![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 10 | Archive 11 | Archive 12 | Archive 13 | Archive 14 | Archive 15 | → | Archive 17 |
Hi Vtria 08, you have difficulties in this article with three block-quotes from the Encyclopedia Britannica 2008. The first two are quite reasonable in what they say; but the same information is available elsewhere, so why continue to force the inclusion of these quotes when the same "quotation" can be found elsewhere. The third quotation (if it is taken in context) makes a claim that is not fully supported elsewhere. I have stated that above; and if it had not been removed by another editor, I would have copy edited it. You also appear to be having similar problems trying to enforce the inclusion of Encyclopedia Britannica 2008 information into Tea; but I have no judgement either way on tea. This to me suggests that it is not particularly helpful trying to force certain Encyclopedia Britannica 2008 quotations into wikipedia. Note: quite a few articles do include (in some cases, consist solely of) out of Copyright Encyclopedia Britannica content. The 2008 edition is not out of Copyright, so you also run the risk of copyright challenges. You are welcome to contribute to wikpedia, but the use of Encyclopedia Britannica 2008 as a source of information, particularly in the case of Gunpowder and the History of gunpowder will lead to problems - some of the information appears unreliable. P.S. I have not read Encyclopedia Britannica 2008, I am relying the the care (accuracy and precision, if you prefer) that you have taken in selecting extracts and quotations. Whilst I don't support the language that Meatwaggon uses above, he does appear to have the integrity of the Gunpowder and History of gunpowder articles to heart. P.S.S. If Meatwaggon is to be tarred with edit-warring in this article, at the present time, you are also at fault. Stop trying to enforce the inclusion of Encyclopedia Britannica 2008, there are better sources - they are already in the two articles, use them with accuracy and precision. Pyrotec ( talk) 19:55, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
i have added important information and cited them all, can i know why have you reverted my edits *and why you insist on the sentence "Islamic world did not acquire knowledge of gunpowder until the 13th century"*, tell me if you have a good reason-- MARVEL ( talk) 16:24, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
Answer: if you know the least about the discussions over gunpowder history then you will know that i wasnt the first to say that actually their are scholars who determined bluntly that gunpowder originated in the Islamic World for example Sigrid Hunke, Gustave Le Bon and Dr. Ahmed Fanjari. others said that at least gunpowders three ingredints were known by Arabs or Europeans. And you can not remove cited sentences that you dont like this is called reduction of the article quality, if some source indicated that muslims invented gunpowder it should be mentioned.1-There are so many things to say. First of all, your very first claim, "Gunpowder was propably invented by Muslims", has absolutely NO direct support from any of your sources and is a conclusion YOU made, not your sources. Even if such a claim were made by any source you provided, they would not likely stand up to rigorous academic scrutiny especially since the established academic consensus does not support your unsubstantiated claim of gunpowder being invented in the Muslim world
Answer:my citation of Needham is correct you might have another print of the book and the print i cited goes under "Alchemy and Chemistry" not "The Gunpowder Epic", and you can see that my citation is compatiple with google books version. and lets say that Needham is completely ignorant of the use of saltpeter in the Arab World for example the well known Arab scientist Jabir ibn Hayyan (722-815) have invented nitric acid he synthesized it from Potassium Nitrate (saltpeter) also many later muslim scientists used saltpeter for many reasons from chemistry (al-Razi, Jabir, Khaled ibn Yazid) to medicine (Ibn Sina and Zahrawi) and freezing water (Ibn Bakhtawayh) and many others. There is no concrete evidence that gunpowder was known in china and the taoist experiment cited does not contain a key element of gunpowder 'charcoal' and it does not mention an explosive nature of gunpowder but rather it shows that there was a fire when taoists tried to make magic alexir and that does not proof they know any actual use of gunpowder. and the name thalj al-sin does not proof that muslims knew it from china as there are other names for example (Yemeni alum) and Armenian buraq ... Needham says in the same page the Arabs got it from "Mountains" in central asia (ie. ore)......also the strange addatives sulfide, lacquer and camphor does not mean muslims took them