Welcome to dextri.com on July 6 2009.
This is an internet experiment running to monitor browsing habbits of individuals through wikipedia contents.

User talk:PericlesofAthens

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Archives

/Archive 1 /Archive 2 /Archive 3 /Archive 4 /Archive 5 /Archive 6

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.

Contents

[edit] Help?

I recently created the long overdue bio for Chen Wangting. However familiar with the tai chi I might be, Chinese history articles are not my forte, and any help would be much appreciated. Thanks, Steven Walling (talk) 23:58, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Just wondering...

Do you plan on nominating all of the Han Dynasty articles for FA? Because they all seem deserving. Cheers! Scapler (talk) 02:24, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Congrats!

CONGRATS!
Congratulations PericlesofAthens on your FA Cheers! Scapler (talk) 21:18, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
And another congratulations from me! That's quite an undertaking there. rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 22:28, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
Congratulations from me too. Xandar 23:22, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
Brilliant work, and congratulations. That old Greek guy you've named yourself after would be proud. :P -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs email guestbook complaints 00:31, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
Congratulations on that wonderful achievement! The strippers are definitely on us. And I promise clowns, bears, and meerkats for when Society and culture of the Han Dynasty becomes featured too. Great job, you old mountain hermit! Madalibi (talk) 00:57, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
Woah, congratulations for another splendid accomplishment. What a work!--Caspian blue 22:06, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Economy of the Han Dynasty

I have started the copyedit of the article. Anyone else from the last copyeditor conglomerate joining in the fun? Cheers! Scapler (talk) 21:53, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Question: When you say "The imperial capitals of Western Han Chang'an and Eastern Han Luoyang were some of the largest in the world", do you mean some of the largest economies or physically large in landmass? Cheers! Scapler (talk) 21:55, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
I will peruse it myself for now, unless people in the FA request more eyes. Let's hope my writing is up to snuff! Lol! Cheers! Scapler (talk) 02:11, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
I doubt I can catch "everything", even as awesome as I am. I am going to bed now, but I hope to perform the bulk of the copyedit tomorrow. Cheers! Scapler (talk) 02:15, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Question regarding this sentence: "Sadao Nishijima, a professor emeritus from the University of Tokyo, speculates that the Han government found it easiest to collect coin taxes, which did not necessitate transportation of taxed goods and properties." Does this mean property as in land? If it does, it would be very hard to transport, so you probably meant seized, but if you meant property like this computer is my property, the word should simply be cut from the sentence. Please clarify. (The copyedit is chugging along!) Cheers! Scapler (talk) 21:28, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay, I did not have opportunity to be near a computer this weekend; I will continue. Cheers! Scapler (talk) 00:28, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Another question: In this sentence "he abolished the purchase and sale of land in a system called King's Fields (王田), a variation of the well-field system where the government owned the land and assured every peasant an equal share to cultivate." Is the King's Fields system the system he abolished, or the one he implemented in its place? Cheers! Scapler (talk) 00:43, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

This sentence does not make sense to me: "While registered merchants were not allowed to own land; if they broke this law their land and slaves would be confiscated" How can their land be confiscated if they were not allowed to own land? Oh, and the copyedit is plodding along, slowly but surely. Cheers! Scapler (talk) 21:54, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
Sorry, another question (he said sheepishly): "During Western Han, conscripted peasants were organized into work teams numbering into hundreds of thousands" Were there hundreds of thousands of work teams, or hundreds of thousands of peasants in each team? Cheers! Scapler (talk) 20:33, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
You are certainly welcome! If I can do anything else for you, just let me know. Cheers! Scapler (talk) 23:03, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Investigating what "screened" means or implies

As you may or may not know, Teeninvestor has appeared to accord great weight to your imprimatur in the context of a minor ArbCom case.

At Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Tang Dynasty/Evidence, a number of the claims presented by Teeninvestor at Evidence presented by Teeninvestor appears to be over-reaching. In that context, there are some questions which would help me clear up any misunderstandings which still linger.

You may not know that Teeninvestor mentioned you specifically in his/her evidence sub-section "Screened by User:PericlesofAthens and User:Penwhale"

  • "In addition, the source has been screened by the two above users and the information as well, and they have shown the information to be perfectly correct as well as the history book being what I said it is: a history book .... The above two users have stated the information of the source is correct and the source was presented with correct bibliographic information as to allow the reader to verify the source ...."

In the context created by these few sentences, I am obliged to ask you to clarify, please.

1. Question: Teeninvestor states that "... the source has been screened [by PericlesofAthens] ...." Did you, in fact, "screen" the book? If so, what did the term "screen" mean specifically in that context?
2. Question: Teeninvestor states that "... the information [has been screened by PericlesofAthens] ...." Did you, in fact, "screen" the information? If so, what did the term "screen" mean specifically in that context?
3. Question: Teeninvestor states that "... [PericlesofAthens has] shown the information to be perfectly correct ...." Did you, in fact, "evaluate" the information? If so, what did the phrase "shown the information to be perfectly correct" mean specifically in that context?
4. Question: Teeninvestor states that "... [PericlesofAthens has shown] the history book being what I said it is: a history book." Did you, in fact, "evaluate" the book? If so, what did the phrase "[shown] the history book being what I said it is: a history book" mean specifically in that context?

