Jump to content

Talk:Emperor Xuanzong of Tang

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former good article nomineeEmperor Xuanzong of Tang was a History good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
February 18, 2009Good article nomineeNot listed
On this day...Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on July 14, 2013, July 14, 2014, and July 14, 2016.

Expansion

[edit]

Great work so far, User:Nlu! Your biographies on China's emperors is one of the most impressive works on Wikipedia. Keep the expansion coming!--Pericles of AthensTalk 04:09, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your encouragement. Certainly I hope to keep it going. --Nlu (talk) 13:53, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Idem Pericles claims. Many thanks Nlu ! 220.135.4.212 (talk) 12:06, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! --Nlu (talk) 04:14, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merger proposal

[edit]

The article Poetry of Tang Xuanzong is unreferenced and add little, if any information that is not available in this article already. Narthring (talk • contribs) 03:12, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think one caveat here is that in the case of someone who may wish to look up the poet Tang Xuanzong (for instance, from the Three Hundred Tang Poems), and that person does not know that this is the same person as Emperor Xuanzong of Tang. This is especially relevant because the article on the emperor is relatively long to scan through quickly for this type of information. Ming Huang is also important in the case of poetry due to the cases of Li Bai, Du Fu, etc. Many Tang persons can be looked at for their importance as important military or political figures and/or as poets, and I think it is important, and, at times, difficult to keep a balance. From the viewpoint of poetry, Ming Huang/Tang Xuanzong is notable in his own right, not so much for his own poetry as for his patronage of poets and for the events involving him, Yang Guifei, and the An Lu Shan rebellion. Indeed, from this viewpoint Yang Guifei and the An Lushan disorders are very important (as well as Li Bai's time at court) -- and the rest of the biographic and historical material of the article irrelevant, and perhaps overwhelming. The Tang Xuanzong poem is probably not important enough for its own article, however I don't know if it would be better to merge it into the "Emperor Xuanzong of Tang" article, and expand that article appropriately, or if it would be better to have a separate article on Xuanzong, Yang Guifei, and the An Lu Shan disorders and their impact on Chinese poetry and literature, and merge the the "Poetry of Tang Xuanzong" article into that one. Dcattell (talk) 01:01, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the output of the above template: the source page was converted to a redirect page to "Poetry" section. Dcattell (talk) 20:43, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Readability needs improvement

[edit]

With all respect to the various contributors, this article is extremely difficult to follow for someone not intimately familiar with the material. Looking at other pages on Emperors, and indeed rulers of other places and times, the problem is easy to identify.

There seems to be an unusual emphasis here on listing scores and scores of other persons, their alternate names, titles, family relations, etc. even when their importance is minor at best. Now, A+ for completeness, but this approach makes it almost completely impossible to discern who is actually of importance, and worse, what is even going on. The vast majority of sentences are buried under a flow-breaking wall of names. For instance, this passage:

"By summer 713, it was said that Princess Taiping, Dou, Cen, Xiao, Cui; along with other officials Xue Ji, Li Jin (李晉) the Prince of Xinxing (a grandson of Li Deliang (李德良), a cousin of Tang's founder Emperor Gaozu), Li You (李猷), Jia Yingfu (賈膺福), Tang Jun (唐晙); the generals Chang Yuankai (常元楷), Li Ci (李慈), and Li Qin (李欽); and the monk Huifan, were plotting to overthrow Emperor Xuanzong. It was further said that they discussed, with the lady in waiting Lady Yuan to poison the gastrodia elata that Emperor Xuanzong routinely took as an aphrodisiac. When this alleged plot was reported to Emperor Xuanzong by Wei Zhigu, Emperor Xuanzong, who had already received advice from Wang Ju (王琚), Zhang Shuo, and Cui Riyong to act first, did so. He convened a meeting with his brothers Li Longfan the Prince of Qi and Li Longye the Prince of Xue (who had changed their names to Li Fan and Li Ye by this point to observe naming taboo for Emperor Xuanzong), Guo Yuanzhen, along with a number of his associates — the general Wang Maozhong (王毛仲), the officials Jiang Jiao (姜皎) and Li Lingwen (李令問), his brother-in-law Wang Shouyi (王守一), the eunuch Gao Lishi, and the military officer Li Shoude (李守德) — and decided to act first."

