Talk:Yuanqu County (Shandong)

So, this article is probably entirely incorrect at the moment...
Every link or mention of this place on the English Wiki and in every English book or monograph I can find calls this place a town named "Yuanju", based explicitly or implicitly on the characters given here. However, the major Chinese wiki at Baidu Baike has the place's primary name as 宛朐 (Wǎnqú), with the alternate names 冤句, 冤朐 (Yuānqú), 宛句, and 宛亭 (Wǎntíng). Our Wiki has its article at 冤句 but notes that it should be read as Yuānqú. Both places give it the rank of county seat, which means our article should really be at Wanqu County or Yuanqu County instead of here. Of course, though, neither Chinese set of articles backs up any of that with mafan cites since everyone should know this stuff...

So I guess it sits here until someone notices and adds some authoritative Chinese sources? or an Anglophone Chinese scholar notices and writes something on the topic? — Llywelyn II   00:55, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
 * According to the beginning of this article it is qú in Cihai, Ciyuan and Hanyu Da Zidian. The author goes on to argue that a pronunciation of gōu may also be plausible, but does not consider jù as a possibility. The first snippet-view result from this Google Scholar search also seems to suggest that qú is the right pronunciation. Cobblet (talk) 01:31, 27 January 2018 (UTC)


 * I have dug up my copy of the 1979 Cihai published by the Shanghai Lexicographical Publishing House. The entry for 冤句 on page 863 of volume 1 gives Yuānqú. Cobblet (talk) 02:58, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Well, thank you for that. Anyone have a source for whether Baidu Baike or the Chinese Wiki is right as far as the primary form of the name? Given that the primary English form is still very rare and seems to be a misreading, we really shouldn't use that and should just correct to the primary Chinese form. — Llywelyn II   11:30, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
 * The primary form is 冤句 in all three secondary sources quoted in that first article I referred to. All three acknowledge 宛朐 as a variant (this form also appears in Shiji) and Cihai and Hanyu Da Zidian give 宛句 as a further variant. 冤朐 appears in Shuijingzhu. Cihai notes that the name was changed to 宛亭 in 1086. The body of the Baidu article mainly uses 冤句. I would follow the modern secondary sources in giving 冤句 as the primary Chinese name and title the article Yuanqu (historic county). Cobblet (talk) 17:12, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Well, there's the that wants counties to be listed as part of the main name, so Yuanqu County. As far as the dab, it's more important to note that this place is a different location from the other one and no need to dab it twice. We'll just mention that it's defunct in the body and categories. —  Llywelyn II   21:49, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I find jarring the anachronism of disambiguating a historic place name using the name of a province that did not exist until later (Pompeii, Campania?). But to each their own. Cobblet (talk) 04:43, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Sure, I understand, but it's not really "better" to use "(historic)" and not clarify that it's in an entirely separate part of the country or "(historic Shandong county)" where "Shandong" suffices. If there were other obscure Pompeiis, it would absolutely be more helpful to most to dab them as, e.g., "Pompeii (Tuscany)" rather than "Pompeii (Tyrrhenia)". It would have been better to have been able to say, e.g., Yuanqu County (Jiying Commandery) but the county outlasted its administrative... eh... "superdivisions" (?) and none of them are less anachronistic or more helpful than just using Shandong. —  Llywelyn II   13:04, 1 February 2018 (UTC)