User talk:PericlesofAthens

• 
  Battle of Normandy, June of '44, quite possibly my favorite pic on Wiki.
• 
  Animated naval gun turret, this pic has to be my favorite animated illustration on wiki.
• 
  Pangea breaking up into the continents we know today. Amazing.

Hey guys, and welcome to my user talk page. Feel free to ask anything on your mind, or any general help with articles. If you would like to look over old talk page discussions, simply view the archive links in the box to the right. -->

If you are looking for my image gallery page, click here.

If you are looking for my minor edits and DYK page, click here.

For the freewebs.com website I maintain that is dedicated to the history of science and technology in China, visit this link here.

New Project

Myself and several other editors have been compiling a list of very active editors who would likely be available to help new editors in the event they have questions or concerns. As the list grew and the table became more detailed, it was determined that the best way to complete the table was to ask each potential candidate to fill in their own information, if they so desire. This list is sorted geographically in order to provide a better estimate as to whether the listed editor is likely to be active.

If you consider yourself a very active Wikipedian who is willing to help newcomers, please either complete your information in the table or add your entry. If you do not want to be on the list, either remove your name or just disregard this message and your entry will be removed within 48 hours. The table can be found at User:Useight/Highly Active, as it has yet to have been moved into the Wikipedia namespace. Thank you for your help. Useight (talk) 05:56, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

I find myself spending too much time on Wikipedia editing articles as it is; guiding newcomers would not be helpful for my busy schedule. It's a miracle that I somehow find the time to include Wiki in my life.--Pericles of Athens^Talk 23:34, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

The Chinese Sailing Carriage

Regarding your repeated tinkering with image size, I don't much mind, but I understand it is Wikipedia policy to leave thumb size unspecified so that users can set their own size in user preferences.--Charles (talk) 21:08, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Would that I could be more helpful

Hello there, Peric. We did indeed do some work together in the past; I recall having a go at Society of the Song Dynasty and I guess it's a good sign that you haven't put me on a "Never ask this person for help ever again" list. =) Tibet during the Ming Dynasty sounds like a very worthwhile project, and something I'd enjoy working on – but alas, I am currently totally swamped with work in real life and elsewhere. The best I can do is offer some time in about a month. I know it's probably not much help, but if you still want another set of eyes come June, let me know and I'll see what I can do.

Sorry I can't offer more. Good luck with the article, and let me know if you think I'll be any use later on. Cheers! – Scartol • Tok 04:14, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Tibet during the Ming Dynasty

These are the ones appearing to be unsourced. Only two, but ya know :)

• Mongol Empire - final sentence "Kublai Khan did not conquer the Song Dynasty of China until 1279, so Tibet was a component of the early Mongol Empire before it was combined into a larger empire with the whole of China—the Yuan Dynasty (1279–1368)."
• Overthrow of the Sakya and Yuan - "In 1368, a Han Chinese revolt known as the Red Turban Rebellion toppled the Mongol Yuan Dynasty in China. Zhu Yuanzhang then established the Ming Dynasty, ruling as the Hongwu Emperor (r. 1368–1398)."

Collectonian (talk) 17:41, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

What? Are you pulling a fast one on me buddy?! If so I think it's kind of funny. But seriously dude, that's like asking for a citation that George Washington became president of the USA in 1789, or asking for a citation that Julius Caesar crossed the Rubicon in 49 BC. These are well known, common sense historical events. Not only that, I provided a citation from Rossabi about the Mongol conquest of Tibet in the 1240s, long before the Song Dynasty was conquered in 1279. Not only that, I provided a link to the article History of the Song Dynasty, which is well-sourced and goes into great detail about the conquest of the Song Dynasty. Not only that, if you doubt the existence of the Red Turban Rebellion or the Hongwu Emperor, that's like asking me if King Henry VIII existed, and asking for a citation. Unless there is some crazy historical revisionist out there like Anatoly Fomenko who wishes to challenge these events by explaining that aliens ruled the earth before 1400 AD, then WP:CITE wouldn't suggest that I provide citations for these, unless some publication comes forth to challenge them.--Pericles of Athens^Talk 17:52, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Hello Eric! How are you? I supported the FA nomination of Tibet during the Ming Dynasty. It is a very good article. You created the article, you expanded it, you did everything for the article!! That's remarkable! Regards, Masterpiece2000 (talk) 12:28, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Tibet

That wasn't very friendly. Blofeld has put a lot of time into editing that article today. We're all here for the purpose of building the encyclopedia :). Seraphim♥Whipp 20:02, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

PLease remain patient and please don't insult me in edit summaries. The article was a shambles and had been the subject of severe over editing and traffic and I was in the middle of trying to make it a little more adequate. I was in the middle of sorting out images but if I lost any references or links it was unintentional. I find your insult about a "skilled editor" amusing. People who know me would agree that I am one of the most capable editors on wikipedia and so I should be after 151,000 edits. Ask John Hill or anybody and given the decent work I've put into setting up Wikiroject Tibet and Tibetan articles during my time on wikipedia ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ ^$1,000,000? 20:03, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

The irony is, that I was just off to tell you, Blofeld, what a good job you're doing. Seraphim♥Whipp 20:06, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, sorry if I took my anger out on you, it was only after I've cleaned up a dozen different articles where people do not know how to align images correctly, and it either leaves gigantic gaps in the text or scrunches them together. I guess seeing your edit was my boiling point after fixing other articles with the same problem over and over, and since I've never seen your edits before I simply assumed you were an amateur like the rest. Good work on the article otherwise.--Pericles of Athens^Talk 20:07, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

OK apology accepted but I have been a little side tracked from editing Tibetan articles over the last few months and in looking at the main article today I was shocked by it. The intro for starters mentioned nothing about about the Dalia Lamas, Buddhism or Lhasa. and had been cut almost to a two sentences. The history yes it needed major condensing but not removed to the extent that it is three elines long. Naturally all of the details should be in the history articles but you still need a fiarly informative summarized history of which I've tried to cut to the main points but needs a SERIOUS copyedit and write. I'm sure you agree the article is a nightmare to maintain and protect. I've rmeoved any obvious POV I've seen and tried to merge the evlauation section which had been rmeoved entirely into a Tibet under CHina section which should be balanced and informative. If I;ve removed any vlauable sentences or references I depely apologise to those editors who added them. It is now part of a working process and I hope you can work with me professionally and try to improve it to a better standard without eroding valuable content within it ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ ^$1,000,000? 20:15, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

These days given the huge amount missing geographically from parts of Africa and Asia I spend most of my time creating new articles and trying to address systematic bias by filling in gapsSee here. It would be good to develop some core Tibetan articles some time though. That article needs to be watched like a hawk! ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ ^$1,000,000? 20:21, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

That sounds great. I've always wished I had the books that User:John Hill has on Tibet as I am fascinated by its past, geography, culture and religion but admittedly the Tibet-Chinese conflict does my nut in. Personally I think Tibet had a distinct cultural difference and heritage to the Chinese that would qualify it as an independent nation but this should certainly not affect the wriiting of a neutral encyclopedia article. So many think it is a forum for politics. Good luck with the editing, I am slightly concerned that some other editor is going to completely pbjects to the changes but I will be watching the article very closely from now on!!! ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ ^$1,000,000? 20:28, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes I started all of the districts in Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan and as you can imagine some of the districts of kazakhstan are the size of some countries in area. Yet they wer emissing entirely and are still stubs!!! The uneveness in parts of africa and asia on here is a severe problem which takes up most of my editing time these days ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ ^$1,000,000? 20:31, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Hopefully some day I can get back to adding an working on some of the monastery articles again. The History of European exploration in Tibet one is mine, I thought it would be useful to look at it from a European persepective independently in addition to the general history. Could use a lot more citations though ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ ^$1,000,000? 20:39, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Well as for filling in gaps thats what wikipedia is all about isn't spreading knowledge and covering topics on here that have never been seen before in a compendium of this magitude. Hopefully I can get the appropriately named User:BaldBot programmed to create 10 articles a minute in grossly underdeveloped parts of the project. Unfortunately given the openess of wikipedia it has its pitfalls at times with vandalism and editors who try to use it for their POV. I try to avoid edit wars and conflict over articles as much as possible ans I'm sure you agree things can get very tense on here at times. Regards ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ ^$1,000,000? 20:49, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Up for FA isn't it? You;ve done brilliantly developing that one I see. If I have some time tomorrow I'll be sure to review and post any possible flaws or areas for improvement with it. I'm sure it will be a very interesting read. Tgis is the sort of thing we need now, specialized articles on various periods in its history will take the project to the next level (only if we can beat out the vandals though). Keep up the good work also ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ ^$1,000,000? 20:52, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Well your're fullly welcome to put your name down at Wikipedia:WikiProject Tibet, evne if you can't commit to much to it is to give some indication of editors who are interested in its articles. ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ ^$1,000,000? 21:03, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Welcome!!! Admittedly I haven't been to active with it in the past few months because of my commitments all across the project but clearly some articles have developed anyway. Just glancing at that article it looks awesome and a wonderful asset for the encyclopedia but I'll give it a full read tomorrow. I won't change the Tibet article too much more tonight, but just added the lakes as it is didn't even mention Manosovar Lake or anything in the geography. Finally got around to mergin those ugly lists that were there before too. Needs some geo facts too which I'll try to find a few references for. Basically a decent editor needs to sit down a just write the article properly and professionally and block out those amateur POV pushers and IP addresses from degrading it ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ ^$1,000,000? 21:30, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

RE:Tibet during the Ming Dynasty

Hello Eric. Thank you for your comment. Regards, Masterpiece2000 (talk) 05:20, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

JSTOR

Hey Eric, I gather you did a lot of your research for TdtMD via Google searches to JSTOR documents. I've done a bit of that, but balked at shelling out $19 to see the full text of an article. Is that what you've been doing, paying JSTOR piecemeal per article? Bertport (talk) 15:33, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Trade ports in Song China

I was reading over the Society of Song Dynasty and I saw how the Tang port of Guangzhou was eclipsed in popularity by those of Quanzhou and Fuzhou. When exactly did this take place? Was Guangzhou still popular around 1100? --Ghostexorcist (talk) 06:39, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Congrats on the forthcoming main page appearance of Society of the Song Dynasty! --Ghostexorcist (talk) 18:26, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

No problem. The new material looks good. McKnight's book Law and Order in Sung China mentions an ethnic group that caused the Chinese authorities many problems. I believe these people were called the "Min", but I can't seem to find the book at the moment. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 21:51, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Correction, it was the "Man" people. I was able to find a scan on Amazon from the book here (see page 79) --Ghostexorcist (talk) 22:05, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure where I would add it in the minority section. You can add a sentence or two at your leisure. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 22:19, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

I see you have a handle on it. Since they were from Hainan island, I'm sure we can find a good page on the internet to link the "Man" name to. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 22:22, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Bayan of the Baarin

Hi,

some while ago you added some stuff about Bayan's ethnicity ("Turk, not Mongol !") to the article, based on a work of Rossabi. I don't know what points Rossabi is making, but there were actually two generals called Bayan in the Yuan dynasty: Bayan of the Baarin a.k.a. Bayan zhengsan (or so) a.k.a. Bayan hundred eyes (d. 1295), and Bayan of the Merkid (d.1340). The Baarin are usually considered a very Mongol tribe, already mentioned in the first pages of the Secret History, descendants of Alan Γoa etc., while the Merkit are quite often said to be Turks (although one might wonder whether this wouldn't be academical by the 1300s). My question is: Could this "Turk, not Mongol !" - stuff be a confusion between the two Bayans?