First of all, this passage names 34 people (not counting the Emperor, since this IS his article), and yes, I am counting the brothers twice each, since their name changes are hardly germane to the matter. Reading this, it is impossible to discern who is actually important, and very difficult to even follow. Furthermore, the fourth and final sentence here seems to be solely an excuse for name spam, the meaning being entirely contained in the previous sentence.

I really have no idea where to start. I'd love to clear some of the chaff, but there is SO MUCH of it that with my only moderate knowledge of the period, I have no idea who all is safe to cut. Is there a reason the above cannot be changed to:

"By summer 713, it was said that Princess Taiping, Dou, Cen, Xiao, Cui along with Xue Ji and other officials were plotting to overthrow Emperor Xuanzong. It was further said that they discussed poisoning the gastrodia elata that Emperor Xuanzong routinely took as an aphrodisiac. When this alleged plot was reported to Emperor Xuanzong by Wei Zhigu, Emperor Xuanzong convened a meeting with his brothers and close associates, and came to the decision to act first."  ?

Is there a reason we can't do this with the whole article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.9.152.146 (talk) 10:19, 17 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Emperor Xuanzong of Tang. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:22, 5 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress

[edit]

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Emperor Xuānzong of Tang which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 00:15, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 26 August 2018

[edit]
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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Consensus not to move (All the IP votes are by the nominator, per this Sockpuppet report), therefore, not moved. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 12:18, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Emperor Xuanzong of Tang → Li Longji (Tang Ming Huang) – This article mainly talks about Li Longji, whose posthumous name is Tang Ming Huang. During his reign, Tang dynasty flourished to its heyday firstly, but finally weakened by An Lushan Rebellion seriously. However, there is an article which has a similar title "Emperor Xuanzong of Tang (9th century)" and mainly talks about Li Chen, Emperor Xuānzong in latter Tang dynasty, in English Wikipedia. In order to distinguish from each other, I think it is a good idea to change this article's title to "Li Longji (Tang Ming Huang)". 123.121.173.87 (talk) 04:20, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

123.121.173.87 (or perhaps both you and 111.194.18.194, but the similarities in your actions are striking), these titles were chosen as the result of a move discussion linked above. Please read Wikipedia:Primary topic to understand how they are currently distinguished. Also, we do not normally use two ways to refer to a subject in a title. The disambiguator acts as an identifying category, not an alternate identifying name. Finally, new talk sections go at the bottom of the relevant talk page, not the top. Since you have now filed several similar requests, it would be helpful for you to familiarize yourself with these conventions before proceeding further. Dekimasuよ! 15:29, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Please read the proposal put forward by 123.121.173.87 carefully. The emperor mainly talked by this article also known as his birth name Li Longji and his posthumous name Tang Ming Huang. In order to distinguish the two Tang-dynasty emperor whose temple names are same as "Emperor Xuanzong of Tang" in English, I support the page-moved proposal.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.124.233.241 (talk) 11:04, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Please read the proposal put forward by 123.121.173.87 and my comments above carefully. You will know the necessity of this page-moved proposal. If you want to search for this emperor in Wikipedia, this article's proposed title "Li Longji (Tang Ming Huang)" can better distinguish from the other article's title named "Emperor Xuanzong of Tang (9th century)".— Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.124.233.241 (talk) 11:44, 30 August 2018 (UTC)(Striking !vote, as this is a duplicate of the IP user's creation of this proposal – see the outcome of the SPI discussion). Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 12:17, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

An Lushan Rebellion <-> An-Shi Rebellion

[edit]