With all due respect, I believe you are only able respond to Question 4. I would guess that your inability to respond similarly to Questions 1, 2 and 3 will demonstrate that these are examples of over-reaching.

In this context, I would appreciate any constructive comments you might be willing to offer.

Thank you for the time you choose to invest in ArbCom matters. --Tenmei (talk) 19:59, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. This is very helpful. It's good news considering my terrible report card(90) and Bernanke screwing the life out of me with his Plunge Protection Team. Just hoping things will get better from here. Regards. Teeninvestor (talk) 21:24, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Han Dynasty

Congratulations on its featured status! And my apologies that I couldn't have gotten to it sooner - real life has interrupted a great deal, and I find it difficult to express my regret as fully as deserved.

I've tried as much as I can so far, and I will continue to copyedit the article, as you had asked. :) —La Pianista ♫ ♪ 05:08, 23 April 2009 (UTC)


[edit] Request for mediation not accepted

A Request for Mediation to which you were are a party was not accepted and has been delisted.
You can find more information on the case subpage, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Li Yong (Tang Dynasty).
For the Mediation Committee, Ryan Postlethwaite 20:42, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to perform case management.
If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.

[edit] Military Strength of the Song dynasty

It is stated that SOng's military strength was about 1,000,000 men. I find this relatively astoudning considering the Song's enemies(Liao and Jin, and later Mongols) could not have fielded more than 200,000-300,000 men,(even conscripting Chinese). If SOng's army was relaly three to four times the size of the enemy, then their defeat and fall is as inexplicable as the Plunge Protection Team. Perhaps Song's army was not so large??? Also, on the new article Mongol conquest of the Song Dynasty shouldn't there be a mention that the Mongols were only able to reach Xiangyang because of the surrender of the Song general defending Sichuan, who was persecuted by Jia sidao.Teeninvestor (talk) 15:33, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Hello

Hi! I'm basically from Han Chinese Clothing club haha! I have a question about Song Dynasty, well you see this painting? [[1]] I noticed that almost every empress have three marks on their face. Do you know the story behind it? BTW if you know, you can add it to Song or HCC articles. --Lennlin (talk) 22:55, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Alright, I will try to research it =] just because these marks are so beautiful on their face but if you had any info on it please tell me :P --Lennlin (talk) 02:53, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Talkback

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

—La Pianista ♫ ♪ 03:23, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Arilang say Hi

Just say Hi to you as I have come back from a long wiki break. Arilang talk 08:14, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

[edit] thanks (re: my username)

Not everyone is so kind to it, so it's nice to get praise from you.

Han Dynasty is a spectacular article—much to read, and much to see—so seeing even tiny mistakes makes me pounce on them! Nice work getting such a long one to "the top". --an odd name 20:58, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Possible statement on ArbCom

We already have about five people documenting Tenmei's behaviour, so there's no need for any more. However, I think you should make a short statement confirming the accuracy of the information in the article, as you have done in Inner Asia during the Tang dynasty. And also, congratulations for finishing the Han dynasty series of articles.Teeninvestor (talk)`


[edit] Another new article

Please have a look and help to add content:Nucai Arilang talk 04:17, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Another new article

Please check List of offences that attract jail terms in China Arilang talk 09:28, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Must see video that will change your concept on Chinese.


]

[edit] China thanks you.

Thank you for the Barnstar; if I deserve one for copyediting the articles, then you definitely deserve this one:

Zhonghua Barnstar of Merit
For researching and essentially single-handedly building the professional quality researched Han Dynasty article and subsequent topics. Cheers! Scapler (talk) 18:34, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
this WikiAward was given to PericlesofAthens by Cheers! Scapler (talk) on 18:34, 3 May 2009 (UTC)


Cheers! Scapler (talk) 18:34, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you once again.

The Han articles inspired me to finally use the note/reference system in an article. It took a couple of hours, but I restructured the ref. style in the Middle Colonies, which is currently at GAR, to comply to this style. So, thanks for the inspiration and the example! Cheers! Scapler (talk) 02:16, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Flame thrower

I had a little think about this, but I really have my doubts about including the Chinese flame thrower. The text mentions the earlier version and the extent of the trade. The older version was known to the Chinese, and the only difference between the two is that one spurts flame, and the other spurts flame continuously. I know there's a different system involcved, but is it enough to be an invention? I'd call it an adaptation, or an innovation, but its just not different enough to be a new invention. Mdw0 (talk) 03:42, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Yes, the argument is whether a system adapted from a known prototype using bellows, siphon piston and flame is an invention or an adaptation / innovation. For me the weapon is interesting, but not original enough to be included. Mdw0 (talk) 05:53, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

