Talk:Battle of Fei River
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Need for reference, POV, &c.
This article is in serious need of references - there are some POV statements, and some confusing points (Jin defending the Huai river but the battle took place at the Fei river, smaller force requests a stand-up battle instead of waiting and attacking a crossing force, no reason for panic during an ordered retreat). I've added the milhist battle box based on the article content, and tagged facts for citation - someone want to fact check in the Cambridge histories? -- Medains 08:45, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
- Just a note: the article unambiguously states that the Fei River, which no longer exists, flowed near the Huai River. There's no conflict between defending the Huai River and the battle occurring at the Fei River. --Nlu (talk) 09:28, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
- Had the Qin already crossed the Huai, or had the Jin crossed the Huai in order to provide themselves with fighting space and a defensive line to fall back to? -- Medains 10:58, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
- Another note: virtually all of the {{fact}} tags referred to factual statements that could be found within volume 105 of the Zizhi Tongjian (s:zh:資治通鑑:第105卷). I don't know if you'd consider that sufficient verification. The Cambridge histories in all likelihood would not be able to provide much help, since they don't go to the level of detail that Chinese language sources do. As I am currently busy with other projects, I won't be able to do full citations on these. Someone else more interested in military history would have to do it. --Nlu (talk) 09:32, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
- This wasn't referenced at all when I added them. Each of those items IMO needs a direct reference via harvard referencing or footnote style - see Wikipedia:Citing_sources. -- Medains 10:58, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
- One more thought: can you point out which statements you consider POV, so that they can be revised accordingly? --Nlu (talk) 09:34, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
-
- "believed to have flowed" by who?
- "considered to be one of the most significant battles" is POV
- "vigorous leader of tremendous drive and ambition" is POV - could need references
- "By 381, he had united" suggests a united nation, whereas his army had some big issues with its makeup of conquered peoples.
- Xie An's abilities are POV
- "never regain its power and glory" is POV
- These could be sorted mostly by referencing, since then it's clear that they are POV from the reference source. -- Medains 10:58, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
- I'll add references for these, however. --Nlu (talk) 16:20, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
- Done (as far as these statements are concerned), changing, in particular, "united" to "conquered" and adding citations. Please take a look. --Nlu (talk) 16:36, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
- Great progress, would be great if an English translation of those texts could be got hold of (other than babelfishing the chinese text) :) I could add an English-Language source - one of the Osprey Publishing short texts on the time period has a short account of the battle, but I'm not sure about the accuracy of the account - there's probably some other references in there that I could dig out, but I don't have the time to chase down other English texts. When I have access to it, I'll add the reference and the references that it cites if you have time to chase them? -- Medains 12:40, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
- Done (as far as these statements are concerned), changing, in particular, "united" to "conquered" and adding citations. Please take a look. --Nlu (talk) 16:36, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
- I'll add references for these, however. --Nlu (talk) 16:20, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
-
I've added information from the Osprey book - it references the Cambridge history, Fairbank's "Chinese Ways in Warfare", none of the other references cover the period of the battle. Definately need more English sources. -- Medains 08:02, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
- Can you reference the change to the quote and that Zhu Xu personally raised the cry that caused the route? The changes made in these statements now appear to be referenced from the Osprey source, when the quote appears differently there and it has no reference to Zhu Xu. -- Medains 11:38, 30 October 2006 (UTC)