User talk:PericlesofAthens/Archive 8

dialog vs dialogue in Ancient Egyptian literature

Hi, you said in a edit summary of Ancient Egyptian literature: "Laments, discourses, dialogues, and prophecies: ?? Is this a British way to spell this? I've never seen this before. I'd like to be consistent, though, since "dialogue" can be found above". I changed most instances of 'dialogue' to 'dialog' because my browser's spell-checker (SeaMonkey), set to US English, preferred the latter to the former. However, checking the Manual of Style, i see that both are acceptable in US English. Under the table is: "# dialogue vs dialog: In a non-technical context, the spelling dialogue is preferred in American English. In Webster's dictionary, dialogue is given first, and Chambers also indicates dialog is less used in North America". Thanks for noticing; I'll change it back now. Cheers, and happy editing. Edit: I see you've done it already, thanks. Baffle gab1978 (talk) 17:52, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Review

May I ask the Wikipedia-Chinese-related-article-expect to review the article Chinese classifier? It needs a bit of polishing. GeometryGirl (talk) 13:50, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Re: barnstar

Thanks! Coming from the king of difficult FAs (Han Dynasty, Ancient Egyptian literature, and other enormous topics) this really means a lot! rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 17:54, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Hasty move of MUL.APIN

Reason at Talk:Mul.Apin. ... said: Rursus (mb_ork³) 08:24, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Today's FA

Congrats on Today's FA!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.65.20.75 (talk) 00:06, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. I was kind of hoping they would show Han Dynasty instead, since that one was recently featured and I put a lot more research effort into it. Oh well, I suppose this is just as good.--Pericles of Athens^Talk 00:08, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

COngratulations on getting your FA to the main page.Teeninvestor (talk) 16:41, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Go you! Hopefully Han will show up soon too. Cheers! Scapler (talk) 19:08, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Song Dynasty on the main page

Dear PericlesofAthens, today Song Dynasty is featured on the main page. After analyzing the history of Song Dynasty, I found that you are the main author of that article. Nice work. :-) AdjustShift (talk) 22:47, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Yes, by your detective skills, you have found me out! I'm the prime suspect of the crime of writing Song Dynasty. And I would have gotten away with it too, if it wasn't for you meddling kids! Lol. In all seriousness thanks for the comment; I appreciate it greatly. :) --Pericles of Athens^Talk 23:06, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome. AdjustShift (talk) 23:30, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Human eating human

PoA, what you think? Arilang ^talk 05:36, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Song military organization

My original source for my contributions on the Song military was Bai Shouyi's Outline History of China, a book that I unfortunately no longer possess. I will order it by interlibrary loan and put up page number cites for my assertions, but it will take about a week. If you feel like taking down my edits in the meantime, go ahead, but I am confident that my assertions will be proven correct in the long run.

My apologies for the poor formatting of the ChinaKnowledge citation; thank you for correcting it. Pirate Dan (talk) 17:38, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Another must read article

http://news.boxun.com/news/gb/intl/2009/08/200908162113.shtml

Please see commons:Chinese Expeditionary Force Arilang ^talk 21:09, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

A Female Peasant Emperor, Chen Shuozhen

Check this article out

[1] --Lennlin (talk) 03:33, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Ha! I'm the first to congratulate you!

Congratulations on another FA! I'm glad I was able to play a role (albeit small) in a few of them. Cheers! Scapler (talk) 05:50, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! Ancient Egyptian literature looks pretty spiffy with that new bronze star at the top right corner. Oh, and it's a well-written article too. Lol. Cheers and thanks for your help.--Pericles of Athens^Talk 06:28, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Hey

Hey, love your articles, especially the ones on the Chinese dynasties. Do you have another one planned next? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.69.60.50 (talk) 14:54, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Unfortunately, no. I plan on going into semi-retirement and will only make small contributions from here on out. I've gotten enough featured articles under my belt; I think it's time to let someone else do this work for the public good! Plus, I'm more busy these days, so I have less time to devote to Wiki. Thank you for taking an interest in my articles! Cheers.--Pericles of Athens^Talk 23:21, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Greco-Roman economy

I was always under the impression that in ancient Greece and Rome, the agricultural husbandmen and craftsmen were slaves and dependants of the aristocracy(citizens), who owned most of the land and shops. Did this situation(had it been correct) continue into the Byzantine Empire, say, of the ninth and tenth centuries?(or did the Byzantines adopt the feudal system of Western Europe?).Teeninvestor (talk) 14:30, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Bias at Second Sino-Japanese war

Some guy tries to argue that the ROC didn't win the Second sino Japanese war and tries to revert my edits when I added that ROC was victorious in WWII.Teeninvestor (talk) 22:11, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

I hope you like this one:

Arilang ^talk 00:00, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Nominating Economic history of China (Pre-1911) for FA

Wish me luck!Teeninvestor (talk) 15:19, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Can you check some of the Alt text at the images because one of the users based his oppose on what he called the "inappropriatenes" of the alt text. Could you please add some more ALT text and clarify it? It seems they're raising a furor about ALT text, but none of the other FA's I see have ALT text(including recently featured articles).Teeninvestor (talk) 16:56, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Hey, does the ALT viewer have a delay or what? Some of the alt text you added still hasn't shown up in the alt text viewer. Strange.Teeninvestor (talk) 18:06, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Do you know any scholarly sources that say China was the largest economy for the past two millenia, til 1800 CE? There's already some but Madalibi disputes that on the FAC. I've already changed it though but I'd be surprised if there were no scholarly sources that indicate so obvious a fact.Teeninvestor (talk) 12:56, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi Eric and Teen. Just to make things clear, I'm not necessarily disputing the claim that China had the largest economy in the world for most of the past 2000 years. But I want it to be better referenced. For now, the references are to an editorial by Chris Patten in the Financial Times and to three magazine articles about Chinese economic development in the last few decades. I don't think this is enough for a featured article. If the article said "China had one of the largest economies in the world until the nineteenth century," I would barely need a reference. But the current claim is stronger and therefore needs stronger references. Cheers, Madalibi (talk) 02:02, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Can you help me edit out some of the links in the article later? User:Tony1 complained about overlinking.Teeninvestor (talk) 13:25, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

