Talk:Devil sticks

Untitled

This page really needs a picture. Anyone? Meelar 03:47, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)

capitalisation

Does it bother anyone that this page was moved from Devil Sticks to Devil sticks? I am certain this is wrong. Neither or both terms should be capitalised as otherwise it emphasises the wrong part. 'The Stick' is the emphasis, not 'Devil'. I have never seen this art form mentioned by jugglers with the first word capitalised and the other not. This article is not only about the gear, the devilstick, it is also about the art form, Devil Sticks as a whole. Several other articles from within this constellation of articles that are spelled in Title Case when describing the art form -- Spanish Web is one, this list has many other examples. The Hockey article isn't titled Hockey stick and skates and Tennis isn't Tennis ball... I'd like to move this back to Devil Sticks where it was in August. Would anyone have a stong objection to this or a reason why this is not acceptable? We already had all the redirects from every possible spelling pointing to Devil Sticks, and I'm willing to go back and fix them all again. comments?Pedant 20:57, 2004 Nov 6 (UTC)

As it is, there are several orphaned redirects to redirect pages that point here, I'd be happy to fix all the reirects, but would like this article in a stable location first.Pedant

OK, trying this again. I have been a sticker more than half my life and have met and discussed sticking with literally thousands of stick jugglers, so I'm not at all uncertain about the following and I have seen no interest in this discussion, so I'm going to try one more time, then call this consesnsus, even if it's just me "consensing".:

According to Wikipedia:Naming conventions the name of this article should be Devil Stick as it is a proper noun, when refering to the Art of stick manipulation as a whole, which is the scope of the article, Devil Stick manipulation as a subset of Equilibristics. It was at Devil Stick before, and someone merged it or renamed it, somehow it became Devil sticks in the plural.

• In the singular, and lowercase, it means the center stick of a set of sticks.
• In the plural it means the equipment, not the art form.

One wouldn't move Hockey to Hockey skates right?

Names of the art form might well include the word 'juggling', 'twirling', 'manipulation' tacked on at the end, but the article is not just about the manipulation of the stick, and those are by no means universally recognised names for the Art.

My assertion is that the best name for this article is Devil Stick. comments?

Why would the title of any article not capitalize major words (those that are neither conjunctions nor prepositions)? Whether or not one or both words should normally capitalized seems irrelevant to whther one or both words whould be capitalized as the title of an article.

I'm not an admin, so I will need to get help to move this article, because a redirect to this article was created when the page was moved and it will need deletion in order to avoid a cut and paste move. I've already had an admin move this once, but someone has moved it again or renamed it, likely someone who meant well... but who did not fix all the consequent double redirects and who did not make any mention of why the page was moved or renamed, here on the discussion page, and who also left the talk page of the old article behind.

If I receive no response within two weeks, I will assume I am the only one who cares about this (I am organising and categorising the entire clown/juggling/circus/circus skills constellation presently, as my time allows, and I want to have some consistency, and not have to keep fixing links -- there are an enormous number of redirects already, and I hate to duplicate effort.) I think it's reasonable to expect any editor of any page to at least read the discussion page for pages they edit, so I think this is a suitable place for this discussion.

please comment if you have anything to say on this, maybe add a comment on whether you are a fellow juggler or just another editor, or expert grammarian or whatever, as I am obviously weighting my own opinion quite heavily as I wrote most of the article as it stands and have much more to add to it, and consider myself one of the primary contributors to the article... would also weight a comment heavily if you wrote some of the article at any point, if you are a juggler, circus historian, etc... Thanks for any commentsPedant 22:13, 2004 Nov 11 (UTC)

I would have thought that the name of the art was devil sticking or devil-sticking (lowercase), though I haven't anything but gut feeling to back this up and I defer to your knowledge of what terms are used most by stickers. I don't see why it should be considered a proper noun though; could you back that up a bit? I favour devil stick as the article title, but am ready to be persuaded. —Rory ☺ 23:18, Nov 11, 2004 (UTC)

I also feel that both words should be capitalized. -Mbarowai

I have been playing Devil Sticks for several years now and have always seen it as being in capitals. --Mark Barnes 22:23, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

