Talk:Zhao Bing

message: I doubt he was born to Emperor Gong of Song if, according to this wiki, they were born on the same year.  I don't know much about Chinese history, but perhaps they meant Emperor Duzong of Song China (don't know how so many edits could have missed this though, I'm not sure if I'm the one missing something...)  69.124.143.230 21:10, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Article

message: 
Emperor Bing of Song → Emperor Huaizong of Song — According to Chinese WP his name was Huaizong - Bing is his first name. Philg88 (talk) 00:51, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Closed and moved. billinghurst sDrewth 16:04, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

text: I think we should have a good citation before it is changed to Emperor Bing. We need an explanation for why he should be the only Chinese emperor referred to by historians without his temple name. If he didn't receive his temple name until 100 years later and is colloquially addressed with his personal name, that should be in the article, but it hasn't been there, even as an unsourced statement. Also, we can't cite Wikipedia as a source for changes in Wikipedia, and it sounds like Chinese WP's approach to the issue changes back and forth. - Mojei (talk) 17:00, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

text: Just reverted another move. If Emperor Bing is the way this emperor is called, then someone should take responsibility and say in the article, for example, "Unlike all other Chinese emperors, this emperor is called by his personal name, Emperor Bing, not his temple name, Emperor Huaizong." In that case, the page can be moved to Emperor Bing of Song. If no one on Wikipedia is willing to take responsibility for asserting this, then I do not think a move is justified. If you can find a source about him, that would be even better, because every source available to Google for either "Emperor Huaizong" or "Emperor Bing" is copied from Wikipedia. - Mojei (talk) 04:22, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I am sorry,"Unlike all other Chinese emperors, this emperor is called by his personal name, Emperor Bing, not his temple name, Emperor Huaizong" is original research,who tell you all other Chinese emperors called by temple name?Emperor Wu of Han?Emperor Guangwu of Han?What a joke.Btw, Huai zong is invented by the netizen,it has no record.——星光下的人 (talk) 03:00, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: 星光下的人, Please stop moving this page in violation of WP:CONCENSUS.► Philg88 ◄ talk 08:06, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

text:  I can NOT emphasize this enough. There seems to be a terrible bias among some editors that some sort of random speculative 'I heard it somewhere' pseudo information is to be tagged with a 'needs a cite' tag. Wrong. It should be removed, aggressively, unless it can be sourced. This is true of all information, but it is particularly true of negative information about living persons。——Jimmy Wales
Wikipedia:Verifiability is the policy of Wikipedia,please show me identifying reliable sources of Huaizong.If not,don't talk to me anything.--星光下的人 (talk) 10:18, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

text: Please maintain a civil attitude or you will be referred to WP:ETIQUETTE. The quote you cite is not relevant here. The verb used by Mr. Wales is "remove" not "move". You cannot arbitarily override the Wikipedia policy of using the temple name without concensus and a reliable source. Since two editors do not agree with you there is no concensus. ► Philg88 ◄ talk 11:06, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 03:39, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion 

message: Have any recent studies been published about this? Typically, a seven year old does not willingly jump off a cliff. Have historians called into question the nationalistic/glorification of the ancient sources on this issue? I rather think he was probably murdered. Newer sources may be in Chinese-only. 50.111.45.197 (talk) 15:47, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  sources on his death