Regards,

Yaan (talk) 16:14, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you!

		The Buddhism Barnstar
		For creating Wikiproject Tibet's first featured article, I award you this Buddha Barnstar. Gimme danger (talk) 16:33, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations

		The Tibetan Award of Excellence and Compassion
		For your outstanding work at writing a brilliant article to FA standard and giving us the gift of the first Tibetan FA on wikipedia.. Hereby I present you this coveted award. The Bald One is proud of you, Much deserved. ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ $1,000,000? 20:35, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Personally I am highly impressed by your work and I can say that I rarely give compliments like that as there are few editors who are at this level. It is also extremely rare to meet somebody on here who seems very much like myself; who is intelligent and scholarly but a cool guy at the same time and into cool music and an avid guitarist. The two rarely go hand in hand and I must say I have only encountered one or two others like this ever since my time on wikipedia. Keep up the great work! ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ ^$1,000,000? 20:38, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Sounds great, the Mandarin language has always intrigued me and how their system works. Must me very difficult to learn, but they say that english is very difficult to learn for foreigners too don't they. How long have you been playing guitar for? I've been playing since I was 7 when I picked up the classical guitar. 18 years later and we have about 20 guitars in my house!, including several ukeleles, a banjo, and a sitar. I;d love to get hold of some of those more obscure traditional asian stringed instruments too! ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ ^$1,000,000? 21:15, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

If you are still interested in developing some Tibetan articles I've always wished to see an FA class article on the Dalai Lama lineage. I don't know what resources you have on it, but anything you could do to improve it at least beyond a GA status would be much appreciated. I haven't edited it much in the past although I did add the gallery of the dalai lamas ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ ^$1,000,000? 21:31, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Hiah just woken up after a heavy night lol?. Yes naturally the dalai lama article is an extremely important one and ties a lot of important historical events and articles together. The article at present is a major let down. It isn't even B class yet. Even the history isn't even covered properly. For Tibet on wikipedia a great article on His Holiness would be awesome. I would imagine you could throw in a lot of information also on the early relationships with the Mongols etc and how it developed and perhaps a section examining possible political power that the lineage held etc weighing up the arguments for and against (this is intimately tied of course to the Tibetan sovereignty debate between Tibet and China). Potentially I'm certain there is a wealth of info that could be written about it if you able to obtain the books and turn it into an extremely interesting article. ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ ^$1,000,000? 17:58, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

I know the library in my area hasn't been open for two years and I have been dying to get hold of some books on it myself (If it was open I could start looking and researching!!!). I did try to buy one of Tenzin's books a while back from Amazon but it was like $100 +. John Hill also suggested some books I could try and they were very expensive too. Perhaps I could nab one off ebay, but I doubt they are going to have the scholarly sort of books which would be needed. ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ ^$1,000,000? 18:45, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations

Another day, another front page story. Congratulations, and keep up the good work. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 10:28, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Foreign tributes to the Song

I just recently learned of a book called Tribute Missions to China, 960–1126 by Prof. Robert M. Hartwell. It covers all of the tribute envoys sent to Song China from Korea to Africa and everything in between (in that order). I was able to find a pdf version of this book, but it is slow to load since it is an entire book. You might fined it useful. The author stated in the preface that he would write an even larger book including envoys from Japan and smaller envoys from other countries not mentioned, but I cannot seem to find that book anywhere. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 18:05, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

No problem. It's just a giant list. Each list is composed of the year, The names of the men in the envoy (if recorded), and the reason for their arrival. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 18:17, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

The book mentions that a Persian tribute traveled through the Western Xia territory in 1023. An unspecified person complained and a decree was enacted in 1024 that forced all future "Ta-shih" (arab/persian) tributes to sail into the port at Guangzhou. A similar tribute arrived in 1096, but they were turned away because they arrived at Hsi-chou (Xizhou, wherever that is). I think this is worth noting in the minorities section right after the mention of the tributes from Egypt, Yemen, India, and Korea. I would add it myself, but there is already a Hartwell book and I'm not sure how to format the new one (Hartwell, Tribute Missions to China, 960-1126, pg 71?) 71 is the book page, but it's pg. 78 in the pdf file. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 10:08, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 18:11, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm not upset or anything. I understand your concerns. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 19:05, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Dali Kingdom

Hi. Any luck on the Dalia Lama books? I noticed also that the Kingdom of Dali is still a stub. Could you expand it? ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ ^$1,000,000? 11:59, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Pagoda of Tianning Temple (Changzhou)

On 26 May, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Pagoda of Tianning Temple (Changzhou), which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--BorgQueen (talk) 13:00, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Sockpuppets on articles related to Tibet

Hi, I noticed you were recently involved in a mediation case concerning the history of the Ming Dynasty in Tibet. Joining as a party to that suit was User:Bertport, who recently had a new comment from User:Centrallib left on his talk page. Centrallib is a sockpuppet of User:Foxhunt99 and it makes me very suspicious that he would know who Bertport was and was familiar with his involvement in Tibet-related articles. Scrutinize the contributions of User:LaGrandefr and see if they match the same broken english as Foxhunt99 and his socks. Also check if their POVs align and, if this is the case, I will assist in opening a second sockpuppet and checkuser case to finally flush out all the socks. Thanks, Cumulus Clouds (talk) 20:36, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

• Their POVs seem to be aligned and their editing times don't seem to have any overlap. User:Chenyangw also appears to be pushing the same nationalist POV and arrives around the same time as Foxhunt99's socks, though again without any overlap. Let me know what you find. Cumulus Clouds (talk) 20:44, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Culture of the Song Dynasty

Thank you for your message. The Opera Project doesn't deal with 'theatrical drama' only the western opera tradition. My understanding is that 'Chinese opera' comes directly under performing arts in the scheme of things agreed by the Arts Project. You could add a Theatre Project banner if you like, as that nominally does cover Chinese theatre. Is that OK now? --Kleinzach 07:34, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

I see. I wasn't aware that it focused exclusively on Western opera. I would add a different banner in its place, but there is no WikiProject for Chinese opera, as evident by Talk:Chinese opera. In the meantime, WikiProject Opera will have to do.--Pericles of Athens^Talk 07:37, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Wei? Sorry, but I don't understand. 'Opera' is an Italian word for a 'work'. It's been gradually adopted for a particular art form that has nothing to do with 戏曲 or 京剧 or any other kind of Chinese theatre, or for that matter kabuki, nō, bunraku or Indonesian wayang kulit. It just happens to be a word used by westerners when they were looking for a suitable name. Why not be sensible and take my advice and use the Theatre banner, OK? Though I can't really see why a banner is needed here. --Kleinzach 07:52, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Photos

Do you need any China photos for any of your articles? I am currently in China and have loads of photos that have already been taken as well as more travelling to do in the future. I would be happy to fulfill any request you might have. Zeus1234 (talk) 12:47, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

I might be able to get a picture of that pagoda for you. It's about an hour away by train (I am in Beijing). Here's a list of the places I've been already. If there's anything nearby that you need I can see if I have a photo of it. Henan: Luoyang and Songshan. Shaanxi: Xian and Huashan. Shanxi: Pingyao. I've also been to various areas around Beijing. Next weekend I am going to Shanhaiguan and the coast of Hebei (and possibly Liaoning). I am planning to do another big trip in a couple of weeks to Wutaishan. I might be able to stop in a few places in northern and central Shanxi or Hebei as well though. So apart from the Liaodi pagoda, are there any other requests? You really should take a trip to China, it's awesome. Zeus1234 (talk) 13:19, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

I uploaded one new picture of the Small Wild Goose Pagoda (sorry it's not great, the park was closed when we got there), and three more of the Giant Wild Goose Pagoda. You cna find them in the relevant categories on the commons. Those are all I have for now from the list you presented. If there's anything else, please don't hesitate to ask. Zeus1234 (talk) 02:18, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

I went to the Tianning Pagoda today and took lots of pictures. They are all in the category Tianning Pagoda on the commons. Enjoy! Zeus1234 (talk) 10:24, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Unfortunately the trip to Henan was a bit rushed and there was not enough time to see everything. The Pagoda forest was the only set of pagodas I saw there. Zeus1234 (talk) 00:57, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Most of the photo requests are going to have to wait until the fall (apart from Wutaishan photos, where I am going on Saturday), because it is nearly the end of the semester and I am leaving China for the summer. But, I do have major plans to go traveling in the fall to some of the areas that photos are needed from. Zeus1234 (talk) 22:50, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

I've started uploading photos from my trip to Wutaishan. The first ones are of Foguang Temple, and there are many more that will be uploaded over the next few days. I know that you are interested in pagodas, and Wutaishan has quite a few, so there will be lots of new pagoda photos coming as well.Zeus1234 (talk) 12:13, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