FAC going disastrously

From the looks of it, this article seems like it won't pass because saying China had a large economy is a peacock term and it has thousands of "redundancies". It disappoints me how some users take advantage of FAC process to impose their own views.Teeninvestor (talk) 02:49, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Happy Mao

Happy people

PoA, a happy guy among happy women, what a happy scene. You bet Chiang Kai-shek would envy this until he turned green. Arilang ^talk 22:08, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Cui Bai painting interpretation

Hello,

I was going to upload a couple of good, high resolution images of Cui Bai's paintings, so I checked the article on him, which you edited in March 2008. I was kind of puzzled to see your description of his Magpies and Hare. Could you maybe provide a source for the "Double Happiness" interpretation? Because really, I mean, the bird on the branch looks hostile to me.. and there's wind blowing in the dry grass, etc.; nothing at all to suggest happiness. As a matter of fact, the short description at the National Palace Museum website only suggests the straightforward reading. I don't read or speak Chinese, and really have very very little knowledge of the culture in question, so forgive me if I missed something obvious. --Jashiin (talk) 19:27, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Hello

Hello since you are interested in ancient warfare , i would like to ask you if you would like to contribute here Dacian warfare.Thankou.Megistias (talk) 19:43, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Have a look

支持 全國政協委員潘慶林建議恢復使用正體字 Arilang ^talk 10:14, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Anti-Ming bias in China????

I've immigrated out of China since I was six, but I've noticed that Chinese seem to have a negative perception of the Ming and some even support the barbaric rule of the Yuan and Qing over the Ming. This is not only unjust but also a great insult to Chinese culture; Ming is one of China's golden ages, perhaps the greatest one, better than even Han and Tang. If Ming had not been taken over by Manchu, perhaps it will be Whites immigrating to China rather than me immigrating to Canada. Have a good time editing!Teeninvestor (talk) 20:33, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Have fun in China! It is the only place where you can pick 0.5m wide noodle soups for 40 cents(Americna dollars), 5 pounds of cake for 80 cents(American dollars) and 4 bowls of gigantic dumplings for 70 cents(American dollars). Also check out the numerous Huo-guo and restaurants; you should have a very good meal for less than 100 yuan(16 american dollar) Be careful of your weight though; if you eat all the food available in China, McDonalds may seem like a diet by the time you come back home.Teeninvestor (talk) 13:30, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

The art of Persia and China

Hello my friend. The other day I learned about a book you might like. It is called The Encounter of Persia with China: Research into Cultural Contacts Based on Fifteenth Century Persian Pictorial Materials. I contacted the publisher in Japan because I could not find it locally and they directed me to their archive where you can download it in pdf format for free. Here is the link:

http://ir.minpaku.ac.jp/dspace/handle/10502/469?locale=en

I had problems opening the file from the site, so I just right clicked the "view/open" link and hit "save link" and downloaded it to my computer.

The book has over one hundred examples of Chinese paintings and Persian paintings inspired by Chinese artists. Enjoy. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 00:24, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

TFA

Congratulations on another main page run! Cheers! Scapler (talk) 05:44, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Best of Bart Simpson

• http://hi.baidu.com/02708002/blog/item/f3bf1e62caf349d58db10d92.html

PoA, best wish for your trip in China, at least you know China more than Homer Simpson, Hehehe. Arilang ^talk 07:24, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Song Dynasty at FTRC

I am sorry to say i have nominated the Song Dyntasy FT for removal, due to the lack of List of Song Emperors - rst20xx (talk) 15:09, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Template citation in Italian War of 1542–1546

See, there are certain people that grumble at my changes of citation styles. It's weird. --bender235 (talk) 12:46, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

You are very good.

I think you've managed to create another outstanding list. I do have one little question though. For sake of consistancy, do you think List of Song Emperors should be moved to List of Emperors of the Song Dynasty to match List of Emperors of the Han Dynasty? Rreagan007 (talk) 17:04, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

To be honest I'm not entirely sure. I can't think of a reason why it would cause a problem to just move it even after you have submitted it to FLC, but you'll have to ask someone at FLC to make sure. You could always just wait until after it is promoted and then move it.Rreagan007 (talk) 17:13, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

I think I'll simply move it afterwards, then. I don't think anyone will raise any substantial objections to such an inconsequential move.--Pericles of Athens^Talk 17:25, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Must watch video

我的团长我的团 My Chief and My RegimentThe best Chinese TV drama I have ever watched. Merrill's Marauders is in the plot too, not a small part. Arilang ^talk 08:12, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

PoA, I have a crazy idea:

• Introduce My Chief and My Regiment to US Defense Department.
• Apply for a government fund, the reasons can be say "Project My Chief and My Regiment", say to provide English subtitles.
• Looking at the prospect of commercialization, say special tours of the location, specially commons:Salween River Bridge, hopefully one day it achieve the fame of Bridge over River Kwai.
• These ideas if they can be achieved, then you can write books, or screen play, then turn it into movie, or prime time TV series, you would be rich!
• According to what I read on internet chat, some battles had been written into West Point text book, may be you can verify it? Arilang ^talk 16:40, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

One year once "Hello" ? :]

Hello Pericles,

Please can you take a look at this new section : Geography_of_China#In_History. It's, in short, an history of the Han expansion. I made it from memory, but my knowledge abut the Song-Yuan-Ming-Qing dynasty is really light, and may need some corrections (does Korea was occupied a long time by Yuan forces ? etc.)