I usually don't like to use metaphors when it comes to this sort of thing, - red herrings abound, and splitting the definitions of what is a gun and what isnt comes into play. However, in the context, consider the following; How much influence was a crossbow on the matchlock? Virtually none. There was a whole range of gun development separate from the arrow slingers. The influence of the Greek prototype on the Chinese flamethrower seems more direct. Also consider the thing that is shot is different, a ball or bullet versus an arrow, wheras the flamethrowers shoot the same thing and create the flame the same way. But in the end you'll notice I haven't re-deleted this section and am willing to acquiesce. If you think they are truly different enough, OK, but I'd reccommend rewriting the section to better indicate the different systems. Mdw0 (talk) 07:46, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Empire of Japan navbox

Just created Template:JapanEmpireNavbox to aid in the navigation of Empire of Japan related articles. Please check for inconsistencies and add contributions of your own. Thanks. -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs email guestbook complaints 09:34, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] ArbCom case

Links: :Workship Evidence. I think it is relevant if you report your findings to ArbCom as to the accuracy of the info in the article(without addressing other matters). By the way, I came upon the convo you had with the anon in History of the Han dynasty and boy did he seem like Tenmei. I proposed a ban for him, by the way.Teeninvestor (talk) 23:15, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

I was joking in that his TLDR comments seemed like Tenmei's(He posts long paragraphs just like Tenmei). What I mean is that you can post a small section of evidence that show your findings about the accuracy of the article. Ignore the other stuff if you wish.Teeninvestor (talk) 23:48, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Additional information needed on Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/User:AssegaiAli

Hello. Thank you for filing Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/User:AssegaiAli. This is an automated notice to inform you that the case is currently missing a code letter, which indicates to checkusers why a check is valid. Please revisit the page and add this. Sincerely, SPCUClerkbot (talk) 13:23, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Ta Da

I present to you Economic history of China which is finished!!! Okay, if you want to help , here's the to-do list: 1. add more citations 2. Expand Ming, Qing, ROC, PRC sections(Which were a bit rushed) 3. Get pictures. Teeninvestor (talk) 13:42, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

I finished expanding Ming, ROC, Qing sections and is going to take a wikibreak(not doing any serious editing). When I start editing seriously again, im going to expand the PRC section(post-Deng). Can you just help look it over, adding citations from other articles???. I want to get this to peer view, and then maybe GA status. Teeninvestor (talk) 22:03, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

On second thought no because the article would have to be split up first.Teeninvestor (talk) 22:38, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

I will expand/work on the PRC section once Vol 3. of Sun Jian's book arrives.Teeninvestor (talk) 23:16, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] 仕農工商

PoA, just a thought you might be interested in is this Four occupations, this system had been adopted by the Chinese society for thousands of years, and is the main reason why Capitalism had never been able to evolve in the Chinese society, because Merchants 商 were always at the bottom of the society, because all the emperors were aware of rich merchants became too rich and had the power to take over. Arilang talk 02:46, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

I disagree completely about this notion. China was by no means stuck in a "time warp". From roughly the Warring states to the Qing, China lead the world in development of both innovations and the market. The Market economy doesn't happen overnight, you know.

I would think that the Song and Ming Dynasties were very close examples of capitalist societies. While most of China's population still remained on the countryside, they had became an integral part of the market economy by the Song(they produced for the market and purchased most of their goods over it). Large enterprises with several million taels had emerged for a long time, and in terms of trade Ming China was far more friendly to it than Europe(who had adopted a mercantilist stance). Chinese factories were able to turn out large amounts of products for a massive market. Technologically wise, production per capita was always improving. This can be seen in that throughout Han, Tang Song and Ming, agricultural techniques were always improving in some way or another. In terms of taxes of regulations, China's merchants were subject to far less than European countries(Tax per capita). The rural market was by no means small; due to advances already made during earlier dynasties, farmers usually were able to procure a surplus of food for themselves and thus had quite a bit of purchasing power. The real reason capitalism didn't develop was the suppression of it after the takeover by the Manchus in the 17 th century which marked the beginning of China's decline.Teeninvestor (talk) 00:50, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

For years in China the reason why China could not develop capitalism was given Marxist dogmatic explanations which were fundamentally traced back to the prejudiced and ignorant model of the so-called "oriental despotism", where the "servile orientals" could not develop their own. More or less, these academics had an answer in mind, and were trying to justify that answer through finding evidence. It's like having a conclusion before making up your hypothesis.Teeninvestor (talk) 00:58, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Sure, rural farmers became heavily engaged in trading at urban markets where they would periodically travel to sell goods they produced on the farm. And yes, some rural farmers did purchase luxury items crafted by artisans in the cities. On the point of the "urbanization" of rural farmers' culture, Timothy Brook makes this abundantly clear in his The Confusions of Pleasure: Commerce and Culture in Ming China (1998), a wonderful book if you ever get a chance to read it. However, farmers did not purchase "most of their goods" from the market. Aside from buying metal farming tools which the peasants couldn't produce unless they operated their own blast furnace, the peasants pretty much produced all of life's necessities on their patch of land from local resources of timber, stone, earth, etc. This is pretty much identical to commercial interactions between the cities and countryside in premodern Europe, before the Industrial Revolution. As impressive as the Ming and early Qing era porcelain factories were in regards to scale of production (which would simply rival if not surpass any of the greatest European industries at the time), think about the limited market of people who actually bought luxury porcelain items. And was production of porcelain—as a luxury commodity sold to a limited amount of people—really the driving engine for drawing a mass of rural farmers from the countryside to the city for work in factories? Hardly so.--Pericles of AthensTalk 02:42, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
"The real reason capitalism didn't develop was the suppression of it after the takeover by the Manchus in the 17 th century which marked the beginning of China's decline." But the suppression of the merchant middle class was nothing new to the Qing period. The Qing court's strict regulations and limitation of foreign maritime trade to only a handful of seaports were major policies of the previous Ming Dynasty (although repealed in the mid 16th century). In both Ming and Qing, the imperial court was convinced that the Middle Kingdom itself produced nearly everything that the Middle Kingdom would ever need.--Pericles of AthensTalk 02:52, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Cutbacks at Economic history of China

