Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Zhang Heng

The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by User:SandyGeorgia 03:08, 28 June 2008 [1].

---

Zhang Heng

This article was granted GA status back in April of 2007, and has seen slow but monumental improvement since then. The article is stable, the images are sourced, the subject (the ancient Chinese scientist Zhang Heng) is thoroughly detailed and laid out in several sections, and as of now the article boasts 90 inline citations from 30 different reference sources.--Pericles of Athens^Talk 06:39, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Issues resolved. — Wackymacs (talk ~ edits) 18:49, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

• Comments - Looks very good, but there's a few things: (permission to nitpick?)
• "Zhang had extensive knowledge of mechanics and gears, applying this knowledge to several of his known inventions." - Knowledge twice in a row in the same sentence, can we avoid this?
• "According to historian Joseph Needham, Zhang Heng was noted in his day for being able to "make three wheels rotate as if they were one".[1]" - Why exactly is this in the lead?
• "When the official Dan Song proposed that the Chinese calendar should be reformed in 123 to adopt certain apocryphal teachings," - Slight signs of redundancy, but nothing major.
• "Meanwhile, officials Liu Zhen and Liu Taotu, who were members..." - Is 'Meanwhile' the best word to use here? In a novel, it would be fine - but it just doesn't sound right in this particular case.
• "However, Zhang was barred from this due to because of his controversial views on apocrypha as well and his view that Emperor Gengshi (r. 23–25)..." - 1) What is 'this'? Since you've started a new sentence, it's best to reinstate what was being said to avoid confusion. 2) I think my proposed wording change is beneficial to the readability.
• "However, his intensive astronomical work was rewarded only with the rank and salary of 600 bushels, or shi, of grain (also commuted to cash); to place this number in context, in a hierarchy of twenty official ranks, the lowest-paid official earned the rank and salary of 100 bushels and the highest-paid official earned 10,000 bushels during the Han." - 1) Why is 'however' being used? I don't see a contradiction to the previous sentence. 2) This sentence is very long, can we break it up a bit to improve readability?
• "However, Zhang's official status at court saw considerable improvement." - I'm not entirely sure 'however' should be used here, either.
• Split your References section into References and Further reading sections, since not all of those books have been used for the footnotes.
• I'm sure there's similar little things throughout the article, but I won't continue because the article is long and so my comments could also get very lengthly.
• I don't think a prose polish would hurt, so I recommend a full copyedit by an editor new to the text. Please see both Peer review/volunteers and LOCE/Members for lists of people who can help. Do not hesitate to contact a few people on their Talk pages!

— Wackymacs (talk ~ edits) 10:08, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi Wackymacs. I have amended the article according to your suggestions, except for the further reading one, since I couldn't find the reference which you were talking about that was not already cited in the article. As for copyediting, I have contacted User:Scartol on this issue. Thanks for commenting!--Pericles of Athens^Talk 18:38, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Can you contact someone other than Scartol? As stated on their Talk page, they're busy at the moment! Thanks. — Wackymacs (talk ~ edits) 18:41, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Oops! My mistake. I've contacted User:AndonicO instead.--Pericles of Athens^Talk 19:26, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

• Support - After reading through the article, I've found the prose is much improved. This article provides a good, fully-referenced read. — Wackymacs (talk ~ edits) 18:49, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

• Comments Sources look good. Links checked out with the link checker tool. One thing, the graphical curly pull quotes are frowned on by the MOS, I believe. Double check, but I am pretty sure that's the case. Ealdgyth - Talk 12:49, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

I checked WP:MOS and I could not find anything in the section on quotations that said curly quotes were prohibited or frowned upon; I didn't use them necessarily for regular blockquotes, only for quoted lines of poetry.--Pericles of Athens^Talk 18:38, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

It's at Wikipedia:MOS#Quotations under "Block quotations": "Block quotes are not enclosed in quotation marks (especially including decorative ones such as those provided by the {{cquote}} template, used only for pull quotes)." Geuiwogbil (Talk) 19:44, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Ok then, I'll get rid of them. One question though, if they are not to be used, why do they exist in the first place?--Pericles of Athens^Talk 19:48, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Your guess is as good as mine, I don't have the foggiest idea. Ealdgyth - Talk 21:33, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

{{cquote}} is (according to its instructions) intended for pull quotes instead of block quotes. I haven't seen many pull quotes in articles (they are a staple of journalism). In-text block quotes are far more common in Wikipedia articles. BuddingJournalist 22:01, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

