Talk:Xiahou Dun

message: Was he a direct descendant of Xiahou Dun?(泰始二年春帝正月（原注﹕《史通·模擬》云：“孫盛魏晉二《陽秋》，每年首必云：某年春帝正月。因元年無正月，故標於此。）高安鄉侯夏侯佐卒，惇之孫也，嗣絕。詔曰﹕“惇，魏之元功勛書竹帛。昔庭堅不祀，猶或到此之，況朕受禪於魏，而可以忘其功臣哉！宜擇惇近屬劭封之。（孫盛《晉陽秋》·《三國志注》九，《類聚》51）P.103。)
:This would depend on whether you choose to take the extra information given in the annotation by Pei Songzhi. Chen Shou merely stated that "廙薨，子邵嗣。" But《晋阳秋》added what you put down above. According to it, Xiahou Zuo was the grandson of Xiahou Dun, but he died without children. Hence Sima Yan, in his second year of reign, chose a close relative of Xiahou Zuo to succeed the title. As to how Xiahou Shao is related to the others i cannot say.
:P.S. Please sign off using two "-" and four "~". :) --Plastictv 14:36, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi. i just saw the change that you made. Yes i do agree with you that it is safer to say that Xiahou Shao was not a direct descendant of Xiahou Yi. :) --Plastictv 14:46, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Xiahou Shao 

message: An image used in this article, , has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests April 2012 
;What should I do?
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
* If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
* If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant 
This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 21:38, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: File:Xiahou Dun 2.jpg Nominated for Deletion

message: Hey can someone ask permission from Koei to use a picture of Xiahou Dun, then we will move the current image to the archives or thumbnails at the end of the article. Or do you want me to? Dark Liberty (talk) 05:17, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  image 

message: That Xiahou Dun was seized and held hostage during Lu Bu's invasion of Yan is correctly in the wiki but the delving into Han Hao rescuing Xiahou Dun feels less about Xiahou Dun and more about Han Hao. For whom the entire incident is not mentioned in his wikipedia. I would suggest we transfer the details of the scene to Han Hao's wiki (with appropriate edits and crediting back to Xiahou Dun article) since the details are about his actions that day. Then whittle down the scene in Xiahou Dun's to: that he got captured and how, then the bare fact that he got rescued. DongZhuo3kingdoms (talk) 12:37, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with this. _dk (talk) 19:35, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  The hostage taking-possibly move to Han Hao 

message: Should we update and expand the Romance section or is the brief summary, with the links to some of the more famous fictional tales, enough and should focus on Xiahou Mao/Han Hao/Shi Huan wikipedia entries? DongZhuo3kingdoms (talk) 08:44, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Hello DZ, I agree with what is written in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Three_Kingdoms "In fiction Describe major deficiencies from history only. Do not retell the person's story according to Romance of the Three Kingdoms and other works of fiction." Unless major changement or important character, I think the summary should be brief. Highlight his role in the novel and most memorable actions. I'm also not sure if it's relevent to have another novel version since the Mao is so famous and people may misinterpret the "record" as another historical document. TheWayWeAllGo (talk) 07:15, 1 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I would suggest then Xiahou Dun (plain language version) deleting the Bowang one, maybe the Baima and the next to last paragraph. In terms of not doing it at all, _dk and I did discuss if we included pre novel fictions and we thought so. Might be something for a wider group discussion and that if we do so, what we do to try to make clear about the plain language not being the records (becuase I have seen that confusion before) DongZhuo3kingdoms (talk) 15:17, 1 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: It is up to you, I'm just giving you my opinion. For me, Lu Su and Zhou Yu section of the ROTK in the current wiki are how I would do it. For the novel version, you can just include them into the ROTK section and add subsection "Sanguozhi Pinghua" "Sanguo Yanyi" with a brief explanation of which one is what (the former and current version of the novel) along with notable differences between versions.TheWayWeAllGo (talk) 09:17, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: The Pinghua was a separate book, I would not suggest treat it as the same as the novel. Something the novel seems to have borrowed from but quite different. We could indeed put all the ancient fiction in one section, just would need to change the section title to reflect that.  DongZhuo3kingdoms (talk) 10:07, 4 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Expand the Romance section?