This article is within the scope of WikiProject Martial arts. Please use these
guidelines and suggestions to help improve this article. If you think something is missing, please
help us improve them!Martial artsWikipedia:WikiProject Martial artsTemplate:WikiProject Martial artsMartial arts articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject China, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
China related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChinaWikipedia:WikiProject ChinaTemplate:WikiProject ChinaChina-related articles
This article is substantially duplicated by a piece in an external publication. Please do not flag this article as a copyright violation of the following source:
In evaluating the origin of the duplicated text in the article and this external site, I began by looking at
the first edit of the article. This was clearly not directly pasted from the external site, as there are significant differences in spite of similarities. For instance, the external site says: "The system combines the martial arts techniques from various Northern and Southern Chinese kung-fu systems; the powerful arm and hand techniques from the Shaolin animal forms from the South, combined with the extended, circular movements, twisting body, and agile footwork that characterizes Northern China's martial arts. It is considered an external style, combining soft and hard techniques as well as incorporating a wide range of weapons as part of its curriculum. Choy Li Fut is an effective self defense system particularly noted for defense against multiple attackers. It contains a wide variety of techniques, including long and short range punches, kicks, sweeps and take downs, pressure point attacks, joint locks, and grappling." At its creation, our article said: "It is a powerful and dynamic martial art that combines techniques from various Northern and Southern Chinese kung-fu systems; the powerful arm and hand techniques from the Shaolin animal forms from the South, combined with the extended, circular movements, twisting body, and agile footwork that characterizes Northern China's martial arts. It is a characterized as a external style, combining soft and hard techniques as well as incorporating a wide range of weapons as part of its curriculum. Choy Li Fut is an effective self defense system and contains a wide variety of techniques, including long and short range punches, kicks, sweeps and take downs, pressure point attacks, joint locks, and grappling." I have formatted several large differences for comparison. We can see the content in our article evolving towards the latter as it is cleaned on Wikipedia. For instance,
here "a characterized as a" is changed to read "considered an", at the same time that "and contains" was altered to read "particularly noted for defense against multiple attackers. It". "powerful and dynamic" are removed
here. Such factors are strongly indicative of reverse copying. This does not address copying from any other sources, but the given source seems to have copied from Wikipedia rather than the other way around.
Moonriddengirl(talk)14:24, 21 April 2011 (UTC)reply
The following discussion is an archived discussion of a
requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a
move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
Cai Li Fo →
Choy Li Fut – Most sources use this spelling or a similar Cantonese-based version. The current title is a transliteration from Mandarin Chinese seldom used in English sources. See also previous discussion
here. —
AjaxSmack04:02, 7 July 2012 (UTC)reply
Survey
Support. I get
22 (11 deghosted) post-1990 English-language GBook results for "Cai Li Fo". For the Cantonese spelling, there are
410 (124 deghosted) for "Choy Li Fut", plus
100 (69 deghosted) for "Choi Li Fut".
Kauffner (
talk)
11:24, 8 July 2012 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a
requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a
move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
Multiple issues (January 2015)
This article has many issues:
WP:PEACOCK: "powerful", "agile", "effective", "particularly noted", "like all great martial artists", etc. Especially bad in the lead section, which sounds like it's trying to make Choy Li Fut sound awesome (especially with the Bruce Lee quote). By contrast, the lead sections of
karate,
wing chun, and
silat, just to give a few examples, describe those respective arts plainly.
Much of the text in the article is just a list of trivial lineage information. A typical Wikipedia reader would want to know the description of the art and the history of its practice, not just a list of random names. A list of only the more notable practitioners can be split off into a separate list article (or a category) if necessary. Most of the names given in this article are not notable, nor is there any citation given for them. The article is short on actual information about Choy Li Fut's techniques and principles. Compare to
Wing Chun's detailed Characteristics and Curriculum sections.
Extremely dubious references:
Wong Kiew Kit, in both his books cited here, unquestioningly repeats the long-discredited
Bodhidharma myth of Shaolin kung fu (see
Meir Shahar's Shaolin Monastery, or
Tang Hao's work on the subject). Wong also repeats the myth of
Emperor Taizu of Song having created a martial art, and of
Zhang Sanfeng being the founder of taijiquan. Reading around on the web, Wong seems to believe all kinds of kooky fringe stuff. He is not a reliable source for anything.
