Talk:The Scholars (novel)

Untitled

The title should be "The Scholars", but there's already a page by that name.

Xihe 12:34, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Page title

I'd like to move this page to Rulin waishi. All of the article's English-language sources use this title. The current title is from a 1972 translation. This translation is being vastly outsold by Wei Shang's Rulin waishi and Cultural Transformation in Late Imperial China (2003). As far as an English translation of the title goes, The Unofficial History of the Scholars (Shang's translation) is clearly superior to The Scholars. Nine Zulu queens (talk) 07:00, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

Many thanks to Nine Zulu queens for excellent improvements to this important article. It is now much more useful.

However, I respectfully disagree with moving the article on the same day (June 24) as the suggestion above, without waiting for discussion or consensus, and changing The Scholars to The Unofficial History of the Scholars in other articles, such as Yang Xianyi, where the change was made without a specific edit summary to inform other editors.

I can accept moving the article to Rulin waishi, but not the blanket change to The Unofficial History of the Scholars, with no mention of the far wider The Scholars.

The Scholars is the title of the only translation and the used in textbooks, the scholarly literature, and such references as Encyclopedia Britannica. Respectfully, there is no evidence that it is being "outsold" by Shang Wei's 2003 book.

Shang’s 1998 article in HJAS here uses “The Scholars” throughout, and in the Sino-Platonic Papers article here uses only “Rulin Waishi” though it does cite the Yangs’ translation once, The Scholars. Slupski translates it as “An Unofficial Chronicle of Confucian Scholars” here

A Google search for “The Unofficial History of the Scholars” here finds that the Cambridge History of Chinese Literature From 1375 uses “The Scholars” (p. 274 ff); Martin Huang uses “The Scholars” here, with “Unofficial History” only as a literal translation; several others use a literal translation, “Unofficial History of the Forest of Scholars.”

For future reference: WP:NCBOOKS#Title translations says "If the book is best known by an English title, use that version of the title." WP:COMMONNAME "generally prefers the name that is most commonly used (as determined by its prevalence in a significant majority of independent, reliable English-language sources). WP:TITLECHANGES says titles not be changed without a discussion.

On a less important point, the Manual of Style/Chinese and Chinese-related articles 1.4.1 says that tone marks are "not used names or terms that appear in the normal flow of an article."

All the best!ch (talk) 21:13, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

All three of this article's references give the title of the book as Rulin waishi. "For foreign names, phrases, and words generally, adopt the spellings most commonly used in English-language references for the article," according to MOS:FOREIGN. Oxford's A Dictionary of Chinese Literature (2017) opens "Rulin waishi 儒林外史 ‎ ( Wade–Giles: Ju-lin wai-shih , The Unofficial History of the Scholars, Unofficial History of the Literati)." As far as Britannica goes, the link above is to a "directory page," their version of a disambiguation page. In the actual encyclopedia, they have three examples of Rulin waishi/Rulin waishi and one for The Scholars. [1][2] While we are quoting guidelines: "Other encyclopedias are among the sources that may be helpful in deciding what titles are in an encyclopedic register, as well as what names are most frequently used," per WP:COMMONNAME. Nine Zulu queens (talk) 02:44, 27 June 2018 (UTC)

It think you are misreading Cambridge History. They use The Unofficial History of the Scholars both as their section heading and as the name of the book upon first mention. The Scholars is treated as a shortened form and is used upon subsequent mention. I suggest we do the same. Nine Zulu queens (talk) 09:47, 27 June 2018 (UTC)

Apologies for the delay in replying to your thoughtful comments. I agree with your good suggestion that the The Scholars should be used in the body of the articles. It should be added to the first sentence of the lead and changed back in other articles. As a side note, the index to Cambridge History has only The Scholars, with no entries for Rulin Waishi or The Unofficial History of the Scholars. Other works add Forest of Scholars. So I think you are right to keep it simple! ch (talk) 16:03, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

Title of the novel

Using pinyin for the page name but English in the article is odd and confusing. Adding to this, different Wikipedia pages use all three of the proposed titles. The Scholars seems to me the most reasonable title for the page and book. It meets four of the five criteria listed in WP:CRITERIA, whereas I don't think Rulin waishi is recognisable or natural (as the translation isn't titled that), and Unofficial History of the Scholars has those issues, is not concise, and is arguably original research.

Moreover, WP:NCB states that "For some books it cannot be determined, not even by educated guesswork, which version of the title is the most common. For these books, try to determine which of the widely spread versions of the book in the English-speaking world was the most authoritative original (that is, the version that contributed most to the book's becoming known in the English-speaking world), and stick to the title as it appeared on that edition." This must be the only English translation.

Generally I think @CWH's arguments above are more convincing than Nine Zulu queens's, especially since a work of literature is by definition a source on itself (eg see WP:NOVELPLOT).

Therefore, I suggest moving the page title to The Scholars and changing the title on other Wikipedia pages. CohenTheBohemian (talk) 05:20, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for bringing this up. To me, the "educated guesswork" seems to tip the balance to The Scholars. It's the title of the only English translation, it's more familiar outside sinological circles. I added several references that use that title. The scholars who study The Scholars (Scholars scholars?) are right to use more rigorous titles, but there are several, so it would be hard to decide which one. In any case, Wikipedia is directed at the general public and students.

But "The Scholars" leads to a disambig page, so it would have to be "The Scholars (Chinese novel)" or some such. But we should give formal notice and wait for others to chime in.ch (talk) 20:00, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

I checked to see if Nine Zulu queens is still active and found that their account has been blocked for sockpuppetry.ch (talk) 20:06, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

Yes, looking at the disambiguation page, "The Scholars (novel)" would be fine. I'll request a move unless you have a better idea. CohenTheBohemian (talk) 04:41, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

A decisive factor is that the pages for all of the other classic novels at Classic Chinese Novels are in English. So let's WP:BEBOLD I'll edit the first line in preparation..ch (talk) 05:18, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

Requested move 15 May 2022

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

---

Result:
Moved per survey below. Closure requested <permalink>. Thanks and kudos to editors for your input; good health to all! P.I. Ellsworth - ed. ^put'r there 03:00, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

---

Rulin waishi → The Scholars (novel) – I feel we should rename the page because this title would meet more of the page title criteria at WP:CRITERIA, and because WP:NCB states that if it's unclear what the most common title is, that page should be named after "the version that contributed most to the book's becoming known in the English-speaking world", which, in my opinion, is clearly the only English translation. "(novel)" is needed for disambiguation, but there are no other pages on novels with this title, so "(Chinese novel)" is unnecessary and overlong. CohenTheBohemian (talk) 08:56, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

Strong support: all of the other classic novels in the article Classic Chinese Novels use an English translation

This is reasonable, as per the many reasons cited in previous discussions on this page. True, much sinological scholarship uses Rulin Waishi or one or another of the fuller translated titles. But China scholars writing for the general public, which is Wikipedia's audience, tend to use The Scholars. The name of the article is not intelligible if you don't know Chinese.ch (talk) 18:32, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.