There was a problem uploading the Foguang photos yesterday and only three were uploaded. The remainder have now been successfully uploaded. In addition, I've also uploaded photos of the Zunsheng Temple, which has a lovely pagoda. I visited 17 temples at Wutaishan, so there will be many more photos coming!Zeus1234 (talk) 01:39, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

OK, I'm done with all of the pagoda photos if you are interested. The rest of the photos I've taken are just of temples, and will be uploaded eventually.Zeus1234 (talk) 08:10, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Monkey

He has more pics that aren't on display! Blnguyen (bananabucket) 07:41, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

		The Epic Barnstar
		Awarded to Pericles for his superb work on olde Chinese history....Blnguyen (bananabucket) 07:41, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

you're filling in a big hole there. Olde Asian history is so weakly covered on Wikipedia. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 07:41, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Image size

I have reverted your edit which gives Titus a much greater size than is appropriate on Pliny the Elder. Any objections? Peterlewis (talk) 20:44, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Phagspa and other schools of Tibetan Buddhism

In a discussion on the merits of Parenti when it comes to the discussion of Tibetan history on some talk page you said that Phagspa was only head of the Saskya school. Dieter Schuh somewhere in his essay about Tibet under the Mongols in "Die Mongolen, Beiträge zu ihrer Geschichte und Kultur", Darmstadt 1986, makes Phagspa the head of all [emphasis mine] Buddhist [not even "Tibetan Buddhist, Y.] monks in the Yuan empire. I can give you page number and a German quote with translation next week, but it may be a thing to look into anyway. I agree that Parenti is unreliable, however, even if not for the reason John Hill gave. Yaan (talk) 00:14, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Schuh does not discuss this conclusion, though, so I'm not really convinced it is true (might be simple oversight) ... only convinced there is a source that says so. Just wanted to let you know. Yaan (talk) 00:39, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

stamp photo

Maybe it's mistagged, but there is no indication on the image page that there is a fifty-year limit for postage stamps in China. Where do you get that from? Mangostar (talk) 16:43, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Actually now I've investigated more, and it looks like it may be PD. China's copyright law limits corporate copyrights to 50 years. I don't know if that includes postage stamps or not, but I would guess it does. In this case, the PD-China template should be changed to reflect that. Mangostar (talk) 16:53, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, that's it. It will really come down to whether the creator of the stamp continues to hold the copyright (maybe they were commissioned to create it and aren't employees, as in the United States) or whether the government holds the copyright (this was the case in the United States until sometime in the 1970s I think). Mangostar (talk) 17:14, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Zhang Heng.

Ah yes, the writer of Technology of the Song Dynasty. :) I enjoyed that article. I'd be glad to copyedit your article, you'll just have to give me a little while, as I have a few older requests. · AndonicO ^Engage. 21:35, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Ah right, "of," not "in." I've fixed the unaesthetic red link. · AndonicO ^Engage. 22:10, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Zhang Heng request

So, Pericles, we meet again! It's been a month since I asked for a month more before I could help you out; alas, I'm in the final throes of the school year, so I can't help with Zhang Heng just yet. If you can give me until Monday, I'll be more than happy to give it a thorough proofread. Otherwise, I must wish you good luck once again and apologize anew. Cheers.. – Scartol • Tok 18:57, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

I have a horrible feeling you're going to read this and think: "Oh, he doesn't have time to copyedit my article, but he has time to read my userpage? WTF?" But anyway.. You like George Carlin and Jim Gaffigan. You support universal health care. You like the Dead Kennedys. How can you not be a fan of Bill Hicks? If you have not heard him, I order you to go right now and purchase his album Relentless. I seriously doubt you'll regret it. (Also check out Mitch Hedberg.) I have some recommendations on hip-hop, too, but those can wait. – Scartol • Tok 19:08, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Okay, so long as you're bathed in their brilliance. I agree with you that they deserve a spot on yer page. Cheers! – Scartol • Tok 11:33, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Gore Vidal

Have you read Gore Vidal's Creation? [1]? Given your interest in history, I presume you have. I read it many years ago and found the concept interesting. I didn't like the execution because Gore Vidal is so obviously much more at home with Western culture than with Indian or Chinese, but the idea of setting these three civilisations side by side at such a fortuitous and important juncture in their histories is a fascinating one.

Bathrobe (talk) 02:19, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

FAC summer slowdown

Perhaps while you're waiting for others to review your WP:FAC, you can review a few as well. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:08, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Well done

		The Original Barnstar
		Wow, great work on the List of Chinese inventions page. Keep up the good work. - tholly --Turnip-- 18:27, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

I've just seen it's now a featured list, well done again! - tholly ^--Turnip-- 18:10, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Sarira Stupa at Tayuan Temple

Thanks for creating this article! But, I don't think the name is really appropriate. In Chinese the Dagoba is called 大白塔 (Dabai Ta) which literally means 'Big White Tower.' 塔 is catch-all word in Chinese that refers to towers, pagodas, stupas etc. I've looked at a few sources in English and they variously describe it as the 'Big White Pagoda', 'Great White Pagoda', 'White Dagoba,' etc. However, keeping in mind the Chinese name, I think that 'Great White Dagoba' would be the most appropriate name for the structure. Of course we could just rename the article 'Dabai Dagoba'. Do you mind if I move the article, or do you have another suggestion? Thanks for the copy editing on the Foguang temple article, it has been much appreciated. Zeus1234 (talk) 00:17, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

"They."

I actually referred to the theories, but good catch, better with "he." · AndonicO ^Engage. 16:47, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Congrats on the FA. :) If you'd still like me to copyedit, I'd be glad to, just let me know. · AndonicO ^Engage. 12:01, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Stargate756 (talk · contribs)

I've issued a {{subst:uw-error1}} template message to his talk page. It's his first talk page notification in nearly a year, so that's all I can do for the moment. You, and any other editor, can post such notifications to talk pages. A pretty comprehensive list is available at WP:UTN. Once it goes past 'whatever4,' you can report them to WP:AIV. Dppowell (talk) 17:54, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

about Qin Dynasty‎ please see 關於中國歷史教科書幾個年代的說明,thank you. Stargate 18:30 8, July 2008 (UTC)

Whoa, no need to get nasty with him. Remember WP:CIVIL and WP:AGF. Dppowell (talk) 19:55, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

I completely agree with you, editorially, but there's no reason to bite his head off. Despite the errors he's introduced, though, I think he means well. I also think that English may not be his first language. He may yet turn out to be a helpful contributor. Dppowell (talk) 20:04, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Pardon the intrusion. I have seen this user's edits (mainly at Guan Yu) and I now see what he was getting at: The dates in the ancient sources are recorded in the Chinese calender, where the ends of the Chinese years may mean the next year in the Gregorian calendar. So I think this is more of a date conversion dispute rather than a "when" dispute. I don't know how much does the Western scholarly sources take date conversion into account when they write years, but for the moment I have reverted Stargate756's edits on Guan Yu since they contradict reliable Western sources. Hope my input helps. _dk (talk) 01:26, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Qin Dynasty

I see you were working on the article yesterday... are you planning to try to take it to FA like your other excellent articles? If so, I think you should probably see this... Nousernamesleft (talk) 01:56, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Wow, that's quite a huge pile of notes you have there. Once I'm finished with Qin, I plan to start on Zhou Dynasty, actually - that'll have to be a really long article; the Zhou was the longest dynasty. Nousernamesleft (talk) 18:11, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

WP:LOTD/WP:LOTM

Congratulations on getting what appears to be your first successful WP:FL during the last month. You may want to get involved in our List of the Day/List of the Month experiment. Feel free to help us select next months lists at User:TonyTheTiger/List of the Day/voting/200808 or nominate your list for consideration to be a LOTD in September at User:TonyTheTiger/List of the Day/Nominees/200809.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 21:06, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Unjustified Sinophobia in 'Science in the Middle Ages' article ?

Dear Pericles

Thanks for your supportive comment in Talk:Science in the Middle Ages and your comment “Welcome to the world of Wikipedia, where entire centuries of time may be dumbed down and simplified into one egregious statement.”

However, most ironically and regrettably, may I raise with you the arguably condescending hypocritical Sinophobic nature of the current Chinese medieval science section, but which I’m sure you do not intend. I quote some current passages:

“As Toby E. Huff notes, pre-modern Chinese science developed precariously without solid scientific theory, while there was a lacking of consistent systemic treatment in comparison to contemporaneous European works such as the Concordance and Discordant Canons by Gratian of Bologna (fl. 12th century).[144]

Despite this, Chinese thinkers of the Middle Ages proposed some hypotheses which are in accordance with modern principles of science.

In their futile experiments, they did manage to discover new metal alloys, porcelain types, and dyes. “

On the first of these passages, in the first instance it is argued by fallibilist philosophers of science that there is no such thing as sold scientific theory anywhere anytime, all scientific theory being ever fallible, fluid, precarious and even inconsistent speculation. Secondly in particular contemporary 12th century ‘Western’ science was certainly not ‘solid’ and systemically consistent, with such as Averroes struggling with the major contradiction in Aristotelian dynamics between its laws of motion and its dynamical model of celestial motion that predicted it must be infinitely fast, contrary to its assertions otherwise on orbital period. I have never read nor heard of Huff, nor of Gratian of Bologna as I recall, but this claim just comes across as nonsense given science is normally systemically inconsistent.

On the second passage, therefore not only is the same true of European thinkers of the Middle Ages in spite of their lacking a consistent systemic treatment, but why is the measure of progress or achievement in medieval science that of whether or not it was in accordance with modern science, rather than constituting progress in explaining the phenomena ?

On the third passage, why describe experiments that made important novel discoveries as being futile?

May I suggest the entire first paragraph be deleted as just philosophically misinformed, pace Mr Huff, and this section should instead begin:

‘Chinese thinkers of the Middle Ages proposed some scientifically progressive hypotheses.’

Hope you find these constructive criticisms helpful.

All best

PS Love the Chinese pictures on your excellent user page

--Logicus (talk) 17:45, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your response and points raised. I'll think about them. I think its Needham who really needs updating. Basic issue is what are valid yardsticks of comparison ? Theory adopted or empirical facts explained/predicted, whatever the theory ?

