Where are your sources?

Question

I know it's not mandatory to list sources and what not but aside from "common knowledge", I find it rather relevant for one to at least let the asker know where they are getting their info on the matters from. I ask this because I've noticed that quite a few answers contradict the truth and some answerers are regulars on here. I'm just curious as to why and where some individuals get their information from. I can atest that the information I get is from 15 years of Martial Arts training. Perhaps not on the same level of brutality as other contributors on here but still. Another example is how individuals on here have 30, 40, or how many years of Martial Arts training under their belts as well as listing the styles they may have trained in.

So my questions:
-Where do you get you information from (generally speaking)?
-Why don't you list it? (I mean...is it that difficult to write a couple sentences, if that, of what your experience on the topic is?)

Just food for thought

Answer 1

I have posted much on Y/A that I have not cited sources for. That is simply because much of it I learned over the years. What is important is I am careful not to make any statement that I don't believe is accurate. I don't have much of the research material I once owned. Also much of my historical info comes from two sources. The first is my observations of things as they were in the 1960's and how they have changed since then. The other was a great source of traditional info for many years (but not any more). That was the early issues of Black Belt magazine. It was a wealth of good info until about the mid or late 1970's. Also There was Official Karate magazine and Karate Illustrated. But those magazines, at least in my area, were not something you could get often. When ever I say something that I have sources for I mention them. for instance I have often spoken of the stats on martial arts practitioners in the U.S.A in the late 1960's or early 1970's. but I don't have the article any more or remember exactly when they were published. The stats I'm referring to are the ones that stated that in all styles of martial arts in the U.S.A. at that time less than 3% of the all students ever made it to black belt. And that there were no children in the martial arts. That is a bit off since there were a few children in Judo during that time period.



As for my personal info, I don't publish that for several reasons. First, I could care less about the people that would try to attack the styles i have studied or my ranks and titles in them. Most of my answers are from information I have. In most cases the styles I hold ranks in would only distract others from my answers. As anyone that knows anything about me knows, I never recommend a style or say that this style or that style in superior or inferior. BUT, I do speak up about rip off organizations and instructors that have been known to be crooks for many years. But I never instigate the negative points of these groups. I only answer about them when someone mentions them. Bottom line here is there will always be those that trust my info and judgement, and those that hate me and disagree with anything I say. Then there are those that agree on some things as long as it does not put down their core beliefs. for that I'm not sorry, because I am giving my honest beliefs based on nearly 45 years of involvement in the martial arts. Lastly understand this about me. i became obsessed with my training early on. I quit college just before graduation in the 1970's to devote full time to training and teaching. while many of the seniors are very experienced, I must say that they did not all do and teach full time for the number of years that I did. Some of the seniors will admit that they had jobs and did practiced or taught martial arts in addition to the job.





...

Answer 2

I do, but my answers get voted/thumbed down anyway, or I get a nasty email from someone who suggests I didn't even answer the question, let alone provided the right source (twice from the asker!)



When someone asks a question of a detailed fact, I'll source what I can. But sometimes, the questions are vague, so I give a broad answer or opinion. I've come to the belief that many times, people don't want sources, they just want answers - this is typical in the computer or homework sections where the askers are too lazy to read the source, and it happens here occasionally, too.



Also, some topics relating to history are notoriously controversial or devoid of source information (like taekwondo history). For every one book that says one thing, there's two more out there that says something contradictory.



I honestly think some people would not write what they do if they also had to provide a source. It's clear that some have no idea what they're talking about. So, just take it all with a grain of salt. Consider it all opinion, even if sourced.



It would be nice if Yahoo encouraged sourcing (say, by giving extra points for sourced questions), but this will probably encourage inane or spam sourcing, I think.



EDIT: You know what else? Sometimes, people will ask a question: it's bad enough that the question's been asked and answered before (like, "how to stretch"). When I first started answering, I sourced my answers in this regard. But people still ask the same questions over and again, which tells me:



..either they researched the question before they asked it, and came to the conclusion that none of the previous answers (including my and anyone else's sources) are adequate; OR



...they're too lazy to research the question in the first place.



In either case, I (1) won't answer the question, or (2) if I'm in the mood to answer I refuse to source it.