I see it more as devil stick - I wouldn't put juggling balls in capitals, and think the same about devil sticks -- Luke

Neither should be capitolized: I just spent an eyestraining quarter hour in the OED, and "devil" is not capitalized once in the 5 pages of deifinitions in that hallowed book. While "devil sticks" as a unique compound is not in there, in all of the compounds of "devil" neither word was capitalized. The rules for determining is something is or is not a proper noun--and therefore whether its initial letter(s) should or should not be written in uppercase--aren't determined by familiarity or if it is a "thing," no matter how unique. There's no grammatic, linguistic, or historic reason for either "devil" or "stick" to be capitalized. Proper nouns are those that name specific (tyically) individual things: Place names, personal names, names of items, registered trade marks, and so on. So we have "Rocky Mountains," but "the mountains," familiarly. If I decided to name my center stick, say "Twirly Tess," then Twirly Tess would be my devil stick. Also, in the immortal words of my grammar mentor, just because you see lots of people doing it, by no means makes it right: as good a rule for life as it is for grammar. Forgive the lack of citations, but I'm without my primary reference at the moment; I suspect wiki's "proper noun" article might offer some help. WHoever mentioned hockey stick and tennis ball was on the right track. Additionally, wikipedia doesn't do article capitalization, so no capitalized initial letters in words other than conjunctions and short prepositions. Aaaand, since length of time playing with devil sticks seems to be an authority-granting criterea, I've been playing for very nearly 20 years (twice the time I've been editing, teaching, and tutoring grammar--guess which pays better), have spoken to countless scores of fellow devil-stick folk all around the world, and appeared in a few instructional videos for variously short-lived companies including Mystix, from (I believe) Minnesota in the early 90s; however, it would be false for me to say we ever thought about capitalization. Now, if it's just a matter of not wanting to rework the rediricts, it's not a huge deal to improperly capitalize something, but in that case, let's at least call it what it is and not make up reasons to leave one or both words in upper case. smallwhitelight--68.42.56.251 (talk) 01:47, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

I agree with smallwhitelight: neither word should be capitalized. There is a general tendency among street performers and circus artists, as among manufacturers of toys and props, to capitalize nouns that are not grammatically deserving of capitalization; I think of it as a part of the culture's language of hyperbole. That doesn't make the capitalization correct practice. As Luke points out, common sense dictates that you wouldn't put "juggling balls" in capitals, and the same should apply to "devil sticks." It's not a brand name. It's a type of object. Lowercase both words. AtticusX (talk) 20:11, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Additionally, it may be helpful to know how reliable sources in the media are using the term. The New York Times consistently uses the term "devil sticks," as in "soon clubs and devil sticks were twirling through the air," [1] "broke into imitations of clacking subway cars on his three devil sticks," [2] and "David Garity and Yang XiaoDi, who will juggle devil sticks." [3]

As a whole, the news media overwhelmingly gives preference to the lowercase form of "devil sticks": [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], etc., etc.

Forums and fan sites for the art form must be deemed less reliable (for Wikipedia's purposes) as sources of proper usage - some of these sites blatantly use Wikipedia as a main source of their info - but it is worth noting that www.devilstick.org gives preference to "devilsticks"; juggling.org's glossary defines them as "devil sticks" and the majority of juggling.org's articles similarly use the term "devil sticks." The International Jugglers' Association generally favors "devil sticks" to refer to both the art form and the set of sticks [10], [11], [12], [13], etc. The term "fire devil sticks" is also lowercase there. However, this evidence must be deemed merely anecdotal compared to some of the more authoritative sources above.

Even if we didn't have the standard rules of capitalization in English that smallwhitelight has summarized above as a guide, the consensus among reliable, third-party, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy overwhelmingly points to "devil sticks" as the correct usage. I would therefore encourage the reversion of all instances of "Devil Sticks" to "devil sticks" in the article. AtticusX (talk) 19:43, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

lower case throughout unless word starts a new sentence. We don't capitalise car, dog or house. It is an object, not a proper noun.

Bobadigilatis. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.4.206.177 (talk) 04:51, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Fad?

