Talk:Ninja

This is a controversial topic, which may be disputed. Please read this talk page discussion before making substantial changes. (This message should only be placed on talk pages.)

Ninjas in Popular culture

Since it not actually proven that Ninjas existed, maybe we should have a section about Ninjas in Popular culture. Those actually exist, even though they are fictional characters. We could then use Image:Ninja_Gaiden_big1.JPG KjtheDj 20:51, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Picture

Can we please find a better picture than the current lo-res screenshot from Ninja Gaiden? Perhaps a historical painting or etching or something from japan? Bonus Onus 06:35, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

I agree, but I only put the picture up there just to hold us off till' we got a different one. §†SupaSoldier†§ 15:23, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

I have stacks of ninja pictures both from real ninja (or sure looks like it) to videogame pictures in high resolution. Problem: I'm a noob and don't know how to upload pictures. If someone can teach me quickly I'll give all the ninja you want. Toxic Ninja 01:38, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

• Image:Ninja1.jpg
• Image:Ninja_Gaiden_big1.JPG

Now that SupaSoldier has showed me how to upload, I've droped off these 2 pictures that could be great for the page, feel free to edit, delete or use em. The top one was found on some random site and the second one is from ninja gaiden. Toxic Ninja 23:34, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Neither of those are (verifiably) pictures of a real ninja. Need some historic artwork, stat.

I'm forced to agree. Looking at an article that covers historical ninjas reference pictures including a video game character I've never heard of and an individual in cosplay isn't what I expected. How can we expect anyone to take this article seriously with those? - Time Traveller Jesus 21:37, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Ninja prided themselves on not being seen, those are the closes I have to a real ninja. Toxic Ninja 17:54, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

You don't know what a real ninja looks like. Flingotravels 21:10, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

i concur with using historical artwork rather than these modern pop-culture clichés.

志能備

"The term 志能備, has been traced as far back as Japan's Asuka period (538-710 AD), when Prince Shotoku is alleged to have employed one of his retainers as a ninja" No one even bothered to state what this means or how to say it in English. This is not a Japanese page, you can't just put kanji in here out of nowhere without any sort of explanation of what it means or how to pronounce it.169.232.102.36 07:50, 23 February 2007 (UTC)mfiedor

Historical Accuracy???

This article is pretty much total BS ... it needs a major overhaul to get any from the pop culture idea of ninja and back to it's historical accuracy ... I'll get onto asap The biz 21:59, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Please do not attack the article calling it BS, a lot of this has been researched and has encyclopedic value. :^) §†SupaSoldier†§ 21:45, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

I agree, this article is severly lacking in a major area: the acknowledgement that ninja might not have existed. There is VERY little historical evidence that ninja have ever existed – if any actual evidence at all. This is completely contrary to the samurai, as there was no shortage of broken samurai swords and armor-pieces. The "ninja-to" never even existed until the 1970s – when companies began to capitilize in the growth of asian/martial arts novelty. Much of the ninja is based off of modern speculation and fad and with very few pieces of historical fact – as far as historians are concerned, the ninja never existe, or if they did, they existed in such small numbers, that their existience is not capable of being proved. Anubite 01 19:19, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

And I will believe all of that when you cite your references and resources! :^) §†SupaSoldier†§ 01:42, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Um, you both seem to be misunderstanding how Wikipedia is supposed to work. Wikipedia does not prove or disprove things, it gathers together and summarizes stuff from different sources WP:NPOV. Thus, while I'd love to see some more citations from writers/researchers that are writing about how the historical ninja didn't exist the way that modern popular culture says they did (everything that I've been able to find so far has said that ninja existed, and also said that they were almost nothing like the pop culture image of today. It's hard to find people willing to do quality research on things that they're arguing don't exist.) that would not be a good reason to delete citations from other sources. Besides, this article is about "Ninja". And many aspects of ninja are quite easily proven to exist. They do exist in popular culture. A number of researchers believe they existed historically in one form or another. There are people in japan who show tourists how they think ninja lived and existed. If you're trying to argue that ninja don't exist, and thus this article shouldn't exist, you're pretty obviously wrong. Trying to show that there has been research into whether historical instances of "ninja" existed, on the other hand, is perfectly valid, but it doesn't negate the citations already provided in the article. Tchalvak 19:56, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

I am aware of WP:NPOV, I was just disagreeing with the fact that the biz was calling this article BS, and that Anubite01 was using information against the discussion, without cited references. :^) §†SupaSoldier†§ 20:40, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Secrecy, stealth, and assassination promote potential inaccuracies: 1) many true ninja facts are not recorded; and 2) many writings about ninja are not supported by facts.

here is the central problem with ninja studies: ninja are secret killers, so even if there are hundreds of them, if they are good at their job, we would never know. this diagram helps illustrate that dilemma.

