This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Gatka article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Wikipedia:List_of_Wikipedians_by_martial_art
I added the POV and wikify templates to this article. There is almost no historical information in the "history" section (which is the only section, as there's no overview) and what is there is is POV and unsourced (e.g. "Opposing forces are documented to have cursed the awesome Warrior Saints that the Sikhs were!"). siafu 19:01, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Sadly, I don't have the knowledge to make these changes, but here are a few things which would improve this article without even getting into the (excellent, but long) guidelines on the Martial Arts Project page:
Zabieru 00:31, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
Thetruth, please DO NOT remove the NPOV tag without first discussing it in the talk page. -- Vivin Paliath (വിവിന് പാലിയത്)
This article has a lot of POVs and a lot of work needs to be done. It lacks proper references and considering my family has a long history in terms of Sikh Phulkian states, this article is seriously in need of work since it is voicing a lot of assumptions.
Especially with its reference to Rajputs and origins of Gatka, also take a look at the time frames and hsitorical correlations.
The article was a nice idea but needs a lot of work.
Good luck
Gorkhali 10:23, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
I am not Sikh, but one sentence brought to my attention the fact that perhaps the entire article needs to be thoroughly checked for factuality. The sentence was:
It [Gatka] was perfected by the time of the tenth and last Sikh Guru.
I am pretty sure there were twelve Gurus? Either way, I agree the article is in need of serious work, and references need to be found.
Thanks, Dan Let me make it clear that there were ten Gurus only. The Guru Granth Sahib was established by Guru Gobind Singh as a divine book which have soul of all ten Gurus. Daljeet —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.253.133.157 ( talk) 13:44, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
The image Image:Banda Singh Bahadur.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check
Let me make it clear that there were ten Gurus only. The Guru Granth Sahib was established by Guru Gobind Singh as a divine book which have soul of all ten Gurus. Daljeet —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.253.133.157 ( talk) 13:41, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. -- 15:06, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
apparently, gatka simply means "short stick". I find 1980s sources that discuss gatka as just one item alongside other Indian weaponry. I have also seen the claim floating around that it was the British who extended the meaning of gatka to include all "Sikh martial arts", but I am not sure this is correct. The impression I get from googling is that there is a recent (2000s) surge in interest in Sikh martial arts, and gatka as a term for a wider martial art, as opposed to fighting with the short stick, appears to arise in this context. We need better sources. -- dab (𒁳) 14:34, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
I removed the creator of Gatka posted as Nanak Dev. Guru Nanak was the first Guru and Founder of the Sikh Religion and not the martial art gatka. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.164.7.166 ( talk) 06:14, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
I have looked into this some more, and I think I understand the terminological confusion now.
I am not sure if this means we should split this article, separating "performative gatka" from "historical Sikh martial arts". -- dab (𒁳) 07:48, 10 September 2009 (UTC) Naadar is a fake —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.73.165.97 ( talk) 02:34, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
I was searching for Gatka over the net and came across this article; as this is a tradition of my tribe the 'Tanoli' in Pakistan and its been in our tribe for a long time. Initially it was a sort of stick fencing but later it remained as performance art (as aslo mentioned in above post); now its almost finished. Cheers! Wikitanoli ( talk) 15:12, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
Londondajatt ( talk) 18:01, 10 July 2010 (UTC) It should not redirect to gatka as gatka and shastar vidiya are different arts, where more people practise gatka.
Hello everybody, I just read a BBC article, "The only living master of a dying martial art," stated that Gatka and shastar vidya where too different things as opposed to what is stated in the revival section I was wondering if anybody could look into that. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-15480741 is the link to the article Philoleb ( talk) 00:47, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
You mean "two" different things.
The article you link is about
Nidar Singh. He reconstructs historical Sikh martial arts.
It is true that this is different from "gatka" as in stick katas or sword dance. The problem is
WP:NOTE, so far it has not been arguable to write a standalone about Nidar Singh and his school because there were not sufficient third party sources. If BBC and others keep writing about him, we may soon be in a position to compile an article about this. As a temporary solution, I have just stashed away brief mention of this under "gatka" for lack of a better solution.
