Talk:Romance of the Three Kingdoms/Archive 1

Archive 1

Pinyin

Is there a reason that some names are pinyin and others aren't? 2/6/03 mgmei — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mgmei (talk • contribs) 07:47, 6 February 2003 (UTC)

Title

Shouldn't it be Romance of the Three Kingdoms? I think that's what the video was called, at least. Without the, it sounds awkward and less accurate (the reference is to three specific kingdoms, after all). Tuf-Kat —Preceding undated comment added 19:47, 14 June 2003 (UTC)

a google check shows both variants are used frequently but I see on amazon that all english versions of the book use Romance of the Three Kingdoms. So I support a change. We could make the current page a re-direct page & put the text on the .+The.+ page. technopilgrim 19:58 14 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Done. Tuf-Kat —Preceding undated comment added 20:17, 14 June 2003 (UTC)

How about simply Three Kingdoms, with the article's name as Three Kingdoms (novel)? I always considered the 'Romance of' prefix merely stylistic, and not really part of the work's actual title (posit titling Frankenstein The Horror of Frankenstein, for instance). Hide&Reason 12:49, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Copy edit needed

This page badly needs to be followed up by some professional writers. The original author obviously didn't have much time to go over what he has written, and this lack of revision has resulted in some errors. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Xiaodai (talk • contribs) 11:48, 22 July 2003‎ (UTC)

Vandalism

methinks the page has been vandalised — Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.132.235.43 (talk) 09:30, 13 November 2004‎ (UTC)

what makes you think that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 164.77.106.153 (talk) 08:53, 15 May 2006‎ (UTC)

from the literary criticism section:

"Lord Joshua Rupp ruled all of the Chinese Empire, it was an amazing string of battles that brought us to this point after nearly 25 years of grueling battles. Rupp's forces were lead by Abraham Lincoln, Albert Einstein, and Paul Bunyan, among many other great generals." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Captain Bonzo (talk • contribs) 09:55, 7 September 2006‎ (UTC)

Revamp

i have gone through this entry to change all names to pinyin spelling and Chinese characters to simplified Chinese where appropriate.

i have also re-written the entire story in short. Hope you like it. ;)

However, i'm at present unable to write something decent under the Literary Criticism as i lack some good reference books in that area. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Plastictv (talk • contribs) 11:53, 31 March 2005‎ (UTC)

Good english translation?

I recently read an abridged translation of this book, and I loved it. I'm highly interested in reading a more authentic (and complete) translation. Can anyone recommend a particular edition? Thanks. Jeeves 10:22, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

There are currently two versions widely available, one by Moss Roberts and the other by C. H. Brewitt-Taylor. Follow the second last link at the bottom of the article for a translation by the latter. --Plastictv 13:23, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

For your info: the Roberts translation puts clarity before lyricism. As an intro to the unabridged text, I'd say any of the Roberts editions are ideal. Hide&Reason 12:52, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Other translations?

I've been trying to find a spanish translation of the novel. Does one exist? Or better yet: How many translations in different languages exist? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 164.77.106.153 (talk • contribs) 08:53, 15 May 2006‎ (UTC)

On this page it is told a Spanish version - available in Beijing which costs ca. $ 300

It could also help, if you ask at es.WP: es:Los tres reinos, ----Erkan Yilmaz (talk ?, wiki blog) 20:04, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Could it be interesting to know: in 1959 this book ("Kolmevalitsus", about 1200 pages in 2 volumes) was printed in Estonian language in pretty good numbers: 30'000 of them... and it was sold out. There were just about 900'000 possible customers (Estonians, little kids included). So, 1 "Romance of the 3 Kingdoms" was sold for about every 30 Estonians. I wonder, if this score will be beaten in any other country of European Union. It might even be the highest "density" anywhere outside of China. Btw: "Kolmevalitsus", which means "Triple government" is a good title for this story, isn't it? You ask why? OK, what are most people thinking about a government? Well, you probably said it. This book tells about times, when it was 3 times worse than normally... (this is a comment by Mart Vabar) PS: It was one of the favorite books of my Grandma Salme Vabar, too. (And I picked it up from her bookshelf.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.150.65.9 (talk) 18:35, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

The Era of the Three Kingdoms

From displays of might to daring sights, they came into power. The Yellow Scarves fought for freedoom, but they came to repel. A Hero to the People with sworn brothers, a Hero of Chaos referred as a villain, and a Tiger of Jiang Dong. Though they quelled the rebellion, another face comes to fright. Upon Dong Zhuo's tyranny reign, a coalition was ready. Though Lu Bu stood ready at the gate, the three brothers give him a chase.