I kinda think that having this categorised as a fad is misleading. It seems to me that playing with a toy whose origin can be traced to before the time of Christ is not a fad. I'll grant you that the popularity of sticking has increased radically in the last few decades, but it seems to me that even a few decades is enough to make this more than a fad. I'm not married to removing it from the category, but this doesn't seem to qualify as a fad. Pedant 15:45, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

Not a fad. It's a skilled discipline for those who practice regularly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.4.206.177 (talk) 04:53, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

crystal and luna

"Crystal stix" and "Luna sticks" are both mentioned in the Devilsticks article, but are not really referenced after that. The phrase "known variously as" is a bit misleading since it gives the impression that "Devil Sticks" could be called "luna sticks" generically, when in fact Lunastix is a brand name, as is Crystal Stix. If the words "lunastix" or "crystal stix" are used in the article, the companies should probably be mentioned as well.

• http://crystalstix.com Professional Grade Juggling Sticks.

• http://www.devilsticks.net/

• http://www.lunartix.com/

fiddlestix prominence

What's with all the Fiddlestix info? Is this an advertisement? I'm all for explaining the physics, but this sounds like someone trying to promote a brand or a version of history. The weird slant toward the flower stick style being better and more advanced than the tapered stick style also reeks of personal preference. Infotrope 06:58, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

fiddlestix/fidlstix/fiddlesticks are an open source design, placed in the public domain by their inventor, Glenn, and the design is often modified from glenn's design which was developed in conjunction with a minimum of 5 specific people: Reid and 'Toes' from Flying Clipper (spiral leather 'dipped in suede' shaft); Glenn (floppy fringe/heavy ends); Todd Farnbach, Todd Ullman and Glenn (various manufacturing shortcuts, the aircraft aluminum core)-- each of whom agreed to allow the resultant design to be shared freely with no reward or recognition. Their advanced design is not a matter of opinion, it's a demonstrable fact that fiddlestix can do any trick that can be done with flower sticks (cup end rather than tassel [fringe]) and any trick that can be done with devilsticks (tapered design) PLUS other trocks that are nearly impossible for an advanced expert stick manipulator using other designs... ... because the weight concentrated so severely towards the ends spreads the manipulable area (sweet spot) wide enough that it allows a much, finer division of the 'scale' of controllable regions on the middle baton -- allowing more precise adjustment on the fly, and better control. Also fiddlestix resist rolling allowing a static contact patch to be maintained at the control stick/baton interface.

Fidlstix are not a commercial product per se, there are at least 10 different sources for sticks based on the 1980's version of fiddlesticks. (originally called sculpture sticks). 24.24.151.13 (talk) 22:52, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Stix

If its anything else besides Juggling stix or just Stix's its a advertisement in my opinion. Certainly Crystal,fiddle, luna, are advertisments. There are hundreds of stick makers and types of stix. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.167.250.61 (talk) 12:51, August 14, 2006

Chop stix?

I've heard the Chinese name is wakun. True? Mention it? Trekphiler 08:50, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Source? Infotrope 07:00, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

most people believe that it was called eiter hua kun which was to be translated with flower stick. i don´t speak chinese but after googling a bit it seems that hua means flower, couldnt find anything on kun though — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.169.225.254 (talk) 10:07, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

found on walls in the pyramids???

where is the reputable source for this? This whole page seems kind of like nonsense.68.9.129.11 (talk) 03:16, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

There was formerly an image from the Beni-Hassan tomb complex that showed acrobalance, tumblers, toss juggling and stick manipulation. Somehow it was removed. This article has gone downhill a lot in the last 5 years, at about the same rate that devil sticks have become of commercial interest to some parties. 24.24.151.13 (talk) 23:06, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

i believe that this claim was always false, there is an picture from beni hassan tomp with acrobatics and ball juggling but theres no sign of a person manipulating 3 sticks of anykind --87.169.225.254 (talk) 13:03, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

Terminology

I noticed a wholesale change of terminology from "devil sticks" to "devilsticks". I have reverted these changes because the description of the subject should agree with the article title. Devil sticks go by many names. If there is a consensus among reliable sources to go with a different name, then we can do that, but if you want to make a change like this, make your case on this talk page. =Axlq 16:25, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Safety-warnings - in an encyclopedia?