Aftwerwhat, please remember :

• Cambridge may be a nice place to make a doctorate on Chinese history ;)
• China and Taiwan grant language scholarships for good students, to learn Chinese one, or 2-3 years. Candidacy are about early February, every year. Information provide on respective embassy's website.
• Soon, you will have to spend 2 years to learn Chinese, and to speak it like a God ! ò_ó

Good continuation ! Yug (talk) 11:15, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

NowCommons: File:Tiangong Kaiwu Chain Pumps.jpg

File:Tiangong Kaiwu Chain Pumps.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:Tiangong Kaiwu Chain Pumps.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[File:Tiangong Kaiwu Chain Pumps.jpg]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 08:41, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Egyptian music

Wow, that's amazing that we both listen to that music on YouTube!! We both have good taste in music and article writing! (This is Blofeld BTW)... Himalayan 22:05, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

List advice

Hello-I know this is presumptuous, so I won't be offended by a brush-off. The diligent editor JayHenry has been banging away on List of recessions in the United States, and is somewhat flummoxed by the FLC process. To me it looks great, but I'm also unfamiliar with FLC. Since I remember being amazed by your work on List of Chinese inventions, I was hoping you could advise on this list. CRETOG8(t/c) 02:57, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for responding. I saw your "semi-retired" notice, but decided it was worth asking in any case. Enjoy your retirement! CRETOG8(t/c) 03:02, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Song

Hooray! A featured topic saved for the benefit of all. Cheers! Scapler (talk) 22:36, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Perusia

The proscriptions were in 43 BC, by Octavian and Antony working together. Perusia was sacked, and its leaders sacrificed, two years later, as part of a war by Octavian against Antony's family. In short, they have no connexion whatsoever.

The Roman Civil Wars are confusing, I grant; but you have failed to understand them, and have failed to follow what indications your sources would have given you. This shows in the unhappy article. Please sit down, get an interlibrary loan of Syme, and read more carefully. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 18:20, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Hi

Hi, please have a look at Lou Jing, may be you can add some comments? Arilang ^talk 14:05, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

A discussion that may interest you

Hello. Please read this discussion. It turns out a publisher in India is ripping thousands of articles from Wikipedia and publishing them in extremely expensive books. I figured you might be interested in this since several of your articles have been published too. The village pump states it's perfectly legal because of the GNUFDL, however, I don't think it is. The publisher cannot properly attribute the article's authors, which is required of the license. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 17:31, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Image for History of China infobox

ZhaoYun's fight at Changban

How do you feel about a detail from ZhaoYun's fight at Changban as the lead image for the History of China info box? LK (talk) 13:44, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

What are inaccurate information on Augustus?

Hi, I'm curious as to why the FA article of Augustus has to have the ugly tag of factual accuracy is disputed. at the top of the article? If only some portion of the article has been disputed, I'd like to remove the tag, and then put a small section template to pertinent section(s). --Caspian blue 07:13, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Han Dynasty - front and center

So, Han Dynasty gets to be TFA tomorrow? Awesome. Cheers! Scapler (talk) 03:04, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Tang Dynasty

I have engaged a procedure for amending Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Tang Dynasty.

• See Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Amendment#Request to amend prior case: Tang Dynasty.

Naturally, the process requires me to notify you. --Tenmei (talk) 00:57, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Nathan Drake

I know it is not really your area of expertise or necessarily your cup of tea, but as the editor who I respect most out of all the ones I have had the pleasure of working with, I would appreciate it if you would leave some comments on the peer review of Nathan Drake (character), a video game character article I created recently. The review is at Wikipedia:Peer review/Nathan Drake (character)/archive1. Thank you and Cheers! Scapler (talk) 19:43, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Talk:Comparison between Roman and Han Empires

You are invited to join the discussion on the talk page.Teeninvestor (talk) 18:18, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

FAC

Hey PericlesofAthens! Add me as an email contact. By the way, can you give a few words and input at Economic history of China (pre-1911) FAC? Thanks.

Architecture of the Song Dynasty delisted as GA...

...hence this. Just letting you know - rst20xx (talk) 19:19, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

Culture of the Song Dynasty

I was looking at this article in the context of the GA sweeps. I compared some of hte text in the lead to text on this webpage: [2] and found copyvio. Example: WP entry: "refinements of the Tang ideal of the universal man, who combined the qualities of scholar, poet, painter, and statesman that pursued interests in historical writings, painting, calligraphy, and the collection of antiquarian items such as hard-glazed porcelain and Chinese inkstones." Chinavoc: "Included in these refinements were not only the Tang ideal of the universal man, who combined the qualities of scholar, poet, painter, and statesman, but also historical writings, painting, calligraphy, and hard-glazed porcelain."
The chinavoc site says it is copright no more recent than 2007, suggesting text from it may have been used in the WP article rather than the other way around. Have you any comments on this? Cheers, hamiltonstone (talk) 00:54, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Emperor Gaozu of Han

Hi, I see you've contributed heavily to Han Dynasty so I believe you must be quite familiar with the events in Emperor Gaozu's reign. I've basically rewritten the sections about his early life and the Chu–Han contention. I'm not very familiar with the events in his reign, about how he contributed to the Han economy and the policies he introduced. Can you help me on that? Please take a look and see if you can provide some suggestions for improvements. Thanks. _LDS (talk) 05:13, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Your input

Your input would be appreciated at Talk:Qing_and_Yuan_Dynasties_debate#Propose_for_deletion [sic] initiated by LLTimes (talk · contribs) since you appear to be interested in solving the problems in "Qing and Yuan Dynasties debate" article. --LLTimes (talk) 06:50, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

GA Reassessment of Song Dynasty articles

I have recently reviewed the GA status of 3 articles on the Song Dynasty (History, culture, economy) as part of the WP:SWEEPS process. All three have retained their status, as they are highly informative articles.... however, each has a problem with the lead. The Culture of the Song Dynasty in particular has a poor lead, which another reviewer may deem as sufficient to delist the article at a later stage. I attempted to have a go expanding it, but was not very sure what to include so left it as is. If possible, I would suggest you expand the lead. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me. ✽ Juniper§ Liege ^(TALK) 22:35, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Tang Dynasty

Thank you, Pericles of Athens, for your work which I think really improved the opening paragraphs. I have just done a little more tightening up which I hope will meet your approval and that of A. Parrot. Please feel free, though, to make any adjustments you think will improve things further. Thank you both for your contributions and civility. Sincerely, John Hill (talk) 00:24, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Hello my friend! I had not seen you active in while, so I figured I would say hi. But then I noticed from your contribs that you have been a busy little bee. I guess I only have a few of your articles on my watch list.

