Talk:SCA armoured combat

Untitled
I've gone through and had a good edit, feel free to tweak it as you'd like 118.90.30.36 (talk) 08:56, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I saw that this page has a "copy edit needed" tag. I tried to clarify and fix some of the most awkward sentences. I changed the meaning slightly in some spots because I believe the wording was slightly misleading and/or confusing. I am not a formal member of the SCA but I was previously authorized to fight heavy in the Kingdom of the West. I used my limited knowledge of heavy combat to help me know how to edit the copy, but I won't be offended if someone wants to correct my corrections. Vampyrecat (talk) 00:46, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Armour
In non US English speaking countries, Armour is spelt with a U. This is also the norm in some circles in the United States, when referring to historical armour...though this is not an official or formally recognised practice, just something I think people do to differentiate it from modern Armour. Deathlibrarian (talk) 10:19, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Definition of SCA combative activities
The SCA does not provide any official statement as to what it is that their combative activities are intended to be. In other words they don't say it is a sport, martial art, game, fantasy game, or simulation game. In my own opinion the lack of a definition was done intentionally so that the participants can delude themselves as to what they are doing and have a poor excuse to deny logical criticism.

My point is simply that it is not reasonable to have an activity with a strict rule set without first making a clear statement as to what it is that is being attempted. For example if the goal is to play a fantasy game that is supposed to focus on safety then it makes little sense to discount blows that are considered too light while using practice weapons that weigh about the same as what they are intended to simulate. When one person thinks he is learning a martial art and another person believes he is playing a sport based on a fantasy game then the result is a conflict of interest. (Midiman Alex (talk) 08:59, 18 June 2011 (UTC))

I could say the same thing about Go. Some people are playing a board game, others are honing their tactical thinking ability. As long as everyone plays by the same rules, why does it matter? 82.41.46.0 (talk) 14:21, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

IMHO this really comes down to the way that SCA combat evolved. It was never specifically designed as a martial art for self defence, nor was it designed 100% as a re creation of historical fighting techniques. It is closer to a sport based loosely on historical combat, rather than a martial art. Deathlibrarian (talk) 11:45, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

I find the term "Martial Sport" is a good, non-offensive description of SCA Heavy Combat. But if you want to call it that, then Kendo, Modern Strip Fencing, Judo, Boxing, and a whole bunch of other martial arts (basically anything with official tournement rules) are also *only* martial sports. The whole area is full of ambiguity and "my sport is better/more realistic than your sport" attitudes. 176.35.126.242 (talk) 17:35, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Suggested merge with SCA Fencing
The suggested merge with SCA Fencing might make sense if the new topic were something like "SCA Martial activities". However, the new entry would need to maintain completely separate sections for Heavy Combat and Fencing, since the weapons, armor standards, and rules are distinct for each of them. At that point, it might be as logical to move them both back under the Society for Creative Anachronism entry, since it is their affiliation with the SCA that seems to prompt this suggested merge. Krookey (talk) 16:42, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Agreed, a straight attempt to merge heavy combat and fencing could be a horrible mess. Further, I suggest a substantial entry should recognise and detail all combat related elements of the SCA.

SCA Martial Activities;

- Heavy Combat

- Light Combat (should include the large differences between the SCA in Australia, Europe, and the US)

- Light Target Practice

- Mixed Combat (should include the large differences between the SCA in Australia, Europe, and the US)

- Fencing

- Youth Activities (eg 'boffer')

121.218.220.46 (talk) 04:41, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

I don't think you can really can't include all these sca martial activities in the one page, it would be overly large Deathlibrarian (talk) 11:51, 3 October 2012 (UTC)
 * I think that is the point, the page "SCA Martial Activities" would be so large that it would require splitting up into several pages, one of which would be this one. 176.35.126.242 (talk) 17:28, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

These two sports are EXTREMELY different and though they are conducted by the same society this does not justify a merger. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.92.97.212 (talk) 02:50, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Move proposal: "SCA Armored Combat"
This sport/activity is now officially called "Armored Combat" per the organization's site . "Heavy" is a slang term that is somewhat antiquated now because it was meant to differentiate it from "light" combat, a term no longer in use. I propose moving under the new title.NicoloSt (talk) 12:51, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

I agree but the correct title spelling for this article is "SCA Armoured Combat". Could you please modify spelling? Deathlibrarian (talk) 09:13, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

Title Change: "SCA Armoured Combat"
This article is written in Standard English, not US English, so as per Wikipedia rules, the title of the article should be "SCA armoured combat" (with a "U") - note all the other spelling of armour. I will make the changes.

"Armored combat" with no U, is US spelling. The article title needs to be changed to "Armoured combat" - standard English spelling. Deathlibrarian (talk) 11:08, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks
I just wanted to thank all of the editors who worked diligently to address the primary sourcing concerns related to this article. I believe the changes, beyond clearly establishing the notability of the subject, massively improve the article itself. Thank you very much! DonIago (talk) 13:20, 9 July 2015 (UTC)