--Logicus (talk) 18:10, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Four Great Inventions of ancient China

Hi,

Sorry to bother you, but I find myself in a dispute with Gun Powder Ma (who, despite his name, seems very anti-Chinese). The latest argument concerns the use of the Francis Bacon quote in Four Great Inventions of ancient China. I've tried to engage him on the talk page, but he is not responsive. I would rather not revert his removal of the quote again, as I would rather not start an edit war. Since you had expressed an interest about this page, I leave the judgment up to you. If you think the quote adds to the page, please add it back, and I will back you up on in. If you feel it detracts from the page, please feel free to ignore me.

Regards, lk (talk) 08:22, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

You're probably right. I'm putting the reference into a footnote. Hopefully this will satisfy gunpowder. lk (talk) 16:10, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Chao Cuo

On 20 July, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Chao Cuo, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--BorgQueen (talk) 17:12, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Rewording edits on crossbow article

Your edit does not make it clear that this has anything to do with crossbows. A ballista for example is not a crossbow and neither is every catapult. Please make it clear that you are quoting material that clearly refers to crossbows or remove it from the first evidence section. As far as I understand you are talking about ballistae and should move this section to the appropriate article. Wandalstouring (talk) 09:18, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Hello. I'm not sure exactly what you're talking about. Are you sure you're talking to the right editor? I recently added information in the article crossbow about the oldest crossbow bolts from China and the oldest crossbow stocks found in archaeological excavations; I'm not sure what that has to do with catapults or the ballista.--Pericles of Athens^Talk 13:57, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Talk:Roman–Persian_Wars#Why_the_lead_needs_revision

The lead to this article seems just awful to me; in saying so, I offended Yannismarou, who shepherded it through FA (which it may deserve when the lead is cleaned up). Can you suggest a compromise text? Septentrionalis PMAnderson 18:47, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

I left a comment.--Pericles of Athens^Talk 20:27, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your trouble. I'm going to let this simmer a few days, and then try another draft, unless someone else does. Do keep watching. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 21:25, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

tang dynasty maps

i noticed your comments about the need for map about 2 to 3 months ago, there are some maps on french wikimedia and wikipedia which shows several different borders, some including the gokturk khanate when they submitted, and tibet when the tibetan king acknowledged nominal control. there should be a new map distinguishing areas of protectorates nominal control —Preceding unsigned comment added by 162.83.176.163 (talk) 20:19, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

they also have internal borders and coloring within the tang empire to show the different states that were under only nominal, or total control.162.83.176.163 (talk) 20:28, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Sure, that would be great to have such a map, to reflect what is pretty much already said in the text about the extent of Tang's imperial influence and its tributary states. However, this requires a scholarly source which provides a map that a skilled Wiki editor and cartographer may refer to when constructing a home-made map for Wikimedia Commons. Unfortunately, I do not have the skills or software to craft the professional-looking maps that can be seen in various Wiki articles.--Pericles of Athens^Talk 20:34, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

I will look at French Wikipedia.--Pericles of Athens^Talk 20:35, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

What, this one?

I assume you are talking about this map here to the right. For one, this map shows the submission of several different groups at different times, and is no way meant to show congruous timing. The submission of the Tibetan Yarlung kings is particularly troublesome in this regard, since Tang-Tibetan wars and cutting off of tribute relations were frequent affairs. If you could find a map that shows a specific year, then it would be of some merit for discussion, but not this map. It is too all inclusive to be accurate, and it moreover does not cite a scholarly source from where these exact boundaries are derived from.--Pericles of Athens^Talk 20:41, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

there was another map, im not sure if tibet was included. in most maps of the maps, there is a clear borderline in the china/tibet border, and a different color for it to note it was only nominal control. i think the maps on the top of this link is most accurate, http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Tang_Dynasty?uselang=fr the one on the top right hand corner found in multiple books on history, it does not include tibet, i saw those exact same borders in other books, EXCEPT for the fact that silla should certainly not be included in the shaded region. the one currently on the page is also common version, but the one i mentioned can be backed up.162.83.176.163 (talk) 00:10, 1 August 2008 (UTC) i can give the exact years for the aquisition of the ferghana, samarkand, central asia region with northern afghanistan in it, including kabul and harat, the date is 659-669, and the protectorate in the former goguryo region, 668-676, from Historical Atlas of the Medieval world be john haywood

and the one you put up there does not include the northern part of afghanistan, im not sure what happened,but i got confused about how chinese aquired the central asia region, from the single gokturk khanate, or military campaigning in many states cenrtal asia —Preceding unsigned comment added by 162.83.176.163 (talk) 00:12, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

---

Hello,
I draw this map long time ago, I think it's maybe my first maps, and yes, at that time I forgave to put the source : The Cambridge History of China, vol.?, Sui and Tang, part.1 , chapter: "Tang Taizong, the Consolidator". I don't remember the pages I used (I don't have acces to the book currently), and yes, this may display areas which were -at one time- under Tang leadership. But yes : Tibet situation was really more complex on this period. My will was just to display were Tang army went and had, one time, some effects. Yug (talk) 01:08, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

I need help with a picture

Thanks, actually I was just about to ask you for some help. I uploaded it on commons but for some reason it does not have the tag that says "This is a file from the Wikimedia Commons. The description on its description page there is shown below. Commons is a freely licensed media file repository. You can help.". Can you please help me? Thanks. Daniel Chiswick (talk) 03:42, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Well one more thing, I just finished raising the contrast on the image so it looks better and has a better chance of being nominated, what should I do and how should I upload it? Also can I replace the existing nomination with the new picture I want to upload? Daniel Chiswick (talk) 03:53, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

I just want to upload a new version of the existing picture and I am wondering if it will replace the old version by doing so. Daniel Chiswick (talk) 03:57, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Also I can't find the link to the commons anymore, do I need to replace the one on commons? I don't know how to transfer pictures to commons so I don't know what to do. Daniel Chiswick (talk) 04:07, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Well I uploaded the new version on the commons already, but I don't know what to do with it. Daniel Chiswick (talk) 04:20, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Here is the new version on the commons [2] Daniel Chiswick (talk) 04:22, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

I just want it to say "This is a file from the Wikimedia Commons. The description on its description page there is shown below. Commons is a freely licensed media file repository. You can help." like all the other pictures. Will not having it effect it getting nominated? Because I have a good feeling they will nominate this picture. Daniel Chiswick (talk) 04:36, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Oh okay, thanks. I have plenty of high quality pictures I plan on uploading in the furture so keep your eyes open for them because I'm sure they would go great in many of your articles (Good job by the way on the Ming Dynasty article). Also one more favor, if you like the picture or dislike it can you comment about it's nomination? Anyways, thanks for everything and I look forward to working with you again. Daniel Chiswick (talk) 04:51, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the support, and I sure will be reading your article because it seems really interested and well written. I am a sinophile and I read any material I can on China. Daniel Chiswick (talk) 05:13, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Hey, I had to renominate the picture (Long story), can you support it again? Thanks. Daniel Chiswick (talk) 00:47, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

List of Chinese inventions

Hello, I notice that you had recently expanded the article, good job! But it seem that dispute was raised over the article, I don't think Gun Powder Ma is in any way trying to improve the article. I guess it would takes weeks to solve the matter. I had neither time or energy to play along with Gun Powder Ma. Still, keep up the good work anyway. Anpersonalaccount (talk) 20:08, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Personal attack

For your personal attack here, see Wikipedia:No personal attacks. Gun Powder Ma (talk) 16:24, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Could you explain me why you wrote that fantastic piece on my user page: Gun Powder Ma (talk) 16:35, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Quote Pericles: "You know what, usually I would apologize to someone for being rude and calling them a "dork" (wow, what a "personal attack"!), but since you maliciously removed cited material in an extreme POV fashion (if not considered outright vandalism and without any explanation), you don't deserve my apology. Cheers!"

You have no two legs to stand on, Ma; you know it, and I know it. I had to restore cited content that you deleted for no apparent reason other than your seething contempt for anything related to China (or at least this is what I assume, since you left no edit summary which would even indicate why you removed perfectly valid and cited content). Tisk, tisk.--Pericles of Athens^Talk 18:16, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Rudder

Hello, PericlesofAthens, your expand over the article is impressive indeed, however I think that the bullet should be clear by itself. For rudder, I am suggesting "Rudder (without use of oar)" or "Rudder, ocean-going travel". What do you think? Anyway keep up the good works! Anpersonalaccount (talk) 18:35, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Hope that satisfy everybody needs. Lol. :) Anpersonalaccount (talk) 18:38, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Hello, the rudder bullet may gone rather too long I think, although is just about definition, steering oar being a rudder should at least be mention, also consider ancient China was never a maritime nation in that early period, those steering oar should be more early enough to raise questions. Anyway I think is more about definition. Anpersonalaccount (talk) 04:15, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Formatting

Hello, I had made a few formatting over the article on the references. Hope you don't mind. I think the content needs to be mantain at a high level. Take care! Anpersonalaccount (talk) 17:44, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Song Dynasty undeletion

See the full deletion log for Song Dynasty for context. Someone deleted it to make way for a page move, but the very earliest revision in that old history, this one, contained the first edit of the article before it was moved by cut and paste to Song Dynasty (960-1279), so I undeleted it. There are still six deleted edits at that title, but they don't contain useful history and undeleting them would cause confusion. If you're curious about the high ID number of the first edit to Song Dynasty, see the explanation at my user subpage. Graham87 07:29, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Post Shang vs. Shang and later

Hey, take it easy, I seen it, although I don't think guqin are a Shang invention, however there is a hint! Anpersonalaccount (talk) 06:49, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Sure, but one example ain't gonna change everything and you know that. Anpersonalaccount (talk) 06:52, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Yes, Shang should be included., I have no comment on this, but what I meant was Post-Shang was correct, since very few items belongs to Shang over the list.. Anpersonalaccount (talk) 06:58, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, but you added two of them, that is guqin and ge, although the oldest known guqin came from Zenghouyi tomb not Shang. Another thing is, would you mind don't make quotes over my user talk page? Thanks Anpersonalaccount (talk) 07:02, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Hello PericlesofAthens, I know what I wrote, should we make our discussion over your talk page next time, I think is much better and save the quotes. Thanks Anpersonalaccount (talk) 07:20, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Yup it is, consider you had expanded the artice over the month, and more importantly you made it into an FA article! :) Anpersonalaccount (talk) 07:30, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

List of Chinese discoveries

Great first cut! --Mr. Vernon (talk) 07:31, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Articles about Chinese dynasties

Hello Pericles, some 3 points to notice to you :

• translation en=>fr: I'm part of a French team which plan to translate your articles Tang Dynasty and Song Dynasty.
• Han: I noticed you project to rewrite the Han Dynasty, that's Great !
• Draw maps: I draw this Image:China, 742.svg and I would be happy to draw other maps relate to Chinese history if you can send me scans of trustable sources.

