Talk:Chinese noble titles in the imperial period

message: The second paragraph:
Elevation and degradation of rank might occur posthumously, and posthumous elevation was sometimes an aspiration; Guan Yu, was styled, during his lifetime, Marquis of Han Shou (漢壽亭侯) in the Han Dynasty then posthumously in the later Song Dynasty elevated to Duke Zhonghui (忠惠公) than in the Yuan Dynasty Prince of Xianling Yiyong Wu'an Yingji (顯靈義勇武安英濟王) than in the Ming Dynasty both beatified and royalized as Saintly Emperor Guan the Great God Who Subdues Demons of the Three Worlds and Whose Awe Spreads Far and Moves Heaven (三界伏魔大神威遠震天尊關聖帝君) and in popular culture deified as a God of Prosperity, Commerce, War, and Police.[2][3]
Yes, that there was posthumous elevation (追封) and degradation. But the example given, on the other hand, are not the correct example. 
First, the Marquis of Han Shou (漢壽亭侯), was not really a Marquis incomparable sense. The system that the Han Dynasty used, which was mostly inherited from Qin, was a 20 levels system, and within which, there were even more subdivisions in the "Marquis" level, depending on the size of their bestowed land. And here I want to point out that in the Qin and Han dynasty section, Qin Shi Huang did not eliminate noble titles. The 20 level system was a result of the Xiangyang Reform. And within this system, only the highest level Liehou(列侯/彻侯) was bestowed to a stripe of land (similar to feudal), and the rest of the levels were only given a "salary". And within Liehou, depending on the size of the land, there was then a difference in the title. Guan Yu's title, given by Cao Cao, (漢壽亭侯), was a "Ting Marquis", where "Ting" was an official administrative level (or size for this purpose). And Guan Yu was posthumously bestowed the title Marquis of Zhuangmou(壯繆侯) by the second Emperor of Shu Han (another side note: it should have been the Romance of the Three "Empires", not Kingdoms since all three claimed the title of Emperor).
Second, while the next two examples are correct, the last one, one can view that as posthumous elevation in the form of deifying and worship, and no longer in the strict sense of nobility title. Something along the line of recognizing a person as a saint officially. And retrospectively, any posthumous elevation or degradation not soon immediately after death usually can be viewed as something similar to saint recognition. 
Third, while the Duke Zhonghui (忠惠公) reference was correct, the use of Gong (公) should be paid more attention to. The word Gong (公), while can be recognized as Duke, it can also be 1. an official title, such as San Gong (三公); 2. an honorific to elderly (male) (公公) or people who are with prestigious status in a certain way, much like excellency regardless of whether the person holds the noble title Duke.
--Endugh4ever (talk) 19:04, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Elevation and degradation, Nobility Systems, and Honorifics

message: Out of countless princes and dukes that have been so entitled, why were Yuan Shikai's given here? It's so out of place. Yuan's rule as the Emperor only lasted less than 3 months, and all these people are better known for their other titles. Whoever put them here should move them elsewhere. 
On the other hand, there's hardly anyone (after Zhou Dynasty) worth-mentioning here. Few have entries in Wikipedia. Liuyao (talk) 06:00, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Who Added Yuan Shikai

message: needs to cover noble titles up to the Qing Dynasty -says cleanup.
: Above remark was by Cohesion, 10:12, 2004 Sep 1. The issue has been addressed since. Sebastian 21:56, 2005 Mar 18 (UTC)
::As per the section title. -114.91.67.40 (talk) 19:08, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Remember to use section headings

message: I just started replacing the pinyin of Chinese translations of titles such as "queen" with hanzi, when I realized: What's the point? I don't think the question of how to translate them is of encyclopedic interest – this belongs in a dictionary (a bilingual one – not Wiktionary). Question: Should the whole section be deleted or only the second half?  21:05, 2005 Apr 10 (UTC) </font> ICANT FIND NE THIMG 4 MIS KITE'S ESSAY
: You would be wrong. The question should be addressed and answered encyclopedically, with an intention to the meaning and historical differences not present in a dictionary. -114.91.67.40 (talk) 19:07, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Styles for Foreign Monarchs 

