User talk:Nlu/archive76

Titles

These titles are misleading. The first title is also particularly bad because the it's suggesting Later Jin more than Li Keyong's territory. I'm thinking of moving them all, but wanted to hear your thoughts. Timmyshin (talk) 22:40, 8 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'd be open to it. The reason why I used "(Five Dynasties)" was that they were traditionally not counted among the Ten Kingdoms. Any ideas would be appreciated. --Nlu (talk) 22:57, 8 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As far as Yin is concerned, one solution is to merge it to Min. --Nlu (talk) 22:58, 8 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Actually I'm undecided. I just checked other language versions of these pages, and most of them agree with the current English titles. (It's obvious at least some of them were translated from English...) However, there are some variations to consider. The Japanese version of Yan is "桀燕". The Norwegian page for Qi is "Qi (Shaanxi)". Korean wiki uses "Qi (Five Dynasties and Ten Kingdoms)" for Qi and "XXX (Five Dynasties)" for the others, probably because Qi is the only one bordering a "kingdom". I was thinking of using the format "Qi (Five Dynasties and Ten Kingdoms period)" with the word "period" added, but it just seems a little too cumbersome. Plus it doesn't solve the "Jin"/"Later Jin" problem. My main concern with the current titles is that someone may look at the titles and say, "Oh, so one of the Five Dynasties was called Yan." ~~I do think that the best solution is probably to merge them all, especially Zhao (with Wang Rong) and Yin (with both Min and Wang Yanzheng).~~ But I think I'd leave them alone for now before my perfectionist tendency gets in my way again. If I do attempt anything about them I'll definitely let you know. Timmyshin (talk) 23:37, 8 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 12

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sang Weihan, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Later Jin (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:06, 12 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Executions by Nazi Germany

Hello, Nlu. Please see Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2014_March_5#Category:People_executed_by_Nazi_Germany. Most of these people were not "executed" per se, but rather murdered or killed in the process by the Nazi regime. Most of the articles should have the categories reverted because the victims did not undergo a judicial process.Hoops gza (talk) 16:57, 22 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

All right. Understood. Thanks. --Nlu (talk) 16:58, 22 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Do you plan on reverting these edits? It might be easier for you to do than for me because you can use your edit history to go through it a little more quickly than I could.Hoops gza (talk) 17:05, 22 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, my edit history is too messy to do that. :-) :-( I would suggest that going through the category tree is easier. It would, in any case, be better to get multiple sets of eyes on it. --Nlu (talk) 17:06, 22 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

OK, one other thing I just thought of, could you please help create the categories such as Category:American people who died in Nazi concentration camps?Hoops gza (talk) 17:16, 22 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I see now that it looks like you already covered some of this. Please give me some time to sort the categories out.Hoops gza (talk) 17:25, 22 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Which term do you prefer: "American people who died in Nazi concentration camps" or "Nazi concentration camp victims from the United States"?Hoops gza (talk) 17:38, 22 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have no preference — but it should be parallel with other categories. Thanks. --Nlu (talk) 17:40, 22 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 24

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Shi Chonggui, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page History of the Five Dynasties (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:55, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 31

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Consort Dowager An (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Chaoyang

Empress Li (Later Jin) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Chaoyang

Li Congke (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Later Jin

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:53, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Basketball player categories

Hello, Nlu. I have noticed that you have been creating categories for basketball players from various cities in China. I am curious, what makes you think that these categories would be acceptable when the categories for basketball players from cities in the United States were not? I would suggest halting work on these categories for the moment and a discussion be held.Hoops gza (talk) 02:58, 12 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

They're not cities — they're provinces (and in the case of Beijing, Shanghai, and Tianjin, they're special cities with the status of provinces) — which makes them equivalent to U.S. states' categories, which are accepted. (Please take a look at Provinces of China.) And I do believe that these categories are going to be helpful. China's population is significantly larger than the United States', as well, which means that when these categories are properly populated as time goes on, they should get quite large. Besides, even back in the U.S. discussions, there is a fairly substantial feeling (if not a majority) that even for cities, New York, Los Angeles, and Chicago may be large enough that subdivisions may be necessary. I would tend to think that the same logic applies here. Please take a look at the population sizes of these provinces (and special cities). --Nlu (talk) 03:05, 12 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pardon my ignorance. I saw places such as Shanghai and Harbin among your categories and I knew them only as cities. Provinces would be acceptable. Also, sportspeople from cities would be acceptable. However, I don't understand why Category:Basketball players from Harbin exists. According to the page you linked, Harbin was a province for only one year.Hoops gza (talk) 03:14, 12 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Harbin was because its Sportspeople category was fairly large. Prior to the partial diffusion (which was done in December 2012), it was about 150-200, which I considered large. You are certainly welcome to create a discussion on it, but again, please remember that this is a city of 10.6 million people. I still do disagree with the results of the California city discussions, but I do have to abide by the consensus there. But these Chinese cities (including Harbin) dwarf California cities, even Los Angeles, in size. --Nlu (talk) 03:19, 12 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 21

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Zhang Yanhan, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Book of Southern Tang (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:18, 21 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Marquis of Extended Grace

I created this article: Marquis of Extended Grace. Check it out. The great huha (talk) 02:49, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nice! --Nlu (talk) 02:50, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I set up Interwiki and pulled the list of title holders from the Chinese version. There was some stuff I couldn't translate, if you want to help. The great huha (talk) 10:29, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am willing to help. However, as Ming/Qing history is not my forte, what I would prefer is this: if you can list specific passages you want me to help translate, I will translate them and let you incorporate them as you see fit. --Nlu (talk) 15:30, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

末代一等延恩侯后来还追随清室去了东北。 He was a courtier for Puyi at Mukden? If so, that seems really sad.

