Bronsan

Welcome!

Welcome!

Hello, Bronsan, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might find helpful:

• Introduction
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Simplified Manual of Style
• Your first article
• Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community
• Feel free to make test edits in the sandbox
• and check out the Task Center, for ideas about what to work on.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to ask me on my talk page or place {{Help me}} on this page and someone will drop by to help. Again, welcome! CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Huliva 08:37, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for your comment. It asks to sign my name. I followed that link but still do not understand if I signed or not.

In your other comment you questioned the validity of the article now named 'Kenko Kempo Karate'. I have shortened it a lot. Did that help the validity? Bronsan (talk) 11:07, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

User:Kenko Kempo Karate over age 50

You moved that to a user page but I think it's supposed to be an article. However, "Kenko Kempo Karate over age 50" isn't a good name for an article, nor am I sure if it is a valid article. I have moved it to Draft:Kenko Kempo Karate where you can get some assistance on it. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Huliva 08:39, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, I still have much to learn! By only calling it 'Kenko Kempo Karate' it misses one of the key karakteristics: a martial art especially devised for older adults. Bronsan (talk) 11:01, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

Links to draft articles

Please do not introduce links in actual articles to draft articles, as you did to Comparison of karate styles. Since a draft is not yet ready for the main article space, it is not in shape for ordinary readers, and links from articles should not go to a draft. Such links are contrary to the Manual of Style. These links have been removed. Thank you. - Arjayay (talk) 09:05, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

OK, thanks, I did not know yet that rule. Bronsan (talk) 10:58, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

Kenko Kempo Karate Comment

It is clear from your User details page and a quick Google search that you have a close personal link to Kenko Kempo Karate and were a translator of one of their books into dutch as well as being a senior member of the organisation. This means that you have a conflict of interest. Please desist from further edits on either the article that you have written concerning Kenko Kempo Karate and adding links to it elsewhere in the Wikipedia, which while seemingly in good faith will very likely be removed due to your close link to the subject as this will be construed as WP:Promotion.

It is clear from your article Kenko Kempo Karate that you are a good writer, however, your tone is not right for an encyclopedia, you need to compare your article to other martial arts and use the same style. The weakest part of your article writing is how you have used many references that make no mention of the subject of the article, the article topic should be the main focus and making 'related claims' turns a factual encyclopedia into a personal essay or academic article.

I can see that another use has welcomed you above with cookies and a list of useful resources, please digest these cookies and resources well to make your contributions here stick and be of value to the community and readers, you are clearly a very dedicated writer and martial artist, we don't mean to discourage you but you are not currently following the guidance. You should use the WP:Talk pages a lot more also before making additions/changes as a new user. Please write to me at my Talk page with any follow-on questions.

My opinion currently is that Kenko Kempo Karate may just about be notable enough for inclusion as an article due to published sources but likely most of the content in your current article should be cut to leave a short article.

Mountaincirque^talk 09:18, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

Thank you of your comment. I understand that I have to split the article in three: Kenko Kempo Karate, Health and wellness in Martial Arts, and Ageing with lifelong exercise. In addition I should update the lemma on Gerontechnology that I started in 2009.

Indeed, I have no WP:Talk experience. I wonder if that already existed in 2009. We keep on learning.

How would you assess this split in three of the information

10:35, 6 June 2022 (UTC) Bronsan (talk) 10:35, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

I saw that you removed Kenko Kempo Karate from the karate style list because it is a hybrid style. As far as I know some other hybrid styles are still in the martial arts style lists.

You also stated that Kenko Kempo Karate is only used within Kenko Kempo Karate. This is correct as far as Wushu is used within Wushu and Budo within Budo. But this is not correct when Kenko Kempo Karate is used by ITF Taekwondo on the Thijssen Taekwon-do Academie (https://thijssentaekwondo.nl/).

