Talk:Architecture of the Song dynasty

Successful good article nomination
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?: [[Image:Symbol support vote.svg|15px]] After some clarifying and re-ordering of the intro, I find that article fits the WP:MOS.
 * 2. Factually accurate?: [[Image:Symbol support vote.svg|15px]] Accurate and well-sourced.
 * 3. Broad in coverage?: [[Image:Symbol support vote.svg|15px]] Comprehensive on the subject of Song architecture.
 * 4. Neutral point of view?: [[Image:Symbol support vote.svg|15px]] This is one of the better ones in terms of NPOV.
 * 5. Article stability? [[Image:Symbol support vote.svg|15px]] Yes.
 * 6. Images?: [[Image:Symbol support vote.svg|15px]] 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)

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)

Bringing this back to GA
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.  S ven M anguard  Wha?  07:02, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

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
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)

Content removed Sept 15, 2011
For storage purposes;

left|200px|thumb|The [[Huqiu Tower, also known as the Yunyan Pagoda, 47 m (154 ft) in height, built in 961 AD]] thumb|right|200px|The Qing Shou ("Celebrate Longevity") stele at [[Shou Qiu]] thumb|right|200px|The [[Lingxiao Pagoda of Zhengding, Hebei Province, built in 1045 and little changed or renovated since, 42 m (137 ft) tall]] 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. 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. 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. 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.

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

Images revert/counter revert - outside opinions needed
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.  S ven M anguard  Wha?  14:52, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
 * 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)

Balthazarduju weird preference low res picture




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).

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

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).


 * 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.  S ven M anguard   Wha?  02:23, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Let us put three pictures to a vote.

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

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.  S ven M anguard  Wha?  03:39, 15 November 2011 (UTC)


 * 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)

are twofold
 * I agree that the priority is the article, a picture shall provide correct information to support the article. The failing of 2001 picture

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).


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

Lingxiao Pagoda
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)

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

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).

All changes in November reverted - discussion on images
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?  S ven M anguard  Wha?  04:14, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Song dynasty bridge
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).
 * 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.  S ven M anguard   Wha?  10:54, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Missing Academy architecture
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).
 * 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.   S ven M anguard   Wha?  11:01, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100206060659/http://www.chinaculture.org:80/gb/en_travel/2003-09/24/content_33014.htm to http://www.chinaculture.org/gb/en_travel/2003-09/24/content_33014.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

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

External links modified
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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070806144733/http://www.chinaculture.org/gb/en_travel/2003-09/24/content_36209.htm to http://www.chinaculture.org/gb/en_travel/2003-09/24/content_36209.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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

External links modified
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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071010221329/http://www.theantiquariansociety.com/tasbase/home/siteview.php?id=29 to http://www.theantiquariansociety.com/tasbase/home/siteview.php?id=29
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090818043351/http://www.epochtimes.com/b5/3/10/11/n391995.htm to http://www.epochtimes.com/b5/3/10/11/n391995.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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