朱之琏正白旗汉军雍正二年十二月，以明代后裔，由正定知府特赐一等侯。八年，卒。乾隆十四年八月，赠一等延恩侯，世袭。 I assume this explains the ancestry of the first marquis.

朱仪凤，绍美从子 Son of Zhu Siumei?

书桂，坦族叔。道光十六年，袭。

鹤鹤龄，书桂继子。龄，书桂继子。

诚端，鹤龄族孙 Grandson of Heling?

朱煜勋，诚端子。光绪十七年，袭。

Why do some entries say "袭" and others not? Didn't all the marquis inherit their title? The article usually gives the full name, but in some cases the family name is left off. Can I assume that "鹤龄" is "Zhu Heling", "书桂" is "Zhu Shugui", etc.? The great huha (talk) 00:04, 11 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Let's take it one point at a time:

As to the reason why some say 襲 and not is that 1) inheritance, while kind of automatic, is not automatic in the sense that the emperor still needs to issue an edict and 2) as you might see, in this case, the succession was interrupted several times and did not go from father and son. When it comes to a collateral branch succeeding to the title, it requires imperial intervention to do so.
Yes, assume the surname of Zhu; in classical Chinese, the family is omitted in references to subsequent family members in the same text.
As to whether the last marquess was a courtier or not was actually not stated; it was just stated that he went to the northeast following the emperor, which could simply imply a relocation and not necessarily part of being the Manchukuo court.
Zhu Zhiliang was explaineed to be, "of the Han Army of the Plain White Banner" (in Qing's Eight Banners system). "In the 12th month of the second year of Yongzheng, he was, based on his descent from Ming Dynasty, bestowed the title of a marquess of the first class while serving as the mayor of Zhengding. He died in the eighth year. In the eighth month of the 14th year of Qianlong, he was posthumously bestowed the title of a marquess of extended grace of the first class, and the title was inheritable."
Yifeng was Shaomei's nephew.
Shugui was Xiuxiang's granduncle (although the Chinese concept of a granduncle is a bit different than English concept; here, it would merely mean that Shugui was a cousin of Xiuxiang's grandfather, and not even necessarily a first cousin; it could be even more distant, given that 族祖 was used rather than 伯祖 (specifically, a granduncle who was an older brother of Xiuxiang's grandfather) or 叔祖 (specifically, a granduncle who was a younger brother of Xiuxiang's grandfather).
Heling was an adoptive son of Shugui. (Most likely, he was by blood from the same clan as well, although that is not made clear. I think his inheritance would be considered problematic if he was not.)
Chengrui was a grandnephew (and the description as 族孫 implies that it is more distant than a simple grandson of a brother; rather, the was probably the grandson of a cousin, and not even necessarily a first cousin).
Yuxun was the son of Chengrui. He inherited the title in the 17th year of Guangxu.

I hope that this answers your questions. Again, I am not a Ming/Qing expert. (But I actually think there is something worth investigating here; it seems to me that 延恩侯 was not an unique title, based on the description here, but rather a more generic type of marquess title that could be inherited. Again, I don't know Qing titles well.) Also, I'd suggest using "marquess" rather than "marquis" given that, while "marquis" is acceptable in English, the English standard is "marquess." --Nlu (talk) 00:15, 11 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot! I have already incorporated this information into the article. Oxford and American Heritage recommend using "marquess" for the British title and "marquis" when an equivalent word translated from another language. Merriam-Webster doesn't make this distinction. I assume the British are more precise about this sort of thing, so I'd go with Oxford.

Do you think the article would make a good DYK? I am not going to nominate it myself, but if somebody else did I'd certainly appreciate it. The great huha (talk) 14:12, 11 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I can not find anything in 隋書/卷05 to show Yang Tong born in 605.--123.27.168.75 (talk) 18:34, 22 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Neither can I at the moment. I believe that I used that date based on implied birthdate -- he was older than Yang You, who was born in 605 based on vol. 5, and older than Yang Tan, who was born in 603 based on vol. 59, but obviously that only limited it to a three-year range. There might be something else in vol. 5 that narrowed it down indirectly, but I forget exactly what the basis was. I wouldn't mind if it is removed. --Nlu (talk) 18:47, 22 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 26

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Zhang Yanze, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page History of the Five Dynasties (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:57, 26 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Request for comment

Hello there, a proposal regarding pre-adminship review has been raised at Village pump by Anna Frodesiak. Your comments here is very much appreciated. Many thanks. Jim Carter through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:46, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]