Talk:Soga no Iname

Appropriateness of Stub rating

The problem you are going to have with articles on figures from the Asuka period and earlier is that there simply aren't any sources of information that talk about anything beyond what is already included in this article. These people only show up in one or two written sources and that's it. We can expand what is already here (fluff it up) by taking more about figures they were associated with or their family members, etc., but you aren't going to find much more information about the individual. I think rating an article stub or not needs to be based on the relative amount of information in an article, not the absolute amount.-Jefu 01:08, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

While it generally isn't much more than speculation, most figures in the late-Asuka period that are covered in the Nihon Shoki have been discussed extensively by Japanese historians. Reputable scholars theorizing on the reasons things happened and what certain figures relation to each other was, etc., is probably better for Wikipedia purposes than biographical information in primary sources. Asuka period persons are really no more problematic than figures in any other ancient, semi-literate society: some appear only once or twice in state chronicles, some kept personal diaries that are now lost to us but are preserved in other later records, some wrote poetry that was learnt orally or otherwise preserved until it could be written down much later, etc., etc. (Kakinomoto no Hitomaro appears in even fewer contemporary chronicles than Iname, but hundreds of books and dissertations have been written on him nonetheless.) elvenscout742 (talk) 08:01, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one article was rated and this bot brought all the other ratings up to at least that level. BetacommandBot 04:30, 28 August 2007 (UTC)