This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
1421: The Year China Discovered the World redirect. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2 |
![]() | The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information. |
![]() | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
For such a proposal, please see here: Forthcoming book on Atlantis#Merger?. Gun Powder Ma ( talk) 00:38, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
This has been controversially merged and redirected to the author's article Gavin Menzies.
I believe a discussion should have occurred after the merge was constested, per WP:BRD.
The book itself is notable, so per WP:NOTABILITY, it should exist as a standalone article, as it is notable outside of the author, since the book is far better known than the author. In fact, if it were to be merged, both the two books and the author should redirect to the their presented in them, instead of redirecting to the author, since the author is less well known than his theory. 70.29.208.247 ( talk) 03:02, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
It should be noted that 1434: The Year a Magnificent Chinese Fleet Sailed to Italy and Ignited the Renaissance 1434: The Year a Magnificent Chinese Fleet Sailed to Italy and Ignited the Renaissance ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) has also been controversially merged to the author's article. 70.29.208.247 ( talk) 03:12, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
While the book 1434 presents evidence and historical documents to support to an alternate route of transfer of the technological and intellectual knowledge of the more advanced Empire of Ming in China to the underdeveloped regions of post-Dark Age and pre-Renaissance Europe. This transfer of technology and knowledge along with the intellectual impetus of the Arab muslim scholars was what ignited the renaissance. Both books are separate and pertain to different subject matter, as such, they must each have their own individual article pages!
This is highly unjustified violation of Freedom of Speech. Many vandals are attempting to suppress this information about Zheng He's naval explorations from the general public. And this proposed so-called "merger" is just a clever and sneaky way for those vandals to delete and suppress Gavin Menzies theories. This is not about whether or not Menzies theories are true or false, but rather it is about the inalienable for his articles to placed here on this free encyclopedic forum of Wikipedia. All those critics who oppose Menzies ideas are welcome to contribute to the edits as long as they conform with Wikipedias policy of neutrality civil conduct. Those vandals can threaten to block, lock, whatever lame attacks the low IQ vandals can muster but it's not going have any lasting affect nothing as we will keep coming back until justice and neutrality is implemented in accordance with the official policy of Wikipedia and NOT on some so-called "consensus" of a small group of anti-Gavin Menzie vandals. We officially OPPOSE any proposed merger or deletion of the said articles. Additionally, the pages for the two books 1421 and 1434 must be restored to their original glory while the Gavin Menzie page should be rendered as an official biography. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.71.1.5 ( talk) 17:40, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
Please refrain from uncivil conduct, while the ideas of Menzies are quite controversal he is still entitled the right to have his books presented here on Wikipedia in their full original manner, regardless of whether they are pseudohistory or fringe science. And to Mr. Dougweller, Regardless of whether one is an IP or registered user, we simultaneously represent the collective sentient cerebral function culminated from the populous of our infinitesimal minute planet Earth. Wikipedia was constructed by its' creator Mr. Jimmy Wales with the express purpose of allowing articles to be edited in good faith by the multitudes of intellectual scholars generous enough to constructively contribute to the continuing evolution of this platform. As such all conscious entities on our planet and hypothetically in the rest of our universe and perceived reality of the multiverse possess the inalienable right, granted by its' creator, to have a voice here on this forum and encyclopedia. You, Mr. Dougweller, are no more special than anyone else here, everyone has the right to speak. Glory to Freedom of Speech! Glory to Freedom of Press! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.68.249.69 ( talk) 19:09, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
71.68.249.69 ( talk · contribs) and 71.68.249.69 ( talk · contribs) are clearly the same editor. Edits overlap so it isn't IP hopping. They have also been canvassing. Dougweller ( talk) 09:38, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
The IP also seems to represent an organisation, as several times the words 'us' or 'we' have been used. I asked the IP what this meant but had no reply. Dougweller ( talk) 13:06, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
Just out of interest, I did some Whois lookups on a couple of the IPs who have been contributing to this discussion and editing the various related articles (it's all public info, so I'm not revealing anything private). I found the following ISP info...
