Jump to content

Talk:Manriki

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The chain's only 11 inches long? I'm not an expert, but it seems like they're a lot longer than that in books and movies.

Where did that last line about a fashion statement come from? LOLZ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.44.153.1 (talk) 20:03, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I propose merging the entries on the following weapons:

---Manriki

---Manriki-gusari (or Manrikigusari)

---Kusari-fundo (or Kusarifundo)

and perhaps ---Surujin as well

Manriki-gusari and Kusari-fundo[edit]

  • Manriki-gusari and Kusari-fundo are the same weapon. Whoever created the "Manriki" article must have been confused about this, the article is also full of factual errors and should be deleted or become a redirect to Manriki-gusari.

--buchhry

Re: Merge - Meteor Hammer[edit]

  • I think this would be inappropriate. Meteor hammer is of chinese origin rather than japanese, it is not generally a throwing weapon and uses techniques more closely related to the rope dart (or indeed, the Manriki-Gusari.


  • Manriki seems more closely related to the surujin.

--Xanthine 12:13, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]


  • The manriki seems to just be a weighted chain, whereas the surujin article mentions more specifically that the suruchin's weight could be in the form of a metal spike. The suruchin also appears to be associated with Kobudo/Okinawa, while manriki does not appear to have that association. Subtle differences admittedly, but sufficient I think to maintain distinct (and cross-referenced) articles for both weapons. Bezapt 14:50, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Re: Merge - Rope Dart[edit]

  • Clearly, this is a different weapon than the manriki. A weighted chain and darts on a chain are different. Also, Manriki's are almost never subtantially longer than 6' feet while the rope dart is much longer.
  • It doesn't make sense to merge these articles in here, since there's no reason to suggest one should be the dominant article. If they should be merged, then they should be merged into a single article that discusses chain weapons in general. Virogtheconq 19:34, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • I am in agreement with the notion to have an article for chain weapons in general, much easier to get the information you need inone hit.--Dexter 12 07:16, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]