from china the opposite can be correct. another issue Bertholt and Duval ascribed a 10th century knowledge of GUNPOWDER check here and please be respective and dont throw your accusations again a dont appreciate what you said about me and dont make it personal . I will later change the article and improve it further ... any other thing you want to say just tell me now-- MARVEL ( talk) 20:10, 26 June 2008 (UTC)2-Second, your Needham citation is patently incorrect. Did you even read this source before you pasted it??? Page 432 of Volume 5:7 (The Gunpowder Epic) does not contain any references to saltpeter whatsoever. I had to scan throughout the index to find Needham's references to Muslim knowledge of saltpeter. These are found on pages 42, 95, 107-8, and 347-50. Page 42 lists Ibn al-Baytar (or al-Baithar) approx. 1240 AD as the first Muslim author to mention potassium nitrate. Page 95 describes the ideal conditions found in Arabia, India, and China for the formation and deposition of potassium nitrate, in contrast to Europe. Page 107-8 confirms that the Arabs knew of potassium nitrate as thalj al-Sin, Chinese snow (NOT Chinese "ore") during the early decades of the 13th century, and did not know of its use in gunpowder until the later decades of the 13th century, around the same time this knowledge arrived Europe. Page 347-50 describes Arab and European gunpowder recipes, which seem to appear in their literature at the maximum explosive concentration of potassium nitrate de novo, without any mention of prior experimentation (such as has been amply documented in Chinese literature) which suggests that they arrived to those regions already relatively fully developed.In short, not only does Needham, one of the pillars of academic research in this area, not describe anything you are trying to claim, he flatly and fully contradicts essentially all of your claims, especially about gunpowder, potassium nitrate, and Chinese use of gunpowder, which I'll get into next.
1-Encylopedia Britannia is a WP:reliable sources and you cannot discredit it and you cannot discredit any source that you dont like something in it thats firt, secondly can you give me the hunke source and show us all what it said literally?, then the word 'ore' means any thing that is takin from nature as is ex. ore petroleum can you just tell people that there is no diference between ore petroleum and that is refined, or you just tell your car that there is no diference! anyways even removing the word ore doesnt mean that they actually bought it from china as Needham states that muslims got it from mountain in central and west asia also there are other names indicating other counties "yemen, armenia, Assis (near antioch). we come to the Partington issue yet again we might have a version issue is there is a mention of "incenerary tubes" in the pages you menioned dated from? i wait for an answer. it is possible that gunpowder compositions might have been known independently in india, or the islamic world it is the mater of facts you like them or not, and there is possibility that chinese never knew the correct formulla of gunpowder and its composition of those three elements till the 14's century and chinese might not have knew the explosive nature till that same time. Lastly you have accused me with "gross displaying and intellectual dishonesty" that is a result either from your blindness or you have intentions to make arguments over nonesence, just read the page again and the passage is clearly cited by the saudi aramco source, one last thing i want all my refrences chicked coz im not the one who is mis-citing Cocroft i hope you got the picture ;) -- MARVEL ( talk) 16:51, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
Chinese alchemists discovered the recipe for what became known as black powder in the 9th century AD; this was a mixture of finely ground potassium nitrate (also called saltpetre), charcoal, and sulfur in approximate proportions of 75:15:10 by weight. The resultant gray powder behaved differently from anything previously known; it exploded on contact with open flame or a red-hot wire, producing a bright flash, a loud report, dense white smoke, and a sulfurous smell. It also produced considerable quantities of superheated gas, which, if confined in a partially enclosed container, could drive a projectile out of the open end. The Chinese used the substance in rockets, in pyrotechnic projectors much like Roman candles, in crude cannon, and, according to some sources, in bombs thrown by mechanical artillery. This transpired long before gunpowder was known in the West, but development in China stagnated. The development of black powder as a tactically significant weapon was left to the Europeans, who probably acquired it from the Mongols in the 13th century (though diffusion through the Arab Muslim world is also a possibility).