Bronsan (talk) 11:46, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

The Taekwondo source is a primary source, which is not recommended, you should be more sensitive to this nuance. As per the guidelines shared with you above you should be using sources that are secondary ideally for the article and not those self-published by the founders of the style as the main justification for the article. Primary sources are OK for clarifying some factual claims at times, but not solely. So for example, if you can share a newspaper article on KK Karate that calls it a 'style' that is much stronger than linking to a Taekwondo club website that is written by that instructor. Frankly to me, KK Karate isn't much more notable than most local karate clubs/associations worldwide, of which there are of course thousands. Having spent a few hours reading on it this morning it seems more of an 'umbrella organisation' where teachers can be certified in their system but still train in other styles under that 'title', small karate organisations and clubs need to meet the WP:General Notability Guideline, you would do well to review that and see if you think it does meet those requirements, your article sees to fall foul of quite of few of the main principles - particularly sources being independent and the coverage being significant.

I am a member of a local karate club myself with a few locations, if our sensei writes a book on his 'style', slightly changing some ideas compared to our style, that doesn't mean that I can add it to the Wikipedia list of global karate styles (of which there are roughly 17 at present), all of which have historical precedent and have secondary sources documenting them. The only point that you could consider writing it up on Wikipedia as a proper style would be if it became internationally popular and had many independent sources backing up the fact that it is a distinct style of karate. Otherwise your page is basically an advert.

The styles listed at Comparison of karate styles are all Japanese and Okinawan systems, the only 'hybridisation' there is within karate itself over the past 100-150 years of its development.

Please don't think that I am trying to say that I do't think your assocation is of worth, it is just that you need to be very careful in how the information is presented here, and more strict editors than myself might have just deleted the page rather than trying to find the salient parts. Mountaincirque^talk 13:00, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for your comment. Unfortunately the references to newspapers calling it a style were removed by you. I will fish them out of the many changes and reincorporate them. There can also be a language problem. In my country we talk more about a system. As such Kenko Kempo Karate was accepted by the Nederlandse Federatie voor Krijgskunsten. I fear that also that reference has been removed by you. However, I do not know if you would accept a 'system' as a seperate style. Please advise.

Bronsan (talk) 09:08, 7 June 2022 (UTC)

I've just gone back in the page history (which is very quick to do by comparing the current version with the historical version you want to compare with) and can see that many of the references were very poor, for example you had linked a user comment on a medical journal blog [1], anyone can write a comment, this is not acceptable for an encyclopedia reference, it was also a little misleading to describe this as 'a medical magazine picked it up', the link to the original article that comment was placed on is now dead.

This is your section on newspaper interest:

Connected news items found their way to newspapers.,

As we discussed earlier, the tone of this is wrong for an encyclopedia. Of course things will end up in newspapers if they are noteworthy, you need to use the newspaper source to reference and justify why the KK Karate is notable, these are your key secondary sources. I removed these initially as 'being in a newspaper' is not something that you report in a Wikipedia entry. The first source Thuringer is a good source for the basic details on KKK for example, rather than using a primary source.

Mountaincirque^talk 09:29, 7 June 2022 (UTC) Mountaincirque^talk 09:29, 7 June 2022 (UTC)

I re-included two newspapers and the NFK. Thanks for your help.

Bronsan (talk) 10:18, 7 June 2022 (UTC)

Another comment on the article. You could look at this page: Kajukenbo for inspiration, though it is not perfect. This is a much more well-known hybrid martial art, that has many influences like your 'KKK'. Note that it is not claimed to be a 'style of karate' or any of its constituent arts, it is simply a hybrid martial art. Mountaincirque^talk 09:54, 7 June 2022 (UTC)

Yes, this is an interesting page. Thanks! Bronsan (talk) 08:04, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Hybrid nature of Kenko Kempo Karate.png

Thanks for uploading File:Hybrid nature of Kenko Kempo Karate.png. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{permission pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. Here is a list of your uploads. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in section F11 of the criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 04:10, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:KKKO-1-schield.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:KKKO-1-schield.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:17, 21 August 2023 (UTC)