I think with the split we are down to roughly within the limit(the pictures and citations, I think, are roughly 16kb considering the number of them(20 pictures and 270+ citations).Teeninvestor (talk) 20:13, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Can you look over said article, copyedit and do some work? thanks. It's been in userspace for two months, and it's stayed there too long. I put it into mainspace as fast as I could get all the citations up. Regards.Teeninvestor (talk) 21:47, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

K. Here's the current system.

Original article has been split into Economic history of China(Pre-1911) and Economic history of Modern China. Economic history will redirect to the first article, but a notice at the top will show that for modern developments you go to Economic history of Modern China.

The reason I did this is that I will be getting several new sources that I will be expanding the ROC and PRC sections with. If such an expansion occurs, the article will become simply too large to handle. Therefore I decided to split it into 2 articles, 1 ancient and 1 modern.

Another way we can do this is to keep the ROC and PRC information in the article, and then I'll expand it there. But if that happens, the article will expand to 160kb-ish, and although right now It's probably only a bit bigger than the Ming in Prose size(before split), an expansion with the sources will bring it higher and thus relatively unmanagable.

A third way is to leave the two articles as they currently are, and create a new Economic history of China article that summarizes both premodern and modern and redirects to them. Teeninvestor (talk) 21:29, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Wu Hu uprising

Can you look over my new article Wu Hu uprising?Teeninvestor (talk) 23:54, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Chinese history from 304 to 589 CE is not covered very well. I plan to add more details to these barbarian uprisings, including perhaps Wei-Jie war, Wei-Xianbei war(Campaigns of Ran Min)) and Expeditions of Liu Yu(covering his expeditions against Later Qin, Northern Wei, and Southern Yan]]. These stub articles should be done very quickly. Teeninvestor (talk) 00:03, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] New forum

Hi Eric! Nice to hear from you. Yes, I heard about the new forum for the first time today (from Yun) and I immediately applied for membership. You'll see me there as soon as the admins process my application. I logged into CHF because I kept receiving PM's from staff asking me where I was. I also posted a few messages, but the site has become much duller since everybody's departure. I'm sure the new forum will be much more stimulating. I can't say enough how impressed I am about your Han articles. I just don't have enough time to contribute these days, but still! E-mail me to tell me about your plans. Weren't you planning to come to China at some point? All the best, Madalibi (talk) 02:32, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Government of the Han Dynasty

Hi, in case you want to use the Ordos map, it is available as File:Map of Ordos Region, 1908-9.jpg. As I have explained, due to its publishing before 1923, it is public domain in US (but not in UK, its country of origin). Jappalang (talk) 12:55, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Han emperors

Well, the fact is that I didn't really have any sources for that template. I made it based completely on material that was in the article List of Chinese emperors beforehand. See this old version.—Nat Krause(Talk!·What have I done?) 16:41, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] List of Emperors of the Han Dynasty

Hey! Are you planning to nominate this for featured list? It looks good to me.—Chris! ct 22:01, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Oh, I wasn't trying to nominate it because I am not the primary editor. I am just wondering.—Chris! ct 22:09, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

It was really not meant to be such a big thing. I just think it is a bit weird when non-Latin characters appear on a page and there is no link provided to make some sense of that. Nergaal (talk) 20:46, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Might more hassle than it deserves. A centralized page would work, but linking every character would be too much. Don't worry about it too much. Nergaal (talk) 21:19, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Title

I'd seen your opinion of talk page of Tibet during the Ming Dynasty. I think the current title is not legal, because it makes people think that Tibet was part of the Ming Dynasty, but Tibet was independence throughout this period until the Manchu conquest. So the aticle should be renamed as Relations between Tibet and the Ming Dynasty. 71.165.197.22 (talk) 00:22, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Ah yes, Tibet during the Ming Dynasty. A number of editors and I had trouble thinking of how to rename the article, but we never got around to it. I don't think it would be wise to move it now, since it is a featured article. Plus, the article goes to great length in showing various scholars' opposition to the idea that Tibet was politically or even culturally "part" of China during the Chinese Ming Dynasty. Nevertheless, the Mingshi and some modern PRC historians insist that it was, hence the current title of the article. Even renaming it Relations between Tibet and the Ming Dynasty would be a POV move; there's really no way to satisfy both sides of the debate here. Unless you can think of a more neutral title.--Pericles of AthensTalk 00:30, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Military history of China