Historical lineage info from online sources that provide no documentation of their own sources. Which 19th century documents did they consult for such detailed information? Lineage fraud is common in Chinese martial arts. Where's the evidence?
The Way of the Warrior by Chris Cruddelli is used as a source for some Choy Gar info. The book only contains basic, unsourced info about various martial arts. He has two short paragraphs on the whole thing and doesn't say how he knows who the founder was. The intro to the book even says it's not necessary to be "overly clinical" in addressing the differences between facts and fables. Seriously?
Dubious fairy tales with intentionally misleading citations:
The cited page in the Bruce Lee book The Tao of Gung Fu does not include the details given in the paragraph about Choy Fook.
Similarly, the cited page on Barefoot Zen doesn't include any of the details of the paragraph about Choy Fook it's given as a reference for.
Given the above, the entire section on Choy Fook looks like made-up bullshit to me, tarted up with a couple of references that don't back it up. At this point I'm not even convinced that Choy Fook was a real person.
Although some books are cited, only a few of the citations give page numbers. Given that the two that I checked that did have page numbers were bullshit (see above), I'm extremely skeptical about the ones that don't cite any specific page numbers.
There are many details about the 19th century history of Choy Li Fut that do not cite any sources. The only cited sentences in those sections pertain to general facts about that era. Where is all this information coming from?
There are far too many claims to lineages to CLF on this page. Self-promotion is a nuisance. This page should be only about the history and foundation of CLF and just because someone took a class from a master who shared a room with another master doesn't make you an heir to CLF. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
209.53.175.249 (
talk)
19:11, 27 May 2016 (UTC)reply
Massive clean-up needed
Far too many unverifiable references to random names and practitioners on this page. If you review the other major martial art pages, they do not contain multiple references to unknown individuals and random teachers and students. Only notable practitioners should be noted on the main page (ie: Wesley Snipes in Shotokan, etc..). All other claimed lineages, individuals and branches should be listed on their own page. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
209.53.175.249 (
talk)
17:30, 17 July 2016 (UTC)reply
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Martial arts. Please use these
guidelines and suggestions to help improve this article. If you think something is missing, please
help us improve them!Martial artsWikipedia:WikiProject Martial artsTemplate:WikiProject Martial artsMartial arts articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject China, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
China related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChinaWikipedia:WikiProject ChinaTemplate:WikiProject ChinaChina-related articles
This article is substantially duplicated by a piece in an external publication. Please do not flag this article as a copyright violation of the following source:
In evaluating the origin of the duplicated text in the article and this external site, I began by looking at
the first edit of the article. This was clearly not directly pasted from the external site, as there are significant differences in spite of similarities. For instance, the external site says: "The system combines the martial arts techniques from various Northern and Southern Chinese kung-fu systems; the powerful arm and hand techniques from the Shaolin animal forms from the South, combined with the extended, circular movements, twisting body, and agile footwork that characterizes Northern China's martial arts. It is considered an external style, combining soft and hard techniques as well as incorporating a wide range of weapons as part of its curriculum. Choy Li Fut is an effective self defense system particularly noted for defense against multiple attackers. It contains a wide variety of techniques, including long and short range punches, kicks, sweeps and take downs, pressure point attacks, joint locks, and grappling." At its creation, our article said: "It is a powerful and dynamic martial art that combines techniques from various Northern and Southern Chinese kung-fu systems; the powerful arm and hand techniques from the Shaolin animal forms from the South, combined with the extended, circular movements, twisting body, and agile footwork that characterizes Northern China's martial arts. It is a characterized as a external style, combining soft and hard techniques as well as incorporating a wide range of weapons as part of its curriculum. Choy Li Fut is an effective self defense system and contains a wide variety of techniques, including long and short range punches, kicks, sweeps and take downs, pressure point attacks, joint locks, and grappling." I have formatted several large differences for comparison. We can see the content in our article evolving towards the latter as it is cleaned on Wikipedia. For instance,
here "a characterized as a" is changed to read "considered an", at the same time that "and contains" was altered to read "particularly noted for defense against multiple attackers. It". "powerful and dynamic" are removed
here. Such factors are strongly indicative of reverse copying. This does not address copying from any other sources, but the given source seems to have copied from Wikipedia rather than the other way around.
