Talk:Tessenjutsu

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The warning that was previously placed here about the this art being fictitious has been removed. Simply because a term doesn't show in a dictionary, doesn't mean it's not real. Anyway, searching for tassenjutsu gives plenty of results and a few books, which assures that this is not a fictional martial art, even though it may be in decline.

"SECRETS OF THE SAMURAI" IS NOT A RELIABLE SOURCE. NOR ARE POSTINGS TO DISCUSSON GROUPS AND WEB PAGES BY REENACTORS WHO ARE ATTEMPTING TO USE TESSENJUTSU TO JUSTIFY USING SHIELDS AS JAPANESE REENACTORS IN SIMULATED ARMORED COMBAT.

A -JUTSU NOT APPEARING IN DAIJIRIN IS PRETTY MUCH EQUIVALENT TO THE GATLING GUN NOT APPEARING IN WEBSTERS UNABRIDGED DICTIONARY. DAIJIRIN IS AN OVERSIZED, SMALL PRINT, 2000+ PAGE JAPANESE-JAPANESE DICTIONARY PUBLISHED BY SANSEIDO WHICH IS A MAJOR PUBLISHER OF JAPANESE SCHOLARLY MATERIALS AND REFERENCE WORKS.

FURTHER, A SEARCH FOR TESSENJUTSU USING EITHER KANA OR KANJI AT www.google.co.jp FAILS TO FIND ANY REFERENCES TO TESSENJUTSU APPEARING ON WEB SITES MAINTAINED BY ACADEMIC OR SCHOLARLY ORGANIZATIONS!! FOR THAT MATTER, I DIDN"T EVEN NOTICE ONE ORIGINATING WITH BUDOKAN!!!

FINALLY. THIS IS NOT A MATTER OF A SINGLE DICTIONARY. "TESSENJUTSU" DOES NOT APPEAR IN THE FOLLOWING KOGOJITEN (DICTIONARIES OF ANCIENT AND MEDIEVAL JAPANESE): :

Shinsen Kogojiten ISBN: 4-09-501503-9

Kodansha Kogojiten ISBN: 4-06-121009-2

Zenyaku Dokkai Kogojiten ISBN: 4-385-13343-3

Kogorin ISBN: 4-469-02115-6 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by DrNostrand (talkcontribs) .

This is an encyclopedia, not a dictionary. Tessenjutsu (鉄扇術) is mentioned on ja: briefly at ja:武芸一覧. The short description there is consistent with the article here. There is also at least one book available listed at Amazon Japan and Kinokuniya, ISBN:480690239X, with the term on the cover that appears to be consistent with the article. I've never heard of it before, but I'm willing to believe in its existence. Reading WP:AFD or WP:HOAX#Dealing_with_hoaxes would be a better way of dealing with the problem than vandalizing the article. Thanks! skip (t / c) 06:34, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]