Talk:Northern and Southern dynasties

message: The term should be plural as found in serach on google and numerous historical texts. Ktsquare
----
----
:Should be Southern and Northern Dynasties, Southern Dynasties are before Northern Dynasties.--zy26 (Talk) 08:19, 2004 Sep 20 (UTC)
I just added two new sections, the Northern Dynasties and the Southern Dynasties, so this article is a stub no more. :) 
--PericlesofAthens 04:52, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: This article needs a map. John D. Croft 03:08, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ask, and ye shall receive.  Three years later, true, but still...  Map added.  White Whirlwind  咨  15:09, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Why no map?

message: I can't believe it! The Qin Dynasty gets it own article while the Southern Dynasties of the Southern and Northern Dynasties still are combined. All the Southern Dynasties have like more than 30 years of ruling or something, (some, even 50), while the Qin Dynasty ruled for only 15 years!!!! 24.1.201.172 (talk) 02:26, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: That's not really the point - the Qin receives such a greater share of attention because of its historical significance and uniqueness, not because of its length.  What the above user is suggesting is akin to grading the importance of peoples' lives by how long they live, not what they accomplish while living.  White Whirlwind  咨  00:39, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: southern dynasties are longer than the [[Qin Dynasty]]

message: The article at Southern dynasties is much less developed from an editorial/historical perspective, but it has a great table of the emperors. I'd like to suggest that we rename that article to be Emperors of the Southern dynasties and then have it clearly link back to this article for the main historical content. This article can likewise link back to it for the full list of emperors. Does anyone have thoughts on this? —Zujine|talk 03:15, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I guess there's no real need to have those sub-articles (other than as a list), considering that each dynasty also has its own article. Same goes with the Northern dynasties. I'd suggest having those current pages redirect to this article. --Cold Season (talk) 13:17, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks Cold Season, I'll wait just a bit longer to make the changes, just in case someone else comes along with a good argument against it. Also, I forgot to add in my first comment that there is also a page at Northern Dynasties in the exact same situation. —Zujine|talk 13:56, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Southern Dynasties article 

message: Shouldn't the title be Southern and Northern dynasties () instead? I know in English the word "north" is usually placed before "south" as north is considered more important than south, but this is a Chinese history article, shouldn't we translate the title as per the Chinese language which puts the word "Southern" before "Northern"?
Another important factor to place the word "Southern" before "Northern" is that the Southern dynasties (Liu Song and its successor states) were administered by Han Chinese while the Northern dynasties (Northern Wei and its successor states) were administered by Siberian (Xianbei ethnicity) nomadic tribes and they were considered foreign invaders instead of local Chinese regimes. 2001:8003:9100:2C01:3C74:FEF2:3BB3:D3E (talk) 06:27, 30 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: The relevant part of the Wikipedia article naming policy is WP:COMMONNAME, "as determined by its prevalence in a significant majority of independent, reliable, English-language sources".  A lot of English-language literature discusses the topic of this article, and those sources consistently use the name "Northern and Southern dynasties". Kanguole 11:03, 30 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Title