Talk:Architecture of the Song dynasty

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleArchitecture of the Song dynasty has been listed as one of the Art and architecture good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Featured topic starArchitecture 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.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
July 31, 2007Good article nomineeListed
September 24, 2007Featured topic candidatePromoted
October 11, 2009Featured topic removal candidateKept
December 18, 2009Good article reassessmentDelisted
March 29, 2010Featured topic removal candidateDemoted
October 15, 2011Good article nomineeListed
November 29, 2011Featured topic candidatePromoted
January 31, 2023Good article reassessmentKept
Current status: Good article

Successful good article nomination[edit]

I am glad to report that this article nominee for good article status has been promoted. This is how the article, as of July 31, 2007, compares against the six good article criteria:

1. Well written?: After some clarifying and re-ordering of the intro, I find that article fits the WP:MOS.
2. Factually accurate?: Accurate and well-sourced.
3. Broad in coverage?: Comprehensive on the subject of Song architecture.
4. Neutral point of view?: This is one of the better ones in terms of NPOV.
5. Article stability? Yes.
6. Images?: Images are extremely good.

If you feel that this review is in error, feel free to take it to a GA review. Thank you to all of the editors who worked hard to bring it to this status, and congratulations. — VanTucky (talk) 15:58, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fixing the size of the city. Currently says 6000 KM to a side which would be 3,000 miles. Think it should be meters. -Duck —Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.167.170.19 (talk) 12:24, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bringing this back to GA[edit]

Right, so this is a solid B article that should be easy to bring to GA. In bringing it back to GA, it will also bring Song Dynasty up to a Featured Topic again.

I am working on this a bit at a time. This will be continuously updated as I go. Sven Manguard Wha? 07:02, 11 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is the current situation, in my opinion:

1. Well written?: in progress
2. Factually accurate?: in progress
3. Broad in coverage?: in progress
4. Neutral point of view?: I don't see anything wrong, and this wasn't one of the issues raised in the delisting.
5. Article stability? Yes, very stable.
6. Images?: All of the images are captioned, have the newest templates, and have the information filled in. The images are all properly licensed, and are on commons. Update Upon reading the delister's comments, I have decided to take another look at the images tomorrow. I have gone over the images with a fine toothed comb. One of them (#9) presented issues, but the opinions I received seem to be that that isn't a big deal, since the issue of copyright and the issue of the actual artist are both settled. Everything else is in the highest order.

Things to do before resubmission

  1. There are two {{cn}} tags that need to be addressed.
  2. The references need to be fixed; specifically the 'ibid' needs to go and the whole thing needs to get converted into Harvard style.
  3. Copyedit for punctuation and other MoS issues needs to be done.
  4. Information on palaces and temples could stand to be inserted. Information on the subject exists in the zh.wiki article, which is FA status, so getting a native level Chinese speaker to assist would be ideal.

Last updated: 03:24, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Query re Needham under Bridges[edit]

In the Needham passage it's not obvious to me that what follows the direct quotation from Qiu continues to paraphrase him. If this is not actually the case, the introductory sentence should be reworded.

Further, if “–55” is an astronomical-style date, it would correspond to the year traditionally called 56 BC, not 55 BC. I don't know whether Needham's negative years accord with this convention, or just amount to an idiosyncratic way of writing “BC” as was apparently assumed. For my part, I have assumed that the “BC” and “AD” are editorial interpolations, and therefore put them in square brackets; if they actually appear in the passage it should be changed back to the original form.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 03:45, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Content removed Sept 15, 2011[edit]

For storage purposes;

Content removed Sept 15, 2011

[[:Image:Pagoda Yunyan Ta.jpg|left|200px|thumb|The Huqiu Tower, also known as the Yunyan Pagoda, 47 m (154 ft) in height, built in 961 AD]] [[:File:Shou Qiu - western turtle - seen from ESE - P1050805.JPG|thumb|right|200px|The Qing Shou ("Celebrate Longevity") stele at Shou Qiu]] [[:Image:Lingxiaopagodazhengding.jpg|thumb|right|200px|The Lingxiao Pagoda of Zhengding, Hebei Province, built in 1045 and little changed or renovated since, 42 m (137 ft) tall]] [[:Image:SuzhouNorthTemplePagoda.jpg|thumb|right|200px|Although rebuilt during the Ming Dynasty, the Beisi Pagoda's frame was designed between 1131 and 1162 during the Song period; it stands 76 m (243 ft) tall.]]