I also notice that the current Han dynasty article was highly misleading about the later Han, displaying them as a continuous fall. A new article will be really welcome !

Many thanks for all the work you already done. Regards, Yug (talk) 01:01, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Hoping general feedback

Hello periclès, as you can see below, I lauched my project to draw good maps specificly for Chinese History use. I plan to redraw or draw a first group of a dozen of maps : topographic China (done), physic China (70%), big historical area (90%), 2008's China Hanyupinyin + WadeGiles (+Simp. Chinese), 1900's China, 742's China, 610's China, 2008's Chinese population density, Chinese rainfalls, Chinese 2005 HDI by province, plus some other not yet chosen.
My "Map Style" is to display all these maps on a topographic background, since tyopography explain many things such as agriculture, the human density, the ways of conquests, the presence of steppes people/nomades 遊牧民族 or, at contrary, the presence of Han peasant 农民. But this background will also transfort simple shemes into complex maps harder and more expensive to print.
Both have exactly the same level of difficulty to draw. I will make them in SVG, which will allow the downloader to delete this topographic background if he want (and have Inkscape).
The question is just : shoud we switch to this interesting but harder to print topographic maps ? Your opinion will be appreciate.

• 
  simple. Easy to print.
• same with topographic background.
  same with topographic background.
• 
  other project

Regards, Yug (talk) 10:21, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments, that what I looked for. I also think that it is a difference between a map to read alone, which should display lot of informations, and a 300px/300px map which have go into an article, an so to stay very basic.

Ok, so now : Most of my maps will be simple SVG (HDI, population density, etc.).

For historical maps, ok, I will manage to provide 2 versions : a rich version with ~40 labels or more (provinces names, main cities, etc.), and a light version to illustrate wiki articles.

For some geographic Maps: the topographic background will be use, of course.

Ok ! So lets go on this way. Thanks for your answers. That give me the direction to take.

Regards, Yug (talk) 17:17, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

PI

Hello, just a thought, would you think that PI should be better off moved to discoveries article? Thank you Anpersonalaccount (talk) 21:32, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Forget about the dispute

Hello, I know you've stressed this few days by Gun Powder Ma. That he spoiled the mood of the article, that has gone well over the past, my suggestion is forget about the dispute and him and keep up the good works. Take care! Anpersonalaccount (talk) 19:39, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Busying lately

I am still around, but I am busying lately. I had seen your recent additions. Thanks for letting me know! Regards Anpersonalaccount (talk) 08:22, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

chancellors of china

i need help adding this Category:Chancellors of China to all the articles on the chancellors. also i dont know any chancellors for any dynasty except tang and qin.ㄏㄨㄤㄉㄧ (talk) 21:01, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Leprosy

Why do you insist on putting 'the earliest confirmed specimens of India's earliest written script, the Brāhmī script, are rock-cut inscriptions called the Edicts of Ashoka and are dated to the 3rd century BC; any excavated evidence for writing in India that may predate these Edicts (such as graffiti on pottery shards from Sri Lanka that may date to the 4th century BC) are controversial and their dating ambiguous.' in the history of leprosy of all places? JSR (talk) 13:14, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

I know that you are compiling a list and leprosy is a part of it. You generally do a good job and are a responsible editor. If reliable literature has it that books in India had an earlier mention then just reword it to 'early contributions to' rather than 'invention'. Why decimate the literary history of a civilization by implying that no literary works existed before the Ashokan edicts? JSR (talk) 13:18, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

When you say that "Even if these entire books were part of an oral tradition predating the 3rd century BC, you still have no archaeological evidence of writing before the 3rd century BC, hence you cannot claim that any of these books are older than the 3rd century BC. It's as simple as that, there was not even writing in India before that point, and only shards of graffiti to suggest that there was." you limit it to archaeological evidence and archaeological evidence only. PericlesofAthens, that's not done.

Scholars may employ other methods; Philology being one of them. If scholars of India hold that Indian literature predates Ashoka then that's it. Just because every Chinese book did not survive and Indians wrote on perishable material does not mean that their Literary Canon has to viewed from a narrow viewpoint of radiocarbon dating of surviving scripts. Indian literature is older than Ashoka's edicts whether you believe it or not. Do you want me to bring you sources on this?

JSR (talk) 14:17, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

I almost forgot to ask this: What are your views on India's literature beginning at the time of Ashoka doing in leprosy ? Should you not place that in literature of India or Ashoka? JSR (talk) 14:21, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

You have actually written that: "You can't seriously date something with a great amount of accuracy using philology, especially since we have no records in India predating the 3rd century BC which could explain to us the changes and evolution of the Indian language, slang, dialects, word definitions, etc." when historians have done just that. Linguistics deals with Indian language and word definitions and the work of western scholars on historical linguistic reconstruction of Indian literature in India has been extraordinary. The material that you cited on Indian literature—again in leprosy, an unrelated article and subject in which Richard Salomon (2003) has no expertise—is being used by you to equate the oldest surviving records as the origin—in other words improper synthesis. Also, will you do the same for every book in China that is dated by scholars to be older than the radiocarbon dating of the oldest surviving copy?

Another question that I almost forgot to ask you is that: Does Richard Salomon (2003) deal with lerosy in particular or is he there because you want to make a statement on the literature of India and you want to do it in the Wikipedia article on leprosy?

Also, quit revert warring. Let your reasoning do the talking. No one will believe what you write about India's literature being 2300 years old no matter what you write in the Wikipedia article on leprosy. The section of China remains untouched by me because I add on India and don't attack other countries—as you seem to be doing. I can cite something about script in China and dating of China's texts but general claims do not belong here and I feel that I should not attack other counties when dealing with India's inventions. Try to do the same for your edit pattern.

Let the line go Pericles. It doesn't belong in leprosy. I request you to please remove it or allow me to. We both have bigger problems than a misplaced text (which I'm going to take as well intentioned) to take care of. Things like this happen but lets just move on to bigger issues shall we? We have better and bigger things to worry about than needlessly engage each other in a futile bout of discussions and edits.

JSR (talk) 15:41, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Attack: "any excavated evidence for writing in India that may predate these Edicts (such as graffiti on pottery shards from Sri Lanka that may date to the 4th century BC) are controversial and their dating ambiguous." Archaeological evidence for origins of literature when scholars have already dated Indian literature to the Indo-European Vedas, Ayurveda texts and such.

All the same don't get all worked up over one sentence. Both the Encyclopedia Britannica and the Cambridge Encyclopedia date the Samhita to the 6th century BCE automatically trumping any claim of no literature existing if archaeology doesn't yield anything.

Listen to me: misplaced text no big deal. Let it go already. You still have to make a single contribution to an article today other than leprosy and my talk page and the same goes for me.

JSR (talk) 16:01, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Once again, can we delete redundant text on the origins of literature with respect to leprosy and do real things here? JSR (talk) 16:03, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Its night here so I'm going to go get something to eat (work tomorrow). Please let me know on my talk page. JSR (talk) 16:19, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Why are you begging him to remove the sentence? What I meant is, you've been copying his methods of editing on List of Indian inventions and transfered the very Indian article into a much impressive one than before. So, the question for you is, since you owed him this, why can't his edits to be allowed? Sound fair to me. Anpersonalaccount (talk) 17:26, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Watch what you speak. I'm not 'begging' him to do anything. There is a sentence in the Leprosy article on Wikipedia which is not related to Leprosy and wrongly implies that the literature of India began during the reign of Ashoka. I'm asking him to keep this claim of literature out of an article on a disease. I'm asking him to move on and that's it. As for his work it's impressive and inspirational even. All the more reason why his real friends would ask him not to make a big deal out of one sentence and move on. Editors interested in the history of science need to stick together and maybe even collaborate in future as convergence of interest is unavoidable and only a matter of time. Such a commotion over one sentence—already rendered useless by two encyclopedia and which nobody is going to believe anyway and which in no way helps his program of improving China related articles— is unnecessary. I'm trying to cut down on the building tensions because he generally does good work. JSR (talk) 17:52, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

I don't have to watch what I what spoken, I know what I am talking about, so don't bark at me. You are clearly begging on him, his edits stay and same goes to yours. Oh, in the meantime while you've having your 'dinner', please don't let other's wait for too long on your responds. Because we got works to do towmorrow as well. Anpersonalaccount (talk) 17:55, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Please, the both of you, don't be so antagonistic. This should be a civil discussion here. Anyways, I didn't say the literature of India began with Ashoka's reign, I have been saying that there is no evidence for literature before his reign. Big difference there. I read years ago on a forum (All Empires, by none other than User:Gun Powder Ma) that when the ancient Greeks traveled to the kingdoms of northern India in the 4th century BC for diplomatic affairs, the men at court were great orators, had great memorization, and a strong oral tradition, but did not mention writing or any sort of written script. I don't know how true this is (i.e. haven't read any scholarly research on the matter), but it is something to look into in terms of the preservation of the Vedas through word of mouth via skilled orators in ancient India.--Pericles of Athens^Talk 18:03, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

As for "Editors interested in the history of science need to stick together" how many edits had you made anyway since 6 June 2008? Is this another kind of swank with no real picture? Because I am starting to get used to them these days. Anpersonalaccount (talk) 18:06, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

I remember reading about that too when I was very young, sometime before 2001 I think. Anpersonalaccount (talk) 18:39, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Pericles, Let me look up Britannica on this and that ought to settle it once and for all. India was the hub of global influences (in both directions) and the script may not be native but scholars have already identified that complex documents were written in Indo-European languages earlier. Bear with me on this.