After losing power and gaining strength, Cao Cao takes his steps towards fate. While the Suns battle for control of their land, Liu Bei wanders around the land. Though having no title nor a name, two warlords make their names into fame. Cao Cao defeats Lu Bu in battle while becoming the Protectorate of the new power. After gaining the Castle of Guandu, Cao Cao heads to battle the indecisive Yuan Shao. With Yuan Shao no longer a threat, Cao Cao becomes a powerful threat.

In regrettalbe moment, Liu Bei seeks a friend. In his stay of Liu Biao, he finds the Sleeping Dragon. True to his words and wise of all knowledge, Liang joins the ranks. A plan for Liu Bei and his brothers sets the motion for land. A trip to Wu and an alliance grew as they fought for the South. As Cao Cao approached upon his foes he meets his major set back. Upon the end of Chi Bi, Liu Bei takes over the west.

Liu Bei of Shu, the Hero of People. Sun Jian, the Tiger of Wu. Cao Cao of Wei, the Hero of Chaos. The Romance of the Three Kingdoms. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zhang Liao (talk • contribs) 05:58, 31 October 2005‎ (UTC)

The Three Kingdoms of the Han Dynasty

As we have read the novel or played the game, we see much attitude displayed throughout the battles. Stupidity, love, courage, knowledge, cunning, intelligence, bravery, etc. The Romance of the Three Kingdoms has shown everyone a history full of people who came into power and how they lost power.

Out of all the generals we have read about or seen, Cao Cao and Liu Bei had no titles to call their own, but as they went to battle they slowly came into power. With the Sun family taking back their land from various warlords, Cao Cao and Liu Bei went through a chain of events that would lead them to power.

As strong as they were, they were not alone in their quest for the restoration of the land. Liu Bei with his sworn brothers received aid from the fame scholar Zhuge Liang. The Sun family managed to require aid from the various generals who had left their leader they once served. Cao Cao, gain many able body fighters from defeating his enemies like Lu Bu and Yuan Shao. For anyone who has not yet read the novel, you can read all about it at www.threekingdoms.com.

The Leader of Wei was Cao Cao and his best strategists were Sima Yi and Guo Jia.

The Sun family was from Sun Jian to Sun Ce and Sun Quan. The best strategists of Wu were Zhou Yu, Lu Su, Lu Meng, and Lu Yi(Xun).

Liu Bei was leader of Shu and Zhuge Liang was the strategist for his army. --Zhang Liao 06:18, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

Some mistakes in the story line

There is an obvious mistakesin the condensed story by Revamp.

"As a final ploy, he set a statue of himself up, and bought time for the Shu army to retreat, as Sima Yi belived that Zhuge Liang had returned from the grave."

The plot was before Zhuge Liang's death. It shows how well Zhuge Liang knows about Sima Yi. Zhuge Liang ordered his army to retreat but he lead a few infirm soldiers staying in the empty city. When Sima's army arrived down the city's gate. He sat on top of the city wall and played a musical instrument and had the infirm solders sweeping the city's gateway to make an impression of welcoming Sima Yi's army into the city. This setting completely tricked Sima Yi to think there must be an ambush inside the city, so he ordered his army to retreat. This was called the "Empty City Plot". It showed how brilliant Zhuge Liang is as a strategist. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Keymaker (talk • contribs) 23:06, 20 January 2006‎ (UTC)

I thought that the empty castle plot and the statue plot was different. the empty castle plot was executed in the 5th or 6th campaign to Qi mountain, while the statue was from Wu Zhang Plain; the seventh campaign. The statue was indeed the final ploy. (No, maybe the Wei Yan's assassination plan (executed by Ma Dai) was his final final ploy. Brilliant man.}Tasfan 07:51, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Actually both of the events occured. He did use the empty city strategem as well as making a wood carving of himself in order to frighten sima yi or ssuma II into retreat. --The dark one 10:11, 18 July 2006 (UTC)The Dark One

They are not "castle","city" is the appropriate word to use. Regards ChowHui 17:34, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Games

The "Miscellaneous" part about the games is a bit off, but I can't figure out how exactly to rephrase it. Is there actually an RPG-series for the PS2? I can only think of the actual RoTK-games, around since the 8-bit era, 三国無双 for the PSX, 真三国無双 for the PS2 and XBOX, and 三国志戦記, none of which are RPGs... 130.232.131.47 20:02, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

In the games that have you control officers; you find items, collect gold, improve your stats...etc. So that could be a reason to classify them as RPGs...but it's mostly a strategy game.--Zhang Lmao 08:06, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Do we really need all this material on some Japanese video game in all the 三国 articles? Can't we move them off to an article of their own? m.e. 13:55, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Section on politically-motivated redactions?

