Talk:Pehr Henrik Ling

Change the redirect

Hello, this article has the wrong spelled name. Mr. Lings full name is Per Henrik Ling. You can see this in many serious sources like 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica, Svensk litteraturhistoria i sammandrag or Svenskt biografiskt handlexikon. The swedish wikipedia had made the same error. Please change the name of this article and invert the redirect. Thanks and Greetings, de:Benutzer:Semperor

Both the Svenskt biografiskt lexikon and the Nationalencyklopedin (both of which are more up-to-date than the references you link to) have "Pehr", although the latter notes "Per" as an alternative form ("Ling, Pehr (Per) Henrik"). Unless you have some better evidence for "Per", I see no reason to move the article. u p p l a n d 14:25, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

I think a source from the time on which Ling lives has a greater chance have the right spelling of his name. When you search for Mr. Ling's books and articles, you will find them under the name Per Henrik Ling and not Pehr Henrik Ling. Greetings, de:Benutzer:Semperor

Neither of the sources you are referring to is actually from Ling's own time. He died in 1839, and these publications are all from about 70 years later. SBL is a better secondary source and more likely to be correct, even if it is published more recently. Contemporary editions of his own works are not consistent, but more spell it "Pehr" than "Per". u p p l a n d 05:19, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

After a discussion with the svenska akademien i has changed my opinion. Even if it is confusing for the readers, if we refer to sources, which are using a diffrent spelling of the name. Thanks for the constructional discussion. Greetings, de:Benutzer:Semperor

The mysterious "Ming"

The anecdote about the "Chinese fellow" called Ming, whom Pehr Henrik Ling supposedly met in Copenhagen, can be found in most versions of this article (the German being a significant exception). To my ears, this sounds like a joke, and—considering the similarity of their names—a rather silly one at that! The only source cited by the English article is the 11th edition of the Encyclopedia Brittanica, but this specific detail is not derived from there (at least judging from the online version, cf. http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/Per_Henrik_Ling).

In all probability, this is a factoid. The question is what fraud made it up, and for what reason? (Perhaps just for the fun of it.)

130.241.45.33 (talk) 09:49, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps the potential commercial use of this factoid should not be underestimated. It seems that this kind of history comes in handy in legitimizing certain kinds of less well documented "medical practicies".

130.241.45.39 (talk) 10:04, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

First sentence doesn't make sense - can you fix it?

"Ling... pioneered the teaching of Physical Education of , and fencing master, developer and teacher of medical-gymnastics." I don't know enough about the subject to be able to edit this sentence correctly. Is there a word missing that should be after the word "of"?--Karinpower (talk) 01:05, 5 August 2014 (UTC)