Just think about what that means. if any of us saw a ninj, we would not live to tell about it. and if we did, that "ninja" was a very poor example of a ninja. therefore, no appreciabel ninja information will ever be known. --Ghetteaux 04:14, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

And yet, despite that logic I think that a majority of modern thinkers shall continue to believe in such invisibles as: dinosaurs, air, outer-space, black holes, and snipers. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tchalvak (talk • contribs) 06:45, 26 February 2007 (UTC).

a lot of this has been researched and has encyclopedic value ... and I guess using very few references makes the article all correct and thoroughly researched, lol ... Hatsumi is a 'martial artist' not a historian, Hayes is another 'martial artist' whose books are so full of misconceptions and outright falsehoods just to appear all ninja-mystical, but only really trying to make a buck selling as much as he can to young minds who don't know better, and Turnbull's works are being reassessed as their accuracy is highly dubious in some of his texts ... so you guys are saying that dodgy/non-reputable sources are ok to prove the existence of ‘ninja’, when good sources don’t exist to prove their non-existence ... I'll have my thesis done by the middle of the year and it's all about the modern misconceptions/falsehoods about ‘ninja’ and the historical realities of ‘shinobi no mono’ and ‘kusa’ (‘person of stealth’ and ‘stealthy scouts’ respectively). Then I’ll have a lot of accurate info to rewrite this article correctly. The biz 13:51, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Besides, this article is about "Ninja". And many aspects of ninja are quite easily proven to exist. They do exist in popular culture. ... lol, that's why I titled this section 'Historical Accuracy???' Where are ninja quite easily proven to exist? In movies, manga, anime and games of course, not in Japanese historical periods though. The biz 13:51, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Like someone said earlier "The reason there isn't a lot of information is because Ninja were good at their job....and if they weren't we would know more." Also if you read the book The Art of War by Sun Tzu many ancient Japanese strategies included Spies or Stealthy Assassins. So they did exist but there isn't a whole lot of "factual" information about them. §†SupaSoldier†§ 17:45, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

I would like to make known that my previous response was not advocating that this article was completely unsound and totally unfounded, but rather misleading. There is very little on the controversy and debate of the ninja and its origins. For as long as there lacks strong evidence that the ninja existed (I have yet to see any primary source beyond the etemology of the word), there should be an entry here that makes note of the ninja's intangibility and plausible fabrication.

Wikipedia is a place where people come to start their research, I believe. And though we need not college-level thesises and what not here, we should be nonbiased. And only including evidence that supports to existeince of ninjas, when there is plausible thought to the contrary, IS biased. I apologize that I lack any sources to back my earlier claims, but I stated what I did only from passing knowledge that I acquired from several history-buffs that I'm acquainted with. My intent with posting is to clear up the misconception that ninja are merely distorted figures from Japan's history and to create some doubt that they are wholly factual. Think of it like the monster squid. Anubite 01 16:00, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Anubite, you make a great analogy. ninja, like the Architeuthis, are obscured in hidden reaches, but loom large in the mind. Ghetteaux 02:18, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Nuts, thebiz, you stole my idea for a thesis when (if) I eventually go back to school and get my PhD in Japanese history. I'd be interested in seeing it when you're done though--one thing that I think has been sorely needed in Japanese studies is a thorough debunking of the ninja myth, though no reputable scholars seem to even want to touch the topic. Masakado 01:07, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Although I support the fact that ninja did exist(and exists now), I must ask why the following sentence is a prove: Also if you read the book The Art of War by Sun Tzu many ancient Japanese strategies included Spies or Stealthy Assassins. The Art of War by Sun Tzu is a Chinese book about strategies on war. It did mentioned and highly rated spies and told the leaders to treat them well, however, it got nothing to do with ninjas and assassins. At that time, China and Japan are not related, have no political relationship, no trading or anything. It is highly doubted that Japanese culture started before the end of the next dynasty in China. (Where some historical evidence points to the escaped people ran from China to Japan and destroyed the original people of Japan) Unless sources could be cited saying the idea of ninja comes from that book, I do not suggest using that as an arguement. If anyone askes for historical evidence on NON-pop culture, the book: 萬川集海written by Fujibayashi Nagatonokami in AD1676, consist of 22+1 volume(labeled 1~22 and side 1). These series of book talks about Ninja and Ninjitsu, the writer himself can be tracked by the Iga ryu as one of the 上忍三家(3 families of hi-ninja) of Iga. I do not consider a written work from 1676 as pop-culture. MythSearcher^talk 03:16, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Just because it was written in 1676 doesn't make it historical proof. The Mansen Shukai (万川集海) is not history; just read the table of contents and you can tell that much. It's a compilation of "ninjutsu" techniques, kind of like a martial arts manual. Considering that the term "ninjutsu" wasn't even really coined until after the Edo period started, that makes it suspect to start with. Remember, specialized martial art "schools" in Japan with their "kata" and "waza" were quite rare pre-Edo, and barring a handful, didn't exist--people trained in overall military matters (horsemanship, spearmanship, riflery, etc) like modern "boot camp" instead of specializing in one "jutsu" exclusively. It wasn't until the peace of the Edo (and hence, the lack of a need for any "ninja" in the first place) that martial arts changed from pure military training to the kind of strict codified martial arts we see today. That doesn't make the Mansen Shukai useless--it's valuable in learning how the Sengoku/Momoyama equivalent of "special ops" would be undertaken, but it doesn't make a single step towards proving the existence of ninja clans training in the mountains and hiring their services out to whatever samurai would take them. Nobody denies that ninja in the form of "regular samurai performing espionage missions" existed; it's the "separate" clans of "ninja" that focused solely on training in "ninjutsu" and hiring themselves out like mercenaries that is highly suspect. Masakado 20:34, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