Some accounts are pro-Wei/Cao Cao, others retain a Shu/Kongming protagonist. A paragraph or two could fit into Lit crit or something; I dunno. I find the editorial history of the novel quite fascinating, so surely others who find themselves reading Ming novels would as well. Hide&Reason 12:57, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Authorship / Date controversy

Moss Roberts says in the afterword to his translation,

"..there is a gap of about one hundred years between the presumed date of Luo Guanzhong's death and the 1494 preface. And there is no record prior to this preface connecting Luo and Three Kingdoms. To establish Luo Guanzhong's authorship therefore requires postulating an earlier text that has been lost. Put another way, those who argue that the 1522 text is the earliest version as well as the earliest printed edition of the novel cannot accept Luo Guanzhong as the real author" (412).

I think the article should reflect this controversy, instead of asserting unambiguously that Luo Guanzhong is the author, and that it was written in the 14th Century. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Alexkyllo (talk • contribs) 22:49, 5 January 2007 (UTC).

Fact and fiction section

I removed the list. The list assumes that the readers are familiar with the novel already, which is not the case. it might work in zh wiki, but not here. I suggest putting those tidbits in individual articles where they are relevent...like Zhao Yun and Zhang Fei's exaggerated heroics can be mentioned in Battle of Changban instead of here. _dk 10:51, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

I actually think it's a great idea to have a historical fact-checking section in articles on historical novels. The novel article is the natural and most useful place to put such information. It adds considerably to the value of the article, and if it became general practice for hist fic novel articles in Wikipedia, it would add significantly to the value of the site. Bertport 14:59, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Even so, it needs to be presented in a way that a reader unfamiliar with the novel would know what's going on. Just saying "Guan Yu actually likes women" isn't very useful if one doesn't know how the novel portrays him... _dk 17:02, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Wouldn't that argument call for editing it to improve the presentation, rather than just deleting it? Bertport 21:42, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Still, I think a semi-exhaustive list like the one I removed would be too long for this article, and would blur the focus of the article. _dk 22:49, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Oath of the Peach Garden

I see one line that says, "Besides the famous oath..." but I don't actually see an explicit mention of the incident. Did I overlook it somehow? It should be in the article... isn't that event one of the most important in the entire novel, since it impacts many future events? --Ling.Nut 19:13, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Plot summary

The plot summary has been tagged as overlong, but while it's true that it is very long and forms the bulk of the article, I would hesitate to remove it because, in this case of a work that is so influential in oriental literature, to this day, but is scarcely known in the west, a fairly detailed exposition of the characters and plot elements would seem to be an essential resource for English-speaking readers who cannot read this mix of Classical Chinese and vernacular, and perhaps may even have trouble with the modern Chinese or Japanese adaptations. I'm going to remove the tag. --Tony Sidaway 19:32, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Buying the book

I think there should be a mention of the many different versions that can be bought. When choosing it at a bookstore one is confronted with many different versions (translations?). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.75.246.49 (talk) 07:06, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Three years later, I have added a section on English translations. --Odie5533 (talk) 13:04, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

Words v Characters

How come it says that the novel has 800,000 words and 1811 characters? I thought 1 chinese character equal one word?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.69.129.246 (talk) 19:25, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

"Characters" here means the people in the story, not the writing system. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.17.154.153 (talk) 00:22, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Wrong Title!

