Talk:Huolongjing

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Huolongjing has been listed as one of the History good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can delist it, or ask for a reassessment.
Article milestones Date Process Result June 9, 2007 Good article nominee Listed June 21, 2007 Peer review Reviewed Current Status: Good article

	This article is part of WikiProject China, a project to improve all China-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other China-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome.
GA	This article has been rated as GA-Class on the quality scale. (add comments)
華	This article is maintained by the Chinese history workgroup.
More information about this article... High This article has been rated as high-importance on the importance scale.

	This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
GA	This article has been rated as GA-Class on the quality scale.
Additional information and associated task forces: Associated task forces (nations and regions): Chinese military history task force

	Middle Ages Portal Huolongjing is part of WikiProject Middle Ages, a project for the community of Wikipedians who are interested in the Middle Ages. For more information, see the project page and the newest articles.
GA	This article has been rated as GA-class on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
Article Grading: The article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.
WikiProject Middle Ages To do:

	This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Firearms; If you would like to join us, please visit the project page where you can find a list of open tasks. If you have any questions, please consult the FAQ.
GA	This article has been rated as GA-Class on the quality scale
Additional information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked

[edit] Note

I just cut-and-pasted the majority of information from the Jiao Yu article into this one, since all of this information in Jiao Yu's article was off-topic.--PericlesofAthens 18:29, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] GA on Hold

I really hate to do this to an article that shows so very much outstanding work. However, my problem is the WP:LEDE, which currently does not serve as a stand-alone summary of the article. The main problem is that there is a large amount of historical information in the article, the main points of which need to be given a top-level summary. I actually think it will be tricky and perhaps time-consuming to do this in only a few sentences.

I also found the long list of weapons offered in the current lede to be distracting. It will also be tricky to rewrite that information in an interesting way... I suggest mentioning each of the subsections of the article "...firearms and flamethrowers including (notable example), bombards and cannons including (notable example), land mines and naval mines, gunpowder and explosives including (notable example) and fire arrows and rockets.."

This article will need polishing before WP:FAC. Aside from my qualms with the lede, however, it is currently well above the quality level needed for GA. Good work! Ling.Nut 03:30, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Also, the chinse word doesn't correspond to the english romanization word for word. Blueshirts 00:24, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Can you be specific about which particular words? I can check on them. --lk 08:30, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

There's a lot of good information here, but it doesn't really belong in this article. I think the article should keep to describing the book and its historical circumstance. In particular, much of the material in 'Historical perspective', about events hundreds of years later, is off-topic. Perhaps a fork to another article about firearms in China? --lk 08:30, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "Drake" or "Dragon"?

• I found 火龍經 translated as "Fire Drake Manual" and corrected it to "Fire Dragon Manual".

User:PericlesofAthens reverted it "Dude, you can't just go around changing the titles of books; unless you have a scholarly source that uses a different name than Needham, it will be drake, not dragon, sorry..". But the title of the original Chinese book was 火龍經, not anything written in English. And 龍 means "dragon", not the modern meaning of "drake". Perhaps its translator used "drake" in an obsolete sense, like Tolkien did once. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 23:33, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

There is nothing incorrect at all about "Fire Drake Manual," drake is simply an archaic term for dragon. The difference between the two is merely a matter of style. Aas217 (talk) 16:23, 27 March 2008 (UTC)