• Comment Could a caption be provided for the image in the infobox? BuddingJournalist 13:12, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

The picture is temporarily removed due to a bogus copyright issue, but this will soon be resolved by an administrator over at Commons, as the person who tagged the image (who doesn't even have an account) is almost certainly there for troublemaking, as the license is already fully described and the image, made by the PRC, was made in 1955 with a fifty-year copyright status.--Pericles of Athens^Talk 18:38, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

• Comments

Resolved comments from Gary King (talk) 02:44, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

• "instrument [73]" – missing a period
• Use en dashes for page ranges in the references per WP:DASH
• Consider adding {{persondata}} to the article
• When you are doing conversions, "500 km (310 miles)" → "500 kilometers (310 mi)". Ensure the entire article uses this method, per MOS:CONVERSIONS
• Use either American or British spelling, but not both. You have "behavior" and "behaviour", for instance. Recheck the entire article.

Gary King (talk) 16:31, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi Gary, I fixed the missing period, the en dashes in the reference section, the unit conversions, and that instance of British spelling of "behaviour". I am an American and the prime editor of this article (no British fellows contributing to it as far as I know), so I think that one case you found was a minor slip-up of mine. As for the person data, there is already an infobox for this in the lead; is there additional person data you would like to see in the article?--Pericles of Athens^Talk 18:38, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Also, some prose issues, like "in order to" → "to" Gary King (talk) 20:29, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for bringing this up, I have fixed two instances where there was the phrase "in order to" into just "to".--Pericles of Athens^Talk 21:15, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Gary King (talk) 02:44, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

• Comment Wow! Check out the article now, I've added a significant amount of new material and pictures just today, including a nifty marble carving of the Greek scientist Ptolemy. Why him, you ask? Well go read the article and find out! Lol. Cheers.--Pericles of Athens^Talk 02:58, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Support Oppose for now, mainly because of some prose glitches/concerns. All taken care of, supporting * Lead - Second sentence of the first paragraph "...began his career in a minor civil service in ..." something is off there. I would have fixed it but wasn't quite sure if you wanted " ... in the minor..." or something else.

• Lead - second paragraph, instead of "incredibly far distances" perhaps give the maximum distance?
• Early life - wouldn't "born in the town/village of Xi'e in Nanyang Commandery..." work a bit better?
• Early life - what does "not incredibly affluent" mean? Poor? Middle class? Well off but not rich?
• Early life - Instead of "notable persons such as Cui Yuan, Ma Rong, and Wang Fu" can we say what they were notable for? If they were scholars/court officials/scientists/teachers etc?
• Early life - this sentence "With his talents known, many promotions were offered to Zhang that would have greatly advanced his career, such as positions as one of the Three Excellencies, yet he acted modestly and turned these invitations down." reads awkwardsly to me. Maybe "With his talents known, many positions to advance his career, including becoming one of the Three Excellencies, were offered to Zhang, who modestly turned them down." I'm also a bit uncomfortable with the "with his talents known..." phrase, as I'm not sure it connects well with the previous sentence nor are we told exactly how his talents became known.
• Early life, the phrase "... staffed as a master of documents..." is awkward. Perhaps, "... serving as the master of documents..." would work better?
• Official career, first paragraph, do you mean "Returning to serve at the capital, an carriage escort was provided to Luoyang, where..." And why is the carriage escort so important?
• Official career - first paragraph, perhaps explain/wikilink what a memorial is? Most readers will be thinking of something like an obituary, not a type of official correspondence.
• Official career - second paragraph this phrase "... should not be relegated to a minor position in comparison to his successor Emperor Guangwu in restoring the Han Dynasty." reads awkwardly to me. Perhaps adjust to "... the relegation of Genshi's role in the restoration of the Han Dynasty as lesser than Emperor Guangwu's."?
• Official career - fourth paragraph, when did his official status improve and why? The reader is left hanging here.
• Official career fifth paragraph, this phrase "... so his political enemies relished in his device's failure." is awkward to me. Perhaps "... his political enemies relished the failure of his device."?
• Literature and poetry fourth paragraph "In exemplifying his attention to detail..." i think you can drop the "in"?
• Literature and poetry section, fourth paragraph, this phrase doesn't make much sense "Zhang listed a variety of different animals and hunted game inhabiting the park" do you mean "listed a variety of different animals and hunting game" or do you mean that he listed the animals and that he hunted them also? If the second, it is awkwardly placed in the sentence.
• Same section "Somewhat similar to the description of Sima Xiangru, Zhang described the Western Han emperors and their entourage enjoying boat outings and sights of water plays, fishing, and archers shooting birds and other animals with stringed arrows from the tops of tall towers along Chang'an's Kunming Lake." Also, wouldn't "displays of archery" work better than the last phrase?
• Same section, fifth paragraph, I'd replace "self-conclusion" with "conclusion"
• Same section, sixth paragraph, first sentence consider changing to "Zhang wrote about the love affairs of the emperoros, who, not satisfied with the imperial harem, went out into the city incognito to seek out prostitutes and sing-song girls." Probably should explain what a sing-song girl is also.
• Same section and paragraph "This was seen as a general criticism of present the Eastern Han emperors..."
• Extra tank section, "Indicated in his writing in 117, ..." that phrase is awkward, perhaps "Zhang Heng was the first to address this problem, indicated in some of his writings from 117, ..."
• Same section, perhaps wikilink "clock jacks"?
• Water-powered armillary sphere section, last paragraph, i'm not sure what "ingenious model" has to do with the sentence it's in (second of the paragraph) perhaps cut the phrase to make the sentence clearer?
• Same section and paragraph, third sentence, do you mean that the use of the device continued?
• Same section and paragraph, last sentence, do you mean "when" instead of "while" to introduce the last phrase? Otherwise I'm not sure what the sentence is getting at here.
• Zhang's seismometer section, first paragraph, second sentence consider replacing "devastive" with "destructive"?
• Same section, do we need the long discourse on the theories of the ancient greeks about the origins of earthquakes? I can see the Chinese theories being relevant... but the Greek?
• Likewise, unless the modern developments of seismometers were based on Zhang's device, I don't think we need to detail the development of the devices...
• Science and technology, first paragraph, first sentence "...inventions influenced the likes of later Chinese inventors..."
• Poetic literature, first sentence, I think you mean "Zhang's poetry was widely read during his life and after his death." As it reads now, it was only read while he was dying and after his death.