Hey, if you need my help I can scoop up some material for the revamp of this article. This article is going to need to be revamped Economic history of China-style. I would suggest a structure like describing the changes in the Chinese army per dynasty. Since I just finished that article(s), I'm pretty much free. If i can be of help, contact me. Regards. I may be working on article Wu Hu period Though.Teeninvestor (talk) 23:22, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

I don't plan to be working on that article due to lack of sources for the near future, I am going to work on Sixteen Kingdoms(though I should be finished very quickly).Teeninvestor (talk) 23:31, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

This era is very important to China. First it obstructed CHina's development for several centuries due to barbarian invasions. In addition, China was so weakened by this event that even the later Tang, Song and Ming Dynasties could not recover to the high point(militarily compared to the barbarians) of the Han(Who had more or less solved the barbarian threat for several centuries).Teeninvestor (talk) 23:54, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

With the creation or improval of these articles, I feel that the Wu Hu era is now relatively better covered than before. I'm going off wiki as this achievement is enough for today, I guess.Teeninvestor (talk) 00:37, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] 北洋水師

Unlike you guys, I am more interested in modern CHina military history. Accoding to one Chinese historian(forgot his name), one of the main reason why Qing lost the First Sino-Japanese war, was because:

  • 李鴻章 treated 北洋水師 like his own private navy.
  • Though the iron-cladded battle ships had a lot of big guns installed, but most of the ammunitions were on land, and never carried on board.
  • 曾国藩, after defeating the Taiping rebellion, was very much tempted to overthrow the Qing dynasty at the same time. But he didn't do it, and left the job for 李鴻章. Arilang talk 11:47, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

If 曾国藩 had overthrown Qing in 1870, China could have modernized at the same speed of Japan as soon as the Manchus were gone. If it were not for the hindering of the state(during Mao's era) and foreign rule(during Manchu and ROC eras), China would have developed rapidly. The Chinese people have always been very receptive towards the free market(China during the dynasties of Han, Tang, Song and Ming usually pursued relatively laissez faire policies).Teeninvestor (talk) 22:43, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Must see video

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4920138942953644691&q=Rape+of+Nanking&hl=en Arilang talk 07:30, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you

... for your note. I hope to improve the articles about the civil rights leaders you mentioned when I get a chance, and when I can get some good reference materials. Thanks again. — Malik Shabazz (talk · contribs) 21:59, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Congratulations on your graduation! — Malik Shabazz (talk · contribs) 22:48, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Re:List of Emperors of the Han Dynasty

Sorry about that, I didn't realize I made a mess. The reason I did what I did was to avoid the empty space above the table, since the images push the table down.—Chris! ct 22:48, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

I notice you're already making the changes I proposed! I think the note on emperors should have a marker "Note 1" next to "Posthumous name"; the note ("Note 2") on the years should be next to "Range of years," which should be re-arranged over two ranks like "Period of reign." This way, the table will look as good as before, and the notes will be exactly where they belong! Let me know what you think. Madalibi (talk) 03:05, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
Good job! I just think the short paragraph on the emperor would look best in the lead paragraph instead of a section called "Naming conventions." Then you'll have another featured article under your name! Take care, Madalibi (talk) 03:37, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] History of the Tang Dynasty

It's a shame, really, since the four main dynasties of China, Han, Tang, Song, Ming all have thier own hisotry articles except the Tang. Taking some info from the main article and adding some more, should get a history of the Tang Dynasty article to become a GA in no time.Teeninvestor (talk) 20:58, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm thinking that before my source on Economic history of Modern China arrives, I can't really do much work on that respect. My plan is to complete my coverage of the 304-420(Wu Hu Era) era by updating the Jin Dynasty article and writting History of the Jin Dynasty.Teeninvestor (talk) 21:08, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
Do you think I should list Economic history of China(Pre-1911) for peer review? (The modern history one is not done yet and is too short).Teeninvestor (talk) 01:52, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Copyeditor

Can you get me a good copyeditor for Economic history of China (Pre-1911), so he/she can fix the references, smooth out redundancies, etc...Teeninvestor (talk) 15:05, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Do you know any good copyeditors that could look over the article/fix it?Teeninvestor (talk) 22:41, 1 June 2009 (TC)

[edit] Song the economic highpoint of Classical China? Doubt it.

Although the Song Dynasty was one of the fastest growing dynasties economically in China(The GDP per capita rose heavily compared with Han and Tang dynasties, though these two above dynasties also saw increases), the Song Dynasty's peak technologically and economically was surpassed by the Ming by the 1400's, by which time the Chinese had recovered from the Mongol conquest. This is shown quite well by Zheng He's expeditions. Teeninvestor (talk) 22:01, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Nice userpage. I stumbled on your userpage/draft and the next thing I knew, it was your userpage! Cheers.Teeninvestor (talk) 23:05, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] More Photos!