If they didn't like the previous answers I gave, there's nothing I can add again that might be more helpful. If they are too lazy to research to see if the question's been asked, I'm not going to waste my time giving them any more information. In fact, I've stopped answering repeat questions: why should I keep writing the same answers over and again?

Answer 3

* * *





Things here may depends upon the kind of question, there are some inquiry that you need to provide your source or sources, just like the profile or some important information of certain person if the question are asking about some known personalities related to the world of Martial Arts.



.................................



But in general, do we really need to rely on those sources if you know that what you had is base on the skills and knowledge adopted from your own instructor, including experiences as a practitioners searching for better motivation.



You cannot let others go with the flow, there is always a contradicting party and such is the only way we will realize what is correct from wrong, but you must not be bias sometimes by not hearing others side, insisting your own understanding will always results on an unexpected debates, and we all knows that arguing is an actions that has no end.



Do you think, who among us here are not willing to put his ego and pride on the right tract, will you insist you are always right if someone trying to correct you, each of us didn't know most here personally, do you think we are totally full if we speak about the ground of our abilities.



Learning has no end and we all knows that.





. . . . . . . .

Answer 4

Generally, when I cite a source (if the citing of a source is helpful in establishing the usefulness of what I'm saying), I do it within the answer itself (i.e. "My martial arts teacher, who holds these qualifications, says..."), and so I don't feel that there's a need to cite it again in the "What's your source?" section (after all, if a person read the answer, then they got the source, and if they didn't read the answer, then citing the source again somewhere else probably isn't going to change anything).



Sometimes it's also my personal opinion that I'm expressing (in which case there's no external source *to* cite), and I do try to make it clear that I'm doing so (granted, I don't always know if I'm successful in doing that, but still...).

Answer 5

Sev,

This is a good question. In fact according to the community guidelines if we use a book, article, website to obtain our information we are supposed to cite it. Other than that we are guilty of plagiarism. Many use source such as wikipedi, youtube and some other source and never site them. As we know wikipedia is not the most reliable source. Others have used sources from some author that is some self proclaimed self defense expert which are full of misconceptions. But because it ha been published it is accepted as truth which in my opinion is misleading.



Most of what I post is based upon my experiences ans what I have been taught by those that I consider to be great teachers. I have done a lot of research of the years but do not retain all of the books, articles that have influenced me positively or negatively. Since I do not quote material from those there is no need to cite it. It would be impossible for me to cite as I couldn't give the name, author, publication, etc.

Answer 6

I listed the main styles that I have trained in. I do not list the styles that I have limited training in. ( Except for this question ) The answers are based on my experiences and interactions with other martial artists.



As a general rule, I do not answer questions on martial arts that I have no knowledge about. I also do not answer questions on martial arts that I have only read about or only seen videos on.

Answer 7

I credit my Teachers as my sources, who gave me all they had to offer, and taught me what real martial arts were as opposed to BS.



I have always been inquisitive since childhood and they gave me the example of always researching for the root of the art.



Their example leads me to the discovery of knowledge and I put anything I find to the test, using different models.



An example of this is how I came to the conclusion that Goju Ryu is more influenced by the Hakka Arts than White Crane. I examined the forms - their shapes, their movement, footwork, directions of their patterns. There is some White Crane concept but the forms are Hakka based.



Shorin Ryu is more White Crane.



These ideas came from my own intuition.



I don't follow things because people tell me to. I follow things I see with my own eyes and test against my own knowledge base, my personal library. I make sure I look at all arts related to the subject.



Many people who are considered "historians" do not agree with my Goju Ryu - Hakka hypothesis but they have yet to show how I'm wrong with anything other than the same history everyone else has.



To me, they are taking my findings as if there was something wrong with the Hakka boxing styles.



I believe the reason is that they don't want to seem wrong or maybe they just conform so as not to be ridiculed or ostracized.



If this is true, it reaffirms Solomon Asch's sociological study on conformity.

Answer 8

Most of us retain the information learned from book, interviews, and other materials but are too lazy to look it up again just to cite it. I will go through the trouble of finding the source if I feel it necessary to contradict a certain idea.



