Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Himizu Ryu

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Himizu Ryu[edit]

A martial-art, alleged to be a koryu with history claiming to date back to 1609. Only few Google links (not counting Wikipedia mirrors), all clearly copied from same source than this article. Himizu ryu cannot be found from reference works like Bugei Ryuha Daijiten, Nihon Kobudo Soran, or from any *reliable* English language secondary source (Draeger's trilogy, Friday, Skoss, Amdur, Lowry, www.koryu.com, etc.). Delete for being unverifiable, non-notable and for using Wikipedia as a vehicle of promotion. jni 12:59, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Updated: See also this discussion in e-budo.com, or this second one, both highly critical to Himizu ryu. I have not been able to find credible countering views anywhere to this critique presented by several e-budo members. jni 08:24, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)


Martial arts is a tremendous amount of politics. And, like all politics, many people are so opinionated that they use their anger to voice their issues instead of seeking truth directly from the source.

Mr. JNI uses only initials to represent who he is but spends his time seeking to attempt to debunk certain groups but yet has offered NO reason as to why he should be given credit himself.

Who wishes to respect anyone who refuses to show their face by at least placing their real name and contact information with their wikipedia entries? ANYONE claiming knowledge of anything without proving as to why they should be respected as an authority on a given topic should not be allowed to troll through free encyclopedia's seeking to damage the name of others without first contacting them and making a formal request for information.

I, Kevin Rocha, as a member in good standing with the Himizu Ryu, can verify that Mr. "JNI" has NEVER attempted to contact ANY members of the Himizu Ryu and is therefore only seeking attention. Anyone wishing to contact me directly may do so at kevinrocha@hotmail.com to discuss this matter in its entirety.

Remember, never trust those who play hide and seek by asking others to trust them but yet only using their supposed initials to identifiy themselves and then use VERY POOR internetiquette to discuss historical issues without ANY real knowledge of the topic or anything to verify their "claims".

When Mr. "JNI" would like to be professional and: 1) List his real name 2) List his contact information 3) List as to how it is he should be respected ie-his credentials that give him authority to write ANYTHING on wikipedia (meaning his educational background in history and martial art training), then I will stop questioning his motives and actions. Until then, he is NOT to be trusted and any of his information is greatly subject to debate as to whether or not it is honest and real. Mr. "JNI" continues to post faulty information on wikipedia and has YET to provide any kind of information that would ligitimately discredit those whom he attacks. I have provided my name and contact information but "JNI" has NOT contacted myself or anyone else on this matter to formally ask questions but has instead spent his time only attacking others -- without providing answers to our questions: 1. Contact Information & 2. Educational credentials concerning History and the Martial Arts. Therefore, he is only seeking to start a internet flame war with 1. no personal credibility and 2. no qualifications to speak on matters of organizations he doesn't even belong to.

The topic being discussed is to the validity of our ryuha and that information is not able to be found. I have stated that our information IS available to those who contact us and formally request information. Therefore, the disussion as to whether or not the validity of HR exists should cease and not be stated as to whether it is in question any longer.

  • Okay, I formally request your information. Post it here. Guy, you're going to need more than an air of injured innocence to back up your claims of notability. jni backs up his point with copious reference sources: what are yours? Unless claims are verified, delete. --Calton 21:26, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • This one will have to be watched. I believe that it is possible to have a worthwhile article on the style if it can stay within the parameters of NPOV. Abstain for now... Fire Star 21:37, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)
    • Without citations and in light of vandalism of VfD page, I'll change vote to delete. Convicing provenance in the public domain may change my vote yet again, but I don't think it is forthcoming anytime soon... Fire Star 15:13, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • I've once again restored the original header here (removed by Kevin Rocha) --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 01:51, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Comment: I think User:Kevin Rocha already gave a reason for deletion above: ...the validity of our ryuha and that information is not able to be found. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and encyclopedias need to contain information that is verifiable from external sources. Kevin effectually says: "we have a densho (scroll), but it is not available to non-members". He mentioning such a primary source immediately promps some questions, however: 1) name of the document? 2) its author? 3) year written? 4) references to published secondary sources that use scholarly method to derive conclusions from said densho? 5) references to Japanese sources that verify its author is a historical person? 6) references to internal documents of *other* ryūha, that reference the document in question. Primary sources alone, even when they can be validated, are not very helpful for building an encyclopedia. As eminent historian Karl Friday notes in his Legacies of the Sword, materials produced by bugei ryūha are nearly always not objective; he uses term "parochial history" in reference to his own work in cases where secondary scholarship does not support (or does not exist for) the internal documents of Kashima shinryū. In summary, the question of whether himizu-ryu is real or fake is immaterial to this VfD, if it cannot be verified. Furthermore, pseudonym Kevin Rochas repeated vandalism of this page and statements of anger towards me and the deletion process do not cast any credibility to his cause. jni 06:59, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Delete as probable fiction. A search in Japanese-language Google (google.co.jp) for 火水流総合戦闘科学方法 appears to bring a grand total of 14 hits, but when one investigates all turn out to be for pages in which the various individual characters within the string all appear somewhere -- in not one single page does the entire string appear. Even the much shorter 火水流 brings just 8530 hits, and note that here again these are hits for pages that merely happen to have all three of the (very common) characters somewhere. I don't notice a single page that has the string 火水流 in its title.-- Hoary 07:59, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC) ..... PS I did all that earnest research before jni posted the excellent links (in particular this one) that appear near the top of this page; if I'd read them I'd have known that "Himizu Ryu" was merely the invention of a single American and wouldn't have bothered looking for Japanese pages. -- Hoary 09:16, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Himizu_Ryu&oldid=30547756"