Nice interesting article, be glad to support when some of these issues/concerns are addressed. Ealdgyth - Talk 17:26, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

• Response: Hello. Thank you for taking the time to critique this article. I have revised the article according to each and every one of your bulletted suggestions. However, I have qualms with just one of your statements:

Official career, first paragraph, do you mean "Returning to serve at the capital, an carriage escort was provided to Luoyang, where..." And why is the carriage escort so important?

First of all, he's not just "returning" to the capital. The first time he ventured there he came to study and gain a prestigious education. He was then later called to serve in the capital where he was nominated to serve in an unspecified office, joining a pool of court gentlemen (lang) waiting for an official assignment, which for him was eventually Chief Astronomer and then Prefect of the Majors for Official Carriages. As for the carriage escort, yes, this is important, because it is symbolic of his status as an official. He didn't just ride in to the capital alone on horseback. If you read the caption of the picture to the immediate right, it specifically states that Zhang would have rode in a specified type of carriage that demarcated his position in the official hierarchy. At the time of writing the prose, I thought it would be overkill to mention this twice in the article, but if this is an issue with you, I will also include this information in the prose.--Pericles of Athens^Talk 21:19, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm generally of the opinion that all important information should be in the article, because not everyone is going to read the captions along with the text of the article. Some will read them before, some will read them after, some won't ever read them (I'm generally in the last camp when reviewing, I hate to admit!) I'd rather see it explained in the article text also, but if you strongly feel it shouldn't be, i certainly won't oppose for only that. Ealdgyth - Talk 22:53, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your support. I have revised the article to make a short mention about the carriage escort. I do not disagree with you or your reasoning, it's just that at the time I first wrote the paragraph, I did not see the carriage escort as something needing a side comment explanation.--Pericles of Athens^Talk 01:54, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Heh, what can I say, I am a curious person! Ealdgyth - Talk 12:35, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