I see you have dealt with John Hill. He sure is a nice fellow. Have you read his recently published translation of the Hou Hanshu? It is amazing. Best regards. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 16:59, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks!

Hi Pericles, thanks for your enthusiatic adoption of Chinese coin images! I have also placed some at Talk:Yuan Dynasty, and since you seem interested I'll also prepare some Song stuff (very rich coinage indeed). Best regards Per Honor et Gloria ✍ 16:33, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Hey!

I notice you have returned to wikipedia after quite a long break. I've taken a long break too (and will probably continue), due to SAT (getting 2300 needs a lot of work). Anyways, the only changes since you were back is that Comparison between Roman and Han Empires has been basically deleted for two months and is only now beginning to be restored. Oh ya, and Tenmei was blocked and banned from editing until he has a mentor. Teeninvestor (talk) 17:30, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Hi

Hi, been long time since last time talking to you, how is your study? Are you now in China or USA? Please have a look at this, might be interesting:

http://club.kdnet.net/newbbs/dispbbs.asp?boardid=1&star=9&replyid=5817667&id=3002628&skin=0&page=1

文 章提交者：monachus 加帖在 猫眼看人 【凯迪网络】 http://www.kdnet.net

汉语的缺陷 及给中国文化的影响早有定论，为民族自尊的原因而只在学术界小范围内讨论。

1 语言，语法不精确，导致 不能建 立有清晰内涵和外延界定的抽象概念。 而概念的缺乏直接干扰中国文化逻辑学的产生。自然也就没有逻辑思维了。

2 象形文字没有进一步转为字母化的符号体系。缺乏丰富的符号体系来表征抽象概念，符号工具的缺乏使得中国古代数学家已经非常接近微积分，而最终无法创造微积 分的原因， 符号对概念的抽象替代-“算 符”。也是现代量子力学的基石。

3 长期接触图像化的象形文字，使中国人的大脑长于形象思维， 弱于抽象思维。长于艺术，文学，人际关系，弱于自然科学，法律。

文章提交者：monachus 加帖在 猫眼看人 【凯迪网络】 http://www.kdnet.net

符 号不仅可以代表概念，还可以代表概念之间由逻辑关系而形成的一个相对固定的结合体，量子力学中的算符就起这种功能

丰富的符号体系造就现 代科学。

象形文字的汉字让中国人无法形成符号体系。

另外， 音形不联系的汉字难学难记， 没有三年艰苦的学习难以读书看报，中国的文盲数量比例非常高。

而表音体系能说即能读， 儿童可以更早的接触文字信息，智力开发也更早。

汉 字难学 ，使得儿童接触同样数量的文字信息比表音文字教育体系下的儿童有1-2年的迟滞，而这1-2年的迟滞对智力发育带来的危害非常大。 Arilang ^talk 06:31, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Qin's wars of unification

Hi, I see you've contributed to the article before. I've expanded the article within the past few days and was wondering if you have any suggestions on how to promote the article to A-Class or GA status. Your help would be appreciated. Thanks. _LDS (talk) 08:09, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for your suggestions. I've just completed my A levels not too long ago and will be going for (compulsory) military conscription soon, so it'll be quite some time before I enter university. And I don't think I have access to any scholarly database of articles or JSTOR at the moment. I can still visit some public libraries though, but I doubt I can find any really good sources. Once again, thanks for your ideas. _LDS (talk) 04:53, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Hi again

Please have a look Chinese Characters and the Greek Alphabet Eric A. Havelock Vassar College may be this really is the reason why Chinese is so backward on science? Arilang ^talk 20:32, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

The sound of ancient Chinese

李白 月下獨酌 中古漢語朗讀 Arilang ^talk 22:21, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Hi

Please have a look and give some comments:User:Arilang1234/Comparison between written English and written Chinese Draft Arilang ^talk 06:27, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

talkback

Hello, PericlesofAthens. You have new messages at Mbz1's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hello, PericlesofAthens. You have new messages at Mbz1's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Thank you

Thank you very much for the barnstar. I was happy to be able to help you. Please feel free to ask me, if you need more help with the images. Good luck with the article.--Mbz1 (talk) 21:38, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Parthia

I would be happy to copyedit it, probably starting either late tonight or tomorrow. I knew that you couldn't stay away from Wikipedia or its sometimes woeful coverage of historical topics. かんぱい！ Scapler (talk) 13:29, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

I have just begun the copyedit, and have done the lead. There is one sentence giving me trouble however: "The Arsacids were titled the 'King of Kings', as a claim to be the heirs to the Achaemenid Empire; indeed, they accepted many local kings as vassals where the Achaemenids would have had centrally appointed, albeit largely autonomous, satraps". I am not 100% clear as to the precise meaning, my main concern being that the subject who is called "King of Kings" and appoints satraps is not clear. I have left a hidden message in the article detailing this as well. かんぱい！ Scapler (talk) 13:50, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

I believe I just finished, and I apologize for any times that I misinterpreted what you wrote. The topic was interesting, as I confess I knew very little of Parthian Empire prior to reading and copyediting it. かんぱい！ Scapler (talk) 23:27, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Ancient Egyptian literature

Just a note that Eubulides (talk · contribs) hasnt edited in nearly a month, and he doesnt seem to be showing signs of coming back despite multiple people pleading for him to. It might be good to try to find someone else to help on FAC if you know anyone who can. —Soap— 17:03, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia_talk:Alternative_text_for_images seems to be the page where the discussion happens, and this thread may be the one that started the chaos. —Soap— 17:49, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, I forgot to reply earlier, so Im just saying that I am not really familiar at all with the FAC process myself, and the people who I know that do work there seem to be a little bit confused about alt text, so my recommendation is to just wait for the article to be nominated and ask questions there. Sorry I cant be more helpful. —Soap— 12:14, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Chinese armies (pre-1911)

Excuse me, can you give a look over the article and perhaps improve it? Gun Powder Ma is wandering around it again, and right now I'm too busy to deal with it. Can you help me look it over, maybe add some sources, validate a few claims, etc.. (since I think you have temple and the other sources, while I don't have them right now). Also, nice to see that you are active again.Teeninvestor (talk) 20:14, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