Instead of warring why not read the chapters by:
There are, respectively chapters 2 and 3, in Buchanan, Brenda J. (2006). Gunpowder: The History of an International Technology - papers presented at the 22nd International Symposium of ICOHTEC. Do either of you "experts" give papers at the two ICOHTEC symposia on the history of gunpowder, or are you claiming expertise that you don't have? Pyrotec ( talk) 17:07, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
?Pyrotec i would appreciate it more if you suggested reading those two sources you provided and if there is some one who obviously pushing POV he will be mr Meatwaggon-- MARVEL ( talk) 08:45, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
With its ninth century AD origins in China, the knowledge of gunpowder emerged from the search by alchemists for the secrets of life, to filter through the channels of Middle Eastern culture, and take root in Europe with consequences that form the context of the studies in this volume.
— Brenda J. Buchanan, Gunpowder, Explosives and the State, "Editor's Introduction"
Chinese alchemists discovered the recipe for what became known as black powder in the 9th century AD; this was a mixture of finely ground potassium nitrate (also called saltpetre), charcoal, and sulfur in approximate proportions of 75:15:10 by weight. The resultant gray powder behaved differently from anything previously known; it exploded on contact with open flame or a red-hot wire, producing a bright flash, a loud report, dense white smoke, and a sulfurous smell. It also produced considerable quantities of superheated gas, which, if confined in a partially enclosed container, could drive a projectile out of the open end. The Chinese used the substance in rockets, in pyrotechnic projectors much like Roman candles, in crude cannon, and, according to some sources, in bombs thrown by mechanical artillery. This transpired long before gunpowder was known in the West, but development in China stagnated. The development of black powder as a tactically significant weapon was left to the Europeans, who probably acquired it from the Mongols in the 13th century (though diffusion through the Arab Muslim world is also a possibility).
— John F. Guilmartin, Jr., Encyclopædia Britannica
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 10 | Archive 11 | Archive 12 | Archive 13 | Archive 14 | Archive 15 | → | Archive 17 |
Hi Vtria 08, you have difficulties in this article with three block-quotes from the Encyclopedia Britannica 2008. The first two are quite reasonable in what they say; but the same information is available elsewhere, so why continue to force the inclusion of these quotes when the same "quotation" can be found elsewhere. The third quotation (if it is taken in context) makes a claim that is not fully supported elsewhere. I have stated that above; and if it had not been removed by another editor, I would have copy edited it. You also appear to be having similar problems trying to enforce the inclusion of Encyclopedia Britannica 2008 information into Tea; but I have no judgement either way on tea. This to me suggests that it is not particularly helpful trying to force certain Encyclopedia Britannica 2008 quotations into wikipedia. Note: quite a few articles do include (in some cases, consist solely of) out of Copyright Encyclopedia Britannica content. The 2008 edition is not out of Copyright, so you also run the risk of copyright challenges. You are welcome to contribute to wikpedia, but the use of Encyclopedia Britannica 2008 as a source of information, particularly in the case of Gunpowder and the History of gunpowder will lead to problems - some of the information appears unreliable. P.S. I have not read Encyclopedia Britannica 2008, I am relying the the care (accuracy and precision, if you prefer) that you have taken in selecting extracts and quotations. Whilst I don't support the language that Meatwaggon uses above, he does appear to have the integrity of the Gunpowder and History of gunpowder articles to heart. P.S.S. If Meatwaggon is to be tarred with edit-warring in this article, at the present time, you are also at fault. Stop trying to enforce the inclusion of Encyclopedia Britannica 2008, there are better sources - they are already in the two articles, use them with accuracy and precision. Pyrotec ( talk) 19:55, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
