Talk:King Min of Qi

Untitled
Will add refs later. Evangeline (talk) 01:17, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

I removed the "possibly not appropriate for an encyclopedia" because WTF? Evangeline (talk) 06:15, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

King Zhaoxiang Emperor of the East,sent Wei Rang to Qi ,told Qi Min get the title of di,Qi Min adopted,two days later(or about one month later after King Zhaoxiang became Emperor of the East) somebody told Qi Min the Disadvantage,so Qi Min give up the title of di.about two month after King Zhaoxiang had the title of di,King Zhaoxiang return to the title of "king". so many people objecte ,book write as a trend not write as a fact.

the following time order is wrong. Qi was one of the most powerful countries in China at his accession, if not the most powerful. King Min took the title of Emperor of the East (東帝) for a time[3], and at the same time King Zhaoxiang of Qin called himself Emperor of the West. But so many people objected[4] that both kings were forced to return to the title of "king" (wáng 王) and there was no emperor in China again until Qin Shi Huang unified China in 221 B.C. and gave himself that title.

Gisbrother (talk) 18:11, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Gisbrother, what is the correct reason that King Min and King Zhaoxiang gave up the title of DI? Evangeline (talk) 13:11, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

NPOV
The article is not written from a NPOV. It seems to be very biased against King Min of Qi. Some rewording or removal of certain POV statements is needed to make the article sound more neutral. _LDS (talk) 14:10, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Hmm-- if the article is "very biased" it's because all the historical sources are "very biased" -- he is always treated as a bad example of a king in the classical Chinese histories, which are the source of all our information about him. I took the article directly from the histories, without adding my own POV and giving references for every statement. If anything, I toned down what the authors of the histories said. It seems to me that being neutral about a historical figure, when every historical source describes him negatively, is not actually neutral. Evangeline (talk) 13:18, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

REFS
I'm still learning how to do refs. I fixed the one that had the problem, but the red MISTAKE marker is still there. The mistake that I made was that I tried to put "translator = name" where "others = name" is required. I find it pretty outrageous that there's not a parameter for translators and that they're treated as some sort of minor, unimportant detail. Evangeline (talk) 22:59, 30 April 2015 (UTC)