"However, advice should always be sought from an expert before mixing chemicals." - I'm not familiar with Wiki guidelines regarding this sort of stuff, and couldn't find them by searching, but it just seems grossly inappropriate for an encyclopedic article to warn us in this tone. The article should mention using chemicals to change colour, such as substance X to produce colour Y - as is does right now - but I see no point in then warning us of the dangers of mixing other chemicals. Otherwise, we may as well affix a warning to every article. "Devil Sticks can hit you in the nuts", "Flying an F16 should not be done without supervision", "Consult a doctor before poking your eyes", etc. --MetzMaboo (talk) 21:41, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

LOL. I agree. I've seen this lapse in encyclopedic tone appearing in other Wikipedia articles relating to sports and performance skills, and it is jarring every time. AtticusX (talk) 04:48, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, that struck me funny too. It seems like something was brought in from another source without being appropriately trimmed. --24.80.163.219 (talk) 07:33, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

WP:NOT wikipedia is not a 'how-to' covers it pretty well. Feel free to make it right. 24.24.151.13 (talk) 23:09, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, there's a lot to be made right.

-- How-to Info, extraneous to the article.

-- Writing style disorganized, Over five of the paragraphs describe all the variations of juggling sticks when only one is needed: not by deleting the other content but merging all of it into one paragraph. The same to be said about technique descriptions (not as How-To, but the ones similar to parallel forms of contact juggling and toss juggling), history, notable examples in media, etc.

-- 800-lb. gorillas: If I edited this, I'd cut the available content in half or more, which would scream vandalism. One revert by a prior editor who's peeved I did anything here at all, and we're back to this mess. The prior editors need to agree that this article isn't working in it's current form.

I'll let a braver soul try to be bold. 209.180.155.12 (talk) 08:05, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Even better: let a pro make that call. Pepper2k3 (talk) 08:30, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

I don't think so, I'm as much of a pro stick juggler as it gets as far as the history design and construction of sticks, I'm one of the designers whose work has been incorporated into sticks from all over the world (and maybe the only one who has the names of everyone involved in the design up until I put my version into the public domain in the 80's). It's not the wikipedia way to use firsthand knowledge, and there are not a lot of books about the subject to draw on. There is no book that has the story of how and why the "tassel" was created. To fix this, I need to write a book. Maybe Billy Vestal should as well. But some of this is just bullshit. To fix this article, as mentioned already, we need to strip down all of the unsupported bullshit (unreferenced assertions) and remove all the self-promotion. Then build it up from there, using only verifiable sources. No original research. 24.24.151.13 (talk) 21:12, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

flower sticks

"And the flower sticks are similar to juggling. They are basically juggling sticks. If the baton (center stick) is not tapered and has tassels (or other weights) at its end, it can be properly called a "flower stick" (as the tassels will twirl outwards and resemble an open flower when the stick is spun). This term can also refer to hybrid sticks which are both tapered and have weights. Tapered sticks without end weights are known simply as devil sticks. Flower sticks can also be properly called devil sticks, as that is the more general term."

NO. Flower sticks have a cup/tulip shaped assembly on the end. Flower sticks predate the tassel design and their physics are different from the physics of sticks with "tassels" -- they aren't tassels either, tassels are decorative. The floppy leather fringe isn't a decoration. There is so much in this article that's self-serving bs. Most of the truth originally written into this article has been removed and replaced with utter nonsense. 24.24.151.13 (talk) 20:56, 7 February 2011 (UTC) (User:Pedant)

Chopped it down to WP-appropriate material

This article had become more of an WP:OR fanpage, without a single decent ref after six years. I've chopped it down to the basics, a few items with refs and a few basic statements that seem pretty non-contentious and common-sensical. And I gave a little flex in "variants" so as not to use what appear to be useful pics. It'd be great to see this fleshed out a bit with actual refs, but in the meantime there are plenty of fansites that can publish all the WP:Original research they like, just Wikipedia isn't the place for that. MatthewVanitas (talk) 05:50, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