By the way, I was surprised that there was no article on Jia Sidao, a famous late Song Challcenor. I have made a stub there, but I won't be able to improve it much. Maybe you can do a little work on it? By the way, how is your Parthian Empire article going?Teeninvestor (talk) 21:45, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

By the way, do you know anything about the history of the salt monopoly in China? your article on Song society says that Wang Anshi established a salt monopoly, but in my knowledge the salt monopoly was in place during the late western Han, the six dynasties, the late Tang, all of the Song, and the early Ming. Wouldn't have the tea and salt monopolies already been in place by the time of Wang Anshi's challcenorship?Teeninvestor (talk) 19:58, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Also, do you have any reliable source on the late Song hyperinflation (i think this would be a good addition to the economy of song dynasty article). As always, when the state gets control of the money, it becomes a mean of robbery. I am curious though as to whether the hyperinflation really picked up after the 1230's, or whether the paper money was already depreciating throughout the 11th and 12th centuries.Teeninvestor (talk) 20:56, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Pericles. I knew the salt monopoly was abolished during the Later Han (which was laissez faire), and during the early Tang and most of the Ming. It seems that the Song policy towards the salt monopoly was not consistent. If the salt monopoly was continously abolished and reinserted, it must not have been terribly efficient (I imagine the black market probably supplied a good deal of the market). As for the cambridge source, I would love to have it, but unfortunately i only have the cambridge history of China volumes on the Han, Ming, the northern barbarian regimes during Song, and Qing. I will try to access the Song volume. Teeninvestor (talk) 20:56, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Nvm, i got the Song volume. I must say it is a paradox how rapidly the Song army, built up by Wang Anshi through half a century, collapsed so rapidly to the Jurchens. This collapse seems a great mystery to me (as the Ming, Tang, and even the earlier Jin army, which faced the Wu Hu, fared better). And you were right: salt was only nationalized during reigns of Shenzong and Huizong. By the way, I will be taking SAT in 1 day. If I get what I want (2300+), I may end up coming over to the US ivy league! if this scenario plays out, I might be able to achieve my goal of working in finance/banking: then my username will become a genuinely true username (except for the teen part) lol!Teeninvestor (talk) 21:13, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

no problem. By the way, can you help me a bit on this issue of User:Tosses? This user is removing material repeatedly in economic history of China (pre-1911) and Chinese armies (pre-1911) with claims like "it's the truth" and publications like the economist are "unreliable". The user is also engaged in an edit war on the article Jews. I am currently in violation of 3RR, so I can't do anything about it. Teeninvestor (talk) 22:07, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Request for comment

Hi, Pericles. This may be more "recent" history than your usual subject matter, but given that you are an expert in Chinese history I was wondering if you'd care to comment on this FAC: here. The last FAC for this article didn't really get any reviews, so this time I am sort of spamming people—since you are an experienced editor who's knowledgeable in this area I figured you would be a good choice to review it. Thanks, rʨanaɢ (talk) 15:45, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Dante

Added and rewrote some on Dante Alighieri, I agree the article needed a lift in quality and critical level and that Boccaccio is a crappy foundation when it comes to Dante's life and works. Will add some source notes soon. Strausszek (talk) 10:40, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Kudos!

Fantastic work on the Parthian Empire article, just in case nobody else said so. Glad to see you still doing excellent work at WP.Waygugin (talk) 13:44, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

FAC

I didn't think it was a bad article; rather, I feel I just don't have the knowledge or the aptitude to engage with it. Tony (talk) 15:18, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Request for peer review on article about Emperor Pedro II of Brazil.

Hello, Pericles! I've noticed that you are a quite successful editor who managed to have many of your articles raised to featured status. If you have interest and time, could you take a look at Pedro II of Brazil and share some thoughts on what it is lacking to be nominated to Featured article? It is about the Brazilian Emperor who reigned for 58 years. I know it is not the subject you are most interested in, but give it a try. I am quite sure you are going to enjoy reading the article. Here is the the peer review page: Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Peer review/Pedro II of Brazil. Regards, --Lecen (talk) 18:46, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Thank you, my friend. Take your time. Your opinion is very important to me. Thank you very much once again, --Lecen (talk) 22:07, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Pericles, do you still plan to review the article or did you give up? If the latter is true, don't worry, you helped a lot and I am grateful. Regards, --Lecen (talk) 13:32, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Parthian Empire

Congratulations on yet another shiny star to add to your collection. I just achieved my first one, so now I can finally appreciate the relief of passing the nomination process. Anyway, it was a pleasure to be a part of yet another one of your creations, and I am glad to see you continue to write them, even in "retirement". Keep it up. かんぱい！ Scapler (talk) 13:35, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Congratulations on making Parthian Empire a featured article. By the way, I have another question; your article on Han economy states that Eastern Han "heavily taxed" private entrepreneurs to make up for lost revenue, but didn't Emperor Guangwu lower the land ta as well as return the salt and iron industries to private control? I had the impression that Eastern Han had lower taxes than western Han (especially with the traditional chinese tax exemption for the literati), with the exception of course of the reigns of Emperors Huan and Ling. Teeninvestor (talk) 23:43, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

WP:WBFAN

Look for Harris Theater (Chicago, Illinois) at WP:FAC before speaking so fast.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 15:24, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Harris just got promoted.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 00:43, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

Re:Arsacids

Hi, I would like to know a direct answer for 1. how should I understand this edit summary? 2. Western Historical Xorasan is northeastern today-Iran. Do you have any doubt about this? Xashaiar (talk) 00:45, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

OK, To clarify: "northeastern Greater Iran" is almost Tajikestan. Your link has an error of +few hundreds kilometres. Xashaiar (talk) 00:51, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Well, I do not care about Islamic Republic, what I care is that "link must make sense". If you want we may solve the problem like this: keep everything as my revision, but do not give any link. One more point: you are confusing the "solely cultural concept" of Greater Iran with geopolitical concept of Iranshahr (by means of a proto-reconstruction). In fact by Greater Iran in your comment in my talk page as well as your edit summary, you can mean only this pre-Sasanid reconstructed Iranshahr. My point is that Iran's current page was the only page that could cover both concepts. Regards. Xashaiar (talk) 15:04, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Marian reforms

