Talk:Jingkang incident

China Mid‑importance

	China portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject China, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of China related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChinaWikipedia:WikiProject ChinaTemplate:WikiProject ChinaChina-related articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Military history: Asian / Chinese

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Asian military history task force
	Chinese military history task force

Untitled[edit]

The Chinese army was over 300,000, included these were inside and outside the Chinese capital. The Jurchen was about 60,000.

“金人之兵，不过六万人，吾勤王之师集城下者二十余万"。李綱-《靖康传信》 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.170.137.100 (talk) 09:10, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Missing Citations[edit]

This is an on-going project. I will add the citations along the way, there are tons. Please allow some time. TheAsianGURU 18:40, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure that you're planning to get around to this, but what is the source for the existing citations 1-11 (as of this version) from? Accounts of Jingkang? Seektruthfromfacts 10:41, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the characters surrounded by "《EXAMPLE》" are the titles of each source.--Ghostexorcist 10:46, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for politely explaining what I should have observed! I realize that the editors have already gone further than many academic sources by including translations of quotations, and I'm really impressed with that effort. As you add more citations, could you work towards making these citations more accessible to English language readers? Guqin#References has examples of what I mean. For one thing, I've puzzled by the 『』 marks, which in my ignorance I've never seen in English or modern Chinese texts. If the citations are to pre-modern Chinese text, it would also be wonderful to start including links to the articles we'll one day have (Book of Jin (1115–1234)????). I hope this stimulates some creative thoughts. Seektruthfromfacts 13:08, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"『』" is a very classical way of quoting Chinese Classics. "《》" are the book titles. They are all a part of the Accounts of Jingkang collection. I will expand & translate the titles soon. TheAsianGURU 17:35, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Woo, after I started this project like a yr ago, I finally got around it and translated / added all the names of the book from The Accounts of Jingkang & Twenty-Four Histories in the REF section. TheAsianGURU (talk) 22:52, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox?[edit]

Should this article have a {{Infobox Military Conflict}}? _dk (talk) 01:05, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good point, I think it should. TheAsianGURU (talk) 07:57, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done. TheAsianGURU (talk) 19:37, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 12 June 2021[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

No consensus to move. After much-extended time for discussion, there is no consensus for a move at this time. BD2412 T 06:36, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Jingkang incident → Jingkang Crisis – Please place your rationale for the proposed move here. Sgnpkd (talk) 17:01, 12 June 2021 (UTC) I think it's more appropriate to call it the Jingkang crisis since it is not a single incident, similar to the Crisis of the Third Century. The term 變 is also translated to a crisis like Tumu Crisis. This is a major event marking the end of a dynasty, not an incident. Sgnpkd (talk) 16:38, 12 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

—Relisting. Happily888 (talk) 10:57, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Are there sources referring to this period by these terms? BD2412 T 03:49, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Narrow oppose - "crisis" should not be capitalized in the article title. Mysterymanblue 21:33, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

War crime[edit]

The articles mention of "war crime" is questionable, was this a recognized crime at the time? If so it should be sourced. We cannot apply a modern set of laws historically. 198.48.192.123 (talk) 14:01, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sure we can. We just need to be clear that's what we're doing and cite RSes along the way. — LlywelynII 22:13, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Eh... guys?[edit]

At some point in here, Du Chong mucked up the course of the Yellow River for the next 600+ years. Kinda seems like that's worth mentioning. — LlywelynII 22:13, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]