I actually like what I see of this man's work online, he seems to know what he is doing. But obviously there are also a lot of vanity and political issues involved. Instead of just saying "I am a decent martial artist intersted in reconstructing Mughal era Sikh fighting styles" he styles himself the "last master of a dying art", poses for the BBC as some sort of walking armoury and claims to teach "shastar vidya", i.e. "Indian martial art" on behalf of the entire subcontinent. This is slightly stretching credibility, and for the purposes of Wikipedia, there simply needs to be enough tertiary references before covering a commercial martial arts school run by a single individual. -- dab (𒁳) 19:54, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
Actually, now the BBC World Service seems to have broadcast a program dedicated to this, "Last Sikh Warrior" on Heart And Soul, 31 October 2011, it should be possible to argue WP:NOTE is met. I'll try to branch this into a separate Nidar Singh article over the next few days. Note that the term "shastar vidya" will need disambiguation, because Singh is using it idiosyncratically. It is basically just the Sanskrit term for "martial arts". Only Singh seems to be using it in a sense of "Sikh martial arts of the 17th to 18th century". -- dab (𒁳) 20:02, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
There's a misconception among editors on this article that gatka refers specifically to the stick-fighting sport, while everything else is a reconstruction of historical Sikh martial arts called "shastar vidiya". The term shastar vidiya is simply armed combat or martial arts in general. It is not and was not a particular system of fighting, but was a collective word for fighting arts at the time. It wasn't even confined to Sikhs or Punjabis, but also adjacent areas of India and Pakistan. The Gurjaras are but one example. Furthermore, gatka is absolutely not a reconstruction. I don't want to generalise since I know that there are some attempts to revive certain Sikh/Punjabi fighting styles. But by and large, gatka masters and instructors simply teach what they learned from their own teachers. For instance, gatka was first brought to Malaysia and Thailand during the colonial era when Sikhs first immigrated to this part of the world. Though it was never widespread, it has been practiced since that time for demonstrative purposes, and the Malaysian Gatka Federation has never made any attempt to "recontruct" anything in the way that is being done with medieval European styles. Strictly speaking, it is true that gatka should properly refer to the stick-fighting sport which originated as a form of sword-training, much in the way that Japanese swordsmen would train with wooden swords. However, the other weapons which are now included under the term gatka have always been a part of the system. Morinae ( talk) 05:46, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Gatka. 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:
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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 16:36, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
Back in 2012, the article was much shorter and much more modest, but it was actually backed up by references [1] Since then, people just seem to have piled on unreferenced blog-entry material. If nobody is up for cleaning it up and basing it on references, I would propose that reverting to what was actually referenced is the obvious way to go here. -- dab (𒁳) 14:08, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. Community Tech bot ( talk) 21:36, 25 June 2018 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Gatka article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Wikipedia:List_of_Wikipedians_by_martial_art
I added the POV and wikify templates to this article. There is almost no historical information in the "history" section (which is the only section, as there's no overview) and what is there is is POV and unsourced (e.g. "Opposing forces are documented to have cursed the awesome Warrior Saints that the Sikhs were!"). siafu 19:01, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Sadly, I don't have the knowledge to make these changes, but here are a few things which would improve this article without even getting into the (excellent, but long) guidelines on the Martial Arts Project page:
Zabieru 00:31, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
Thetruth, please DO NOT remove the NPOV tag without first discussing it in the talk page. -- Vivin Paliath (വിവിന് പാലിയത്)
This article has a lot of POVs and a lot of work needs to be done. It lacks proper references and considering my family has a long history in terms of Sikh Phulkian states, this article is seriously in need of work since it is voicing a lot of assumptions.
Especially with its reference to Rajputs and origins of Gatka, also take a look at the time frames and hsitorical correlations.
The article was a nice idea but needs a lot of work.
Good luck
Gorkhali 10:23, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
I am not Sikh, but one sentence brought to my attention the fact that perhaps the entire article needs to be thoroughly checked for factuality. The sentence was:
It [Gatka] was perfected by the time of the tenth and last Sikh Guru.
I am pretty sure there were twelve Gurus? Either way, I agree the article is in need of serious work, and references need to be found.
Thanks, Dan Let me make it clear that there were ten Gurus only. The Guru Granth Sahib was established by Guru Gobind Singh as a divine book which have soul of all ten Gurus. Daljeet —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.253.133.157 ( talk) 13:44, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
The image Image:Banda Singh Bahadur.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check
Let me make it clear that there were ten Gurus only. The Guru Granth Sahib was established by Guru Gobind Singh as a divine book which have soul of all ten Gurus. Daljeet —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.253.133.157 ( talk) 13:41, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. -- 15:06, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
apparently, gatka simply means "short stick". I find 1980s sources that discuss gatka as just one item alongside other Indian weaponry. I have also seen the claim floating around that it was the British who extended the meaning of gatka to include all "Sikh martial arts", but I am not sure this is correct. The impression I get from googling is that there is a recent (2000s) surge in interest in Sikh martial arts, and gatka as a term for a wider martial art, as opposed to fighting with the short stick, appears to arise in this context. We need better sources. -- dab (𒁳) 14:34, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
I removed the creator of Gatka posted as Nanak Dev. Guru Nanak was the first Guru and Founder of the Sikh Religion and not the martial art gatka. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.164.7.166 ( talk) 06:14, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
I have looked into this some more, and I think I understand the terminological confusion now.