I don't know which one should be used, since they are both interchangeable kind of. I would like people to vote on this, since I just changed it and I'm not sure about what it should be called in this article. I have not yet reverted my edit. Friend505 (talk) 12:36, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Friend505 if that's a discussion you'd like to initiate, the proper place is likely Talk:An Lushan Rebellion. Currently An–Shi Rebellion redirects to An Lushan Rebellion per a requested move discussion which took place about ten years ago. As long as we're using one name or the other consistently throughout this article, it probably doesn't matter much which term we use. <3 Folly Mox (talk) 19:33, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, good idea, Folly Mox. But what should I do about it? Thanks. I am a fairly new user needing enough advice to proceed as a Wikipedian. Friend505 (talk) 20:10, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Friend505: the relevant process is described at Wikipedia:Requested moves/Controversial, with exact instructions at Wikipedia:Requested_moves#Requesting_a_single_page_move. For Wikipedia's purposes, any move that has been discussed in the past is considered controversial because some editors could reasonably disagree with it. A look at Talk:An Lushan Rebellion shows that the page started out as An Shi Rebellion, and a move to An Lushan Rebellion was discussed in 2003, 2008, and late 2010. In early 2011 the third move discussion was closed with the consensus to move the page to its current title. That does seem long enough ago that consensus may have changed. Previous discussion seems to have centred around the preponderance of terminology in English-language sources, which may or may not have changed in the past decade. If you do start a requested move discussion, providing a concise rationale based in Wikipedia's page title policy will help participants understand why you think a move would be beneficial. You could probably also update this thread for people who watch this page but not Talk:An Lushan Rebellion.
The most appropriate venues to ask for technical or procedural help learning Wikipedia's now extremely complex bureaucracy are Wikipedia:Teahouse and Wikipedia:Help desk. Those pages are watched by a lot of more experienced editors who can typically answer your questions pretty quickly, and can also suggest ways to accustom yourself to the different kinds of tasks that can be done around here. Thanks for lending a hand! <3 Folly Mox (talk) 21:10, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I wasn't talking about moving the page An Lushan Rebellion. What I meant was do I need to revert my edit that changed "An-Shi Rebellion" to "An Lushan Rebellion"? It is called An-Shi Rebellion in traditional Chinese historiography, according to the article about the An Lushan Rebellion. However, in Western sinology, it is usually termed "An Lushan Rebellion." Friend505 (talk) 22:04, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Right, Chinese historiography does typically use the term An–Shi Rebellion. Since our page is titled An Lushan Rebellion, it's perfectly reasonable to use that term when linking the article, particularly since it was (prior to my most recent edit to the page today) only mentioned once. In general, if we have two phrases which are sufficiently similar that one redirects to the other, we can use whichever term is preferred in the article, as long as the usage is consistent. So no, you don't need to revert your edit at all, and in fact the edit I made today follows the terminology you introduced. <3 Folly Mox (talk) 00:52, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wu Longji

[edit]

@Friend505: While "Wu Longji" is a name, I can't find any source that uses this term to describe the emperor, even during the period when he supposedly changed his name. The episode is explained in the main text and I think that is sufficient – putting the name in bold in the first sentence may mislead readers to think that this was an import alias of his.

In addition, is there a source to prove that Xuanzong actually used this name in his childhood? I searched for both English and Chinese sources on topic but found nothing. Most references to the name are copied from Wikipedia and that's a bit suspicious. Esiymbro (talk) 15:02, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Esiymbro: Oh, sorry, Esiymbro. I didn't check for sources out on the internet; I just thought that any extra information would be better. I will self-revert. Thank you. Friend505 18:13, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Minghuang

[edit]

Why is the name Minghuang not mentioned even a single time in the article's text (outside the infobox)? 173.88.246.138 (talk) 20:30, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Commentary on the Tao Te Ching

[edit]

An omission: the Emperor Xuanzong is known to be one of several emperors who wrote a commentary on the Tao Te Ching, which Max Kaltenmark has described as "one of the most respected [commentaries] of all". (Lao Tzu and Taoism, trans. Roger Greaves (Stanford: University Press, 1969), p. 18). Apparently this emperor had a literary bent beyond writing poetry. -- llywrch (talk) 07:36, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "http://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Talk:Emperor_Xuanzong_of_Tang&oldid=1201895384"