Fixing Wikipedia - question #3 (ITF forms)

TrueJim

Master Black Belt
Joined
Jun 21, 2014
Messages
1,006
Reaction score
370
Location
Virginia
When I look at the taekwondo pages on Wikipedia, I see a number of errors that to me seem like easy fixes. I was thinking at taking a crack at fixing them, but I wanted to run these thoughts by some other martial artists first. I've checked the Talk pages on these wiki articles, but none of the recent online chatter is from martial artists.

Regarding this page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyeong

Scroll down to the section where it discussed the "Unofficial" ITF Syllabus.
  • Ko-Dang...that one I get. It's a deprecated form in the ITFs, but still used by the GTF.
  • Ghul-Gi and Bassai though... Question: do you think those should be on the ITF list for that wiki page?

I get it that Chul-Gi and Bassai are popular forms from the Nine Kwans era of taekwondo (previously from Shotokan Karate)... I get it that many schools like to teach a few of the older pre-ITF forms. But why these two forms in particular? Are they really so popular in ITF schools that they should be listed as part of an "unofficial" syllabus?

Before I delete them from that list, I wanted to get some thoughts from other martial artists. Thanks!
 

Earl Weiss

Senior Master
Joined
Jan 27, 2009
Messages
3,227
Reaction score
625
Original Ko Dang is not part of any official ITF cirriculm that I know of. USTF still includes it as an ancillary form and I believe the General's Son renamed Ju Che Ko Dang.

Ghul Gi and Basssai were never an ITF form.
 

Tez3

Sr. Grandmaster
Supporting Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2006
Messages
27,355
Reaction score
4,645
Location
England
If it's easily fixed whatever you change could be changed right back or to something else, most people know to take Wiki with a pinch of salt and use it as a starting point for research rather than it being the fount of all knowledge. I wouldn't let it worry you to be honest.
 
OP
TrueJim

TrueJim

Master Black Belt
Joined
Jun 21, 2014
Messages
1,006
Reaction score
370
Location
Virginia
Original Ko Dang is not part of any official ITF cirriculm that I know of. USTF still includes it as an ancillary form and I believe the General's Son renamed Ju Che Ko Dang. Ghul Gi and Basssai were never an ITF form.

That's a good point. As I fix that wiki page, I should make mention of the fact that one of the three ITFs calls Juche by the name Ko-Dang.

I can't fathom why some Wikipedia author originally listed Chul-Gi and Bassai as being ITF-related at all. I was hoping somebody on this forum might have some idea. Based on the feedback I've received so far, it seems an obvious fix to delete those two forms from the ITF list. Thanks!
 
OP
TrueJim

TrueJim

Master Black Belt
Joined
Jun 21, 2014
Messages
1,006
Reaction score
370
Location
Virginia
If it's easily fixed whatever you change could be changed right back or to something else, most people know to take Wiki with a pinch of salt and use it as a starting point for research rather than it being the fount of all knowledge. I wouldn't let it worry you to be honest.

That's true. I just didn't want to make something already erroneous even MORE erroneous, so I thought a second-opinion was worth obtaining. It's interesting when you look at the taekwondo pages on Wikipedia, they don't get much work done to them, except administrative fixes by Wiki editors. The karate pages are in so much better shape.
 
Top