i have added important information and cited them all, can i know why have you reverted my edits *and why you insist on the sentence "Islamic world did not acquire knowledge of gunpowder until the 13th century"*, tell me if you have a good reason-- MARVEL ( talk) 16:24, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
Answer: if you know the least about the discussions over gunpowder history then you will know that i wasnt the first to say that actually their are scholars who determined bluntly that gunpowder originated in the Islamic World for example Sigrid Hunke, Gustave Le Bon and Dr. Ahmed Fanjari. others said that at least gunpowders three ingredints were known by Arabs or Europeans. And you can not remove cited sentences that you dont like this is called reduction of the article quality, if some source indicated that muslims invented gunpowder it should be mentioned.1-There are so many things to say. First of all, your very first claim, "Gunpowder was propably invented by Muslims", has absolutely NO direct support from any of your sources and is a conclusion YOU made, not your sources. Even if such a claim were made by any source you provided, they would not likely stand up to rigorous academic scrutiny especially since the established academic consensus does not support your unsubstantiated claim of gunpowder being invented in the Muslim world
Answer:my citation of Needham is correct you might have another print of the book and the print i cited goes under "Alchemy and Chemistry" not "The Gunpowder Epic", and you can see that my citation is compatiple with google books version. and lets say that Needham is completely ignorant of the use of saltpeter in the Arab World for example the well known Arab scientist Jabir ibn Hayyan (722-815) have invented nitric acid he synthesized it from Potassium Nitrate (saltpeter) also many later muslim scientists used saltpeter for many reasons from chemistry (al-Razi, Jabir, Khaled ibn Yazid) to medicine (Ibn Sina and Zahrawi) and freezing water (Ibn Bakhtawayh) and many others. There is no concrete evidence that gunpowder was known in china and the taoist experiment cited does not contain a key element of gunpowder 'charcoal' and it does not mention an explosive nature of gunpowder but rather it shows that there was a fire when taoists tried to make magic alexir and that does not proof they know any actual use of gunpowder. and the name thalj al-sin does not proof that muslims knew it from china as there are other names for example (Yemeni alum) and Armenian buraq ... Needham says in the same page the Arabs got it from "Mountains" in central asia (ie. ore)......also the strange addatives sulfide, lacquer and camphor does not mean muslims took them from china the opposite can be correct. another issue Bertholt and Duval ascribed a 10th century knowledge of GUNPOWDER check here and please be respective and dont throw your accusations again a dont appreciate what you said about me and dont make it personal . I will later change the article and improve it further ... any other thing you want to say just tell me now-- MARVEL ( talk) 20:10, 26 June 2008 (UTC)2-Second, your Needham citation is patently incorrect. Did you even read this source before you pasted it??? Page 432 of Volume 5:7 (The Gunpowder Epic) does not contain any references to saltpeter whatsoever. I had to scan throughout the index to find Needham's references to Muslim knowledge of saltpeter. These are found on pages 42, 95, 107-8, and 347-50. Page 42 lists Ibn al-Baytar (or al-Baithar) approx. 1240 AD as the first Muslim author to mention potassium nitrate. Page 95 describes the ideal conditions found in Arabia, India, and China for the formation and deposition of potassium nitrate, in contrast to Europe. Page 107-8 confirms that the Arabs knew of potassium nitrate as thalj al-Sin, Chinese snow (NOT Chinese "ore") during the early decades of the 13th century, and did not know of its use in gunpowder until the later decades of the 13th century, around the same time this knowledge arrived Europe. Page 347-50 describes Arab and European gunpowder recipes, which seem to appear in their literature at the maximum explosive concentration of potassium nitrate de novo, without any mention of prior experimentation (such as has been amply documented in Chinese literature) which suggests that they arrived to those regions already relatively fully developed.In short, not only does Needham, one of the pillars of academic research in this area, not describe anything you are trying to claim, he flatly and fully contradicts essentially all of your claims, especially about gunpowder, potassium nitrate, and Chinese use of gunpowder, which I'll get into next.
1-Encylopedia Britannia is a WP:reliable sources and you cannot discredit it and you cannot discredit any source that you dont like something in it thats firt, secondly can you give me the hunke source and show us all what it said literally?, then the word 'ore' means any thing that is takin from nature as is ex. ore petroleum can you just tell people that there is no diference between ore petroleum and that is refined, or you just tell your car that there is no diference! anyways even removing the word ore doesnt mean that they actually bought it from china as Needham states that muslims got it from mountain in central and west asia also there are other names indicating other counties "yemen, armenia, Assis (near antioch). we come to the Partington issue yet again we might have a version issue is there is a mention of "incenerary tubes" in the pages you menioned dated from? i wait for an answer. it is possible that gunpowder compositions might have been known independently in india, or the islamic world it is the mater of facts you like them or not, and there is possibility that chinese never knew the correct formulla of gunpowder and its composition of those three elements till the 14's century and chinese might not have knew the explosive nature till that same time. Lastly you have accused me with "gross displaying and intellectual dishonesty" that is a result either from your blindness or you have intentions to make arguments over nonesence, just read the page again and the passage is clearly cited by the saudi aramco source, one last thing i want all my refrences chicked coz im not the one who is mis-citing Cocroft i hope you got the picture ;) -- MARVEL ( talk) 16:51, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
Chinese alchemists discovered the recipe for what became known as black powder in the 9th century AD; this was a mixture of finely ground potassium nitrate (also called saltpetre), charcoal, and sulfur in approximate proportions of 75:15:10 by weight. The resultant gray powder behaved differently from anything previously known; it exploded on contact with open flame or a red-hot wire, producing a bright flash, a loud report, dense white smoke, and a sulfurous smell. It also produced considerable quantities of superheated gas, which, if confined in a partially enclosed container, could drive a projectile out of the open end. The Chinese used the substance in rockets, in pyrotechnic projectors much like Roman candles, in crude cannon, and, according to some sources, in bombs thrown by mechanical artillery. This transpired long before gunpowder was known in the West, but development in China stagnated. The development of black powder as a tactically significant weapon was left to the Europeans, who probably acquired it from the Mongols in the 13th century (though diffusion through the Arab Muslim world is also a possibility).
Instead of warring why not read the chapters by:
There are, respectively chapters 2 and 3, in Buchanan, Brenda J. (2006). Gunpowder: The History of an International Technology - papers presented at the 22nd International Symposium of ICOHTEC. Do either of you "experts" give papers at the two ICOHTEC symposia on the history of gunpowder, or are you claiming expertise that you don't have? Pyrotec ( talk) 17:07, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
?Pyrotec i would appreciate it more if you suggested reading those two sources you provided and if there is some one who obviously pushing POV he will be mr Meatwaggon-- MARVEL ( talk) 08:45, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
With its ninth century AD origins in China, the knowledge of gunpowder emerged from the search by alchemists for the secrets of life, to filter through the channels of Middle Eastern culture, and take root in Europe with consequences that form the context of the studies in this volume.
— Brenda J. Buchanan, Gunpowder, Explosives and the State, "Editor's Introduction"
Chinese alchemists discovered the recipe for what became known as black powder in the 9th century AD; this was a mixture of finely ground potassium nitrate (also called saltpetre), charcoal, and sulfur in approximate proportions of 75:15:10 by weight. The resultant gray powder behaved differently from anything previously known; it exploded on contact with open flame or a red-hot wire, producing a bright flash, a loud report, dense white smoke, and a sulfurous smell. It also produced considerable quantities of superheated gas, which, if confined in a partially enclosed container, could drive a projectile out of the open end. The Chinese used the substance in rockets, in pyrotechnic projectors much like Roman candles, in crude cannon, and, according to some sources, in bombs thrown by mechanical artillery. This transpired long before gunpowder was known in the West, but development in China stagnated. The development of black powder as a tactically significant weapon was left to the Europeans, who probably acquired it from the Mongols in the 13th century (though diffusion through the Arab Muslim world is also a possibility).
— John F. Guilmartin, Jr., Encyclopædia Britannica