Just went to the 应县木塔 and 大同 last weekend, there I saw the 云冈石窟 (Yungang Grottoes)，善化寺 (Shanhua Temple) and 悬空寺 (Hanging Temple)! Unfortunately all the temples in Datong were under renovation, which lessened my enjoyment. Hope you make it to China too sometime, and enjoy the photos I've uploaded already.Zeus1234 (talk) 07:15, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

I might go to Sichuan this summer. Do you know of a resource which lists the location of these gates? I can't look at the book in the link you sent me. Thank you for complementing my photography, but I really think that there is much room for improvement. The new camera I recently got does help though. Zeus1234 (talk) 05:18, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Google Books is not blocked (unlike many other sites), but that book is not available for viewing. No preview is available.Zeus1234 (talk) 06:15, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Just solved the problem. It seems that the book is not available for viewing in China, but my proxy solved that! I'll let you know if I do in fact make a visit Sichuan this summer.Zeus1234 (talk) 07:51, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] New user page

Hi PoA. No time to chat, but great job on your new user page! But where's the meerkat?! Madalibi (talk) 11:47, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Thank you for your comments! Phg (talk) 06:11, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Emperors of the Han Dynasty/archive1

Don't mind that comment. It was a really bad attempt at a sarcastic joke. Sorry. Dabomb87 (talk) 20:58, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Copyeditors for Economic history of China (Pre-1911)

I took a wikibreak between June 1st and 9th(Schoolwork) and now I'm back, I contacted 10+ copyeditors. Hope some will come to the article.22:00, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks!

Hey man, thanks very much for the barnstar! Of course making a template is one thing, but completing your second featured topic? Now that's something to commend! Love the new userpage design too, it's very sleek and user-friendly. Keep up the excellent work! Cheers, --Hemlock Martinis (talk) 00:23, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Yet another must see article

乾隆盛世是一个饥饿的盛世 张宏杰 Arilang talk 18:20, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Featured topic: Han dynasty

Not to worry. I was just finishing off and coming to let you know it was promoted.

The Topic talk page boxes are automagically updated as the status of articles change. So when i first created it, only Han dynasty was updated, and the box thought that was not enough for a FT. As soon as the second FA was added, it changed it to FT. It is either that or add all the articles first, leaving the topic as a redlink - so it looks strange for a few minutes either way. (note, it takes at least 30 minutes to do all the category creation, article histories and transclusions, so there is always a small lag).

But all is now done, so just left to congratulate you on your great work! YobMod 18:38, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Oh, i just checked Economy, which was still showing GT - i needed to purge my cache to force it to refresh to the correct FT. Takes a while for the translusions to feed through otherwise, as your browser will have it cached as GT for a while.YobMod 18:45, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Is it me, or are modern figures on economic history before 1800 complete bs...

I did a little research on ancient economy estimates and the results are pretty astounding(if you actually believe the data, which is pretty much nonsense). For example, for the Song it was stated that the income per capita of the Song Dynasty was only 10% above that of Medieval Europe for the same period. Yet if you take Song's agricultural advances(seed drill, hoeing, etc..) you would know that's nonsense. these techniques did not spread to Europe til 1500 and were not fully adapted til 1700.. These techniques would have ensured that each Song era Chinese farmer produced perhaps two or three times more output PER person than the Europeans. Yet somehow that output is only worth 10% more? I don't think so. Also what happened to all the extra commerce from not being engaged in feudal warfare?

It is the same with the Ming. It states in one magazine that GDP per capita income for Europe surpassed China in 1500. Maybe that is true for the Netherlands, but for Europe in general that is not true. In terms of agricultural tools, European agricultural output per person did not come anywhere close to matching Chinese output til the agricultural revolution in the 1700's, which was matched by a corresponding decline(after the Manchu Conquest). Since agriculture made up 80% of the ancient economy, I have no clue how they could have concluded that. It was not as if Ming economy was in any way inferior to Europe in terms of trade and manufactures as well.

The list of regions by historical GDP(PPP) article is simply laughable and should have been deleted. THe data is all from one source and it states that India had a higher GDP than the Song and Han dynasties, not withstanding the fact that the Han and Song had much more population as well as having a higher agricultural output(from my argument above, no need to repeat). These "economic historians" better get their act straight as their figures are not in any way even close to reality.

P.S. If you thought the above was bad, I recently read a book which advocated this nonsense "Malthusian view" of economic history. This view is simply too laughable to accept. It states that from 100,000 BCE to 1800 CE, GDP per capita was constant. Also, it states that an English labourer's wages in 1500 was much higher than in 1800. I don't want to waste time refuting this absurd argument, but you can see for yourself what's happened. Thanks for listening to my rant!

Oh ya, and congratulations for Han Dynasty now being a featured topic.Teeninvestor (talk) 22:16, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Tang Dynasty

This arbitration case has been closed and the final decision is available at the link above.

Tenmei (talk · contribs) is topic-banned from Inner Asia during the Tang Dynasty for a period of six months. He is permitted to comment on the talkpage, provided that he does so in a civil fashion. He is instructed not to interact with or comment with regard to Teeninvestor (talk · contribs) or Caspian blue (talk · contribs) on any page of Wikipedia (except in the course of legitimate dispute resolution initiated by others or his mentors). Tenmei shall also be assigned one or more volunteer mentors. Other remedies also apply.

