Talk:Great Wall of Qi
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Great Wall of Qi. 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://archive.is/20130121143723/http://news.cultural-china.com/20090202165049.html?PHPSESSID=02a2394bbcef9e8cc76c322146a58945 to http://news.cultural-china.com/20090202165049.html?PHPSESSID=02a2394bbcef9e8cc76c322146a58945
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) 03:37, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
Addition of Zhao state
I thought it was a good idea to change the article name because I added information on the Zhao wall, which like the Qi wall was built before the unification of China. I also added general info on other walls during this period in time to the article. I think the subject matter and time period go together well. Villagethings (talk) 19:51, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
- Other walls of the Spring and Autumn and Warring States periods are adequately summarized at History_of_the_Great_Wall_of_China#Pre-imperial_China_(7th_century–221_BC). There is no real need to make a content fork± of that section combining all the walls of the different states. The walls are built by different states for different circumstances at different times, with the only similarity being them being built in the "pre-imperial" era, which is ultimately an arbitrary period covering thousands of years of Chinese history before the Qin dynasty. _dk (talk) 21:57, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
- The idea that it is arbitrary is hard to understand. Doesn't the main history article organize the same pre-imperial time period as a section? Villagethings (talk) 06:49, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
- What works as a section of a larger article may not necessarily work as its own article. _dk (talk) 09:29, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
- That's a general observation and doesn't apply any analysis to this situation. Unfortunately, I think what you are saying is that you like the article a certain way and you don't want others changing what you like. That's not reasonable in any collaborative effort especially given I spent over an hour making the edit you reverted. Villagethings (talk) 04:05, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
- That's a lot of talk for what is ultimately two paragraphs (of which one is in the lead section) of new content that you specifically moved the whole article to justify the addition of. And that information is already in another article so we don't need a content fork (a copy). _dk (talk) 04:25, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
- You should not belittle other people's work contributing to Wikipedia. The edit took me over 1 hour to prepare. Especially when you put so little effort justifying your actions. I expanded the scope of the article so I could write about the Great Wall of the Zhao. Not just the history but also current preservation. I can't add all of that content in one sitting. It seems to be good organization to put the Zhao, Qi and other walls within the same time period in one page. Villagethings (talk) 03:32, 7 October 2020 (UTC)
- You are encouraged to start a new article for Great Wall of Zhao. _dk (talk) 04:41, 7 October 2020 (UTC)
- You should not belittle other people's work contributing to Wikipedia. The edit took me over 1 hour to prepare. Especially when you put so little effort justifying your actions. I expanded the scope of the article so I could write about the Great Wall of the Zhao. Not just the history but also current preservation. I can't add all of that content in one sitting. It seems to be good organization to put the Zhao, Qi and other walls within the same time period in one page. Villagethings (talk) 03:32, 7 October 2020 (UTC)
- That's a lot of talk for what is ultimately two paragraphs (of which one is in the lead section) of new content that you specifically moved the whole article to justify the addition of. And that information is already in another article so we don't need a content fork (a copy). _dk (talk) 04:25, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
- That's a general observation and doesn't apply any analysis to this situation. Unfortunately, I think what you are saying is that you like the article a certain way and you don't want others changing what you like. That's not reasonable in any collaborative effort especially given I spent over an hour making the edit you reverted. Villagethings (talk) 04:05, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
- What works as a section of a larger article may not necessarily work as its own article. _dk (talk) 09:29, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
- The idea that it is arbitrary is hard to understand. Doesn't the main history article organize the same pre-imperial time period as a section? Villagethings (talk) 06:49, 5 October 2020 (UTC)