message: Wang, or "king" (when directly translated), carries the same weight as a British Governor-General.  In many cases, a "king" within a dynasty is appointed by the emperor and he becomes responsible for the security and administration of the region.  The office itself can be hereditary so in a sense, it is like and unlike the British Governor-General system.  (Psychoneko 04:56, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No, it does not carry the same weight as governor-general. The Chinese equivalent of governor-general is Viceroy (China), sometimes translated as governor-general. It is also not hereditary. Wang carries the same weight as the Duke of York or Prince of Wales.Rajmaan (talk) 08:12, 6 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wang as a title of nobility/government 

message: This dissertation is mostly about the Chinese aristocracy during the Tang and Song dynasties. Some aristocrats traced their roots back to the Han dynasty. They affixed the place of origin to their surnames to indicate what clan they belonged to.
*Tackett, Nicolas Olivier, THE TRANSFORMATION OF MEDIEVAL CHINESE ELITES (850-1000 C.E.), COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY, 2006
20:16, 5 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  THE TRANSFORMATION OF MEDIEVAL CHINESE ELITES (850-1000 C.E.) 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Chinese nobility. 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/20130531215622/http://www.chinaknowledge.de/History/Zhou/zhou-admin.html to http://www.chinaknowledge.de/History/Zhou/zhou-admin.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160425031918/http://www.forgottenbooks.com/readbook_text/Present_Day_Political_Organization_of_China_1000115601/507 to http://www.forgottenbooks.com/readbook_text/Present_Day_Political_Organization_of_China_1000115601/507
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:34, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 7 external links on Chinese nobility. 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/20161007061850/http://www.sidamingzhu.org/book/0/456/34821.html to http://www.sidamingzhu.org/book/0/456/34821.html
*Added archive https://archive.is/20161023001755/http://15269682.blog.hexun.com.tw/102536659_d.html to http://15269682.blog.hexun.com.tw/102536659_d.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160506023255/http://www.kong.org.cn/Item/Show.asp?m=1&d=458 to http://www.kong.org.cn/Item/Show.asp?m=1&d=458
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160304053840/http://www.npm.gov.tw/hotnews/9910seminar/download/all/B10.pdf to http://www.npm.gov.tw/hotnews/9910seminar/download/all/B10.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110903010033/http://www.ndcnc.gov.cn/datalib/2004/HundredName/DL/DL-20031203183333/ to http://www.ndcnc.gov.cn/datalib/2004/HundredName/DL/DL-20031203183333/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060116060231/http://www.ndcnc.gov.cn/datalib/2004/HundredName/DL/DL-20040216142301 to http://www.ndcnc.gov.cn/datalib/2004/HundredName/DL/DL-20040216142301
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20161007063611/http://www.fs7000.com/wap/?9179.html to http://www.fs7000.com/wap/?9179.html
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) 08:04, 5 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The article does not meet the "C" criterion, "Useful to a casual reader," only "Start": "Provides some meaningful content, but most readers will need more."
Major points:
*The most important missing items are the last Millenium, from the Song to the Qing, which saw major changes in the social structure and the Imperial examination system undermined the hereditary nobility. The lead section does not summarize.
*Most of the article is random information. 
*The number of notes (over 200) misleads the reader into thinking that the article is well referenced. But many of the sections are not referenced at all; many of the notes do not give titles; many references are to inappropriate works while major works in the field are not used at all. 
*A note says that some text is incorporated from Encyclopedia Britannica 1911, but there is no note to it.
*Proofreading! Starting with the first sentence of the lead, which does not make sense, there are too many errors.
ch (talk) 23:47, 7 July 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: 👆🏽This is not an encyclopaedia article. It's an indiscriminate heap of poorly sourced unstructured information. If anyone seeing this has relevant sources please help Folly Mox (talk) 12:56, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rating from C to Start