Two IP ranges belonging to two ISPs, both in South Carolina, in towns that are aren't too far apart from each other. -- Boing! said Zebedee 18:44, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
1421: The Year China Discovered the World redirect. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2 |
![]() | The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information. |
![]() | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
For such a proposal, please see here: Forthcoming book on Atlantis#Merger?. Gun Powder Ma ( talk) 00:38, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
This has been controversially merged and redirected to the author's article Gavin Menzies.
I believe a discussion should have occurred after the merge was constested, per WP:BRD.
The book itself is notable, so per WP:NOTABILITY, it should exist as a standalone article, as it is notable outside of the author, since the book is far better known than the author. In fact, if it were to be merged, both the two books and the author should redirect to the their presented in them, instead of redirecting to the author, since the author is less well known than his theory. 70.29.208.247 ( talk) 03:02, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
It should be noted that 1434: The Year a Magnificent Chinese Fleet Sailed to Italy and Ignited the Renaissance 1434: The Year a Magnificent Chinese Fleet Sailed to Italy and Ignited the Renaissance ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) has also been controversially merged to the author's article. 70.29.208.247 ( talk) 03:12, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
While the book 1434 presents evidence and historical documents to support to an alternate route of transfer of the technological and intellectual knowledge of the more advanced Empire of Ming in China to the underdeveloped regions of post-Dark Age and pre-Renaissance Europe. This transfer of technology and knowledge along with the intellectual impetus of the Arab muslim scholars was what ignited the renaissance. Both books are separate and pertain to different subject matter, as such, they must each have their own individual article pages!
This is highly unjustified violation of Freedom of Speech. Many vandals are attempting to suppress this information about Zheng He's naval explorations from the general public. And this proposed so-called "merger" is just a clever and sneaky way for those vandals to delete and suppress Gavin Menzies theories. This is not about whether or not Menzies theories are true or false, but rather it is about the inalienable for his articles to placed here on this free encyclopedic forum of Wikipedia. All those critics who oppose Menzies ideas are welcome to contribute to the edits as long as they conform with Wikipedias policy of neutrality civil conduct. Those vandals can threaten to block, lock, whatever lame attacks the low IQ vandals can muster but it's not going have any lasting affect nothing as we will keep coming back until justice and neutrality is implemented in accordance with the official policy of Wikipedia and NOT on some so-called "consensus" of a small group of anti-Gavin Menzie vandals. We officially OPPOSE any proposed merger or deletion of the said articles. Additionally, the pages for the two books 1421 and 1434 must be restored to their original glory while the Gavin Menzie page should be rendered as an official biography. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.71.1.5 ( talk) 17:40, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
Please refrain from uncivil conduct, while the ideas of Menzies are quite controversal he is still entitled the right to have his books presented here on Wikipedia in their full original manner, regardless of whether they are pseudohistory or fringe science. And to Mr. Dougweller, Regardless of whether one is an IP or registered user, we simultaneously represent the collective sentient cerebral function culminated from the populous of our infinitesimal minute planet Earth. Wikipedia was constructed by its' creator Mr. Jimmy Wales with the express purpose of allowing articles to be edited in good faith by the multitudes of intellectual scholars generous enough to constructively contribute to the continuing evolution of this platform. As such all conscious entities on our planet and hypothetically in the rest of our universe and perceived reality of the multiverse possess the inalienable right, granted by its' creator, to have a voice here on this forum and encyclopedia. You, Mr. Dougweller, are no more special than anyone else here, everyone has the right to speak. Glory to Freedom of Speech! Glory to Freedom of Press! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.68.249.69 ( talk) 19:09, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
71.68.249.69 ( talk · contribs) and 71.68.249.69 ( talk · contribs) are clearly the same editor. Edits overlap so it isn't IP hopping. They have also been canvassing. Dougweller ( talk) 09:38, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
The IP also seems to represent an organisation, as several times the words 'us' or 'we' have been used. I asked the IP what this meant but had no reply. Dougweller ( talk) 13:06, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
Just out of interest, I did some Whois lookups on a couple of the IPs who have been contributing to this discussion and editing the various related articles (it's all public info, so I'm not revealing anything private). I found the following ISP info...
Two IP ranges belonging to two ISPs, both in South Carolina, in towns that are aren't too far apart from each other. -- Boing! said Zebedee 18:44, 13 May 2010 (UTC)