Talk:Qi (Li Maozhen's state)

	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
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Chinese history.

Requested move 10 June 2015

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: moved. The consensus is to use the name of the emperor to disambiguate for Qi, and "Five Dynasties period" to disambiguate for the latter three. Jenks24 (talk) 16:14, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

– These 4 states are associated with the 10th-century Five Dynasties and Ten Kingdoms period in China, but they are not among the "Five Dynasties" nor the "Ten Kingdoms", and as such, the current disambiguators are confusing and technically incorrect. Discussions at User_talk:Nlu/archive76#Titles and User_talk:Nlu#These_states_again with User:Nlu generated some choices, but nothing perfect. Presently I feel using the warlord's name is the best approach to identify these states. Timmyshin (talk) 03:19, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose instead use "(Five Dynasties and Ten Kingdoms period)" as that is the period; also per WP:PRECISE do not indulge in over specification, since our audience is a general audience, not just Sinologists and Chinese historians. The period is much more recognizable than the warlord for disambiguatory purposes, and does not do duplication of meaning in the title and its disambiguator. -- 70.51.202.183 (talk) 04:11, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Update "Qi" can be renamed per the nom because of the other Qi during the Five Dynasties period. And I find "(Five Dynasties period)" acceptable per the revised naming below - 70.51.202.183 (talk) 04:32, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Prefer nom's choices over the current misleading titles. Per WP:PRECISE. The current titles are not only ambiguous, but even mislead readers into false information. The current titles have wrong disambiguators because these four kingdoms (Qi, Yan, Zhao, and Yin) are not among the Five Dynasties or the Ten Kingdoms. The only Five Dynasties were Later Liang (Five Dynasties), Later Tang, Later Jin (Five Dynasties), Later Han (Five Dynasties), and Later Zhou. Hence using the warlords' name is more appropriate for disambiguation. Though, Timmyshin, how about if we simply add the word "period" to the current titles, just for the clarification that the disambiguators are referring to the periods and not Five Dynasties and Ten Kingdoms themselves? Suggest move to "Qi (Five Dynasties period)", "Yan (Five Dynasties period)", "Zhao (Five Dynasties period)", and "Yin (Five Dynasties period)", because they might be good titles, and no longer misleading for the readers. They might be more WP:RECOGNIZABLE to readers in general, and more searchable. The rulers' names (Li Maozhen, Liu Shouguang, Wang Rong, and Wang Yanzheng) are harder to memorize to be able to find the articles. Khestwol (talk) 09:18, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks guys for the input. Zhao (Five Dynasties and Ten Kingdoms period) and Zhao (Five Dynasties period) are both OK in my opinion. The former is a little too cumbersome, but more recognizable and precise than Five Dynasties period which I just created a redirect for. Historically, "Five Dynasties" were all in modern central China, while "Ten Kingdoms" were mostly in southern China, and renaming Yin to Yin (Five Dynasties period) could potentially be confusing as the state was completely in the south, but I suppose the other 3 states are OK with (Five Dynasties period). Another option for Yin is Yin (943-945), but the other 3 states are best not disambiguated by years. Moreover, but prefer latter as it's more concise. However, "Qi" is a problem because Southern Tang, one of the "Ten Kingdoms", was also known as "Qi" during its earlier years (although this "Qi" 齊 differs from Li Maozhen's "Qi" 岐), therefore I think Qi (Li Maozhen's state) is a better choice per WP:Precise. As for the argument that the warlord's name is not recognizable, I don't think you will ever find a source that talks about this state without mentioning Li Maozhen's name, and frankly if you are not somewhat of a historian/sinologist you won't ever visit this page. For the other 3 states, I suppose I can live with Zhao (Five Dynasties period), Yan (Five Dynasties period), and Yin (Five Dynasties period). Timmyshin (talk) 14:28, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for more info Timmyshin. Hmm, I think "Qi (Five Dynasties period)" might be good enough per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. Only adding "period" to it makes it at least clearer than the current title. The Southern Tang is also occasionally called "Great Qi" but its infobox doesn't say that's simply called "Qi" without adding "Great" to it. Even if it is, I guess "Qi (Five Dynasties period)" qualifies as the PRIMARYTOPIC for this article not that one. I am not very knowledgeable here though so I may be wrong, and more of your input is needed before I finalize my !vote. Also, if the ruler's name has to be used in the title then I think I will prefer just "Li Maozhen's state" as the title, because then adding "Qi" to it is unneeded. However, naming it as such will not be WP:CONSISTENT with other states from the Five Dynasties and Ten Kingdoms period, none of which is named after their rulers. Khestwol (talk) 05:07, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

In Chinese history/language, "Great XXX" = "XXX", e.g. "Ming dynasty" officially is the "Great Ming". The word "Great" means absolutely nothing (which is why the word is translated, rather than transliterated). You have made some good points, and right now I don't know which option is the best. Li Maozhen's state is not advisable in my opinion. Historically, Li Maozhen controled a major territory as early as the late 880s, but it was not until 907, the year the Tang dynasty emperor was deposed and the Five Dynasties period "officially" began, that he declared his territory Qi (which in political terms, is a declaration of independence from "central" rule). Another option of course is to merge all these topics with their respective warlords. Timmyshin (talk) 21:42, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. That means at least one title must use its ruler's name for disambiguation. Khestwol (talk) 03:57, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Support move from Qi (Five Dynasties) → "Qi (Li Maozhen's state)"; Yan (Five Dynasties) → "Yan (Five Dynasties period)"; Zhao (Five Dynasties) → "Zhao (Five Dynasties period)"; and Yin (Ten Kingdoms) → "Yin (Five Dynasties period)". Khestwol (talk) 03:57, 13 June 2015 (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.