Talk:Southern Dragon kung fu

Almost all of the information is wrong
Majority of the information on this article is wrong. I don't care what the references say, they're wrong too. There is not really a southern nor a northern style of kung fu Dragon Style. Kung fu Dragon Style is a relatively new form of kung fu (in comparison to other's such as wushu) and is only a few hundred years old. When the creator of this style of kung fu invented it, they had to think logically about how the dragon would move according to Chinese mythology, in which kung fu Dragon Style body mechanics are based upon. This explains why kung fu Dragon Style is a more modern martial art, were as in the ancient styles the monks would imitate the movement of actual animals for a means of exercise, sine Dragons are mythical it took a bit of imagination/logic to invent it (i.e. according to Chinese mythology the dragon has many legs, similarly to a centipede, therefore it would step side to side - as does a practitioner of kung fu Dragon style). A possible explanation of the inaccuracy for the references is that perhaps the websites are about a school with the title "Dragon Style" were they actually practice a mixture of martial arts, then actually practicing the type of martial art known as kung fu Dragon Style. Unfortunately I am unaware of any websites that would support my claims, however if one takes a look at the references for the current article, all of the websites appear somewhat unreliable as a source of information.

Does anyone know how to add one of those "This article is under dispute" notices at the top of the article? Or can only administrators do that? 24.47.122.166] ([[User talk:24.47.122.166|talk) 00:51, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:List_of_Wikipedians_by_martial_art add yourself!
List_of_Wikipedians_by_martial_art

Material from another webpage
I fixed some code, removed some disruptive vandalism and finished some of the "Code" sentences, but looking for the information to complete them, I found that most of the information under "Techniques" is taken verbatim from this site. More work needs to be done to present the history and knowledge of this art but without copying from another site. Cybertooth85 20:27, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Spelling Error?
Shouldn't the "Shaolin Kung Fu Institute" of the third paragraph be the "Shaolin Gung Fu Institute"? It's been changed to Kung, perhaps mistakenly, but I wasn't able to find any concrete sources supporting either spelling. Milkfoam 09:28, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Split?!
I do not believe the article should be split. It isn't that big and still needs a little work. → Icez {talk | contrib} 22:24, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Northern / Southern Division
I'm preparing a section to be added to this page speaking of Northern Dragon, which may include changes/additions to the History portion. It likely wont be ready for a few weeks though.

What is the best way to edit this page? I agree that it should not be split, since Northern and Southern Dragon style can be said to share the same roots, however right now the "Techniques" heading is basically all related to southern dragon.

Would it be best to change "Techniques" to "Southern Dragon" and add a peer-heading for Northern Dragon? Or is there some better format to this?

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________

This article as it exists is about a specific style, Lung Ying Mor Kiu (called Southern Dragon by it's English speaking practitioners), rather than any other variant that uses "dragon" in the name. For a completely separate style I would suggest it better to start a new article under the heading "Northern Dragon Kung Fu" and create a disambiguation page for anyone typing only "dragon kung fu" into the search. Trying to place information on two separate styles that share primarily only a similarity in name is likely to create more confusion than clarity among potential readers.

For potentially shared early history, it would be better to make a note in the section on "history" regarding the shared history, and potentially even create a separate article on that history if it is detailed enough and warrants one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.87.7.64 (talk) 05:25, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

What is this? Some sort of game?
Why does the, "Footwork" section keep on referring to the, "player"? What is this? Some sort of game? Seriously though, I don't think "player" is the right word here. 212.250.138.33 (talk) 03:48, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

-

Actually, player is quite the right word here. It's a term commonly used among English speaking kung fu practitioners to refer to a practitioner of a given style as well as generically. You you might hear someone referred to as a "Lung Ying" player or a "Wing Chun" player. The term originates from the imprecise mapping of words in Cantonese to English. It's apparently as close an approximation of the Cantonese term as can be had. The term actually extends further than its use as a pronoun for practitioners to use as a verb. For example you will sometimes hear English speaking kung fu practitioners (particularly those that trained in southern China or Hong Kong) speak of "playing their forms" when referring to someone performing one of a styles traditional forms. You will find this same term used elsewhere including no less than Bruce Lee's Tao of Jeet Kune Do as well as many other manuals and texts on southern Chinese Martial Arts.

71.177.191.205 (talk) 04:35, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

Intro is not about the subject
Most of the intro talks about what the dragon is in chinese culture, not what this style of kung fu actually is. Compare to the changquan article which gives a good overview of the topic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.164.101.8 (talk) 16:48, 27 February 2019 (UTC)