Moonriddengirl(talk)14:24, 21 April 2011 (UTC)reply
The following discussion is an archived discussion of a
requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a
move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
Cai Li Fo →
Choy Li Fut – Most sources use this spelling or a similar Cantonese-based version. The current title is a transliteration from Mandarin Chinese seldom used in English sources. See also previous discussion
here. —
AjaxSmack04:02, 7 July 2012 (UTC)reply
Survey
Support. I get
22 (11 deghosted) post-1990 English-language GBook results for "Cai Li Fo". For the Cantonese spelling, there are
410 (124 deghosted) for "Choy Li Fut", plus
100 (69 deghosted) for "Choi Li Fut".
Kauffner (
talk)
11:24, 8 July 2012 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a
requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a
move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
Multiple issues (January 2015)
This article has many issues:
WP:PEACOCK: "powerful", "agile", "effective", "particularly noted", "like all great martial artists", etc. Especially bad in the lead section, which sounds like it's trying to make Choy Li Fut sound awesome (especially with the Bruce Lee quote). By contrast, the lead sections of
karate,
wing chun, and
silat, just to give a few examples, describe those respective arts plainly.
Much of the text in the article is just a list of trivial lineage information. A typical Wikipedia reader would want to know the description of the art and the history of its practice, not just a list of random names. A list of only the more notable practitioners can be split off into a separate list article (or a category) if necessary. Most of the names given in this article are not notable, nor is there any citation given for them. The article is short on actual information about Choy Li Fut's techniques and principles. Compare to
Wing Chun's detailed Characteristics and Curriculum sections.
Extremely dubious references:
Wong Kiew Kit, in both his books cited here, unquestioningly repeats the long-discredited
Bodhidharma myth of Shaolin kung fu (see
Meir Shahar's Shaolin Monastery, or
Tang Hao's work on the subject). Wong also repeats the myth of
Emperor Taizu of Song having created a martial art, and of
Zhang Sanfeng being the founder of taijiquan. Reading around on the web, Wong seems to believe all kinds of kooky fringe stuff. He is not a reliable source for anything.
Historical lineage info from online sources that provide no documentation of their own sources. Which 19th century documents did they consult for such detailed information? Lineage fraud is common in Chinese martial arts. Where's the evidence?
The Way of the Warrior by Chris Cruddelli is used as a source for some Choy Gar info. The book only contains basic, unsourced info about various martial arts. He has two short paragraphs on the whole thing and doesn't say how he knows who the founder was. The intro to the book even says it's not necessary to be "overly clinical" in addressing the differences between facts and fables. Seriously?
Dubious fairy tales with intentionally misleading citations:
The cited page in the Bruce Lee book The Tao of Gung Fu does not include the details given in the paragraph about Choy Fook.
Similarly, the cited page on Barefoot Zen doesn't include any of the details of the paragraph about Choy Fook it's given as a reference for.
Given the above, the entire section on Choy Fook looks like made-up bullshit to me, tarted up with a couple of references that don't back it up. At this point I'm not even convinced that Choy Fook was a real person.
Although some books are cited, only a few of the citations give page numbers. Given that the two that I checked that did have page numbers were bullshit (see above), I'm extremely skeptical about the ones that don't cite any specific page numbers.
There are many details about the 19th century history of Choy Li Fut that do not cite any sources. The only cited sentences in those sections pertain to general facts about that era. Where is all this information coming from?
There are far too many claims to lineages to CLF on this page. Self-promotion is a nuisance. This page should be only about the history and foundation of CLF and just because someone took a class from a master who shared a room with another master doesn't make you an heir to CLF. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
209.53.175.249 (
talk)
19:11, 27 May 2016 (UTC)reply
Massive clean-up needed
Far too many unverifiable references to random names and practitioners on this page. If you review the other major martial art pages, they do not contain multiple references to unknown individuals and random teachers and students. Only notable practitioners should be noted on the main page (ie: Wesley Snipes in Shotokan, etc..). All other claimed lineages, individuals and branches should be listed on their own page. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
209.53.175.249 (
talk)
17:30, 17 July 2016 (UTC)reply