Anpersonalaccount, I may have made only 1349 edits total but also have rewritten 11 full articles and I know that my path with Pericles will overlap since we both edit on 'history of science'—which is why I don't want trivialities to sour things. I was inspired by Pericles and the other article on the History of science and technology in China—to which I hope he gets to soon (he may pick a period scheme similar to my six section division of Indian history here) and I imagine the article would probably be the best 'science and tech' articles on Wiki. One word of advice, Anpersonalaccount: Be polite and take things easily. My knowledge and sources on Chinese science—simple as they may be—are bound to come handy sometime.

JSR (talk) 18:43, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Lol. Hey, thanks for letting me know about that '11 articles' you created. I am now taking it more easily. Anpersonalaccount (talk) 19:02, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I'm very interested in this. I am not some expert in linguistics or ancient scripts, so I don't have much more to say but am open to the ideas of any scholar who stakes their reputation on solid, published research (which Britannica does a good job in representing). In what scripts were the Indo-European languages written in before the Brahmi script? Is there such an article on Wikipedia which already discusses this? It would be good to have better background knowlege about this, but I am unfortunately ignorant of the subject as far as this goes.--Pericles of Athens^Talk 18:56, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

The transmission of alphabets to India may have been long but comparative linguistics makes things just a bit easier (though not much). On another note, thank you for the kind words. I try and bring minimum respectability to some of the neglected wikiproject India articles if I can help it. Nothing like your monumental Joseph Needham like articles but just a small effort. Thanks to Anpersonalaccount as well for taking it easy. 'Good night' (1.10 AM in Agra) :-)

JSR (talk) 19:39, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Sushruta

Hi, could you answer the question I've posed at Talk:Sushruta. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 23:20, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

To use 'circa' or not use 'circa'

I'm not sure if you were asking a question or making a comment, vis-a-vis the use of circa on the Chinese ceramics page; but I did included if for a reason & I would be happy to tell you if you're interested. In any case, thanks for all your work on the Gallery; I think the article is starting to look really good (if I do say so...) Cheers, Isocephaly (talk) 19:28, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

the map i added

the map i added had a reference on the article i pulled it from, Taizong of tang, but i forgot to put in the correct number or something because it isnt showing up.ㄏㄨㄤㄉㄧ (talk) 03:52, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

i see the reference now, it says "Invalid, no text provided" ill try to add the text, if i know where to put it.ㄏㄨㄤㄉㄧ (talk) 03:55, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

the references are on the taizong article but i have no idea how to add them into the tang dynasty article.

something got meesed up on top of there. and now im just explaining what i was doing on the tang dynasty article, i was just trying to explain the type of government, and relationship. keep it hidden in there because i can think of a new way to put it. the relationship between tang and the other countries wasnt exactly the normal kind of tribute relationship, but it wasnt exactly the same as directly ruling them. but i think the map should stay, as it has noted the borders are approximate and explains the map.

and i know you had an issue earlier about finding a correct map for tang, and the current one is correct for a certain year, but the terrirory varied greatly during its reign, the ming dynasty article has ming at its maximum extent depicted. im not trying to make tang or china look good or anything but i think tang should have the maximum extent depicted, and have explanations in the caption because its neighboring relations wasnt like any other dynasty.ㄏㄨㄤㄉㄧ (talk) 20:45, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

no no i wasnt going to keep federation. i was trying to make it a government or administrative section or something, i know there is already a foreign policy section explaining foreign relationships but tang seemed to have a different relationaships with them than other dynasties except han.

what i mean is that on alot of maps in history books the protectorates of tang are shown as part of the empire, and the tributaries are not. but they are shaded differently/ㄏㄨㄤㄉㄧ (talk) 20:56, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

maps from shang to han dynasty displayed in the article

they seem very poorly made, with random disconnected sites and blotches of color all over. i think we need replacements.ㄏㄨㄤㄉㄧ (talk) 21:21, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

the map im refering to now is not when taizong ruled. im talking about the one where china extended into afghanistan, you know with all the protectorates in central asia.ㄏㄨㄤㄉㄧ (talk) 21:10, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

this map is nearly accurate EXCEPT silla and manchuria should not be displayed as part of tang on here. i have a historical atlas which almost shows the same map. File:Tang-map1.gif ㄏㄨㄤㄉㄧ (talk) 21:16, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

the yuan dynasty map has serious problems too, someone made it deliberately to conform with modern china's southern border which was seriously not the case.ㄏㄨㄤㄉㄧ (talk) 21:23, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

hows this for a rewording?

During Emperor Taizong's rule the Tang Empire had a unique realtionship with its neighbors. He was recognized ruler of the turks and tibetans yet did not exercise administrative function and was not allowed to interefere in internal affairs. He served as Emperor of China, Tibet, and Khagan of the Turks at the same time, though it did not last very long. Tribute was obviously expected of course, and the Chinese called upon the Turks and Tibetans several times to serve in their armies. ㄏㄨㄤㄉㄧ (talk) 21:28, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

actually not server, just to suplement its own armies.ㄏㄨㄤㄉㄧ (talk) 21:29, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Hello, I don't think that map is accurate, probably none of these are, actually I am thinking the current ones serve much better purpose, since we're out of choices on selecting a map for each dynasty. To give you just a picture, Yunnan was part of Tang, where the government exercise administrative function over there, the original Nanzhao did not ruled entire Yunnan let alone Guizhou, which was under control of the hybrid Chinese Cuan clan. The Nanzhao or rather all of its unified tribes of 738 were huddle together in an area no larger than the size of an modern average English county. Anpersonalaccount (talk) 03:01, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

list of chinese inventions

should the jiazi dumpling count in there?ㄏㄨㄤㄉㄧ (talk) 19:47, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

source for the thing

i have A History of Chinese Civilization by Jaques Gernet. i beleive it mentions tibetan soldiers being used by Tang commanders when they were called upon to interfere in ?Magadha? i might be wrong though.ㄏㄨㄤㄉㄧ (talk) 21:06, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

i found it and well it doesnt mention the tibetan trooops but i did see it somewhere, that the chinese diplomats were killed, but one escaped, and returned with turk and tibetan soldiers to support the opposite side in a civil war in magadha than the one that killed them.

but here it is anyway.

its on page 238, "the t'ang created chinese prefrectures in Transoxiana and even intervened in northenr India in the region of Patna (dynasty of Harshavardhana, 605-47, in Magadha.ㄏㄨㄤㄉㄧ (talk) 21:35, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

list of chinese inventions

can concepts like feudalism be included in there? im not sure if other societies developed feudalism before china, but the warring states period qualifies for it in the classic sense, with lords that have fiefs, not the landlord/peasant relationship.ㄏㄨㄤㄉㄧ (talk) 22:27, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Congrats.

On the FA of the day. :) · AndonicO ^Engage. 01:58, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Came by to add the same message. Congrats dude. Nice job! lk (talk) 02:22, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Wow. Two FAs on the Main Page in the last few days. You should be very proud. 130.113.81.33 (talk) 03:13, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

I'll second all of the above. Way to go, man. Cliff smith ^talk 03:51, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Hey Eric, it's Evan Larson. I was browsing wikipedia and I noticed the featured article was about China, and I immediately thought it must be yours. And voila, it was. Congratulations from California man, awesome stuff! -MalaclypsetheYounger (talk) 04:29, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

bots

do you know if any of the bots in wikipedia deal with specifically reverting dletions of referenced material?ㄏㄨㄤㄉㄧ (talk) 20:36, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

do you know where we can request it? it could save alot of work.ㄏㄨㄤㄉㄧ (talk) 20:51, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

we definetly need a bot like that, as i thought so, korean nationalist editors are screwing up articles like lelang commandary, like that histographer dude and hairwizird.ㄏㄨㄤㄉㄧ (talk) 03:09, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

what i was anooyed at is that they keep removing links, and replacing chinese names with korean ones.ㄏㄨㄤㄉㄧ (talk) 15:51, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

i followed your suggestion. unfortunetly another korean editor ermoved it again, as i suspected would happen.ㄏㄨㄤㄉㄧ (talk) 02:28, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Chinese Architecture

I just read your edit comment. Can you elaborate on what you do not like?Sjschen (talk) 04:43, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Sorry for deleting some of you hard work dude, no offense intended. Nevertheless I still think that pagodas are such a special case in Chinese architecture that having so many images of them in the article seems a bit "over-represented" Sjschen (talk) 23:46, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

confucinism not a religion

from now on we should put confucinism in |Philosophy =

in the former state info box.ㄏㄨㄤㄉㄧ (talk) 04:39, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

wait im not sure if thats real i saw in in zhou dynasty editing but it isnt displayingㄏㄨㄤㄉㄧ (talk) 04:41, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Photos again

I am travelling again, this time in Anhui (Huangshan) and Hangzhou. Any photo requests? Also, I just took a trip to Tibet, so if you want any photos from there, I can see what I have. Zeus1234 (talk) 09:37, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

I've just finished uploading some pagoda photos. There are new photos of the Zhenfeng Pagoda in Anqing from the Ming Dynasty, of the more recent Wanfo Pagoda in Jiuhuashan, additional photos of the Baochu Pagoda in Hangzhou to supplement the one already uploaded, and of the 1924-built Qiji Futa Pagoda in Harbin. Enjoy! Zeus1234 (talk) 14:14, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

seriously

its regarding several changes made to articles on china.162.83.160.174 (talk) 19:43, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

how about uncyclopedia? i cant play any tricks there.162.83.160.174 (talk) 20:02, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

hey this anon ip 128.100.109.6 keeps reverting middle and old chinese to Chinese on every single chinese dynasty article. he says "they were spoken languages, not written", apparently he doesnt know what vernacular and classical chinese are... he probably thinks chinese is an ideographic writing system but its not.162.84.137.245 (talk) 19:06, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Apparently you are the one who don't understand what "old/middle Chinese" means. As stated in Old Chinese and Middle Chinese articles, they are both spoken languages. On the other hand, 128.100.109.6 reverted them to "Chinese" (it linked to Chinese language, not Spoken Chinese, unlike the one you linked to above). As spoken languages, the terms "old/middle Chinese" certainly did not include Classical Chinese, which was the official written language used by the courts and considerably different from the written forms that modeled the spoken languages during these dynasties, but Chinese language includes both spoken Chinese (old/middle Chinese, etc) and written languages such as Classical Chinese.--209.183.20.236 (talk) 21:01, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

yuan dynasty is protected, Chinese languages needs to be changed to middle chinese.162.84.137.245 (talk) 19:46, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

