Talk:Parrying dagger

Picture
OK, I sort of got it. It's not quite showing up, but I got the link in half-decent. Check out the "Swordbreakers" section.
 * You know what, I got the picture in, but it would look a lot better in a different section. I tried moving it, but it just showed up as an URL. Anyone know how to fix that?
 * Hey, I put the picture in for you. It's under the REFERENCES section. Pretty neat!
 * Here's a picture: . Someone add it, please?
 * This can't be real. Is it? Theblindsage (talk) 09:35, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Issue
I think that the title of the page was confusing. I'm using general info for a school project, but I kept searching for "main-gauche" from the list of daggers. I finally found the link using Google.
 * Calling it a sword breaker is kind of speculative. It might break a smallsword, but I have a hard time believing it could break anything else.

Theblindsage 09:59, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Eraser
A paragraph's worth of text was removed (I presume accidentally, as it rendered the article useless) so I reinstated and rephrased it.

I have a reference - a children's history book, Exploring History: Ancient Weapons, by Will Fowler (ISBN 1-84038-692-4), but I'm not sure if it's either a valid source or, if so, how to cite it... Noaqiyeum 00:52, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Excellent! Generally, published works are more reliable sources than web pages (the best this article has at the moment). As long as the book is not too simple, it should be fine. WP:Reliable sources goes into more detail and if you're still not sure, you can discuss it with other editors at the noticeboard linked on that page.


 * WP:Citing sources talks about how to cite. It mentions three styles of citing; this page is using Footnotes, so it would be best to use that one. These citation templates make citing much easier - you supply the raw data, they handle the formatting. If you get bogged down, or run out of time, etc, just put in as much information as you can about the source and I or someone else will fix it up. The citation is the important thing, not the formatting!
 * 124.148.116.66 14:42, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Oh really?
"One thing of note is that sword-breakers were not spring-loaded daggers which had sides snap out to meet the guard. These faux-historical stainless steel knives are sold in various places, but are not historically accurate."

Might want to check this article: http://www.myarmoury.com/feature_spot_combo.html

Such weapons did indeed exist. Macroidtoe 18:44, 11 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Maybe I'm missing something, but from what I can see that page doesn't mention sword breakers - the closest thing is a fixed sword catcher on a shield. 124.148.74.39 12:22, 14 August 2007 (UTC)


 * There are indeed renaissance daggers that 'pop open' into triplicate blades. http://www.myarmoury.com/feature_euroedge.html#parrying But I think the idea that such daggers can 'pop shut', scissors style, to break blades, probably comes from the Three Musketeers movie, where Porthos has such a device. There seems to be some confusion with the main-gauche style blade found on page 41 on this book:	Daggers and Bayonets by Logan Thompson (Hardcover - Nov 1, 1999), which had notch for catching the blades of civilian rapiers, circa 1650. The swords to be broken would be of a similar time, which would mean civilian dueling rapiers, smallswords, and court-swords, more similar to the modern epee. Theblindsage (talk) 09:32, 24 November 2007 (UTC)