Talk:Emperor Xuanzong of Tang

message: Great work so far, User:Nlu! Your biographies on China's emperors is one of the most impressive works on Wikipedia. Keep the expansion coming!--Pericles of AthensTalk 04:09, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for your encouragement.  Certainly I hope to keep it going.  --Nlu (talk) 13:53, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Idem Pericles claims. Many thanks Nlu ! 220.135.4.212 (talk) 12:06, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you!  --Nlu (talk) 04:14, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Expansion

message: The article Poetry of Tang Xuanzong is unreferenced and add little, if any information that is not available in this article already.  Narthring (talk  • contribs) 03:12, 27 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I think one caveat here is that in the case of someone who may wish to look up the poet Tang Xuanzong (for instance, from the Three Hundred Tang Poems), and that person does not know that this is the same person as Emperor Xuanzong of Tang. This is especially relevant because the article on the emperor is relatively long to scan through quickly for this type of information. Ming Huang is also important in the case of poetry due to the cases of Li Bai, Du Fu, etc. Many Tang persons can be looked at for their importance as important military or political figures and/or as poets, and I think it is important, and, at times, difficult to keep a balance. From the viewpoint of poetry, Ming Huang/Tang Xuanzong is notable in his own right, not so much for his own poetry as for his patronage of poets and for the events involving him, Yang Guifei, and the An Lu Shan rebellion. Indeed, from this viewpoint Yang Guifei and the An Lushan disorders are very important (as well as Li Bai's time at court) -- and the rest of the biographic and historical material of the article irrelevant, and perhaps overwhelming. The Tang Xuanzong poem is probably not important enough for its own article, however I don't know if it would be better to merge it into the "Emperor Xuanzong of Tang" article, and expand that article appropriately,  or if it would be better to have a separate article on Xuanzong, Yang Guifei, and the An Lu Shan disorders and their impact on Chinese poetry and literature, and merge the the "Poetry of Tang Xuanzong" article into that one. Dcattell (talk) 01:01, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Merger proposal

message: With all respect to the various contributors, this article is extremely difficult to follow for someone not intimately familiar with the material.  Looking at other pages on Emperors, and indeed rulers of other places and times, the problem is easy to identify.
There seems to be an unusual emphasis here on listing scores and scores of other persons, their alternate names, titles, family relations, etc. even when their importance is minor at best.  Now, A+ for completeness, but this approach makes it almost completely impossible to discern who is actually of importance, and worse, what is even going on.  The vast majority of sentences are buried under a flow-breaking wall of names.  For instance, this passage:
"By summer 713, it was said that Princess Taiping, Dou, Cen, Xiao, Cui; along with other officials Xue Ji, Li Jin (李晉) the Prince of Xinxing (a grandson of Li Deliang (李德良), a cousin of Tang's founder Emperor Gaozu), Li You (李猷), Jia Yingfu (賈膺福), Tang Jun (唐晙); the generals Chang Yuankai (常元楷), Li Ci (李慈), and Li Qin (李欽); and the monk Huifan, were plotting to overthrow Emperor Xuanzong. It was further said that they discussed, with the lady in waiting Lady Yuan to poison the gastrodia elata that Emperor Xuanzong routinely took as an aphrodisiac. When this alleged plot was reported to Emperor Xuanzong by Wei Zhigu, Emperor Xuanzong, who had already received advice from Wang Ju (王琚), Zhang Shuo, and Cui Riyong to act first, did so. He convened a meeting with his brothers Li Longfan the Prince of Qi and Li Longye the Prince of Xue (who had changed their names to Li Fan and Li Ye by this point to observe naming taboo for Emperor Xuanzong), Guo Yuanzhen, along with a number of his associates — the general Wang Maozhong (王毛仲), the officials Jiang Jiao (姜皎) and Li Lingwen (李令問), his brother-in-law Wang Shouyi (王守一), the eunuch Gao Lishi, and the military officer Li Shoude (李守德) — and decided to act first."
First of all, this passage names 34 people (not counting the Emperor, since this IS his article), and yes, I am counting the brothers twice each, since their name changes are hardly germane to the matter.  Reading this, it is impossible to discern who is actually important, and very difficult to even follow.  Furthermore, the fourth and final sentence here seems to be solely an excuse for name spam, the meaning being entirely contained in the previous sentence.
I really have no idea where to start.  I'd love to clear some of the chaff, but there is SO MUCH of it that with my only moderate knowledge of the period, I have no idea who all is safe to cut.  Is there a reason the above cannot be changed to:
"By summer 713, it was said that Princess Taiping, Dou, Cen, Xiao, Cui along with Xue Ji and other officials were plotting to overthrow Emperor Xuanzong. It was further said that they discussed poisoning the gastrodia elata that Emperor Xuanzong routinely took as an aphrodisiac.  When this alleged plot was reported to Emperor Xuanzong by Wei Zhigu, Emperor Xuanzong convened a meeting with his brothers and close associates, and came to the decision to act first."  ?
Is there a reason we can't do this with the whole article?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.9.152.146 (talk) 10:19, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Readability needs improvement 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Emperor Xuanzong of Tang. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20170810012509/https://www.sinica.edu.tw/ftms-bin/kiwi1/luso.sh?lstype=1&yy=762&mm=5&dd=3 to http://www.sinica.edu.tw/ftms-bin/kiwi1/luso.sh?lstype=1&yy=762&mm=5&dd=3
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20170810052146/https://www.sinica.edu.tw/ftms-bin/kiwi1/luso.sh?lstype=1&yy=712&mm=9&dd=8 to http://www.sinica.edu.tw/ftms-bin/kiwi1/luso.sh?lstype=1&yy=712&mm=9&dd=8
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080219204850/http://ef.cdpa.nsysu.edu.tw/ccw/02/ntan13.htm to http://ef.cdpa.nsysu.edu.tw/ccw/02/ntan13.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:22, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Emperor Xuānzong of Tang which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RMCD bot 00:15, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move discussion in progress 

message: While "Wu Longji" is a name, I can't find any source that uses this term to describe the emperor, even during the period when he supposedly changed his name. The episode is explained in the main text and I think that is sufficient – putting the name in bold in the first sentence may mislead readers to think that this was an import alias of his.
In addition, is there a source to prove that Xuanzong actually used this name in his childhood? I searched for both English and Chinese sources on topic but found nothing. Most references to the name are copied from Wikipedia and that's a bit suspicious. Esiymbro (talk) 15:02, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, sorry, Esiymbro. I didn't check for sources out on the internet; I just thought that any extra information would be better. I will self-revert. Thank you. Friend505 18:13, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wu Longji 

message: Why is the name Minghuang not mentioned even a single time in the article's text (outside the infobox)? 173.88.246.138 (talk) 20:30, 24 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Minghuang

message: An omission: the Emperor Xuanzong is known to be one of several emperors who wrote a commentary on the Tao Te Ching, which Max Kaltenmark has described as "one of the most respected [commentaries] of all". (Lao Tzu and Taoism, trans. Roger Greaves (Stanford: University Press, 1969), p. 18). Apparently this emperor had a literary bent beyond writing poetry. -- llywrch (talk) 07:36, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Commentary on the ''Tao Te Ching''