The correct title should be Legend of the Three Kingdoms. There is no romance in this book. I come from China, I know this.-- Vintei  Talk  22:25, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Apparently, you are confused by the multiple meanings of the English word "Romance". "Romance of the Three Kingdoms" is not only a well established and accepted translation, it is also suitable. It basically means something like "novel" as opposed to "history".Bertport (talk) 00:42, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Agree with Bertport. The word romance carries a sense of heavy complexities and intrigues. Therefore, a romantic courtship could actually be a complex and intriguing relationship. Hence Jewish Anderstein (talk) 20:22, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Cultural impact

I think this section needs to be expanded, since it's mostly about videogames... and this has a large cultural impact in East Asia, outside of videogames. 70.55.84.13 (talk) 13:16, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Difference between novel and history

On the Chinese Wiki site there is a section about the difference between the novel and the history document book, Sangouzhi, anyone care to translate it? Speaker1978 (talk) 17:02, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Question

Who would you say are the main villain(s) in Romance of the Three Kingdoms. So far I counted Dong Zhuo, Lu Bu, and Zang Jiao. If there are any others I should count, please let me know. Thank you in advance. Neo Guyver (talk) 22:00, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Actually, I feel that there are no real 'heroes' or 'villains' in Romance of the Three Kingdoms. How do you define good and evil in the novel? To some people, Dong Zhuo may not necessarily be a villain. Although he was a bloodthirsty tyrant, he was also labelled as a Xiao Xiong (梟雄) in Chinese, just as Cao Cao was. Due to influence from games such as Dynasty Warriors, I don't think some people would call Lu Bu a villain, but instead, a great warrior or even 'Hero of the Three Kingdoms'. Personally, I feel that Zhang Jiao isn't a villain, but rather another ambitious character longing to seize power, with the help of the anger of the common people. Cao Cao a villain? He's a controversial character. What about Sima Yi? Just because he's the arch-nemesis of the 'good' character Zhuge Liang? Or perhaps even Zhou Yu? Think again, how do we really define good and evil in Romance of the Three Kingdoms? It's far too complicated, so we might as well leave all these thoughts and definitions to ourselves. Lonelydarksky (talk) 04:45, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Lonelydarksky - DO NOT START DELETING CONTENT ON THIS PAGE AS YOU HAVE DONE ON OTHERS. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.244.36.83 (talk) 00:21, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Your recent posts on the talk page for The Legend of the Condor Heroes have been all directed at me. They seem very much like personal attacks to me. I'm very amused by the fact that you've even resorted to attacking me on another page which I haven't really made any significant edits to, for quite some time. I do not intend to remove any content on this page unless it's vandalism or anything that is not constructive at all. Just to remind you, I've little tolerance for abusive remarks, insults and personal attacks or anything of similar nature. Please write your posts in a more appropriate tone next time. Lonelydarksky (talk) 15:00, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Corrigendum: syntax problem

This,

It was written in partly vernacular and partly Classical Chinese...

should be

It was written partly in vernacular and partly in Classical Chinese...

Rinbayashi (talk) 06:45, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

賠了夫人又折兵

Losing your wife and your army. 賠了夫人又折兵

The losted 夫人 is not your(Wu state's) wife. --刻意(Kèyì) 15:04, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Nothing on legacy?

It seems that for something like this there should be a section appraising its legacy. Have none of the researchers involved in this page so far also considered so? Homunculus (duihua) 06:56, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Seems to me that it would be a good idea to do this and replace the long lists of manhua, manga etc, though of course the most significant examples should be mentioned.--Rsm77 (talk) 05:42, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

What's it about?

Perhaps someone could briefly mention, in the lede or elsewhere, what it's about. You know, 'a sea captain in search of a great white whale' - or - 'a story which takes place over events leading up to Napoleon's invasion of Russia, and the impact of the Napoleonic era on Tsarist society, as seen through the eyes of five Russian aristocratic families' ... that kind of thing. One should be able to read an encyclopedia article and at least have a clue. It's kind of the point. 99.141.243.84 (talk) 21:21, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Isn't that in the first sentence of the lead section? based upon events in the turbulent years near the end of the Han Dynasty and the Three Kingdoms era of China, starting in 169 and ending with the reunification of the land in 280. Lonelydarksky (暗無天日) _{contact me (聯絡)} 04:34, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

You're missing the remainder, "as seen through the eyes five Russian aristocratic families". And actually, on reflection, perhaps that's the problem - the Tolstoy 'War and Peace' lede is rather poor as well, it's just such a familiar story that a minor prompting is all that's required for the reader to fill in the blanks. Maybe that's the issue, the editors of this article are simply too familiar with the story. I honestly don't have a sense of what it's about, even after reading the article. The article seems to be more about it's place as literature, background and history. This leaves precious little, if anything, about the storyline itself. 99.141.243.84 (talk) 19:37, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Doesn't the Story section cover the storyline? Lonelydarksky (暗無天日) _{contact me (聯絡)} 14:20, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