• Support. The last copyedit tilted me over the edge. Nice work! Karanacs (talk) 02:05, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
• Comments. The article appears quite comprehensive and detailed. I think the prose could use some work. There is a lot of unnecessary verboseness-a tighter prose would definitely read better for an article of this length. I've done some copyediting - please check to make sure the meaning is still accurate and see those changes as examples of some of the overly wordy sentences that need to be fixed.
  • Is there a reason all of the images are on the right? I would recommend that some be moved to the left to vary the layout a bit. This might also fix a few issues that my resolution is having - there is white space in several areas because images are stacked on top of each other
  • "he was given many posthumous honors in his own day and throughout the centuries." - if given in his own day they would not be posthumous honors, right?
  • "Any fleeting opportunity that Zhang might have had in serving as a court historian was closed to him with the death of Liu Zhen and Liu Taotu" - This sentence seems a little overdramatic and unnecessary to me.
  • "Zhang was not the first to have suffered politically for disregarding apocrypha" - I am not sure about phrasing this as "suffered politically" - did it harm his career not to be involved with the history?
  • Why go into detail on Han Tan's apocryphal text issues here? I don't know that I would include that in this article.
  • I am very confused at how the two parts of the paragraph that begins "In 132, Zhang introduced an intricate seismometer" are related to each other. Half of the paragraph talks about the seismometer and then the second half talks about a new recruitment system??
  • Is the rejection of his memorial directly tied to his elevation to Palace Attendant? If not, I'd lose or reword the sentence "memorial was rejected, yet his status was significantly elevated soon after to Palace Attendant, a position he used to influence the decisions of Emperor Shun."
  • Is it really necessary to include the entire description from the Book of Later Han? The last paragraphof this is already detailed in the article in the Life section.
  • Per WP:MOSQUOTE, quotations of less than 4 lines should not be offset. They should be in the paragraph instead. See Posthumous honors for several issues with this.

Karanacs (talk) 15:07, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

• Support, concerns addressed! --Laser brain (talk) 03:08, 26 June 2008 (UTC) Comments, leaning toward support. The prose is mostly up to par with a few glitches:
  • Concur with Karanacs that the right-aligning of all images is rather unpleasant. It really messes up the text - for example, the "edit" link for the "Odometer and South Pointing Chariot" heading appears next to "Poetic literature" for me. Consider staggering.
  • "He was educated in the capital cities of Luoyang and Chang'an ..." Suggest "ancient capitals" to clarify that they are not currently capitals.
  • "Zhang had extensive knowledge of mechanics and gears, applying this to several of his known inventions." Wordy.. why not "Zhang applied his extensive knowledge of mechanics and gears to several of his known inventions." to avoid the ambiguous "this"?
  • "Zhang's memorial criticized the new recruitment system of Zuo Xiong which fixed the age of eligible candidates for the title 'Filial and Incorrupt' at age forty." I don't get how this connects to what was just written. His memorial? Isn't that for when someone has died?
  • "Zhang's long lyrical poems also revealed a great amount of information on urban layout and basic geography, with his rhapsody "Sir Based-On-Nothing" providing details ..." The "with <noun> -ing" construction is ungrammatical. Revise.
  • Attention needed to non-breaking spaces between numerals and their units - things like "3rd century". --Laser brain (talk) 23:02, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

• Response Hello, thank you both for commenting and sharing input on how to improve this article. I have not been able to respond as I have been volunteering for the past 3 days at Personal Democracy Forum at the Jazz at Lincoln Center in New York. I just got back to the D.C. area by train, I'm tired, cranky, and I want to go to sleep! Lol. I will address all of these issues tomorrow, I assure you. I've read through most of them and they seem easy enough to fix. Cheers!--Pericles of Athens^Talk 05:12, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Hello once again. I have addressed all of your concerns, but there are a few of your questions which I would like to answer.
  • "This sentence seems a little overdramatic and unnecessary to me." - Really? How so? They were the only two historian allies that Zhang had, and once they were dead, Zhang had no chance to 'rub elbows' so to speak and find a means to work on a committee compiling official histories. Instead of acquiring a prestigious post as a court historian (who could have controlled how the past was viewed) he was stuck in his relatively minor position earning 600 bushels a year...at least until he was promoted to Palace Attendant.
  • "Is the rejection of his memorial directly tied to his elevation to Palace Attendant?" - No, but I presume that the substance of his memorial was loosely associated with his elevation at court. Whether it was through the prestige he gained from presenting his seismometer or his elegantly-written diatribe (or a combination of both), he certainly gained the admiration and trust of the emperor.
  • "His memorial? Isn't that for when someone has died?" - Yes and no. In this case, a funeral is not the topic of discussion. If you read the first paragraph of that same section there is a description (in parentheses) of what a memorial is in regards to documents submitted to the court.
  • That's all folks.--Pericles of Athens^Talk 19:14, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

