Talk:Blind Justice/@comment-116.226.111.15-20150921002013/@comment-3391671-20151109074927

Not only is your writing filled with spelling errors, the manner of writing reflects someone who believes he/she is intellectual when he/she may not be. The reason I say this is because there is some ignorance in what has been typed out in hte above two "statements".

1. First and foremost, why state that "Zatoichi" the character (once again, you mispelled items on a normal basis, especially Japanese terms) is a Zato, not a Samurai? I understand if the article mentioned that, but it doesn't. If commenters do mention "Zato is a Samurai," that is no more than their mistake of research (and I only find it only a couple of times, not over and over). If you cannot resist correcting such people, then the comments here is not the best place to start. Also, if you classify "swordsman" as "samurai," that might as well be your misunderstanding of the term. If you also wished to state that he's a Zato, then let that be everyone else's homework, not your lecture.

2. Battoujutsu. I am rather ill-kept to see someone so fevered to correct the term when they mispell it with caps and all. He did wield it in a way similar to Iaijutsu, which is interchangeably known as Battoujutsu or "quick-draw" style. Whether or not "Zatoichi" had his blade hidden in a sheath or a rod is not important as this is a stance, not an entire discussion of the weapon he had wielded (fictionally). Also, "Zatoichi" didn't strictly use the "quick-draw" techniques, but also others such as Sumo and Japanese archery; this stance just ellaborates on his most popular aspect which was his reverse-grip, quick-draw style.