There is some specialized scholarship on these reforms:

• M.J.V. Bell, "Tactical reform in the Roman Republican army", Historia 14.4 (1965), 404-422
• P.A. Brunt, "The army and the land in the Roman revolution", Journal of Roman Studies 52 (1962), 69-86
• L.J.F. Keppie, The Making of the Roman Army: from Republic to Empire (London, 1984)
• R.E. Smith, Service in the Post-Marian Roman Army (Manchester University Press, 1958)

And check out Adrian Goldsworthy. Regards Gun Powder Ma (talk) 21:59, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Ipuwer Papyrus

Have you been watching this recently? Dougweller (talk) 06:12, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Keep up the good work

Read a bunch of articles that you contributed to today. Just wanted to say 'keep up the good work! Intranetusa (talk) 03:29, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Reason for Great Divergence

This may have come to your attention already, but I have just discovered a very interesting fact about the Qing Dynasty. During the reigns of the Qing rulers, they greatly prohibited commerce, even going as far as to prohibit mining completely (with the exception of Yunnan). You can't have an industrial revolution without coal, no? I think this factor alone is enough to know why China stagnated under the Manchus. Teeninvestor (talk) 00:30, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

I would have thought the restrictions on mines during Qing was common knowledge (at least among historians!). It is mentioned in the Chinese wikipedia of the Qing Dynasty article, and this google search in Chinese will probably lead you to discover more sources. 1 Apparently, the prohibition was lifted during the Qianlong era, but reinstated afterwards (allegedly for reasons of fengshui, though Ming and Song had booming mine industries). It was not complete, sparing Yunnan and several remote southwestern provinces. However, alone is a cause of the great divergence! Without the opening of new mines, industry stagnated, and China went into a "malthusian trap" as farmers went onto progressively more marginal land. Even when private mining was allowed (such as during the Qianlong era) it was greatly restricted compared with Song and Ming (of course, the purges which murdered thousands of scholars, the destruction caused by the invasion itself (e.g. rape of Yangzhou), and the prohibitions on foreign trade and seafaring also contirbuted to this stagnation). On a side note, although Later Han did impose higher taxes on merchants, it seems from the historical record that they were a great deal more prosperous than former han (their level of prosperity was probably not again achieved until late Tang/early Song).Teeninvestor (talk) 13:27, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

Some links on prohibitions on private mining:

• 1
• 2
• 3
• Myers, H. Ramon and Yeh-Chien Wang. (2003). "Economic developments, 1644-1800", In Willard Peterson (ed.), The Cambridge History of China: Volume 9: The Ch'ing Empire to 1800, 563-647. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 9780521243346. (see pg 608-09) for details.

Teeninvestor (talk) 13:33, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

Hello? Your thoughts on the effects of this mining prohibition?Teeninvestor (talk) 22:21, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Although earlier governments had undertaken interventionist policies, Qing's policies were arguably the most systematic (bans on overseas commerce, mining, nationalization of salt, requisition of land, e.g.), and ones that lasted for the longest period. Although the policies of Wang Mang, Wang Anshi, and the Mongols were also just as destructive or even more so(basically a form of modern neo-mercantilism/socialism), they were very short in duration compared to the Qing. Thus, I think Qing's policies had the greatest effect on the Great Divergence.Teeninvestor (talk) 21:32, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

I would appreciate you helping me to add some sources to the articles Great Divergence and Chinese armies (pre-1911), as some sources I do not have on hand. Also, I would like to hear what you think of the results of the mining prohibition(I find it very curious you did not know of this).Teeninvestor (talk) 23:30, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

I have just finished Pomeranz's book, and it is very exciting. It has confirmed what I have always thought: Per capita incomes in China probably exceeded Europe as a whole and even England until 1800; considering English per capita income is estimated around 1,800 or so, and that Late Ming per capita incomes probably equalled and most likely exceeded that of the Mid-Qing, this would mean that by 1600 Chinese living standards (across the whole empire; not just Yangtze) were roughly equal to 18th century England or contemporary Holland! Considering economic changes such as the decline of heavy industry afterwards, it seems the interventionist policies of Qing rulers are to a large extent to blame.Teeninvestor (talk) 19:08, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Chinese economic reform

I have revamped this article. Would you care to help add pictures, reformat the bibliography, alt text, etc? I am planning to expand it until it is a GA or FA, which it should be cause of the importance of this topic.Teeninvestor (talk) 01:55, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

History of painting

Hi Pericles - your comments here [3] will be appreciated...Modernist (talk) 21:37, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

GA reassessment

An article that you have been involved in editing, Romano-Chinese relations has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments here . If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Gun Powder Ma (talk) 09:51, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Dzungarian Gate

My thanks for your very helpful edits to the article, and I hope you like the picture of Zhang Qian you inspired me to add.μηδείς (talk) 00:47, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

HuoLongJing

Hi Pericles. I am heavily skeptical on a picture shown on the HuolongJing page. It shows musketeers in 3 line drill formation. However, I am heavily skeptical that matchlock muskets were known during the Hongwu period. Needham's book on gunpowder weapons, claims that matchlock muskets were introduced after the 1500ds by Turks or Portuguese. Perhaps the illustration is from another manuel? Gnip (talk) 10:19, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Chinese armies (pre-1911)

I would like to hear your opinion on this dispute. Several editors have been disputing a claim from Joseph Needham's work.Teeninvestor (talk) 01:13, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Ya, I can see that. Maybe just help me expand the section on gunpowder weapons if you have time? And I'm still waiting for your response to the inquiry about Qing mining above, lol. It's been several weeks. Don't leave! Wikipedia will be a worse place without you (Though I will likely be leaving too if I do get into the ivy league; even if I don't, I doubt the top Canadian schools will let me have time to edit wiki.)Teeninvestor (talk) 00:27, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