No, it should stay what it is now. See the comment above. Even more, the Chinese spoken during the Yuan was Modern Chinese, not Middle Chinese (which was a SPOKEN language from Southern and Northern Dynasties to Song dynasty).--209.183.20.236 (talk) 21:01, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

oh yeah then since when was the written langugage supposed to be put in the info box? thats bull, its like putting latin alphabet into roman empire, classical chinese was modeled on old chinese, might as well put old chinese into every one of them. LOL162.84.135.252 (talk) 22:45, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

On your Han Dynasty project

Hi PoA,
Nice to see that you're doing the same thing for the Han as you did for the Song. You like periods with polymaths, don't you! Your industrial-sized "sandboxes" are very impressive. Here are a few suggestions for reading, not exhaustive of course, but I tried to pick a few good books. In pretty much random order:
- You'll find a lot of useful info and relevant references in Mark Edward Lewis's The Early Chinese Empires: Qin and Han (2007).
- Read everything you can find on the "Wu Family Shrines" (including a website [3] developed by Anthony Barbieri-Low): it will tell you a lot about religion, conceptions of the afterlife, and material culture. Just Google it.
- Don't forget John Major's Heaven and Earth in Early Han Thought: Chapters Three, Four, and Five of the Huainanzi.
- Derk Bodde's Festivals in Classical China (an enduring classic).
- On law: A. Hulsewe's Remnants of Han Law and Wilt Idema's Thought and Law in Qin and Han China.
- There's no good survey of Han philosophy in English, partly because people are just starting to study it more in depth. You should probably start with Mark Csikszentmihalyi's Readings in Han Chinese Thought (2006), because it's recent, it has good intros to texts, and it's written by a guy who has studied Han thought in some depth (especially the "Huang-Lao" movement). For Dong Zhongshu, get Sarah Queen's From Chronicle to Canon: The Hermeneutics of the Spring and Autumn Annals according to Tung Chung-shu (1996; sorry, man, it's in Wade-Giles).
- You mentioned Michael Loewe's The Men Who Governed China, but not his Biographical Dictionary of the Qin, Former Han, and Xin Periods, 221 BC – AD 24, an essential source you must already know about.
- An invaluable resource for studying Han "foreign relations" and geographical knowledge is John Hill's translation of Chapter 88 (on the "Western Regions," Xiyu 西域) of the Hou Hanshu 後漢書 (Book of the Later Han).[4] His page also has a six-fold appendix on the silk trade and other issues [5]. Pretty amazing scholarship, which will complement Yu Ying-shih's book very well.
There's a whole lot more (including a lot of articles), but I'll stop here for today. I'll try to find a few good works on medicine for you, including one on dissections under Wang Mang. Interesting stuff. See ya! Cheers,--Madalibi (talk) 09:11, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Hey bro! To add one little morsel to this cornucopia - I hope it's not actually a "litany" ;)- here's the reference to the cool article on dissection that I mentioned:

Yamada Keiji (1991). "Anatometrics in Ancient China." Chinese Science 10: 39-52.

I promise I'll give you more on medicine soon!--Madalibi (talk) 10:24, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

When I write a paper (or a long wiki, I guess), I like to rely on a working outline that I refine as I write. The outline allows me to have many issues in mind as soon as I open my very first book on a topic. The new ideas I get while reading can in turn reshape my outline and make me think more. I find this a very useful way of working and I would recommend it for most kinds of papers, and especially research papers. This is why I've composed already outlines for my sandboxes on Shunzhi, Kangxi, Yongzheng, Qianlong, Tongzhi, and the Qing dynasty even if I haven't written anything in them yet. This is just one way of working among many others, but it's worked well for me! But man, I wish I had the patience to write notes about almost every page of the books I read. You must have great files of your readings. Keep them preciously: they'll be very useful in grad school. If you're interested, PM me on you-know-what-site and I can give you some advice (if you allow me to use this word) on how to keep really useful short files on the books you've read. I just love my advisor for having taught me that skill! Cheers,--Madalibi (talk) 09:40, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

One last note: even if a working outline usually makes you realize how much you still need to learn, it also provides a framework for learning, and it actually makes huge topics like "the Han dynasty" (+ society, philosophy, etc.) seem less daunting than they originally appeared.--Madalibi (talk) 09:51, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

I saw your outlines several days ago, but for some reason I forgot to reply. They're of course very impressive, and I'm glad that you're aiming for the featured status right off the chauve-souris (as any Frenchman would certainly say). I'll be glad to provide suggestions for enhancements once I see the drafts. (And I haven't forgotten about the references on medicine. Just give me a week.) Have a good time writing! --Madalibi (talk) 07:13, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Before I either forget or postpone again, here are the works on Han medicine that I promised you. I'm not sure you'll find them all on JSTOR, but you have the Library of Congress nearby, so I'm not too worried!

• Bridgman, Robert F. 1955. "La médecine dans la Chine antique." Mélanges chinois et bouddhiques 10: 1-213. [Still very useful despite its age.]
• Harper, Donald (1990). "The Conception of Illness in Early Chinese Medicine, as Documented in Newly Discovered 3rd and 2nd Century BC Manuscripts." Sudhoffs Archiv 74: 210-35. [Based on the Mawangdui medical manuscripts.]
• ––––– (1998). Early Chinese Medical Literature: The Mawangdui Medical Manuscripts. London: Royal Asiatic Society, 1998. Sir Henry Wellcome Asian Series.
• Hsü, Elizabeth, editor (2001). Innovation in Chinese Medicine. Needham Research Institute Studies, 3. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• ––––– (2001b). "Pulse diagnostics in the Western Han: how mai [脈] and qi [氣] determine bing [病]." In Hsü 2001a: 51-91.
• Lo, Vivienne (1999). "Tracking the Pain: Jue and the Formation of a Theory of Circulating Qi through the Channels." Sudhoffs Archiv 83.
• ––––– (2001). "The influence of nurturing life culture on the development of Western Han acumoxa therapy." In Hsü 2001a: 19-50.
• Loewe, Michael (1997). "The Physician Chunyu Yi and his Historical Background." In Gernet, Jacques, and Mark Kalinowski (eds.), En suivant la voie royale. Mélanges en hommage à Léon Vandermeersch: 297-313. Études thématiques 7. Paris: École Française d’Extrême-Orient. [Chunyu Yi has a biography in chapter 105 of the Shiji.]
• Raphals, Lisa (1998a). "The Treatment of Women in a Second-Century Medical Casebook." Chinese Science 15: 7-23. [Also on Chunyu Yi.]
• Sivin, Nathan (1995a). "State, Cosmos, and Body in the First Three Centuries B.C." Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies 55.1: 5-37. [Very important!]
• ––––– (1995b). "Text and Experience in Classical Chinese Medicine." In Don Bates (ed.), Knowledge and the scholarly medical traditions: 177-204. Cambridge University Press.
• Sivin, Nathan, and Geoffrey Lloyd (2002). The Way and the Word: Science and Medicine in Early China and Greece. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press.
• ––––– (1998b) Sharing the Light: Representations of Women and Virtue in Early China. Albany, NY: SUNY Press. [For more general insights on early Chinese women, including those from Han times.]

I know there's way too much, but you can select what you're interested in. Sivin is always a good start, because he discusses broad historical issues. Good reading! --Madalibi (talk) 06:14, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

I'm too busy (ok, I mean lazy) to find the links, but Sivin's articles should be available on his website. I notice that your new sandbox (which I like very much!) has something on astronomy. If this is a topic you're planning to include, you should not miss this article on Han Wudi's important calendar reform:

• Christopher Cullen (1993). "Motivations for Scientific Change in Ancient China: Emperor Wu and the Grand Inception Astronomical Reforms of 104 B.C." Journal for the History of Astronomy 24: 185-203.

I didn't tell you, but I'm extremely jealous about the Library of Congress! All I have here is a municipal library that has the Chinese translation of "Chicken Soup for the Soul" and that kind of stuff. Aaargh... --Madalibi (talk) 08:16, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

source for the tang dynasty map

for the tang dynasty map, im sure there are already sources about the turks recognizing taizong surzeinity, and i have the title and page numbers and author of a book that says it so that shouldnt be a problem. im not sure about any source for the tibet thing but i think it was inscribed on a column somewhere? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 162.84.167.109 (talk) 20:59, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

i think he wrote that because ALL ancient maps are not accurate in their borders. the things i see in yugs map fit the standard maps of the gokturk khanates borders that i see for that time.162.84.159.3 (talk) 20:02, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Zhou dynasty map, fiefdoms

you know i know a book, the Times Atlas of World History that has a map of the different zhou fiefdoms, and a good map of the han dynasty.162.84.131.3 (talk) 04:09, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

yeah i need a cartographer.141.155.151.117 (talk) 22:01, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Tang Dynasty

Kudos on such a great article. Most impressive! 140.247.131.119 (talk) 18:44, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! Keep an eye on Han Dynasty, it will look VERY different by the time 2009 comes around. That's a promise. Look at my notes at User:PericlesofAthens/Sandbox, and navigate through all my sandbox pages.

Cheers!-Pericles of Athens^Talk 00:20, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Hey, I tagged the infobox on the Tang Dynasty page, and put my full comments in a new section which is currently at the bottom of the talk page. The most important point is that I find it confusing that only the first six emperors and the first six chancellors are listed (without explanation as to why the list is truncated). From looking at the source, this looks like a limitation of the currently-used infobox template. Given your heavy (and admirable :-) involvement, I'm glad that you're looking into this. Cheers. Supasheep (talk) 13:15, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Han Dynasty

check out this map i made.

