Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Consort kin


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. Liz Read! Talk! 06:38, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Consort kin

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Appears to be an abstract social construct from Ancient China. Article has no sources and strange claims which read like myths rather than fact eg. "Corrupt and incompetent consort kins have been linked to the downward turn of fortunes for many dynasties."    Kadzi    (talk) 18:38, 25 July 2022 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 00:01, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions.    Kadzi    (talk) 18:38, 25 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep. This is a genuine and notable topic regarding the politics of both Ancient and Imperial China. Agree that it needs sources (I'll find some this week).
 * While it is true that consort kin (the families of imperial wives and concubines) have been overblamed in very early legends for the downfall of dynasties, it is also historical fact that the women closely linked to male rulers (especially mothers of imperial children) and their own blood families did obtain a degree of power in the court that could and did destabilize government policy and expenditures. The men of the consort families were frequently granted rich emoluments by the emperor when he took one of their daughters into the imperial harem, including titles of nobility, enfeoffments, sinecures, and official positions in the capital. These people sometimes understandably prioritized the gains of their own clan over loyal government service, and when they also held some sway over the emperor, this could lead to some pretty big problems. A general example would be persuading the ruler to disinherit an heir apparent in favour of a younger son borne by a woman of their family, which naturally led to succession struggles, including armed conflict between the families of the two mothers. Also the men elevated to high government office by way of dowry gift sometimes lacked the training of lifelong scholar-officials and would just straight up do a bad job in a position that could cause great harm.
 * The sources for this kind of thing are super plentiful in the historical literature, and I'm confident there have been multiple entire books written on the topic. I'll track some down for us and add them to the article, but it's definitely a topic deserving encyclopaedic coverage. Folly Mox (talk) 19:39, 25 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Updating this to note that as foretold, there have been several books written about this topic, in broad historical overviews and also as specifically related to the Han and Tang periods. A search of google books for the native term "外戚" confirmed this. English language sources on the topic in general, as constrained by free access sources and sources available through the Wikipedia Library, are sparse. I have not yet searched for sourcing for the individual examples listed in the article, nor even clicked through to all the individual biographies to see if their sources contain general discussion on the topic of consort kin and their power dynamics, but all are historically attested. The article does seem to rely overmuch on individual examples rather than giving a high level overview, and organizing the concept around "leading figures" is probably misguided and an artefact of the premium position afforded biographies in standard imperial Chinese historiography. A rewrite with sources would be the ideal outcome, which I intend to manifest. Folly Mox (talk) 19:46, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Keep wàiqì is a historically important topic. Taung Tan (talk) 13:57, 6 August 2022 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.