Talk:Battle of Zhuolu

A fact from Battle of Zhuolu appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 30 April 2006. The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that the Battle of Zhuolu, fought in the 26th century BC and the second recorded battle in Chinese history, is often considered a pivotal moment in the establishment of the Han Chinese civilization?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2006/April.

Wikipedia

China High‑importance

	China portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject China, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of China related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChinaWikipedia:WikiProject ChinaTemplate:WikiProject ChinaChina-related articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Military history: Asian / Chinese

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion not met

Associated task forces:
/
	Asian military history task force
	Chinese military history task force

This article states that the Battle of Zhuolu is the second earliest in Chinese history. Would the Battle of Banquan be the earliest recorded battle? -- llywrch 17:55, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. deadkid_dk 00:23, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There looks to be nothing beyond mythology to record this battle. Is there any historical evidence, or just mythology? If it is mythological, should this article be rewritten to reflect as much?

"Korean Account"

What was that "history" book, that should have been referenced here, called? Hanfresco 05:58, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What language that "Korean history" book was written?? Chinese??jeeez... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.250.38.49 (talk) 10:34, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

it was a book that claimed the korean empire stretched all the way to iraq, and claimed all civilization comes from korea.... its obviously a load of trash.70.107.79.57 (talk) 20:21, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is not the mainstream history at Korea. So, I erased it. Thank you. --Idh0854 (talk) 09:19, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Who gets to declare it a "fringe theory"? Have you even read WP:FRINGE? Per WP:NPOV, we give space to all schools of thought on a topic, not just your favorite one. Of course, if you have something like a "reference" (beside yourself) actually calling it a fringe theory, then maybe we can add something like "however, so-and-so holds the viewpoint that this is a fringe theory." Til Eulenspiegel (talk) 01:52, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]