Historian of the arab people (talk) 20:02, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

year AD 2, the green dot was supposed to represent an embassy/military post in Parthian persia but i decided not to get into the whole diplomacy thing...

Done.

i know the crenelations arent straight, but i have no tool specifically designed to make them.

Plain version

ive created a plain version of the map, you have no idea how long it took me to get the right shade of gray and eliminate all the borders.

the book i have has a detailed mpa of the early zhou feudal states during the spring and autumn period. if i have a blank backround map of east asia with the sub administrative divisions i could fit in all the small zhou states and details, and it has a good map of the qin dynasty too. i use subdivions and geographical features to make my maps relative to the ones i copy.

Little boxes, big boxes...

You asked why the box was moved.

• Because info boxes that give a string of consecutive articles, (such as historical periods, Books by an author etc etc, are often horizontal and fit neatly at the foot of the page, for the benefit of a person who wants to look at the next, when they have finished the one that they are reading now.
• As an artist who has work in layout and design (among many other things) I am offended by poor layout. It offends me intensely thhat people created boxes to go under boxes, ie for the same series of article, and don't bother to make them match. If they arre going to look any good, they need to be the same width, and harmonious layout. That narrow box under the wide one looks simply awful.
• The list of references for that article is very long. Like most ref lists, it keeps to the left. The blank space down the side can well be filled by a long info box.
• The info box, of itself tells you almost nothing about the subject of the article. It is a generic box. Having the date of the dynasty within that Topic Box is sufficient.
• The info boxes, both of them, take up space which I personally believe would be better occupied by good illustrations than repeating info contained in the text. However, the topic box could be said to be an effective summary. (So is the introduction, of course).
• I commented on the layout. The whole layout of this article was dreadful, previous to my rearrangement. If I had looked at it when it was up for FA, I would have fixed it before such a visually ghastly mess became the article of the day.
• Lastly, you did what people who jam in info boxes often do, either don't look, or else DO look but simply don't see the result of your action. It's not always apparent.

When you jam a box or and addition illustration on top of a pic that is tied in place to some text, then it pushes the picture, and all the ttext below it further down the page. The gap so created frequently occurs immediately bbelow the section heading, so that you end up effectively orphaning the heading from the text that it pertains to .

If you screen is quite narrow, you may not notice this happening. It might only take effect on a wide screen. If your screen is wide, then it would have been apparent when you used the Show preview. It's obvious that a great many picture and box editors don't bother to look, because even on a very narrow screen they manage to casue problems.

I have fixed the problem by moving the pic to the left.

If you have a narrow screen, and you find that your changes have caused a pic to sit snugly right below a box, then you know for sure that it will look bad on a wide screen. Conversely, if you have a wide screen, then you can easily visualise the effect that you layout edits have had by making a "favourites bar" down the left, and enlarging it sideways to squeeze the text box into various proportions.

Cheers! Amandajm (talk) 01:00, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Confucius says "Sagacity and Humour will overcome all slings and arrows of outraged artist" or something like that!

This Boxy problem is ongoing, the problem is that it is always done by people who are seeking to improve things... sorry I was so rude!

I hope that the current arrangement is a propitious one! It's an excellent article of course! Congratulations on your FA! Amandajm (talk) 01:36, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

New drafts

Hi PoA, and thanks for your encouraging comments! I'm of course studying from THE master of China-related articles on the wiki, but I haven't written anything yet! Anyway, I've just created a new structure for the Qianlong wiki that should improve the article if I ever get around to writing it. Check it out! This is all very time-consuming, but also extremely addictive, I must say. And there's so much missing... I'll try to keep at it without forgetting about my real life. Cheers, --Madalibi (talk) 04:34, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

On the Ming dynasty, you're welcome. They were truly strange additions. I've also opened more sandboxes on Qing emperors, so check'em out and don't hesitate to leave comments and suggestions!--Madalibi (talk) 00:08, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

I'm taking over the Qing, then! I've just added the names and dates of Shunzhi's sons. Took forever to look through the Draft History of the Qing (Qingshi gao 清史稿). I'll try to keep adding material once in a while, but I should REALLY get back to my real work at some point! Anyway, I plan to write wikis on the major emperors before I tackle the Qing dynasty article. By the way, I haven't seen your Han drafts in your sandboxes. Are you writing offline? Bye,--Madalibi (talk) 05:45, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

history of Military equipmeant, techonoly of china article

do we have any particular article here containing all the history of the weaponry and a wikimedia commons category for the imagess i.e. the manuals and instructions with the drawings of the weapons. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.155.156.23 (talk) 06:25, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Not exactly, but Wikimedia Commons does have pages like these:

• http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Weapons_of_China
• http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Armour_of_China

And on Wikipedia there is Chinese armour and of course a category called Category:Weapons of China.

I hope that all of this helps.--Pericles of Athens^Talk 19:07, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

have you ever resarched the flora and fauna of ancient china? on shang bronzes there are elephants depicted and rhinos that arent there today. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.155.156.23 (talk) 21:48, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

the manuals and other things needham describes in his books

where the hell did he get the ancient manuals and texts? is there original text somewhere or on the internet?

Well, first of all, may I ask who you are? You forgot to sign your comment by adding this tag of four tildes, or ~~~~. Second of all, I believe what you are asking about is a primary source. Needham was a respected scholar who could easily gain access to old materials. University libraries and other public facilities (such as the Library of Congress in Washington D.C. for example) have many old original documents. Also, primary source documents can be converted to microform, so that the original materials can be better preserved while miniature photo copies of them can be made available to the wider scholarly community. Since Needham died shortly after the public introduction of the internet, he would have relied on these traditional methods of study which did not involve online databases where ancient, medieval, and early modern documents can now be posted. Since he could read and write in traditional Chinese characters, he did not have to rely on English translations of premodern Chinese documents either.--Pericles of Athens^Talk 05:32, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Untitled message

i assumed that signbot gets to all of the comments —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.155.153.231 (talk) 21:48, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

PR request

Hi Pericles; since you're known for your Chinese history articles (and because you're currently working on Han Dynasty), would you mind taking a few moments to peer review Luan Da? I'd be grateful if you did. Nousernamesleft (talk) 01:08, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

What a day!

		The Original Barnstar
		For just being you day after day Happydude 69ya (talk) 21:34, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

		The Editor's Barnstar
		and making the day fun Happydude 69ya (talk) 21:34, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		What a day Happydude 69ya (talk) 21:34, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Um, thanks?--Pericles of Athens^Talk 21:40, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

LANGUAGE

the Chinese language that was put into the infobox of every dynasty is very ambiguous if you look at the article. the proper things to put in are Old Chinese, Middle Chinese,han'er, Proto-Mandarin, and Mandarin.Julius Ceasarus From Primus (talk) 04:08, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

just wondering, do you know where the wikipedia hard drives are located? and are they encased in a 5 feet thick iron case? if anyone tosses a bomb in the place it could screw all the editors hard work up unless they backup.Julius Ceasarus From Primus (talk) 21:37, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Maps

China-Historic macro areas.svg

Hello, I made [again, since I had lost my data O.O] the following map. I personnaly think this is an important map to understand and help to read Chinese history, but I don't know where to put it. If you know where to put it, your help will be appreciate. If you have some comments, they are welcome too. Yug (talk) 23:38, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Ok, thanks, I will look in these ways.

PS: I can make general maps on request for Han, Tang, and Ming, since I have access to the Cambridge History of China vol 1 (Qin-Han), vol.3 (Sui-Tang), and vol.7 (Ming.).

If you are interested by one issues display on this books, tell me. Yug (talk) 13:21, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Maps links

The currecnt maps of shang, zhou, and the warring states are bad quality maps based on city centers and population and activity concentration than state control, there are several good maps at these links, if you can find a mapmaker? They are all basically the same when representing the same periods, so it shouldnt be a problem for someone making it.

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

[10]

[11]

[12]

these are great maps of the zhou dynasty, the inner line in the west zhou appears to be the shang dynasty

[13]

[14]

[15]

[16]

han dynasty

this map is fairly accurate.

[17] - Han, no source.

General rule

As you can guest, I now become more 'professional' in map creation. Accordingly, to create a new map, I now need a : 1. clear source + 2. trustable source + 3. strong need such as your request ;)

Previous links

Great ! I seen several links, interesting ! For sure, that will allow me to draw clear maps. That's a good start. Note: these scans don't cite their sources (for those I had check), sadly. I now prefer spend my 'map creation time' to reuse clearly cited and trustable sources. So the the Shang, Zhou, and divided periods before the Qin dynasty will not be my priority. I will check all this links one by one later (I leave France in 48hours O.o)

i have a reputable source which Back up these links Julius posted. its on your talk page, Yug. The maps in muy book exactly match those in the links, i think these representations are actually standard in mappiing history.Historian of the arab people (talk) 17:27, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Han

I'll be rewriting the article on the Han Dynasty very soon, so I might need your services in creating a map sooner than you think. Cambridge is always a trustworthy source.--Pericles of AthensTalk 17:58, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Great ! I have trustable sources for both Han periods ! (Cambridge History of China ; Atlas Duby) And was interested to work on these periods : I love the Tang period, which continously cite the Han dynasty.

When need, tell me when you will need one Han map. I will do my best to provide it one week later.

regards, Yug (talk) 11:50, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Yeap : I'm admirative of the high quality work done by Jack Yuan (user:Yu Ninjie). In fact, my aim is both to continue his work, a to create a set of SVG tools and icons for Chinese history maps. Time will say. -- Yug (talk) 17:11, 6 December 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.147.248.245 (talk)

Han Dynasty collection

I just stumbled across your set of Han Dynasty sandboxes. Can't wait to see them published into articles! If you need a second set of eyes at any point, I'd be happy to help. --Hemlock Martinis (talk) 19:13, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Gathering sources for a paper

Word up? I am gathering sources for a paper on cotton trade in the middle east and Asia. Please see this question at the reference desk for more details. See this thread on CHF as well. I've contacted several historians on the subject and they have been really helpful. I'm sure you've run across mentions of cotton production in some of Neeham's books and some of the others you used to write the Song articles. Could you check the indexes of those for mentions of cotton? Thanks. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 20:40, 5 December 2008 (UTC)