happen in the history of the style. This is clearly not the case here, as it is sufficiently verified by the existance of active branching lines.

Controversy regarding 7th Soke and legitimacy of the line

This point somewhat confounds with the prior remark about "Revived" status of the line. As per explanation of the term Sōke here on Wikipedia, the title refers to a person who is "... generally considered the ultimate authority within their art, and have final discretion and authority regarding promotions, curriculum, doctrine, and disciplinary actions." In the same article it is also explained, that the position of Soke "...to essentially be a hereditary honorary title in the Iemoto system while the Shihanke is responsible for the actual teaching and operation of the school." Therefore I assume that a Soke is not required to practice his/her art and he/she has full authority to appoint the next Soke as he/she pleases. If both of these assumptions hold, then no recreation or revival of the line happened in 2013, as stated in the article, but a "normal" transmission of the title Soke. I don't know how normal a changing of the Soke family line is, which is why i put normal in quotation marks earlier, but a quick search on other Koryu pages here on wikipedia shows this to be a quite normal occasion, indicated by the changing surnames in the lineage.

Another minor point regarding this part of the article is the somewhat less than optimal language used. Lots of repetition and some, to me, weird grammatical constructs. 2A02:8109:F3F:E378:110F:486C:CC42:ECA1 (talk) 05:45, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Hokushin Ittō-ryū. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140222132556/http://www1.ka6.koalanet.ne.jp/souma/shuusaku.htm to http://www1.ka6.koalanet.ne.jp/souma/shuusaku.htm

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 20:03, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

Dubious claim

"Hokushin Ittō-ryū is also one of the remaining ryūha which still practices kumitachi with bokuto (wood swords)."

Is this supported by any observations? I think we can evidence that modern kendo uses these forms, as does Toyama-ryu. Any others?

Kortoso (talk) 02:55, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

There is room for subtlety to that question. In the general usage of the term kumitachi, many if not most ryuha practice with bokuto, with the exception being iai schools, or high level demonstrations. Here is [1]Tenshin Shoden Katori Shinto-ryu Kenjutsu, for instance, but you can look for any ryuha you like on youtube that isn't an iai school and you'll probably see it being done with wooden swords.

However, a paragraph earlier they had been talking about specifically kumitachi with onigote. If that's what they meant, that's more likely to be true, as usually only Itto-ryu derived schools use those. I do agree that it's at best ambiguous and should be changed if that's what they are referring to. 2601:600:947F:D20:845B:C956:A4D:76D2 (talk) 13:14, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

Ongoing vandalism by IP address users

I reverted the article to latest correct, meaning commonly accepted, version. Also I reported the following users to the wikipedia vandalism page, because of the ongoing vandalism of this article with unsourced claims against one of the lines. I suspect personal or business reasons behind these edits. User:14.231.220.159 & User:42.113.203.196

I'd like to remind my fellow editors of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources