![]() | A fact from Liu Wu, Prince of Liang appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 6 December 2013 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
| ![]() |
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
There's an argument to be made for Prince Xiao of Liang; there isn't a decent one for including both of his names in the title (especially at a misspelling). Redirects exist. I followed the general naming practice and the format for dabbing other Han princes. If PXL is the common name in English sources, present that evidence and move it there but then check the other Han princes and see if they need moving as well. — LlywelynII 10:44, 29 November 2013 (UTC)
Well ... bleh. Looking through the search results, I can find counterexamples but Kave is certainly right that the other usage (which as far as the title goes isn't wrong—just uglier, misleading, and unnecessary) seems to be completely standard for the Chinese prince articles. I could go through and fix those ^_^ but let's just fight one of those battles at a time. — LlywelynII 10:29, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Page moved, at my request (as closer), by an admin. Sven Manguard Wha? 04:50, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
Liu Wu, prince of Liang → Liu Wu, Prince of Liang – Noble titles following the personal given names of all Chinese imperial princes should be capitalized. He was the Prince of Liang. Lowercase prince can be use when using the word prince without referring to it as proper title; what I mean: Liu Wu was Chinese prince, a Han Dynasty prince, and Prince of Liang much how like Prince Charles is a British prince but Prince of Wales not prince of Wales. Examples for capitalization include all European titles are name followed by the comma and a capitalized form of the title follow by the realm like Charles, Prince of Wales or Albert II, Prince of Monaco. And more pertinent are examples for Qing Dynasty princes like Zaifeng, Prince Chun or Yikuang, Prince Qing. -- KAVEBEAR ( talk) 10:07, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
Pretty sure it counts as WP:OR to put this in the article, but for the curious: given the value of ~252 gr to the Western Han catty given here and the value of ~US$40,000 per kilo in late Nov 2013 given here, the prince's 400k catties in gold would come to around a quarter of a billion dollars. (If the figure were accurate, which of course it probably isn't.) — LlywelynII 11:18, 29 November 2013 (UTC)
For the curious, there's a non- WP:RS translation of the letter here. — LlywelynII 14:49, 29 November 2013 (UTC)
I posted a comment on this before, but there was no citation there because I couldn't find any scholarly articles in English talking about the grave goods, just photos from the museum on Picasa, &c. I just now found something in Chinese and will put it up, but it'd still be nice if someone with access to Jstor could find more about the toilet, &c.. — LlywelynII 16:57, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
Well, that's unpleasant. Haven't seen this before, but searching this pdf for 'Liu Wu' pulls up that his title after 161 during life was Prince of Suiyang (睢陽王). Seems to have come out of Sima's treatment of the family, so wonder how to work that in or whether Liang was technically in abeyance during his life. — LlywelynII 11:09, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
It is not helpful to have an unintelligible image on the theory viewers can 'link through': one might as well post a text link. The images are there to be seen. For better or worse, both of the ones on this page are relatively busy and need to be somewhat larger than normal to be effective. (That said, given the relatively low-res image at the top, it probably is better to use 350px rather than 400+ as before.) — LlywelynII 17:10, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
Could the BC and AD be written out normally rather than subscript or minimized as they are right now? -- KAVEBEAR ( talk) 17:26, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Liu Wu, Prince of Liang. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 02:17, 4 January 2018 (UTC)
![]() | A fact from Liu Wu, Prince of Liang appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 6 December 2013 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
| ![]() |
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
There's an argument to be made for Prince Xiao of Liang; there isn't a decent one for including both of his names in the title (especially at a misspelling). Redirects exist. I followed the general naming practice and the format for dabbing other Han princes. If PXL is the common name in English sources, present that evidence and move it there but then check the other Han princes and see if they need moving as well. — LlywelynII 10:44, 29 November 2013 (UTC)
Well ... bleh. Looking through the search results, I can find counterexamples but Kave is certainly right that the other usage (which as far as the title goes isn't wrong—just uglier, misleading, and unnecessary) seems to be completely standard for the Chinese prince articles. I could go through and fix those ^_^ but let's just fight one of those battles at a time. — LlywelynII 10:29, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Page moved, at my request (as closer), by an admin. Sven Manguard Wha? 04:50, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
Liu Wu, prince of Liang → Liu Wu, Prince of Liang – Noble titles following the personal given names of all Chinese imperial princes should be capitalized. He was the Prince of Liang. Lowercase prince can be use when using the word prince without referring to it as proper title; what I mean: Liu Wu was Chinese prince, a Han Dynasty prince, and Prince of Liang much how like Prince Charles is a British prince but Prince of Wales not prince of Wales. Examples for capitalization include all European titles are name followed by the comma and a capitalized form of the title follow by the realm like Charles, Prince of Wales or Albert II, Prince of Monaco. And more pertinent are examples for Qing Dynasty princes like Zaifeng, Prince Chun or Yikuang, Prince Qing. -- KAVEBEAR ( talk) 10:07, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
Pretty sure it counts as WP:OR to put this in the article, but for the curious: given the value of ~252 gr to the Western Han catty given here and the value of ~US$40,000 per kilo in late Nov 2013 given here, the prince's 400k catties in gold would come to around a quarter of a billion dollars. (If the figure were accurate, which of course it probably isn't.) — LlywelynII 11:18, 29 November 2013 (UTC)
For the curious, there's a non- WP:RS translation of the letter here. — LlywelynII 14:49, 29 November 2013 (UTC)
I posted a comment on this before, but there was no citation there because I couldn't find any scholarly articles in English talking about the grave goods, just photos from the museum on Picasa, &c. I just now found something in Chinese and will put it up, but it'd still be nice if someone with access to Jstor could find more about the toilet, &c.. — LlywelynII 16:57, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
Well, that's unpleasant. Haven't seen this before, but searching this pdf for 'Liu Wu' pulls up that his title after 161 during life was Prince of Suiyang (睢陽王). Seems to have come out of Sima's treatment of the family, so wonder how to work that in or whether Liang was technically in abeyance during his life. — LlywelynII 11:09, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
It is not helpful to have an unintelligible image on the theory viewers can 'link through': one might as well post a text link. The images are there to be seen. For better or worse, both of the ones on this page are relatively busy and need to be somewhat larger than normal to be effective. (That said, given the relatively low-res image at the top, it probably is better to use 350px rather than 400+ as before.) — LlywelynII 17:10, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
Could the BC and AD be written out normally rather than subscript or minimized as they are right now? -- KAVEBEAR ( talk) 17:26, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Liu Wu, Prince of Liang. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 02:17, 4 January 2018 (UTC)