In 1919, Zhu Qiqian, founder of the Chinese Architecture Institute (Zhongguo Yingzao Xueshe), was so intrigued on reading an 1145 Ding manuscript of the Yingzao Fashi, at the Nanjing Provincial Library, that he had a photolithographic edition (to be known as the Ding edition) published that same year by the Commercial Press.[1] Soon after, a half-page fragment of a Song Dynasty manuscript was discovered among Qing Dynasty court documents; Tao Xian then cross-checked the Ding edition against Wenyuan Chamber and Jiang Library editions, reworked nearly a hundred of the original line drawings into color plates based on Li's notes, compiled the text according to the style of the Song fragment, and in 1925 published a deluxe edition (later referred to as the Tao edition). The Chinese Architecture Institute began studying the book in greater detail.[2] The publication also spurred worldwide interest in Chinese architecture, receiving notice from French author Paul Demièville, British scholar W. Perceval Yetts, and Japanese scholar Takuichi Takeshima.[3] In 1932 another Song Dynasty manuscript of the Yingzao Fashi was discovered in the Forbidden City (therefore referred to as the Forbidden City edition) and used by Liang Sicheng and Liu Dunzhen of the Institute to identify important omissions from the Tao edition, of which a new version was printed. Beginning in 1925 Liang Sicheng spent nearly forty years studying the Yingzao Fashi; as the result of this work the Annotated Yingzao Fashi, complete with modern engineering diagrams, was published posthumously in 1980 by Qinghua University and later reprinted as Volume 7 of Liang's collected works.[4]

A deluxe facsimile of the 1925 Tao edition was reprinted in 1989,[5] again in 1995, and in 2006 as a paperback.[6]

Reflist[edit]

  1. ^ Guo, 9.
  2. ^ Guo, 9–10.
  3. ^ Guo, 11.
  4. ^ Collected Works of Liang Sicheng, Vol VII, Chinese Architecture Press, ISBN 7-112-04431-6
  5. ^ Guo, 10.
  6. ^ Li Jie: Yingzao Fashi, China Book Co 2006 vol 1,2 ISBN 7-80568-974-1/K.168

Images revert/counter revert - outside opinions needed[edit]

In order to avoid an edit war, I'm taking this to the talk page.

I went through the article and rearranged the images, and it was reverted by Balthazarduju. He changed the images again, and I reverted it and brought it here to avoid an edit war.

My argument for the arrangement I designed is simple: It's clean, effective, and contains enough images to adequately illustrate the subjects in question, without cluttering the text.

I believe Balthazarduju's version, with images on the left and the right, forcing the text into a smaller gap in the center, is visually distracting. Creating alternating columns of images (one section left ruled, the next right ruled) makes the images pop, while allowing for the text to flow smoothly over a large area. I spend a lot of time doing image work (about 75%+ of my edits are file related), and I can appreciate the 'the more, the merrier' sentiment when it comes to images, but really, too many makes the whole article flow poorly, and it becomes a distraction.

