This article is within the scope of WikiProject Three Kingdoms, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Three Kingdoms 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.Three KingdomsWikipedia:WikiProject Three KingdomsTemplate:WikiProject Three KingdomsThree Kingdoms articles
This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
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
The statement about Cáo Chōng having the intelligence of an adult at age 5 is obviously wrong - no 5-year-old really has adult-level intelligence, even if they are a prodigy. We can say that he was a prodigy, and attribute any statement about adult-level intelligence to Sānguózhì directly. -Thucydides411 (talk) 16:22, 9 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
There are a number of questionable stories in this article sourced to Sānguó Zhì. In general, an ancient historical text like Sānguó Zhì should be treated with more caution, especially when it gives colorful anecdotes or makes implausible claims (e.g., about the intelligence of a 5-year-old child). Throughout this article, it should be clearer what is actually known for certain about Cáo Chōng, and what are colorful, possibly exaggerated stories. I'm looking specifically at the story of the elephant. Did the writer of Sānguó Zhì really know exactly what Cáo Cāo and Cáo Chōng said in the moment? -Thucydides411 (talk) 11:12, 15 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
So Sanguo Zhi is a compilation of contemporary sources on the period. It is considered the authoritative source for the period, in some many case, the only source available. For the elephant anecdote, there is some scholarly debate about its authenticity especially since there is an earlier Buddhist story about weighing elephants from India. It is likely that this story did not take place as described in the Sanguo Zhi. (and that should be added into the article) _dk (talk) 17:23, 15 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I think Sānguó Zhì falls under WP:PRIMARY. Everything in this article should, ideally, be sourced to secondary and tertiary sources. Ancient historical texts can obviously be invaluable sources of information, but they're not reliable in the same way a modern scholarly work would be. I seriously doubt the quotations included throughout this article are true transcriptions of what the various people said. I have similar doubts about the anecdotes. -Thucydides411 (talk) 19:59, 17 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