That's about a 2500 word section. I'm going to take a crack at it - give me a day. ...oh, and wish me luck - I won't try to defend my attempt at summary if I miss the mark.72.5.199.254 (talk) 18:59, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

I've added a summary. 99.141.243.84 (talk) 23:08, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Nicely done. However, there're some minor inaccuracies and errors. I've corrected them. Lonelydarksky (暗無天日) _{contact me (聯絡)} 03:26, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Removal of Cultural references section

I deleted the entire cultural references section. I think a legacy section would be useful that perhaps mentions some notable references, but the list on the article was somewhat WP:OR and was more important for the references themselves than they were for the actual novel. --Odie5533 (talk) 20:36, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Absolutely, many Three Kingdoms related topics are in the state of listing large amounts of trivia (i.e. the article Guan Yu) which adds little to the topic itself or that many historical characters has a videogames section in which it appeared (most notable Dynasty Warriors as if someone decided to merge the article List of Dynasty Warriors characters with every other article). -- Cold Season (talk) 21:22, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for the support. Many times discussions on talk pages go unnoticed, so it's nice to receive a response. --Odie5533 (talk) 01:29, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

I thought it'd be more appropriate to move that deleted section to a separate page List of media adaptations of Romance of the Three Kingdoms, as per Journey to the West, as opposed to erasing it completely. Yes, I do agree with Cold Season that the trivia problem on many Three Kingdoms articles is indeed a cause for concern. We've many misinformed or totally ignorant IP editors trying to change historical people's birth dates (which are not found in historical sources) to fit the dates given in Dynasty Warriors or other video games. We've been attempting to reduce the amounts of trivia, but I've observed that after some time someone will add them back and this may go unnoticed. Lonelydarksky (暗無天日) _{contact me (聯絡)} 02:40, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

I think it would only be appropriate to have its own article if the subject meets the WP:GNG, i.e. the body of cultural references has received significant coverage in reliable sources. Each individual reference may be reliable, and indeed they should be placed on their respective articles, but I don't think a list of them has received as much attention. If you can find sources that show otherwise, then I'd change my opinion. --Odie5533 (talk) 10:35, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

The fact that the novel has spawned many modern media adaptations is testament to its influence. Of course, not every media adaptation should be mentioned or is noteworthy (notable, in WP-speak). But to delete all adaptations is patently disproportionate and illogical. Looking forward, I echo LDS's point that a separate article may be appropriate; in the alternative, the list as it stands here can be trimmed. Until this impasse is resolved, re-deletion is contrary to consensus. The point about WP:GNG is also unconnected to the issue at hand. Chensiyuan (talk) 13:32, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

No, the WP:GNG does apply to this matter since we were considering placing the list in a new article which would require application of the GNG. I would also like to note that I don't think restoring a giant list to save the information is appropriate; you should have trimmed the list yourself, or restored only a few and added the rest to the talk page for discussion. You also haven't stated which entries are notable, only that perhaps it should be trimmed. You are basically saying that you don't agree, and someone should do something about it. This does not actually help form consensus and I see it as throwing a wrench into the works. --Odie5533 (talk) 14:49, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

As per Chen. Manderiko (talk) 13:50, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Currently, there is an enormous ugly list that mars the article. I would like to establish consensus that the list be replaced with a legacy section that mentions a few notable cultural references. Most of the list has no references, or some of the references are in Japanese (this one appears to be a Japanese 404 page). Although User:Chensiyuan restored the entire list including many uncited, non-notable, or otherwise dubious entries, I do not believe every single reference is as notable as User:Chensiyuan does. User:Chensiyuan also stated that he or she would like to preserve the list, either here or on another article and perhaps in a trimmed form. For the purposes of this article, I believe a list is not appropriate and, against User:Chensiyuan's recommendation, I think a prose section would be more appropriate. I would thus like to ask of others: which references are notable? The only two I can vouch for are The Ravages of Time, which is an on-going manga series for the past 10 years, and Romance of the Three Kingdoms (video game series), which has been producing video games based on the series for the past 30 years. --Odie5533 (talk) 14:49, 27 September 2011 (UTC)