Aside from historical information or the fundamentals, most things in martial arts are personalized and opinion based, so it's unreasonable to expect a source on everything that is said on this board.

Answer 9

Truth is: A source in this section can be just as meaningless or meaningful as the answer given.



I actually hate the clipboard sources when they have zero bearing on the answer given. I see it as a way for point scoring and just some other things -- oh well.



But all of our answers (at least the ole regulars here) have experience to back up what we say, experience that will probably never tested by some rany on Y!A, so our sources are still of little value.



If what we say is backed and trusted by other members, YAY(!), but if not, it doesn't really matter if it isn't. It should all be taken with a grain of salt.

Answer 10

Actually, the prompt for the source box directs us to share sites. That is not relevant for most answers in this section. Many of us will include a blurb about our training history or rank, to let the asker know what we are basing our answers on. Is there another way that would work better? If you have one, I'm open to trying it.

Answer 11

I used to put a minor description of my history in the source section of the answer, but stopped just because it was tedious. I ended up saving it to a wordpad so I could copy & paste it, but then I figured that those who even half what they claim to be, or genuinely looking for truth, that my words could speak for themselves.



I hate diplomacy. No amount of certificates or legal papers can account for real knowledge, wisdom and experience. Scientists with their PHD's make them no more than "official guessers", as apposed to anyone else who has a guess at things. No one should need a piece of paper saying they know something. It's pointless. Experience is all that matters. Anyone should be able to illustrate that without citing much of a source, unless called for. X amount of years doesn't even account for experience, either, just as you put yourself. There is no measure to knowledge or experience.



Come this mid summer, I'll have been in the martial arts for 17 years of my life. Probably only about 10 of those years being very serious. I started when I was seven and pretty much just went through the motions until I was around 14 or 15 and began taking it very seriously.

I have just about everything I've studied on my 'about me' in my Y!A profile. Aside from any of those, I get the rest of what I know from various places such as books or even just from listening to other people. Before I repeat anything I see to it's validity myself personally. Any amount of common sense (from the brain, as it were) is simple deduction taken from experience - the ability to rule out.



The only things I never source are the more esoteric things concerning the martial arts, such as Dim Mak. I'd love to explain where it comes from, but those who disbelieve in it could find out for themselves if they take their heads out their butts and really look for it. Other things, like Qi and Ki, is relevant and available to anyone who simply looks for it. People refuse to dig, but that's the only way to find the things that are buried. I don't have time to waste on people who would rather argue it than find it. These things I won't source.

Answer 12

That's a good question and one of the reasons why I keep my answers public and allow others to contact me via e-mail. For some things there are "no sources" per say and it comes from just common knowledge and personal experience. A case in point is a question I just answered about "How many fights are needed to turn pro?"



That varies from state to state and one only has to look up the rules and regulations of their State Athletic Commission to find this out and my answer is pretty straight forward I think and self- explanatory as well as the other statements I make in that answer that this varies in some states as well.



Also for some of these things there is nothing written down and so much of martial arts is just handed down from one person to another or is a compilation of things learned over the 40 plus years of experience that I have in martial and fighting arts.



Then there are the messages and e-mails that I sometimes get from those that read my answers and who benefited from them like the young man that asked about an upcoming tournament in the next couple of days and how he could prepare for it. My answer was that he could not do much is such a short period of time and instead should focus on things he could do to that day that could directly help him in other ways. He did indeed do those things one of which enabled him to win his sparring division and beat a fellow martial artist that he had lost twice to at previous tournaments and sent me an e-mail thanking me.



The proof is in the pudding as they say and if you think my answers don't have or hold value for you then you of course don't have to use them or take them into consideration. You can even discard them as hog wash if you like but you will not see the number of top answers jump for me in a day or two by a few hundred like you do for some who keep their answers private and don't allow you to contact them and the obvious ballot stuffing that goes on in this forum.



You can of course take my answers and advice or discard it and I have at times even validated things behind the scenes that I have stated here in this forum. On my profile it states some of my background but not all of it as I am not on here to post a martial arts resume for others to copy and steal from which I have had happen before in real life. My answers as always can stand on their own merit and for many they have value but for some maybe not and I can live with and accept that.