I would think that this paranoia was expressed mostly by the Qing; remember that the modernist faction never gained power in China again after Emperor Wu(with the exception of maybe Wang Mang and Anshi), and afterwards China's policy was relatively laissez faire. During Ming times, private merchants were relatively free, perhaps not as much as the US during the laissez-faire pre-1929 era but certainly more than Europe at the time and any other times. As to court memorials about how miners could rebel, you are correct; Emperor Yongzheng explicitly banned numerous mines for "inciting disorder", including several mines that were worked by merchants in wealthy Ming-era Sichuan, contributing to that once great province's decline. I was surprised that you did not know about this, given that you were an East Asian history major; The "Mining debate" in the Qing Dynasty is one of the most famous events in Chinese history, on par with the Discourses on salt and iron; however, unlike that Han debate, the laissez-faire confucians ultimately lost this one, as Emperor Jiaqing reversed his father's policy and banned mines once and for all until China's inferiority was obvious.Teeninvestor (talk) 00:57, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Hongwu was certainly no liberal, but on the other hand he was a lot better than the Mongol khans, who virtually instituted state socialism by monopolizing almost every commodity. However, I think emperors like Hongwu, the Manchu rulers and Wu are the exception in Chinese history; confucianism's ideal of light taxation and corvee eventually ended up helping merchants, whether they liked them or not. Emperor Wen even abolished agricultural taxes for heavens sake, Emperor Guangwu's policies would have probably pleased Adam Smith (besides the looting by his generals and executions of suspected rebels), and by the end of the Ming Dynasty only about 30 percent of the population was even on the census and paying very light taxes (this is not including the literati, who was tax exempt and was more or less the local government for most peasants seeking to solve a dispute considering that there were only 15,000 MIng officials). This is a big contrast to say Diocletian, Philip V, and Louis XIV; as bad as the Manchu rulers were, remember that in Spain one-third of farmland was lying fallow and peasants starving because of the crown's aid to shepherding and in France people were being executed for wearing cloth not made by Louis's favorite guild! This is my favorite counter-example to those who still stick to that "oriental despotism" theory about China, lol. From a late Ming scholar's point of view, it's more like occidental despotism.Teeninvestor (talk) 01:34, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Oh ya, and while you're at it, can you make a statement on Chinese armies (pre-1911) on the reliability of Temple's work as GPM seems determined to claim Temple is a "Fringe author". There should be no doubt that this source is a reliable one.Teeninvestor (talk) 00:14, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

A very useful source

I have discovered a rendition of all the cambridge histories of China online in Chinese. The only problem is in translating these authors' names into English (sometimes their name is not provided at all!). All the else should be well. 1.Teeninvestor (talk) 02:20, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

I have copies of many of the volumes in English on my computer. Don't ask how I got them, it might not sit well with the copyright vigiliants on wiki :). The chinese versions don't offer the authors' titles and are not very useful for editing, but very useful for casual reading (I don't know about you, but a wall of Chinese text is easier to read than in English for me, despite having grown up in the west).Teeninvestor (talk) 02:37, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

GPM is trying to discredit Temple again. He inserted a claim that Europeans invented the cannon in 1326 right next to a picture of a Chinese hand cannon from 1288. Sigh. Link: 1. Can you please clear this up?Teeninvestor (talk) 15:05, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

Oh ya, I can't believe this article hasn't been created yet. Discourses on Salt and Iron. On a side note, are you sure the reformists were against the creation of large estates? Cause that's exactly what happened under Eastern Han when they were in power, and not necessarily a bad thing either. Large estates can coordinate capital and labor a lot better than self sufficient peasant households; indeed it is my belief that without large estates there will be little market agriculture, and thus little market for proto industrialization and industrialization.Teeninvestor (talk) 15:45, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

I reverted him. check the article history for details.Teeninvestor (talk) 15:53, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

I've expanded the discourses article somewhat. It is pretty good now.Teeninvestor (talk) 16:43, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

VPC

— raekyT 10:39, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

ANI

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Disruptive editing and other issues during RFC/U by User:Teeninvestor regarding an issue with which you have been involved. Thank you. Teeninvestor (talk) 01:21, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Another gold mine

This place is full of information on Chinese economic history. The amount of info here is incredible. I think with the info here you can bring all the ancient Chinese dynastic economy articles up to FA status without using any other source. Click on the individual tabs for articles on all the dynasties; the number of papers here (attributed) number in the thousands. By the way, I'm working on Qing conquest theory; maybe help a bit? By the way, also check out User:Teeninvestor/chart on premodern Chinese tax levels. What do you think I should name this article? Teeninvestor (talk) 14:43, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

(Postscript). I have created an article, Taxation in premodern China; you might want to include the information here on your FA's. I notice info on taxes is sorely missing. Btw, for the Jur'chen Jin and Yuan it would be easier to list what wasn't monopolized. lol.Teeninvestor (talk) 19:51, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

Maddison says that Needham's view deserves "serious consideration" and that Needham dated the date of the Chinese superiority "considerably back" (this is after he referred to a chart he made on GDP per capita, and then he stated that Needham disagreed, so its clear what they're talking about) to the 5th century BCE; according to Maddison, Needham based this on his research on agarian technology (after reading Temple+Needham I am greatly inclined to agree). Then he talks about why he disagrees. The work cited by Maddison is the Grand titrations by Needham. You should have access to this through JSTOR, lol. Maddison's book is also linked; go see for yourself. By the way, did you check out the other link I gave you?Teeninvestor (talk) 13:39, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Request your opinion on Talk:Roman metallurgy as GPM is trying to support an extremely high iron production per capita estimate for the Roman Empire (Higher than Han, Song, 1700 Europe and almost the same as Ming). I am wondering if you can get me some alternative estimates for the Roman iron industry.