I'd like to get Balthazarduju's opinion on this, as well as that of anyone else watching the page. Sven Manguard Wha? 14:52, 30 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your arrangement, with the three pictures all aligned on the left, blocks the header "Temples" below, and creates an extremely uneven look on the article. My old arrangement did not alter the format of the article. Anyhow, I lessened the amount of pictures, and moved the rest into a mini-gallery for the Buddhist pagodas section, as I believe these pictures are all extremely valuable in terms of illustrating the pagodas.--Balthazarduju (talk) 18:57, 30 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Architecture of the Song Dynasty/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Buggie111 (talk · contribs · count) 01:24, 3 October 2011 (UTC) Hello there. I remember this article vividly when I first stumbled across it at FTRC. I thought about trying to fix the GAR problems, but decided against it. Now, here goes:[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
  • "built upon the accomplishments of its predecessors"? Rather POV, favoring the older dynasties (I know trivial, but still POV). I'd suggest a rewrite. Also, the dyansty articles before this are rather lacking inarchitecture info. The Tang and Han have the word "architecture" in their article about three items each. While the Han dynasty page has just a two sentence paragraph. All the others don't have anything. so, what can show that the song dyanasty actually "built" off of their predecessors architecture.
  • "as did the architecture of subsequent dynastic periods of China" Doesn't relate to the article.
  • "was no exception" Sounds too dramatic. Say "For example..."
  • "guarded by three sets of doors" Huh? Guarding doesn't fit here, at least, I think it doesn't.
    • I think it kind of does. The point of the city wall was to keep out hostile forces, so the word works. I'll try and think of a replacement in the mean time though. Sven Manguard Wha? 07:39, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Possibly add a note at the bottom of the page (using <ref group="note") to explain chi, dan, and the like. Place this after the quote.
    • I linked them up, as I think it would be a less awkward solution. Sven Manguard Wha? 07:22, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Probably shorten the description on Bianjing and add in another one or two cities that had palaces (assuming there were any....:p).
    • Bianjing, as the capital, would be the city with the palace. The concept of having multiple palaces, as far as I can tell, really dosen't come into play for a few centuries. The noteworthy secondary palaces, such as Yuanmingyuan, are all post Song. Sven Manguard Wha? 07:22, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think the should be added in front of, for example, gate names.
    • Based on my understanding, there really isn't a Chinese word that quite works like "the" works in English. The people of the Song Dynasty wouldn't have used it, they'd have referred to the gates the same way we did, direct proper noun reference. Sven Manguard Wha? 05:26, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The period also featured true cast-iron pagodas, such as the Iron Pagoda of Yuquan Temple (Jade Springs Temple), Dangyang, Hubei Province. Built in 1061, it incorporates 53,848 kg (118,715 lbs) of cast iron and stands 21.28 m (69.82 ft) tall.[14] Imitating contemporary wooden, stone, and brick pagodas, this iron pagoda also features sloping eaves and an octagonal base. The Liuhe Pagoda, or Six Harmonies Pagoda, is another example of Song-era pagoda architecture. It is located in the Southern Song capital of Hangzhou, in Zhejiang Province, at the foot of Yuelun Hill facing the Qiantang River. Although the original was destroyed in 1121, the current tower was erected in 1156 and fully restored by 1165. It stands 59.89 m (196.5 ft) tall, constructed from a red brick frame with 13 stages of wooden eaves. The pagoda, being of considerable size and stature, served as a permanent lighthouse to aid sailors at night (as described in Hangzhou Fu Zhi). During the Southern Song period it was one of the most renowned pieces of architecture in the capital city." Rather promo (it ahs x, y, and z, and right now, you can buy it for.......:)). Also would like a cite at end of second para "most renowned pieces of architecture in the capital city".
    • Tweaked the wording a little bit. I'll ask around and see if ND or wct has a source for that last line. If there is one, we can stick the line back in, but I just removed it, as I don't see a good reason to keep it in the first place. Sven Manguard Wha? 07:39, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Look over some spelling/grammar erros in "Tombs of the Northern Song emperors" Guyangi city, for example.
    • I can't find that error, but I'm a terrible proofer. Including the GOCE copyedit, this has gone through three proofreadings though, so I'd have to think that whatever you found was an isolated incident. Sven Manguard Wha? 07:39, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • The two headers "Shen Kuo on Mu Jing and "The treatise of Li Jie: Yingzao Fashi" should be shortened to just the title of the book/writing.
  1. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
  • The 2004 and 1993 Steinhardt refs aren't used, so consider removing them or citing something with them.
    • 93 is in use, 97 and 04 were the ones out of use. I cut the sections that those references belonged to, as those sections dealt with other dynasties. Just pulled 97 and 04. Sven Manguard Wha? 06:39, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Current books in the reflist should be added to the bibliography using {{cite book}}
    • Done. I can't find an ISBN for Steinhardt, it might not exist, but with the information already there, I was able to get the PDF freely from this website. Everything else isn't current enough for an ISBN or isn't a book. Sven Manguard Wha? 10:17, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Can any of you read Chinese? If not, then consider removing the Chinese refs per WP:NOENG.
    • wctaiwan does, and a few of the earlier writers do as well. Sven Manguard Wha? 06:39, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • The Temples section needs more cites.
    • See the general status at the bottom, since this is the last task on the plate. When this is done I'll be ready for you to look it over again. Sven Manguard Wha? 17:06, 14 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  1. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  • "although literary works on architecture existed beforehand" Might give a few examples.
    • There are examples, wctaiwan found this one rather quickly, but I worry that a) it would be awkward putting examples in, and b) the examples are not from the Song Dynasty, and I'm trying very hard to make the coverage in the article as much Song Dynasty as possible. Sven Manguard Wha? 09:37, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Anything on Shaohao's tomb during the Nationalist/Communist Eras?
    • If you know something, please share it with me, I'm not coming up with anything in the sources I have available to me.
  1. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  2. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  • Will wait for resolution of above thread.
  1. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
    The first two images for the Bianjing section need U.S. PD licenses.
    Since both of the images are older than the United States, I stuck in a PD-1996, although PD-US and PD-100 would have worked as well. Sven Manguard Wha? 06:39, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:

