Talk:Stone skipping

Untitled

Are these useful as references ?

1) "In skimming, spin's the thing" http://plus.maths.org/issue22/news/skimming/index.html

2) The physics of stone skipping Lyderic Bocquet (University of Lyon, France)
arXiv:physics/0210015v1 [physics.ed-ph] http://arxiv.org/pdf/physics/0210015 86.137.254.55 21:17, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Names

What does the name drakes and ducks derive from? Any point in adding that info into the article? -- Cimon Avaro; on a pogostick. (talk) 10:46, 10 November 2008 (UTC) do not have one that is E_P —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.62.29.150 (talk) 20:34, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Should there be a reference to 'scooning'? I believe this game gave its name to the ships called 'schooners'. 80.4.149.253 (talk) 08:44, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Basingstoke - fiction ?

Delete ?

In spring 1698, the first global stone-skipping competition was held in Basingstoke, said to be the golden era of stone-skipping. After intense competition between the three hopefuls,Chris'wrists of fury' Walkinshaw, Calvin'loveshack' Shackleton and Ric 'cannon arms' Fawdry, resulting in an extended period of competition lasting three weeks. Throughout intense storms, the conditions of the water were seen to be lethal by the stone-skipping standards committee, but the dedication of the mighty three lead them to no fear and certain death. Eventually a winner was decided but just as the announcement was due to be made, a rogue stone cast from the mighty cannons of Fawdrys arms, struck the judge between the eyes causing instant death the next day, and the winner was never to be announced. Until this day it still remains a mystery to who the true champion was, and myth tells us that the cries of the three warriors can still be heard until this day when the moon is full, and on the third Sunday of April.

I'm sceptical of this but have just flagged it 'citation needed' for now. It sounds like childish fiction, created to name-check someone's buddies ! "stone-skipping standards committee" - Oh, come on ! --195.137.93.171 (talk) 00:58, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, there is no reference and it's just a faniciful story. Names on google don't come up with anything. I'll delete it unless someone has a source. King (talk) 21:20, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ancient use of the effect in warfare

i remember watching a tv documentary where they talked about some ancient battle between two forces on opposite sides of a river shooting cannon rounds that would bounce on the water to extend their range, but i can't recall nor find any details about it. anybody heard about it? or did i dream? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.127.94.7 (talk) 14:06, 15 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Distance Records

As the Easdale, Scotland competition is about distance, it would be interesting to know what distance holds the record. Colin McLarty (talk) 22:45, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Number of Skips Records

I read that as recent as 2007 the record stood at 51 skips. This makes me wonder whether the nearly doubled number of skips in recent records may not be mostly due to better high-speed camera technology than to the dexterity of the thrower. --BjKa (talk) 11:49, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Long article about skipping and a skipper, Kurt Steiner

https://www.outsideonline.com/outdoor-adventure/water-activities/stone-skipping-kurt-steiner/?sponsored=0&position=10&scheduled_corpus_item_id=9feedc97-81b9-4a70-bd7d-9c22aeaa7267%3Futm_medium%3Demail&sponsored=0

Might be of use in expanding the article 164.47.179.32 (talk) 19:35, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Names needs more references

Looking at the names section, most of the names given don't have a reference. Does anybody have any reliable sources to back up the names given? Autarch (talk) 17:11, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Mention of mizu kiri in the intro?

Why is a variety of stone skipping mentioned in the intro and not as a subtopic? I'll elect to move it or remove it on the next few days. Plebiano (talk) 20:22, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

re: reversion of edit removing in popular culture section

Hey there, still new to this so not intending this as something to be weirdly rceived or anything but figured I'd query @Randy_Kryn regarding his recent reversion of edit (with the intention of avoiding an edit war), why the grounds of removing the in popular culture section (as well as the removal of a regional name from the top introductory paragraphy) on account of its longevity within the page a valid grounds for reversion? It seems fancrufty at best. Furthermore, there are other movies with stone skipping scenes, and they don't make this (not that I'm arguing for their inclusion, but dedicating a section to it is a decision.)

Again, new to this.

Cheers Plebiano (talk) 20:08, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Plebiano, and welcome to Wikipedia. The Amelie sourced (The Guardian) mention may be the most prominent stone skipping scenes in film history. If you have other character defining examples, please include them. Nothing wrong with popular culture sections in articles, they are common, notable, and when a good one appears, such as this, it gives credence to the subject. Thanks for following up on your concern. Randy Kryn (talk) 22:07, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey @Randy Kryn!

Thanks for your prompt response. I'm sold on your reasoning at this time.

Enjoy your evening!

Cheers, Plebiano (talk) 22:17, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Plebiano, you're welcome. I can't leave this discussion without recommending the film Amelie if you haven't seen it yet (if you haven't, consider yourself lucky, as you still have it to view!). Randy Kryn (talk) 22:58, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]