I am not sure if this means we should split this article, separating "performative gatka" from "historical Sikh martial arts". -- dab (𒁳) 07:48, 10 September 2009 (UTC) Naadar is a fake —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.73.165.97 ( talk) 02:34, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
I was searching for Gatka over the net and came across this article; as this is a tradition of my tribe the 'Tanoli' in Pakistan and its been in our tribe for a long time. Initially it was a sort of stick fencing but later it remained as performance art (as aslo mentioned in above post); now its almost finished. Cheers! Wikitanoli ( talk) 15:12, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
Londondajatt ( talk) 18:01, 10 July 2010 (UTC) It should not redirect to gatka as gatka and shastar vidiya are different arts, where more people practise gatka.
Hello everybody, I just read a BBC article, "The only living master of a dying martial art," stated that Gatka and shastar vidya where too different things as opposed to what is stated in the revival section I was wondering if anybody could look into that. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-15480741 is the link to the article Philoleb ( talk) 00:47, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
You mean "two" different things.
The article you link is about
Nidar Singh. He reconstructs historical Sikh martial arts.
It is true that this is different from "gatka" as in stick katas or sword dance. The problem is
WP:NOTE, so far it has not been arguable to write a standalone about Nidar Singh and his school because there were not sufficient third party sources. If BBC and others keep writing about him, we may soon be in a position to compile an article about this. As a temporary solution, I have just stashed away brief mention of this under "gatka" for lack of a better solution.
I actually like what I see of this man's work online, he seems to know what he is doing. But obviously there are also a lot of vanity and political issues involved. Instead of just saying "I am a decent martial artist intersted in reconstructing Mughal era Sikh fighting styles" he styles himself the "last master of a dying art", poses for the BBC as some sort of walking armoury and claims to teach "shastar vidya", i.e. "Indian martial art" on behalf of the entire subcontinent. This is slightly stretching credibility, and for the purposes of Wikipedia, there simply needs to be enough tertiary references before covering a commercial martial arts school run by a single individual. -- dab (𒁳) 19:54, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
Actually, now the BBC World Service seems to have broadcast a program dedicated to this, "Last Sikh Warrior" on Heart And Soul, 31 October 2011, it should be possible to argue WP:NOTE is met. I'll try to branch this into a separate Nidar Singh article over the next few days. Note that the term "shastar vidya" will need disambiguation, because Singh is using it idiosyncratically. It is basically just the Sanskrit term for "martial arts". Only Singh seems to be using it in a sense of "Sikh martial arts of the 17th to 18th century". -- dab (𒁳) 20:02, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
There's a misconception among editors on this article that gatka refers specifically to the stick-fighting sport, while everything else is a reconstruction of historical Sikh martial arts called "shastar vidiya". The term shastar vidiya is simply armed combat or martial arts in general. It is not and was not a particular system of fighting, but was a collective word for fighting arts at the time. It wasn't even confined to Sikhs or Punjabis, but also adjacent areas of India and Pakistan. The Gurjaras are but one example. Furthermore, gatka is absolutely not a reconstruction. I don't want to generalise since I know that there are some attempts to revive certain Sikh/Punjabi fighting styles. But by and large, gatka masters and instructors simply teach what they learned from their own teachers. For instance, gatka was first brought to Malaysia and Thailand during the colonial era when Sikhs first immigrated to this part of the world. Though it was never widespread, it has been practiced since that time for demonstrative purposes, and the Malaysian Gatka Federation has never made any attempt to "recontruct" anything in the way that is being done with medieval European styles. Strictly speaking, it is true that gatka should properly refer to the stick-fighting sport which originated as a form of sword-training, much in the way that Japanese swordsmen would train with wooden swords. However, the other weapons which are now included under the term gatka have always been a part of the system. Morinae ( talk) 05:46, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Gatka. 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:
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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 16:36, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
Back in 2012, the article was much shorter and much more modest, but it was actually backed up by references [1] Since then, people just seem to have piled on unreferenced blog-entry material. If nobody is up for cleaning it up and basing it on references, I would propose that reverting to what was actually referenced is the obvious way to go here. -- dab (𒁳) 14:08, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. Community Tech bot ( talk) 21:36, 25 June 2018 (UTC)