That's it for now. Buggie111 (talk) 01:45, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • There are two points left unaddressed, both require research. I'm doing the research now, I didn't forget about this, I'd appreciate a bit of extra time though, I plan to finish up this coming weekend. Thanks, Sven Manguard Wha? 17:13, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • I have the research done now, it should be in the article in the next 24 hours. Sven Manguard Wha? 17:06, 14 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • It's in. Please look the article over again and tell me what, if anything, you still think needs doing. Sven Manguard Wha? 14:23, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, Sven! Great job! It warms my heart knowing that someone else cares about this project enough to resubmit it as a Featured Topic candidate! I was upset when it was delisted a while back, and I have not had time to fix anything since I am now a United States Peace Corps volunteer serving in the Kyrgyz Republic. You have done wonderful work here. Keep it up! Thanks and cheers.--Pericles of AthensTalk 07:50, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
High praise coming from one of the people that built the rock that I merely assisted in cleaning up. You should know that this wasn't my effort alone, I hooked user:NickDupree and user:wctaiwan in, and it wouldn't have reached GA again without those two. Thanks for stopping in, enjoy Kyrgyzstan. Sven Manguard Wha? 08:05, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Balthazarduju weird preference low res picture[edit]

version 1
verson 2

And version 3, (previous upload of version 2:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/archive/9/91/20111115001924%21%E5%BC%80%E5%B0%81%E9%93%81%E5%A1%94.jpg

Balthzaduju has a weird preference.He prefers a ‎ (480 × 640 pixels, file size: 88 KB, picture taken with a 1st generation cellphone over a (2,250 × 3,000 pixels, file size: 2.39 MB,photograph--Gisling (talk) 23:46, 14 November 2011 (UTC).[reply]

Balthazarduju show me the bells on your so called "clearer" picture, where are the bells ??--Gisling (talk) 23:55, 14 November 2011 (UTC).[reply]

I have uploaded a even sharper picture taken with Canon 5D Mark II + Leica Elmarit R19 lens. This full frame Canon digital camera is extremely sharp. I challage Balthzarduju to upload a sharper picture --

Don,t tell me that a 2001 digital PS Camera is sharper than Canon 5D mark ii


Gisling (talk) 00:27, 15 November 2011 (UTC).[reply]



  • Yes, Gisling's image has more definition, but it's also sun-bleached, and the angle is off. It's not as simple as 'who has more pixels', the original image is still better. Sven Manguard Wha? 02:23, 15 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Let us put three pictures to a vote.

--Gisling (talk) 03:05, 15 November 2011 (UTC).[reply]

Version 1 or Gisling's old image I'm fine with Gisling's older upload (with the road and the correct angle). However I must insist on the crop being redone so that it's at a .75 width/length ratio (the 480 × 640 pixel version used now is at a .75 ratio), because I've spent a great deal of time making sure that everything is sized up so that it looks good on all of the most common screen resolutions. If the image is any taller than a .75 ratio, it'll push the images into the section below it. Sven Manguard Wha? 03:39, 15 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Version 1: I feel that the priority here is the article. When viewed within the article, version 1 looks better (resolution is almost meaningless at this size, and the colours are better). Gisling's images are certainly valuable assets for Commons, though. wctaiwan (talk) 03:40, 15 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • I agree that the priority is the article, a picture shall provide correct information to support the article. The failing of 2001 picture

are twofold

1) Incorrect color, the iron pagoda has a red brown color, not iron grey color. The 2001 picture shows a greyish color, this lead to the erronous statement that "iron-grey color" in this article.

