![]() | Science and technology of the Song dynasty is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() | Science and technology of the Song dynasty is part of the Song Dynasty series, a featured topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() | This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on March 25, 2008. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I can't wait to hear the responses for this article. I've put a lot of work into it, and I'd love to hear suggestions/criticism/approval.-- PericlesofAthens 03:08, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
As you've requested, I've organized those two sections into multiple sub-sections, made all block quotes normal font, not italic, and converted most of the text that was placed in parentheses into article prose instead.-- PericlesofAthens 11:11, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
I did the GA review for the article. Findings:
Passing GA. Added the article to Wikipedia:Good_articles. -- Drieakko 11:56, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
Where is the (featured article) star??????????!?!??!! (pardon my use of punctuation, I just found it particularly amusing) Pandacomics 20:20, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
The picture of a modern odometer is an anachronism of the technology of the Song Dynasty. Even the caption, "A modern mechanical odometer of an automobile." proves so. They also did not have automobiles at the time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bdodo1992 ( talk • contribs) 03:15, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
Follow-Up Question: First, congratulations on a very good article. However, I have a question about the description of the odometer, and would appreciate some clarification here and in the body of the article. After reading the description in the article, the rotating device that you describe as an odometer was not actually recording the total distance traveled. From the article, it seems as though the device only makes a sound each time that a certain distance has been surpassed. My question is: how was the total distance recorded?
Compare this with the image of the odometer that you have inserted, which suggests that the device can measure and record distance traveled.
Thanks for the clarification. Amarco9 ( talk) 14:43, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
What a superb article, it really is a fascinating read. Congratulations to all those who contributed to it and brought it to this fine standard. Keep up the good work. WilliamH ( talk) 02:53, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
Is the Chinese text in this article in Simplified or Traditional? 1. It should be mentioned. 2. Both versions should be offered. - 68.4.73.34 ( talk) 08:08, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
Given that there's almost always a 1 to 1 correlation, I don't see the problem … IIRC you can just convert the characters as needed with near 100% fidelity. John Riemann Soong ( talk) 19:24, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
This article is definitely FA, but I could see some room for additions from other sources, given that much of the sources seem to be from a single Needham. John Riemann Soong ( talk) 19:27, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
The MoS says that either BC/AD or BCE/CE may be used in an article. Since this article is about a non-Christian part of the world, it seems to me that BCE/CE notation would make the most sense. The Chinese use the term " Common Era (公元)" and I note that key articles about China, (e.g., China, Song Dynasty) use BCE. Comments? Sunray ( talk) 20:55, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Technology of the Song Dynasty's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.
Reference named "chase":
I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 19:39, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
Hartwell's iron production figures are fundamentally flawed, as the cited article by Wagner argues in great detail. The actual production could easily have been an order of magnitude smaller or larger. 83.92.91.2 ( talk) 19:11, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
![]() | Science and technology of the Song dynasty is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() | Science and technology of the Song dynasty is part of the Song Dynasty series, a featured topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() | This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on March 25, 2008. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I can't wait to hear the responses for this article. I've put a lot of work into it, and I'd love to hear suggestions/criticism/approval.-- PericlesofAthens 03:08, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
As you've requested, I've organized those two sections into multiple sub-sections, made all block quotes normal font, not italic, and converted most of the text that was placed in parentheses into article prose instead.-- PericlesofAthens 11:11, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
I did the GA review for the article. Findings:
Passing GA. Added the article to Wikipedia:Good_articles. -- Drieakko 11:56, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
Where is the (featured article) star??????????!?!??!! (pardon my use of punctuation, I just found it particularly amusing) Pandacomics 20:20, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
The picture of a modern odometer is an anachronism of the technology of the Song Dynasty. Even the caption, "A modern mechanical odometer of an automobile." proves so. They also did not have automobiles at the time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bdodo1992 ( talk • contribs) 03:15, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
Follow-Up Question: First, congratulations on a very good article. However, I have a question about the description of the odometer, and would appreciate some clarification here and in the body of the article. After reading the description in the article, the rotating device that you describe as an odometer was not actually recording the total distance traveled. From the article, it seems as though the device only makes a sound each time that a certain distance has been surpassed. My question is: how was the total distance recorded?
Compare this with the image of the odometer that you have inserted, which suggests that the device can measure and record distance traveled.
Thanks for the clarification. Amarco9 ( talk) 14:43, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
What a superb article, it really is a fascinating read. Congratulations to all those who contributed to it and brought it to this fine standard. Keep up the good work. WilliamH ( talk) 02:53, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
Is the Chinese text in this article in Simplified or Traditional? 1. It should be mentioned. 2. Both versions should be offered. - 68.4.73.34 ( talk) 08:08, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
Given that there's almost always a 1 to 1 correlation, I don't see the problem … IIRC you can just convert the characters as needed with near 100% fidelity. John Riemann Soong ( talk) 19:24, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
This article is definitely FA, but I could see some room for additions from other sources, given that much of the sources seem to be from a single Needham. John Riemann Soong ( talk) 19:27, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
The MoS says that either BC/AD or BCE/CE may be used in an article. Since this article is about a non-Christian part of the world, it seems to me that BCE/CE notation would make the most sense. The Chinese use the term " Common Era (公元)" and I note that key articles about China, (e.g., China, Song Dynasty) use BCE. Comments? Sunray ( talk) 20:55, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Technology of the Song Dynasty's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.
Reference named "chase":
I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 19:39, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
Hartwell's iron production figures are fundamentally flawed, as the cited article by Wagner argues in great detail. The actual production could easily have been an order of magnitude smaller or larger. 83.92.91.2 ( talk) 19:11, 19 May 2024 (UTC)