The parties are instructed to carefully review the principles and findings contained in this decision. Each of the parties is strongly urged to conform his or her future behavior to the principles set forth in this decision. Should the remedies fail to improve the situation described in this decision, after a reasonable time, an application may be made to reopen the case and impose other remedies as may be necessary.

- For the Committee, Mailer Diablo 22:46, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Basically, Tenmei lost and now they're going to assign someone to look over him.Teeninvestor (talk) 23:01, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] We will be missing your work here in wikiproject China

Wikiproject China will have lose a ton of progress without you here, while the Ancient Egypt wikiproject will also be quite enhanced. Good luck with your new work. My goal is to get Economic history of China (Pre-1911) up to GA or FA status this summer, now that I'm home free. Then, maybe I'll be working on Plunge Protection Team, at least until the CIA finds my house....Teeninvestor (talk) 00:38, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Ridiculous argument

PoA, when you have time, please have a look at commons:File talk:Flag of the Republic of China.svg, I bet you would not stop laughing, wonder how silly people can become. Even a blind Frady can see the difference between Blue and Black, so to speak. Arilang talk 01:39, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

diff. Betcha didn't know this wikiproject existed.Teeninvestor (talk) 12:25, 12 June 2009 (UTC)


[edit] Chanyu is preferable to Shanyu

Thank you so much, Pericles of Athens, for suggesting I search through articles and make the change to Chanyu - I needed a bit of a push! I have done the articles I could quickly think of as likely hiding places - but I'm sure there are still some Shanyus lurking out there which I have missed. If you come across any hidden Shanyus please let me know and I will head out on my white charger and deal with them! Cheers and best wishes, John Hill (talk) 22:23, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] You have been nominated for membership of the Established Editors Association

The Established editors association will be a kind of union of who have made substantial and enduring (and reliably sourced) contributions to the encyclopedia for a period of time (say, two years or more). The proposed articles of association are here - suggestions welcome.

If you wish to be elected, please notify me here. If you know of someone else who may be eligible, please nominate them here

Discussion is here.Peter Damian (talk) 19:11, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

I think Yannismarou has already nominated you, so it's not a self nom. regards. --Joopercoopers (talk) 23:57, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Established Editors

Discussion of objectives here. Peter Damian (talk) 20:09, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] I hope you will reconsider

(a) This is just my view - it is not my group any more. (b) 'Excommunication' would be for very serious offences such as gross or persistent incivility, bullying, abusive socking and so on.

Perhaps this was an unfortunate analogy. I am a medieval scholar and perhaps these things seem more 'normal' to me. Apologies again. Peter Damian (talk) 16:07, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

I would urge you not to leave. As Damian says, he is not in charge of the group, he merely initiated the idea. This group needs your advocacy and ideas. Nothing is settled yet, and I completely agree with you that editor review/enforcement is exactly what the group should NOT be doing. That is totally covered by the processes already in place. I think the group should be all about improving content and perhaps clarifying content policies. -- Ssilvers (talk) 16:33, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Holy $hit

Heh, thanks for those words. I suppose it'd be more impressive if I did anything other than hurricanes, but I think my username shows you where my interests lie :) Who knows, I might break an arm one of these years, and I'll be out of commission to let everyone else catch up! ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 22:22, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Heh, I've broken my wrist three times before, so chances are, I'd cope with a broken arm, rather than retiring. Now if it was during a hurricane, which consequentially totally eliminates my interest in storms, it might be a different story ;) ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 00:04, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

I appreciate the kind words. I've noticed and enjoyed the excellent articles you've written on Chinese history. I hope you catch me soon on number of FA. As you've probably noticed, one area where the Wikipedia model works is when someone such as yourself takes a topic that they find fascinating and runs with it. It's unfortunate that there aren't more editors doing the same.

I see by your contribution history that you'll be coming up on three years of participation soon. The three-year mark is where burn-out or disillusionment hits a lot of committed participants. I've observed that the editors who are here to actually write quality articles, such as yourself, are often able to avoid burn-out because of the pride and satisfaction they can take in the very real and visible accomplishments that they've achieved. Best of luck in the future. Cla68 (talk) 22:59, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Iranian protests

Hi PoA, and sorry for not replying any faster. Yes, I've been watching news reports about the Iranian protests. To me, two things are surprising: the strength of the desire for change within the general population (not just students), and what seems to be a deep rift even within the ruling class. Former president Rafsanjani, for example, seems to be supporting the opposition, and he "happens" to be the head of a council that has the power to remove the Leader of the Revolution (Ayatollah Ali Khameini, who seems to be taking the hardline). It is purely coincidental but still funny that Khameini took power 20 years ago on June 4, 1989, the day of another famous repression... Anyway, I doubt the reformers will win this one, because the army seems to remain loyal to the ayatollahs. At best, they can hope to be integrated into the new government in exchange for stopping the protests.
I've seen your new project on Egyptian literature. I guess you found a way to a good library even after graduating. Library of Congress? But I hope this is not a permanent departure from Chinese historical topics! Cheers, Madalibi (talk) 01:35, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