2) The 2001 photo failed to show the "The architectural style features densely positioned, articulated dougong in the eaves (miyan) and multiple stories (louge).[2] The exterior features more than fifty different varieties of glazed brick and 1,600 intricate and richly detailed carvings, including those of sitting Buddha, standing monks, singers and dancers, flowers, lions, dragons and other legendary beasts as well as many fine engravings. Under the eaves are 104 bells that ring in the wind. The foundation rests in the silt of the Yellow River.(from Iron Pagoda

  • Show me thearticulated dougong
  • Show me the carvings
  • Show me the bells that rings in the wind

Song dynasty pagodas have bells,(Liuhe, Iron Pagoda, Liaodi pagoda), the 2001 picture has no bells, is it really a Song dynasty pagoda ??? Hence from article point of view, the 2001 photo failed to deliver supporting detail, instead, it misled--70.50.203.76 (talk) 13:29, 15 November 2011 (UTC).[reply]


    • I shall recrop it asap first thing tomorrow morning --Gisling (talk) 07:38, 15 November 2011 (UTC).[reply]

Lingxiao Pagoda[edit]

I'm adding the picture back to the article because the pagoda is still described in the text. From a few minutes of Google search, it seems like the pagoda was built during Tang Dynasty and later renovated, during both Song and Jin dynasties, with the architecture from Song Dynasty surviving to this day. This source, used in Lingxiao Pagoda, seems ambiguous on the matter. If a source can be found definitely stating that the current building survives from Jin and not Song, please remove both the picture and the paragraph in the article. Thanks. wctaiwan (talk) 04:01, 15 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • The Zh version has more reliable sources. That article stated that

"根据出土的石函铭文记载，始建于唐朝肃宗至德元年（756年）至代宗大历十四年间（779年），于北宋庆历五年（1045年）重修，金皇统元年（1141年）重建。塔呈八角形，共九层"

According to unearthed stone inscriptions, this bridge was built in the Tang Dynasty Suzong first year (756 years) to Daizong fourteen years (779 years), renovated in the Northern Song Qingli fifth years (1045), rebuilt in the the first year (1141) of Jin dynasty.

--Gisling (talk) 07:35, 15 November 2011 (UTC).[reply]

All changes in November reverted - discussion on images[edit]

Alright, I think this has gotten out of hand. There are now four editors rapidly making image changes. It needs to stop, because stability is a GA requirement, and I'd rather keep it as a GA.

Can we please discuss any changes to images either in the above threads, or this one? Sven Manguard Wha? 04:14, 15 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Song dynasty bridge[edit]

It is a pity that there is no actual photograph of extant Song dynasty bridge in this article. Can any one submit photograph of the Bronze Goddess of Mercy bridge in Guangfu township of Suzhou city ? It is a genuine Song dynasty stone bridge. There is also a Song dynasty bridge in Xitang. I remember I had taken photographs of Bronze Goddess of Mercy bridge, however I cannot locate my SD card --Gisling (talk) 07:28, 15 November 2011 (UTC).[reply]

I'm in Beijing, and can get, within reason, just about anything you need in Beijing. I'm really not able to leave Beijing though, sorry. Sven Manguard Wha? 10:54, 15 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Missing Academy architecture[edit]

zh version has a section on academy architecture, which is missing here. North Song dynasty had four famous academies. The Song Yang Academy at Henan Dengfeng city is now a World Heritage Site. Pity missing here--Gisling (talk) 08:31, 15 November 2011 (UTC).[reply]

对不起， 我的汉语不好。 I can't read that article, I'd need someone who could read fluently, both the article and the sources, in order to get that information in. Said person would also have to want to spend a good deal of time working on the article. I'll keep it in mind, as it does need to be addressed if this is ever to be taken to FAC, however right now I don't have the resources to work on that. I suppose that it should be said that I still believe that this is a top quality article that paints a pretty complete picture, the most complete you'd be able to get before going into academic books. Sven Manguard Wha? 11:01, 15 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Architecture of the Song dynasty. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:11, 17 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Architecture of the Song dynasty. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:56, 8 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Architecture of the Song dynasty. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:08, 30 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Good article reassessment[edit]

Architecture of the Song dynasty[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • GAN review not found
Result: kept no evidence provided that the article does not meet the GA criteria. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 17:08, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A GA from 2011. There's a bad amount of uncited material that needs to be cited. Onegreatjoke (talk) 03:59, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • As the article contains general references, it only requires inline citations for statements of the five types mentioned in GA criterion 2b, Onegreatjoke. Thus, I think keeping the article works, unless evidence of OR or similar emerges. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 13:26, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Architecture_of_the_Song_dynasty&oldid=1193678373"