If the pro who posted above (as an IP) did actually put together a book on the devilstick "scene" and how it developed culturally and commercially since the 1980s, that'd be pretty cool, and citeable if it were (ideally) peer reviewed. Even an article in a published journal would be great. That wouldn't quite cover us for the pre-1980s stuff (except for whatever oral history of anyone interviewed who could attest to seeing them at hippie festivals in the 1960s or wherever they were in the past). But there are probably some books floating around that aren't yet up on Google that cover devilsticking back in earlier parts of history in whatever parts of the world; at the moment all I could find was several cites claiming a Chinese origin, but there has to be more in other old books. MatthewVanitas (talk) 06:04, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

suggestions

Anybody else think that the line:" Flower sticks are one variation on devil sticks, with tassles to slow down the movement of the baton to learn more difficult moves and tricks" is incorrect and misleading ? I´d prefer to say:

Flower sticks are one variation on devilsticks, with tassles to slow down the movement and usually some plastic wrapped around the wooden core to make it more sticky and therefore more easy to control. The Devilstick has a conic shaped, 60cm long wooden core weighting between 180 and 220 gram and is usually heavyer and longer than flowersticks.

There are Firesticks using fuel-soaked wicks and Glowsticks usually working with LED.

Maybe it would be good to mention other existing builds like the Devils Triangle (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ctvcn3CH7HY) or the Bravo Tri Stick (http://www.bravojuggling.com/en/bravo_tristick.html)

A consideration would be to mention that Devil and Flowersticks often result in different styles.

Then i think there should be more chapters

possible would be a famous stickers section (Markus Furtner, Nikki Sneep Sniders, Andy Gebhard... )

chapter about volley-sticking which has been a partly documented event at ejcs that is still held each year and a well known game in the juggling scene

and then history, even if we havent found the chinese evidence i think there should be a chapter about the few things we got — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.169.225.254 (talk) 12:50, 8 September 2014 (UTC) --87.169.225.254 (talk) 13:03, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

history

on pre 1980 stuff i found some evidence but havent been able to verify it here are the claims i found

in 1759 there was a Description of Devilsticks Play in:"An Account of Great Attractions in the Imperial Capitol During New Years Celebrations" A translation by Zhan Gao was published by the Peking Press in 1978... sadly i couldnt find the text

By 1813, a theatre in Berlin was advertising a show

including "the performance of Chinese stickplays by Medua and Mooty Samme".

the source of both of these claims seem to be the Devilstick Book by Todd Strong

between 1915/1923 a duo called Frank and Clara la Tour are performing Devilsticks ( http://soapbubbler.weebly.com/la-tour.html )

around 1940 a juggler named Karl Rappo was performing Devilsticks ( http://www.juggling.org/jw/87/4/yesterdays.html )

1947 "Manual of Juggling" from Max Holden contains chapter about devilsticks

1977 "Circus Technique" from Hoven Burgees contains chapter on devilsticks

maybe someone with a more scientific/historic background than me can verify some of these and deliever sources

also here´s a link with my collection of basicly anything i could find over the internet, it´s pretty messy but maybe someone finds it usefull

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-ELsZ_jHNO5Eb_s32o0tHMQEMKdeAISz1ItBIMeN1NI/edit--87.169.225.254 (talk) 13:09, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

Devil sticks

Robynthehode, You reverted my recent link pointing to Bladder fiddle, saying "What's this got to do with 'devil sticks'". The answer is that "Devil stick" in multiple languages including English has been associated with bumbass fiddles for hundreds of years. The fiddles are much rarer now, but the association still exists. Rather than repoint the link to bladder fiddle/bumbass, I chose the disambiguation link at the top.  How would you like to handle the need to point to both? Jacqke (talk) 19:07, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

Jacqke. Thanks for coming to the talk page. A reliable source regarding the association would be good. Couldn't see any mention of devil sticks (as circus props) in the bladder fiddle article. The reference would have to make explicit the association re devil sticks as circus props. I'll leave it with you. Robynthehode (talk) 19:56, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

on history/Benjamin Peirce.[7]

"The first scientific analysis of the physics of the game, called "the Devil on Two Sticks," was published in 1855 by Benjamin Peirce.[7]" . This is clearly referring to what is known as a diabolo today, not a devilstick and should be removed from this article.