It's not as if Iran couldn't use good old fashion Deng Xiaoping-style free market reform(60% of the economy is nationalized) but these protests seem like another one of those astroturf "velvet revolutions" sponsered by certain intelligence agencies. However, Mousavi should be a lot closer to Khameini than Ahmadinejad; he was an official all the way back to the islamic revolution.Teeninvestor (talk) 12:35, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
I predict this might actually end in the victory of Mousavi since Ahmadinejad(as I said earlier) is in reality not as close to Khameini and the "old guard" then Mousavi is. If the protests get bad enough, he might just get ditched by Khameini and the others. Iran's economy could use some liberalization and marketization(then again, so does everyone; even in China, where the public sector has only 20% of the GDP, probably needs some more). However, it seems Mousavi's policies is not much better than Ahmadinejad's. Teeninvestor (talk) 13:29, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
I'd have to disagree with you there. The fact that Mao screwed up the economy so bad was actually an impetus for reform in 1978. THe only time where governments adopted free market policies very well is when its clear statist policies have failed miserably. They don't change til they hit their head on a brick wall, I suppose.Teeninvestor (talk) 13:39, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Voting on color soon

Hi PoA, looks like there is going to be a consensus voting on the color of ROC flag:commons:File talk:Flag of the Republic of China.svg, please go there and voice your opinion. Arilang talk 23:05, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Chiang Kai-shek, Genghis Khan, or Tian Kehan

PoA, there is a discussion on your possible past lifes on my talk page, please join in. Arilang talk 01:08, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] New Userpage

I really like your new userpage. In fact, I like it so much that I may steal it and modify it! Cheers! Scapler (talk) 18:03, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome. But really, would it be okay if I modified your design? The working prototype is at User:Scapler/Userpage prototype. Cheers! Scapler (talk) 18:09, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
I would be honored to copyedit another of your articles — it forces me to read them carefully, and your articles are treats to read. Cheers! Scapler (talk) 18:19, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Economic system of Ancient Egypt

Economic systems of civilizations in the (relatively) modern era are easy to determine; for example, from existing records we can see that the Chinese under the Song and Ming Dynasties had a very complex market economy that some even argue to be a form of early capitalism, the Han and T'ang a semi-autarkic but still relatively complex market economy, and India and medieval Europe a feudal economy(as evidenced by people inheriting their fathers' positions). Roman and Greek economies were similar(though less advanced) to the economy of Han China.

However, for very ancient economies(such as the economy of Ancient Egypt and Mesopatamia) it seems difficult to determine what type of economic system they had. From reading the featured article Ancient Egypt, it seems that Egypt had a feudal economic system, similar to Ancient India and the Xia, Shang, and Zhou periods in China. Is that correct?Teeninvestor (talk) 01:29, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

But the important thing is whether the majority of land was owned by independant farmer-cultivators, like in China, or by the state. It seems that in Ancient Egypt the state had a great share in owning and irrigating new land and that cultivators weren't necessarily owner of the land they farm- this is a big distinction since owner-cultivators will naturally work much harder than simply semi-slave labor as this is their land, after all.Teeninvestor (talk) 13:56, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Ancient Egyptian literature

Hi. Thank you for your note. Unfortunately I'm swamped IRL and won't be able to help with anything for the foreseeable future. Good luck. — Malik Shabazz (talk · contribs) 04:15, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Deletion review for Surnames by Country

The discussion for Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2009 June 6#Category:Surnames by country in which you participated was closed as delete and is now under review at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2009 June 25#Category:Surnames by country. Your participation and input is invited. Alansohn (talk) 05:29, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Must watch video

Arilang talk 06:44, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] photos

Aloha. I saw some of the photos you uploaded recent on the Scalper's page. Very nice! ChildofMidnight (talk) 03:51, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Many, many thanks

Thank you so very much for awarding me a barnstar. It was most unexpected and a real honour - especially coming from you, who has done more than anyone else I know of to improve the articles relating to Asian history on the Wikipedia. It is really most encouraging when people notice what you are doing, and give you some praise - I am so thrilled! See you soon on the discussion forum on Chris' work. Cheers and best wishes, John Hill (talk) 01:12, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] The Fourth Of July

Are you a friend of CoM too?

HAPPY INDEPENDENCE DAY!
--The Legendary Sky Attacker 07:47, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

I don't think we've ever spoken but I am pleased to make your acquaintance.--The Legendary Sky Attacker 07:50, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Economic history of China (Pre-1911)

Economic history of China is looking very very nice. The last time I looked at it, it was a terrible mess. I want to thank you for the excellant work you and user:Teeninvestor have put into it. I think it's ready to go for a GA or a FA review. LK (talk) 17:11, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:PericlesofAthens"
Personal tools
Visit joltnews for the latest headlines
Visit bloit.com for company information
Geed Media does computer consulting on long island.
This page viewed times. See Logs