Talk:History of the Northern Dynasties

China: History Mid‑importance

	China portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject China, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of China related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChinaWikipedia:WikiProject ChinaTemplate:WikiProject ChinaChina-related articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Chinese history (assessed as Mid-importance).

What is the reason for removing the dynasties that are covered by the work? (And no, "apparently cos the dates was already given on the article, or maybe you're blind, which I can't blame on you" is not a good enough reason -- since the readers of the articles can't immediately convert dates to dynasties without first knowing what the dynasties were in the first place.) --Nlu (talk) 22:10, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What did you meant by without first knowing what the dynasties were in the first place? What the hell are you blabbing about by the way, the book as its named northern dynasties is clear I think, and with all the sub-cat its even clearer. You've taken the readers too raggedness just as you've done with all your other petty arguments, all the time as well Eiorgiomugini 04:25, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You are presuming that the reader knows which dynasties are northern dynasties, which may be the case for people who are as interested in Chinese history as you and myself. That's not true for the Wikipedia user population at large. --Nlu (talk) 04:43, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yawn.. Nlu, you seem to know so much for other who can't even speak Chinese. Why don't you just give up this hopeless debate and let people who actually know and interested in Chinese dynasties continue, you can make a quick survey for them if you want it to Eiorgiomugini 04:49, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is English Wikipedia; obviously, most of the readers here won't speak/read Chinese. For articles to be useful to them, information has to be immediately available. You think, for example, given a time period of 27 BC to 68, you can immediately tell which Roman dynasty that period corresponded to? --Nlu (talk) 05:31, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

We're talking about period in an article don't we, given that's there timeline and subcat which corresponded to the subject, I don't think it would be confused by the readers, poor example anyway. Like I said, you can keep this petty debate for yourself, and just for your information the issue was already solved. Eiorgiomugini 05:39, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RfC[edit]

RfC has been filed. The current main arguments are as above. These arguments, presumably, pertain to both this article and History of Southern Dynasties. --Nlu (talk) 04:46, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Responding to the RfC, though I personally was aware of the dynasties covered, I agree that many others wouldn't be. Give that these articles are not exactly so big that they need cutting down I can see no reason not to include the dynasty names. --Daduzi 15:14, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on History of the Northern Dynasties. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061006204552/http://ef.cdpa.nsysu.edu.tw/ccw/02/index.htm to http://ef.cdpa.nsysu.edu.tw/ccw/02/index.htm

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) 09:56, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]