Talk:Zhao Bing

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Zhao Bing article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Biography: Royalty and Nobility

	Biography portal 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 supported by WikiProject Royalty and Nobility (assessed as Low-importance).

China Mid‑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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

History Mid‑importance

	History portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History 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.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Politics Mid‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics 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.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Article

I doubt he was born to Emperor Gong of Song if, according to this wiki, they were born on the same year. I don't know much about Chinese history, but perhaps they meant Emperor Duzong of Song China (don't know how so many edits could have missed this though, I'm not sure if I'm the one missing something...) 69.124.143.230 21:10, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Move

Emperor Bing of Song → Emperor Huaizong of Song — According to Chinese WP his name was Huaizong - Bing is his first name. Philg88 (talk) 00:51, 11 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Closed and moved. billinghurst sDrewth 16:04, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would strongly recommend moving this page back to Bing. I have never seen him described anywhere as Huaizong, and the Chinese wikipedia itself says he only got this temple name 100 years later. Plus the page name in the Chinese Wikipedia is just Zhao Bing, as opposed to all other Song emperors, and in the text it is stated that later people have normally just called him Emperor Bing. 141.84.14.76 (talk) 22:27, 7 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think we should have a good citation before it is changed to Emperor Bing. We need an explanation for why he should be the only Chinese emperor referred to by historians without his temple name. If he didn't receive his temple name until 100 years later and is colloquially addressed with his personal name, that should be in the article, but it hasn't been there, even as an unsourced statement. Also, we can't cite Wikipedia as a source for changes in Wikipedia, and it sounds like Chinese WP's approach to the issue changes back and forth. - Mojei (talk) 17:00, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just reverted another move. If Emperor Bing is the way this emperor is called, then someone should take responsibility and say in the article, for example, "Unlike all other Chinese emperors, this emperor is called by his personal name, Emperor Bing, not his temple name, Emperor Huaizong." In that case, the page can be moved to Emperor Bing of Song. If no one on Wikipedia is willing to take responsibility for asserting this, then I do not think a move is justified. If you can find a source about him, that would be even better, because every source available to Google for either "Emperor Huaizong" or "Emperor Bing" is copied from Wikipedia. - Mojei (talk) 04:22, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry,"Unlike all other Chinese emperors, this emperor is called by his personal name, Emperor Bing, not his temple name, Emperor Huaizong" is original research,who tell you all other Chinese emperors called by temple name?Emperor Wu of Han?Emperor Guangwu of Han?What a joke.Btw, Huai zong is invented by the netizen,it has no record.——星光下的人 (talk) 03:00, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

星光下的人, Please stop moving this page in violation of WP:CONCENSUS.► Philg88 ◄ ^talk 08:06, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I can NOT emphasize this enough. There seems to be a terrible bias among some editors that some sort of random speculative 'I heard it somewhere' pseudo information is to be tagged with a 'needs a cite' tag. Wrong. It should be removed, aggressively, unless it can be sourced. This is true of all information, but it is particularly true of negative information about living persons。——Jimmy Wales

Wikipedia:Verifiability is the policy of Wikipedia,please show me identifying reliable sources of Huaizong.If not,don't talk to me anything.--星光下的人 (talk) 10:18, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please maintain a civil attitude or you will be referred to WP:ETIQUETTE. The quote you cite is not relevant here. The verb used by Mr. Wales is "remove" not "move". You cannot arbitarily override the Wikipedia policy of using the temple name without concensus and a reliable source. Since two editors do not agree with you there is no concensus. ► Philg88 ◄ ^talk 11:06, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 7 December 2017

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. (closed by page mover) SkyWarrior 17:32, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Emperor Bing of Song → Zhao Bing – I'm not aware of any other Chinese emperor who uses this weird, totally invented "Emperor + personal given name + of + name of dynasty" format. Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Chinese) says "use temple names" for Song emperors, but this kid had no well-known temple name. Like User:星光下的人 mentioned in the discussion above, the temple name (and posthumous name) listed in the article's infobox are probably fabrications by netizens. The linked Wikibooks.org article was created by an IP without any source. Finally, Google Ngram shows no graphs for "Emperor Bing" or "Bing Emperor". Timmyshin (talk) 01:25, 7 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Support - as the last emperor, he did not receive a temple name and is referred to by his given name. The proper translation of his customary Chinese name Song Di Bing is "Bing, Emperor of Song", but that sounds cumbersome and unnatural in English. Zhao Bing is preferable per WP:CONCISE. -Zanhe (talk) 07:00, 13 December 2017 (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.

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Song Modi.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 03:39, 19 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

sources on his death

Have any recent studies been published about this? Typically, a seven year old does not willingly jump off a cliff. Have historians called into question the nationalistic/glorification of the ancient sources on this issue? I rather think he was probably murdered. Newer sources may be in Chinese-only. 50.111.45.197 (talk) 15:47, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]