Trying to validate answers that others disagree with, attack, or that for them, hold no value is like trying to hold an amount of water between your fingers.

Answer 13

Ya, good question. Actually I'm answering questions in Martial Arts. So, where do I'm getting the knowledge from simple answer by my master, learning the martial art reference. And so the simple thing is "Martial Arts"



In Food and Drinks > Vegetarian & Vegan I give the sources Diet and Drink.

When I'm in Health > Diet and Fitness I give "Martial Arts" Fitness Way because I learnt the fitness things from Martial Arts only.





.. .... .... ..

Good Luck !

Answer 14

Depends on what I'm actually giving by way of an answer.

If I'm voicing an opinion I generally leave the source blank.

If I'm working off the top of my head I put down martial experience in the source section.

If I'm working from an outside source I tend to incorporate it in my answer or put it in the source section.

If I'm being a jerk I tend to point that out.

Answer 15

I pretty much do what Odee does but I forget to source sometimes because I can't always remember where I got it or I'm too damn lazy when I posted lol



generally I will say it in a way like martial arts training since 1997 for what I have concluded or amateur researcher & historian or whatever if I cant remember.

Answer 16

Hi, Sev, thanks for putting up this question. It is a valid concern and especially so when the origin of a particular school of kungfu, wushu, CMA is involved. Recently there was this question about the degree of originality of Wing Chun to the (supposedly) founder Ng Mui and Yim Wing Chun. And I wrote about the story of Yim Wing Chun and Ng Mui as I learnt from popular stories and reinforced by attestations from a local grandmaster of Ng Mui Pai. Well, I thought that the story told so many times of these two ladies MUST be true until I came across a compilation of writings about the history of Southern Shaolin styles. And, I was surprised and embarrassed...that both these people could be fictional and created to hide the identities of the anti-Government martial artists. Wing Chun was the name of the training hall in Putein Shaolin where meetings and training of these remnants of the Ming forces gathered. There was no Ng Mui, no Yim Wing Chun. Those were the trouble times in China for the last of the Ming Imperial family and Ming Generals.



In another question, the asker wanted to know about Jee Zim Weng Chun and why it differs from

traditional Wing Chun ( I supposed he meant Ip Man's Wing Chun). The answer is there in the Han Wei Wushu series "Natural Traditional Chinese Martial Arts articles by Sal Canzonieri". The articles are well researched and written though Romanized Chinese names (sometimes given in their dialectic forms, some in the official Chinese, ie Mandarin) can be daunting. For those who wanted to know of their CMA (Southern) school's origin, the information in those articles will be invaluable. There is an extensive write-up on Wing Chun in there.



As for my background in CMA, it is not important as long as my input is sincere and truthful, though one may say be lacking in depth. I can't deny that. The years that one spent in CMA training in this era cannot be compared to those trouble-times in the 1700s, a day's training then was 8 to 12 hours solid, not 2-3 hours, and a year's training then was 360 days (according to the lunar calender) without a break. Quite unlike now with all the breaks in between training and holidays. So, if I say, I have 40 years of CMA, it does not give any satisfaction as to the level of competence. If Han Wei Wushu was to be believed, Wing Chun was a compressed and distilled form from Southern Shaolin to train a person to fight proficiently in 3 years (12,960 hours). These hours will mean 41 years of training, 3 times a week, each time 2 hours for 41 years in this 21st century.



In one of my answers, this time factor was stated as a prominent success factor to be an accomplished CMA artist, and the asker's comment was a truthful, "who had the time?" for that. He is right. But, I'm still at it.

Answer 17

my sources are my research training and life experience.

I understand the source or curiosity, but on most intriguing answers if you look at the activity of the person answering, main page and previous questions you might get an Idea of their qualifications.



believe nothing, take words at face value, but investigate on your own the wisdom offered by others.

Answer 18

i love frank the tank's source. hahaha

but really, this is a good question, i don't have a lot of experiencein martial arts, what i tell others has been from my experience from the past few years of learning, but this is a good idea that will encourage people to do(like me) to do more research and cite sources.

i like this idea. thanks!

Answer 19

My brain