Talk:Zhang Yan (Han dynasty)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Three Kingdoms, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Three Kingdoms 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.Three KingdomsWikipedia:WikiProject Three KingdomsTemplate:WikiProject Three KingdomsThree Kingdoms articles

Mid

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

To-do list:

Here are some open WikiProject Three Kingdoms tasks:

Meta-tasks:
- Place the {{WP3K}} template on the talk page of articles within the scope of this project.
- Get pictures for the infoboxes of the 3K people.
- Add references to the articles.

Start an article:
- Article requests

Improvement Drive
- Segregate fact and fiction for all biography and history articles.

Feel free to edit this list or discuss these tasks.

(edit)

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

Biography

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

No sense

This article doesn't make sense. It doesn't even say where or when this person lived. Badagnani 03:22, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

de Crespigny (2007), p. 624

@DongZhuo3kingdoms: Just to clarify this: When I originally added sources to this article in 2020, I was using a physical version of the de Crespigny (2007) book from a library. As far as I remember, the book was not in the best shape. I assume this might have contributed to the confusion on my part. I have now checked a digital version of page 624, and it indeed mentions only Zhang Yang, not Zhang Yan. So for initially restoring this faulty part, I want to say sorry to you.
Regardless, the issue of primary sources remains. Generally, we should try to avoid adding infos solely sourced to primary sources - per the wiki's rules. Applodion (talk) 18:19, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the acknowledgment and I'll accept the Lu Zhi thing won't fly in this article until the unlikely event of a secondary source covering it.

Please note I never said anything to provoke "you cannot just claim "i know better" compared to De Crespigny, one of the foremost experts on the subject matter; if you want to dismiss De Crespigny's claims, provide another expert disagreeing with him, not your interpretation of the sources". Indeed some of the work you removed was based on De Crespigny's work and cited him but just just blanket removed for reasons unclear.

No sources claim Zhang Yan was a common criminal (I think you are taking bandit perhaps a little too literally? Carl Leban doesn't even use the term bandit, but while I agree that is unusual, outright claims to previous criminal background is too far). He was given rank when he surrendered but acknowledgment as a high ranking official is a stretch. You cut out detail (how he came to power, how his reach was across several provinces, his attempts to support Gongsun Zan, details of the best recorded battle he was involved in and the resources he was able to muster). Without a reason for any of these (secondary sourced, accurate) while cutting down the wiki considerably. Rather then cutting out the two things you thought were wrong.

DongZhuo3kingdoms (talk) 18:59, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Given over 48 hours, been no explanation as to why removal of one small part (Lu Zhi) justified the removal of every single other change I had made (info box, added details on battle, on his range of power and so on). So I'm reverting it back twice then removing the Lu Zhi part as agreed. If Applodion has issues with parts and wants them changed, can use the talk page rather then mass reverts to his old versions.

Sadly also been no explanation or apology for the public and false claim made either about me claiming to know better than Rafe De Crespigny. A man whose work I have cited in the Zhang Yan entry (didn't stop Applodion removing those segements) and repeated wiki articles DongZhuo3kingdoms (talk) 11:22, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@DongZhuo3kingdoms: Sorry that I did not notice that you had already responded. Next time, please use a ping (like I did), so I'm notified. Regarding your points:
You do imply that you know more than De Crespigny. Look at your change: Do you see how much of his sourced content you remove or completely change?
My issue was never regarding Lu Zhi. It was in regards to using primary sources. Per Wikipedia:No original research, we should generally avoid the use of primary sources. Most of your additions are sourced to primary sources, including: raid of Shanze; attack on Yingtao; Zhang Niujue being killed by an arrow; all new details related to the war with Yuan Shao; Zhang surrendering with 100,000 followers. All of these would need secondary sources as well.
How exactly is a bandit not a criminal?
Applodion (talk) 17:36, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Applodion No problem, the fault is mine on not pinging you.

My Chinese isn't anywhere good enough for that idea unfortunately (and I know no Japanese which is the other main place for works as I understand it)

De Crespigny: Citations of his removed: 0. Citations of De Crespigny added: 3 (at start, his reach, in Lu Zhi paragraph). Amount of De Crespigny's work removed by your last major reversion...

So I add his work and that is disrespectful. You remove his work and that is respectful? I'll admit, I'm struggling to see the logic. I changed some things you said, that is different. For which I don't see as disrespect, more of a building on what came before.

Primary: It says no original research. However, since I didn't do that, seems fine. The rules encourage us to use secondary sources and rightly so where there is sufficient coverage, secondry trumps primary. But they don't say you can't use primary at all, just that it shouldn't be the main where possible, and it does say you can use primary repeatedly. What it objects to is original research which I don't think anyone could define Lu Zhi line as original. My first created page (Xu Yi) was mostly primary (due to lack of secondary sources about such a man) and was approved so doen't seem to have a major problem with that when appropriate. Primary sources are used often in the three kingdoms part of Wikipedia and bar this article, people haven't had an issue with that.

I can double-check the secondary sources (most likely two works for this as imperial warlord and the early life of Tsao Tsao) to supplement them in the coming week but since no ban on primary sources, will use them when they will add something to the wiki entry.

Bandit: He didn't rise from a common criminal, we don't know his background till we first meet him as a leader of men. We don't know his background before then (maybe he did indeed rise up from common criminal but we have no way of knowing) or how he became a leader of such men, a rebel leader. In terms of the idea of bandits (where I am sympathetic with you), the term gives us the idea of criminals and so on, but even leaving aside "your a bandit" shots, it could be sprayed around rather liberally. It was used against peasant groups both secular and religious, natives who were pushed out, even as far powerful clans and their troops (Liu Biao's rivals, Jia Long's army for examples). Now in a discussion one can argue that in this case, Zhang Yan and co fit the term bandits in the way people think of it, but not all accept that,it is not a factually settled matter. Carl Leban uses the term Black Mountain rebels each and every time he mentions the group in Tsao Tsao and the rise of Wei, he never uses the term bandits. DongZhuo3kingdoms (talk) 16:39, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@DongZhuo3kingdoms: To ask a different question: Can you read Chinese? If so, it would be great if you could add the work of modern Chinese historians for the Three Kingdoms period. Western sources (aside of De Crespigny) are quite lacking. Applodion (talk) 17:52, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]