No, I did not suggest ninja clans training in the mountains and hiring themselves out in the above. I only claim that they existed not only in the popular culture. However, what you have stated here can be simply put: Samurai have clans(families) In ancient Japan, the same family serves the same general family, this is not pop culture, it is in fact historically proven. They view their bloodline of their family as the most important thing to carry along.(Heretically rule) And thus, if ninja is a type of samurai, it is just more likely that they serve as a clan instead of individuals. No, they do not hire themselves out, in fact they should be loyal to who their fathers are loyal to, unless they became a traitor of their family. You said nobody denies ninja existed, however, go read the Katana article history, at least 1 editor doubt their existence. MythSearcher^talk 04:18, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Considering the extensive debate that we are having here and considering that it appears that the debate stems from several sources outside of Wikipedia, might I suggest that we have a section that talks about the controversy surrounding their existance which includes citing sources which say that Ninja might not have existed. No, we can no more disprove of ninja existing than we can unrefutably prove their existance, but researchers are fully capable of putting issues into question and if it is a subject as widely talked about and suggested as you guys claim, then there will be an article SOMEWHERE that you can reference. If you can't find such an article, it becomes original research and not worthy of being addressed within the context of this Wikipedia article.--Forgottenlord 14:12, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Addendum: certainly, I had not heard of this controversy before I read the talk page, so if it actually does exist and is considered a valid contraversy, then it probably should be documented.--Forgottenlord 14:15, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Etymology section needs adding to

It needs this bit added to the end of the Etymology section, from the Ninjutsu article, because it details another meaning of 'nin':
"Although the popular view is that ninjutsu is the art of secrecy or stealth, actual practitioners consider it to mean the art of enduring - enduring all of life's hardships. The word nin carries both these meanings."

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.12.195.70 (talk) 22:39, 12 February 2007 (UTC).

Oniwaban (お庭番) is another name for Shinobi that might be included. Generalklagg 01:15, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank You for the information Generalklagg, I have added it to the Etymology Section of the Article. :^) §†SupaSoldier†§ 21:08, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Protection

Someone got through the vandal protection(66.198.185.107 13:04, 20 February 2007 (UTC))

Yeah, I noticed that! The Vandalism was still there after it had been reverted! :^) §†SupaSoldier†§ 19:23, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Okay, I removed all traces of Vandalism on the article. :^) §†SupaSoldier†§ 19:26, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

The vandalism is still there. And it is protected, so someone needs to remove it.

Strange line

"Ninjas were banned in Japan in the 1600s," from the looks of it this is vandalism, sure most of the things ninjas do (kill, steal, destroy) are illegal but I don't think ninjas in particular are "banned." I'm removing this until someone can find a citation. Toxic Ninja 03:17, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Great thinking Toxic. I don't believe this is true, but if a cited reference is given then it will be put back. :^) §†SupaSoldier†§ 06:30, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

This sounds like it is based on the idea of 'outlawed samurai' popularized in several anime series'; it was supposed to have taken place in the Edo period (17th century). 24.129.122.147 22:42, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Image suggestion

Jiraiya, ninja and title character of the Japanese folktale Jiraiya Goketsu Monogatari.

File:Ninja Gaiden big1.JPG

A ninja in popular culture.

How about using the two images on the right with the accompanying captions? I agree with User:Bottlecapninja that having a poor quality photo of someone cosplaying (or whatever the verb may be) is not very, shall I say, encyclopedic. The video game image, I think, makes for a decent replacement of that and might be placed in the "Modern Costume" section. As for the main image to be placed at the top of the article, just looking around a bit, I thought the upper one might be decent, since it is an image of a ninja in the original sense (or at least more so than the video game one).

-Nameneko 03:25, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Ninja vs. Pirate

Should we add some information on the great ninja vs. pirate debate? Eyeball kid 04:37, 28 March 2007 (UTC) slady

Please, No. I see lots of bad things happening if we try to introduce that. Besides, I dunno if that really belongs on Wikipedia. Cronus Zephyr 01:09, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

intro paragraph

"Since the art of stealth killing leaves no witness, the truth about the ninja will likely remain hidden." This sounds like a tagline to a video game, not an encyclopedia article. Anyone else think it should be changed? Jodamn 03:09, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

I second that. MythSearcher^talk 07:18, 21 April 2007 (UTC)