Talk:Takezo Kensei

Do we need to sic the "Kensai" spelling in the quote? Since they're both Anglicised, either is correct, but I can see how it might dissuade people from "correcting" the spelling.--Hardvice (talk) 13:37, 24 January 2007 (EST)

• Maybe we can remove it for now, and if there's a problem we can put it back? --Fcphantom 13:40, 24 January 2007 (EST)
• Given the flexible nature of the English spelling, I'd make one name a redirect to the other, specify that both spellings are valid in the introduction, and drop the sic. --Ted C 14:39, 24 January 2007 (EST)
  • I say drop the "sic" and add a note. - RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 21:13, 24 January 2007 (EST)

Formal Name

Out of curiosity, what's the source we use to identify Takezo Kensei as Miyamoto Musashi? --Ted C 14:40, 24 January 2007 (EST)

• I'm not the one who added it, but from my research at wikipedia, this assumption seems valid. Disney42 19:46, 24 January 2007 (EST)
  • I added it. Searching for Takezo Kensei (and Kensai) on Wikipedia yields the article on Miyamoto Musashi. The article on Musashi has info that seems consistent with what Hiro says about Kensei, but there's not much to go on from Hiro's monologue. I don't have any other sources, but I'd say that Wikipedia usually has correct info. If anybody can find more info on it, I'd appreciate it. :) - RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 21:13, 24 January 2007 (EST)
    • I was the one that posted the redirect for Kensei (which btw is an incorrect spelling and most probably a production error) to Musashi's page on Wikipedia. I also linked the Takezo Kensai character to Miyamoto Musashi on Wikipedia's Godsend page. In the talk page I discussed and gave some good points about why Takezo Kensai are one of the same. Here's my quote:
      Just a follow up on Miyamoto Musashi. I noticed in Godsend, when Hiro sees the sword on the armour for the first time, the scene changes to a placard with: Takezo Kensei (1584- [sic]. Note two things, one is that the name is misspelt as Kensei. I assume this is a production error because later on, subtitles correctly spell it as Takezo Kensai. However, the important part is the birth year 1584. Miyamoto's birth year is also 1584. I don't think that's just a coincidence.
      --Takagawa-kun 07:14, 25 January 2007 (EST)
      • Lacking any historical connection between the names, I've changed the Formal Name of the character to Takezo Kensei. Being based on a historical figure is not the same as actually being that figure. --Ted C 09:47, 25 January 2007 (EST)
        • Just to be clear, there's 2 issues at work here. 1) This may or may not be Miyamoto, we can't be sure. 2) Since this is a tranliteration of a Japanese name, there is no "correct" spelling. The only correct way to spell it is with Japanese kanji characters. That said, the placard and the subtitle are not in accord, so I'm sure there was a small production error/miscommunication somewhere along the way. It's noted on the page. - RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 11:02, 25 January 2007 (EST)

• • • • • • I can sort of understand the point in regards to a historical figure, and the character within Heroes that its based on. I think its still important to reflect the basis of this historical figure. For instance, its important that Tekezo Kensei IS Miyamoto Musashi whose regarded as the worlds most greatest swordsman with many stories and artifacts which attest to that. On to historical connection to the name. A brief story would begin with a person named Shinmen Takezo born in 1584 who became a skilled and adept swordsman. Sometime in his career he was given his samurai name Miyamoto Musashi and from then on thats what he was referred to. Now to Takezo Kensei. Kensei is an honorific; a title given to warriors with legendary skills in swordsmanship. That is why he is referred to as Takezo Kensai.
            
            As long as it can be established that Shinmen Takezo was a reknowned swordsman of his time, that he would be called Takezo Kensai. And that's most definately established, with supporting evidence that Shinmen Takezo and Miyamoto Musashi was the same person. Supporting material can be found here [1] and here [2]. Furthermore, as stated earlier the placard states Takezo as born in 1584. Miyamoto was also born in 1584. Miyamoto was undefeated, so it would be hard to believe there would be another swordsman born in the same year with an even greater notoriety. He also wrote a book called Book of Five Rings (Gorin no shô). Also many other websites and even movies attest to the history of this historical figure, and the progression of from his birthname, honorifics etc.
            
            Now about the spelling of Kensei, I retract my earlier statement. I agree, its possible (I'm not knowledgeable in Japanese) that Kensei/Kensai is a transliteration of the kanji and the right spelling would be the one which has been conventionally adopted as correct. Which one I don't know. --Takagawa-kun 12:18, 25 January 2007 (EST)

Character?

Should he be in the character categories? ---- 19:08, 24 January 2007 (EST)

I don't think so. Heroe 19:19, 24 January 2007 (EST)

I put him in the character category because he's the original owner of the sword. Afterall, he is (was) a person. I think he's also a reference, since he's a figure from history. I'd keep him as both. As for the portals, I don't really care how that's taken care of. Personally, I think it should be in both. - RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 21:13, 24 January 2007 (EST)

I agree. Mr. Petrelli's a character and he's dead, too. Ditto Shanti Suresh. They're people who are important to the story.--Hardvice (talk) 22:43, 24 January 2007 (EST)

However, I disagree. This guy is more of a legend than someone who could directly influence the story, other than his sword. ---- 00:09, 25 January 2007 (EST)

...so far.--Hardvice (talk) 00:13, 25 January 2007 (EST)

Really, the only differences between Takezo and the others Hardvice listed are that Takezo is much older, and that he's a figure from history. However, I don't think age should matter, and we're not even sure he's really a real person. He's may be Miyamoto Musashi, but even historians can't be sure. (In fact, maybe that's why the writers chose him, so they can be ambiguous about the character's past.) I say that the original owner of a major plot point like the sword is definitely a character - especially in a show where time travel is possible. - RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 00:21, 25 January 2007 (EST)