Qing conquest theory

I wonder whether the theory merits an article separate from Great Divergence. Nev1 (talk) 18:19, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

Other theories about the Great Divergence have seperate articles, for example the high level equilibrium trap and oriental despotism.Teeninvestor (talk) 18:49, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

So what if other crap exists, I never said either of those theories merited an article. I'm not saying it should be nuked, but if it's dealt with properly in the article on the Great Divergence, what's the point of an article on the Qing conquest theory? Nev1 (talk) 18:52, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

The details on the theory is not explained well; only a summary exists in great divergence.Teeninvestor (talk) 19:14, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

Temple

There is another discussion regarding Temple's reliability here. 1. I invite you to comment as an expert.Teeninvestor (talk) 13:17, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Economic history of China (pre-1911)

Hi Pericles, as you've been significantly involved with editing the above article and are familiar with the area, I thought you should know that it's now undergoing a GA review (initiated by Gun Powder Ma). Teeninvestor, the main contributor to the article, is currently under editing restrictions which means Teeninvestor must "Avoid Gun Powder Ma. That means not talking to him, not talking about him and not editing the same articles and talkpages as him (within a month)". As a result the main contributor is unavailable to improve the article. Nev1 (talk) 16:12, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Potential goodbye

I am very disappointed with the results of my efforts here. I was naive enough to think that providing sources and playing by the rules would get everything done, but that was shattered here. I'm going to be trying to get Chinese economic reform to GA or FA, and then I may be gone. During my time on wikipedia, you are the only editor that I've seen that was always civil and tremondously productive, and you've always been knowledgable about the topic you've been doing. With regards to the GAR, I appreciate your help there, but the way the GA system works that article will probably be back to oriental despotism/stub stage very soon. I just have one request: can you email me so I can further contact you? I've always enjoyed our discussions on Chinese history, a topic that fascinates us both (you more than me as you chose it for your major!), and I'd like to continue that in an off-wiki forum.Teeninvestor (talk) 01:49, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

History of the Song Dynasty

Hi Pericles, Thanks for fixing my error in the History of the Song Dynasty article. It took me a while to figure this out - the Chinese Book of History article was linked to the English Book of Song article hence it looked like there were English versions of both. All the best. Philg88 ^contact 12:03, 22 May 2024 UTC [refresh]

Robert K. G. Temple is unreliable

Hello Pericles. A query on the reliable sources noticeboard overwhelmingly found Robert Temple to be an unreliable source on Chinese and world history which should not be used. I know you are short on time these days, but please make the removal of Temple from all your articles a top priority of your WP activity. Specifically, he has no place in community assessed articles such as List of Chinese inventions, Technology of the Song Dynasty and Science and Technology of the Han Dynasty etc. As their creator you know best what articles are affected. Regards Gun Powder Ma (talk) 09:03, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Science in the Middle Ages

Hi Pericles,

I followed up on your comments, and saw that you created most of the Chinese segment, which Jagged 85 later pasted into the Science in China article.

I'm replying on your page since I think the catalogue of achievements that you wrote and that Jagged dumped into the China article disturbed what seemed to be (from a first glance) a fairly coherent historical article on China and didn't contribute much to the Science in the Middle Ages article either. My point of view is that while we all fall into the trap of compiling such lists of discoveries, they detract from well written and well edited articles. I favor deleting them rather than trying to salvage the information.

Thanks for your comments. SteveMcCluskey (talk) 20:10, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

You are invited to participate in the vote at Talk:Science in the Middle Ages#Ballot box as an attempt to establish a consensus. Regards Gun Powder Ma (talk) 20:30, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

Songyue Pagoda

Check out the article now. I removed the section about there being a brick pillar in the middle. It's wrong. I visited the pagoda, and it is in fact totally hollow. Zeus1234 (talk) 13:21, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

1375, Ru Taisu and the long memo

Hi, I've tagged the section in the 1375 article about Ru Taisu and his long memo as citation needed. But, having traced the addition to you and seen your distinguished history, I fully expect there is a good source out there somewhere. If so, it seems like a good enough story to include in the Hongwu Emperor article. Regards, Cavrdg (talk) 11:07, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Government of the Han Dynasty

Hi Pericles, I don't believe the picture of the stone relief next to "Minister of the Household" section is correct. In fact I'm sure the picture is post-Han dynasty. Han stone reliefs simply don't look like that. In fact, the source in which the picture came from is not overly reliable. For example, the source says that http://picasaweb.google.com/GaryLeeTodd/HenanProvincialMuseum1ZhengzhouPrehistoryThroughHanDynasty#5208004835942458242 or http://picasaweb.google.com/GaryLeeTodd/HenanProvincialMuseum1ZhengzhouPrehistoryThroughHanDynasty#5208005801615509538 came from the Han dynasty, although I'm sure it came from the Sui/Tang dynasties. Gnip (talk) 2:32, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

The two examples I gave for the inaccuracies from the source are from the Sui/Tang dynasties, but the brick relief itself is probably from the North/South dynasties. You can compare Han brick reliefs with Northern/Southern dynasty brick reliefs here. http://www.chinaknowledge.de/Art/Bricks/bricks.html. The two pictures at the bottom is from the North/South dynasty. Now I would be lying if I said I'm 100% confident, but I think we can all agree that the relief shown on the wiki page is much more similar to reliefs of the Northern/Southern dynasties rather than those typical of the Han dynasty. Here is a page on Northern/Southern dynasty art. http://history.cultural-china.com/en/54History2086.html. If you scroll down to the art labeled "The Pictorial Brick Featuring a Guard of Honor", you will see that this picture and the one we are discussing would look exactly the same if not for the different equipments they are carrying.Gnip (talk) 1:55, 07 October 2010 (UTC)

Request for comment

Hi PericlesofAthens,

I am a relatively new Wikipedia editor who is helping with a controversial page related to China. I'd appreciate some input from you regarding whether or not a couple of disputed figure captions do indeed violate the rules of WP:NOR and WP:SYN. Since I have been unable to attract any experienced editors to opine on the matter, your input on the matter would be greatly valued. Bobthefish2 (talk) 02:10, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

jesuits in China

yo can you do an article about Jesuit introduction of cannons and breench loading culverins to china i don't have. i heard adam schall von bell introduced large calibre cannon to china and the ming aggresively pursued the manufacture of cannons and brought european models from macao and the jesuits.

and besides that, it was absolutely mind boggling that there is no article on wikipedia about the Qing conquest of the ming dynasty, basically there is only one article Battle of Shanhai Pass about that war. We have Mongol conquest of the Song Dynasty but no article on Qing conquest of Ming?Дунгане (talk) 03:45, 10 October 2010 (UTC)