Talk:Yongzheng Emperor

message: "1678 - 1735", then why "He died suddenly at the age of 55. "? Should it be 58?
Most historical accounts have his reign dates from 1723-35, rather than 22 as stated on the page.  (see, eg. Spence The Search for Modern China, p. 74 (1st ed.))  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.252.91.151 (talk) 21:47, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Untitled 

message: Something is really wrong with the year of Yongzheng's first wife's death, which refers to a year before which Yongzheng himself is actually born. Colipon 21:21, 28 Jul 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Queen 

message: It is misleading to suggest that there is evidence that Yong Zheng changed the will.  Where are/were the evidence?  According to all reputatable history books, there weren't any evidence of changing the will.  Back then, the will was in Manchurian, and it was difficult change from the 14th son to the 4th son.
: Although this is a good point and probably accurate, the story of Yongzheng changing 14th son to 4th son is a common legend and is frequently told, even in history classes. It's still worth being told even if the accuracy is dubious.
:: The whole story is too controversial to ignore any viewpoints, really. Feng Erkang has a good take on it. Colipon+(T) 23:01, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Accuracy of Will 

message: Please can someone go check a history book? I'm pretty sure that the part about his relief work along the Yellow River while still a prince is created by a novelist. --Middaythought 08:29, 15 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, that does appear in Er Yueh Ho's the Great Kangxi Emperor (康熙大帝), but his novels are very closely tied with actual historical facts. The only great dispute is how Yongzheng actually succeeded the throne, legitimately or otherwise. Colipon+(T) 01:55, 31 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The only way to know whether a historical novel is historically accurate is to compare it with a history book. And if one has done so, there's no reason to use the novel as the source. Er Yueh Ho is a fantastic story-teller, but he can't even get the characters' age straight. I read his novels 10 years ago and was so fascinated that I immediately borrowed a biography of Emperor Yongzheng written by a scholar called Feng Erkang (冯尔康). I remember being amazed by the amount of "fiction" in Mr. Er's books. Please consult a real history book instead of a fictional one! --Middaythought 06:13, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Hello. I have bought Feng Erkang's 《雍正传》during a recent trip to China. Please help me in constructing a better article. Colipon+(T) 23:39, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I think this article is based on the TV show, 雍正皇朝 , which i think is a story. Through history books i read, it always stated that the prince had never do much during kangxi's time. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Zcwsg (talk • contribs) 16:10, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Accuracy 

message: I plan to expand the following areas, you can help too:
*The disgrace of Nian Gengyao and Longkodo (maybe even start an article on Longkodo)
*Political manoeuvering against Yinsi and co.
*The changes in Economic policy
*Crackdown of corruption
*Legacy of the era
Colipon+(T) 23:46, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Planned expansion 

message: https://web.archive.org/web/20140325231543/https://webspace.utexas.edu/hl4958/perspectives/Zhao%20-%20reinventing%20china.pdf
8 9 11 12
The Qing Emperors since Shunzhi had identified China and the Qing as the same, and in treaties and diplomatic papers the Qing called itself "China".Zhao 2006, p. 7. During Yongzheng and Kangxi's reigns, China (Dulimbai Gurun in Manchu) was used as the name of the Qing state in official Manchu language documents, identifying Qing and China as the same entity, with "Dulimbai Gurun" appearing in 160 official diplomatic papers between Qing and Russia.Zhao 2006, pp. 8-9. The term "China" was redefined to be a multi-ethnic entity which non-Han peoples and their lands by Yongzheng and the other Manchu Emperors like Kangxi and Qianlong.Zhao 2006, p. 12.
China and Qing were noticeably and increasingly equated with each other during Qianlong's reign, with Qianlong and the Qing government writing poems and documents using both Zhongguo- the Chinese name for China Dulimbai Gurun- the Manchu name for China. Compared to the rule of previous Qing Emperors like Yongzheng and Kangxi, the use of China to refer to the Qing then increased under Qianlong, when scholars examined documents on Sino-Russian relations.Zhao 2006, p. 9.
https://zh.wikisource.org/zh-hant/尼布楚條約_(漢文界碑)
http://zh.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=尼布楚條約_%28漢文界碑%29&variant=zh-hant
［Nerchinsk Treaty］ 「...將流入黑龍江之額爾古納河為界。河之南岸、屬於中國。河之北岸、屬於鄂羅斯。」 "Argun river will be set as the border (between the two countries). The land from the south of the river belongs to China; the land from the north of the river belongs to Russia."
「將流入黑龍江之額爾古納河為界，河之南岸屬於中國（Qing），河之北岸屬於鄂羅斯」
https://zh.wikisource.org/zh-hant/大義覺迷錄
https://zh.wikisource.org/zh/大義覺迷錄
https://zh.wikisource.org/wiki/大義覺迷錄
「...(逆賊)不知本朝之為滿洲，猶中國之有籍貫。」 "(traitors) are so foolish that they don't even understand that Manchu is a part of China." --Yongzheng, emperor of Qing Ｄynasty.
《大義覺迷錄》：在逆賊等之意，徒謂本朝以滿洲之君，入為中國之主，妄生此疆彼界之私，遂故為訕謗詆譏之說耳。不知本朝之為滿洲，猶中國之有籍貫。舜為東夷之人，文王為西夷之人，曾何損於聖德乎？
自我朝入主中土，君臨天下，並蒙古極邊諸部落，俱歸版圖，是中國之疆土開拓廣遠，乃中國臣民之大幸，何得尚有華夷中外之分論哉！
Rajmaan (talk) 07:34, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  China 

message: An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect :Yinzhen's Quote and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 October 13#Yinzhen's Quote until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  ‡ El cid, el campeador talk  16:41, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Yinzhen's Quote" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]