It looks a lot better with the image placement changes - thank you! As for the sentence I though overdramatic, perhaps it could be more neutrally worded and described a bit better. Maybe something along the lines of, "Liu Zhen and Liu Taotu were Zhang's only historian allies, and after their deaths Zhang had no further opportunities for promotion to the prestigious post of court historian." Karanacs (talk) 19:27, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I reworded that sentence as you requested. It sounds better!--Pericles of Athens^Talk 21:58, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the support, Laser Brain!--Pericles of Athens^Talk 04:06, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Comments resolved --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 23:40, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

• Comments. A very informative and interesting article, but I think there are still a few rough edges that need to be sorted out. I've listed some examples below:

• "Zhang applied his extensive knowledge of mechanics and gears to several of his known inventions." Shouldn't that be "in several of his known inventions"?
• "... invented the world's first seismometer device". Why seismometer device instead of just seismometer?
• ... His political contention with palace eunuchs over influencing the policies of Emperor Shun ...". That reads very awkwardly to me. Would "rivalry" perhaps be better than "contention"? Not sure about "over influencing" either ...
• For his scholarship and ingenuity, he was given many posthumous honors." Wouldn't "He received many posthumous honors for his scholarship and ingenuity" be simpler and more direct?
• "Zhang Heng earned a specific salary and rank of 600 bushels of grain ...". What does "specific mean in this context? Fixed?
• "... held a unique emblem that distinguished his status level ...". Why "status level"? Why not just "status"?
• I'm a bit puzzled by some of the apparently inconsistent capitalisation in the article. For instance, "court historian" is not capitalised, but "Court Astronomer" is.
• "Although at one point his device indicated an earthquake occurred in the northwest ...". Shouldn't this be either "was occurring", or "had occurred"?
• "He was buried in his hometown in Xi'e, Nanyang Commandery, while his friend Cui Yuan composed the inscription for his tomb". So these two events happened at the same time?
• I don't follow the logic behind the formatting of the titles of the poems. For instance, why is "Southern Capital Rhapsody" in quotes, but Four Sorrows is in italics?
• "Zhang's 'shelun' or 'hypothetical discourse' involved a written dialogue between imaginary or real personas ..." Is "personas" correct here?
• "In his poem "Xijing fu", Zhang also shows that he was aware of a new foreign religion, Buddhism, introduced via the Silk Road and the legend of the birth of Buddha with the vision of the white elephant bringing about conception." Not sure what this is trying to say. That Buddhism was introduced via the legend of the birth of Buddha, or that Zhang was aware of the legend. What is the relevance of the white elephant to either?
• "For centuries the Chinese approximated pi as 3, while Liu Xin (d. AD 23) made the first known Chinese attempt at a more accurate calculation ..." I don't think "while" works here. Why not : "For centuries the Chinese approximated pi as 3; Liu Xin (d. AD 23) made the first known Chinese attempt at a more accurate calculation ..."? Or split into two sentences?
• "Zhang Heng believed that one side of the moon was fully-lit with the reflected rays of light from the sun ..." I don't think that makes sense. Either the light comes directly from the Sun (which ought to be capitalised btw) or it's sunlight reflected off ... what? Heng's own quoted work indicates that he believed the Moon (also capitalised) was directly illuminated by the Sun.

--Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 11:45, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

• Response: Hello Malleus Fatuorum, I have addressed every one of your concerns. As for the white elephant, the reason I did not elaborate is because it would be too off-topic and there is a wikilink; if a reader is curious as to why it is significant that Zhang mentioned the white elephant story and got it correct in his writing, they can simply click on the link. Cheers.--Pericles of Athens^Talk 15:43, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

• Thanks for dealing with the issues I raised so promptly. They were, of course, only examples though, and for me the article still has too many rough edges to allow me in all honesty to support it just yet. A few further examples:

• "The theory posited by Zhang and Jing were supported by later pre-modern scientists ...". Theory is singular.
• "Those parts of the Moon which the Sun illuminates took bright ...". Does the source say took?
• "...Zhang introduced an intricate seismometer device ..." & "A year after Zhang presented his seismometer device to the court." We still have seismometer device in the article.
• "... to rotate the astronomical instrument of the armillary sphere ...". What does that mean? The armillary sphere is the astronomical instrument.
• "The water-powered armillary sphere of Zhang Heng would have profound effects ...". Had profound effects? Wouldn't Zhang Heng's water-powered armillary sphere had profound effects ..." be better?
• "... believed they were the result of massive pieces of the earth falling into the cavernous hollows due to drying; and Aristotle (384–322 BC) believed they were caused by instability of vapor (pneuma) caused by the drying of the moist earth by the sun's rays. As before, Earth and Sun should both be capitalised.
• "There were other early theories about earthquakes by those in ancient Greece." By those in ancient Greece? Developed by the Ancient Greeks? Shouldn't it be Ancient Greece anyway?
• "It is a non-magnetic compass-vehicle shaped in the form of a wheeled chariot, and functioning off of differential gears." I think I understand what trying to be said here, but this isn't saying it.
• "... Zhang Heng re-invented it from its earliest model found in the Zhou Dynasty period ...". An earlier model? Based on an earlier model? If he had a model to copy, in what sense did he re-invent it?
• "Zhang Heng has also been given posthumous honors of several things named after him." Kind of clunky, don't you think?
• "Xiahou Zhan (243–291), who came from an illustrious family intermarried with the ruling Cao family of the Wei Dynasty and then the ruling Sima family of the Jin Dynasty, nonetheless led a rather unsuccessful career as a minor official." This seems to come rather out of the blue. Who was Xiahou Zhan, and why is his unsuccessful career as a minor official relevant?
• "While travelling to Luoyang ...". The article should make consistent use of either British or American spelling.
• The lead tells us that "He was educated in the capital cities of Luoyang and Chang'an", but later talks about "being recalled to serve in the capital". Which capital?
• "... and so he would have worn a specified type of robe, rode in a specificied type of carriage ...". Ridden in a specified ...
• "Zhang Heng attempted to convince the Emporer". Please take another careful look through the whole article.

It may seem like I'm being very critical, but I don't think this article is a million miles away from being an FA, it's just not quite there yet IMO. I've done quite a bit of copyediting to it, and I'll have another go at it later/tomorrow, if SandyG will allow enough time before closing the nomination. Please bear in mind though that these are once again just examples of what needs looking at, not an exhaustive list. I will try to help, but please take a slow and careful look through the whole article yourself tomorrow. There really ought not to be obvious spelling mistakes at this stage of the game. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 21:27, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

• Comments. I'm adding these in as I copyedit, so the list may expand. · AndonicO ^Engage. 16:28, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
  • I notice "Zhang" is used in the article as if it were his surname; I'm guessing that's a Chinese custom, but I just want to confirm my ignorance.
  • "His political rivalry with the palace eunuchs in influencing Emperor Shun's policies (r. 125–144) led to his retirement from the central court to serve as an administrator of Hejian, in Hebei." Did the fact that he had a rivalry get him retired, or that the emperor grew to dislike him? I'm sure it's explained lower down, but this sentence is not technically correct. Also, did he retire willingly, or was he "fired," so to speak?
  • I suggest it be mentioned that he was a polymath somewhere in the lead; that's certainly important. I suggest it be written in the last sentence, as it's a bit too short. Something along these lines, perhaps: "Zhang received many posthumous honors for his scholarship and ingenuity, and is often considered a polymath."
  • A few too many images in the article, I think; it looks cluttered. If you think they're all important, at least make them smaller (see cannon).
• I'll add more later. · AndonicO ^Engage. 16:28, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
• Response: Hi guys. Once again, I have edited the article according to your suggestions, Malleus. Always a pleasure to see the mistakes you can dig out, since I have trouble critiquing my own writing. As for your questions, Andonico, I will try my best to address these above and more of them as they pour in. Zhang is his surname; in China (and some other cultures) the family name is given prominence over the individual's name. I just fixed the sentence about retirement and added a mentioning of him being labeled a polymath by some.--Pericles of Athens^Talk 16:54, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Comments resolved --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 23:59, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

• Comments. I know that you're slowly coming to hate me, but I have a few more:

• "When the official Dan Song proposed the Chinese calendar should be reformed ...". As contrasted with the unofficial Dan Song? Perhaps better to leave "official out"?
• "Zhang's contemporary Du Shi (d. AD 38) was the first to apply the motive power of waterwheels to a mechanical device, operating the bellows of a blast furnace to smelt cast iron." Blast furnaces don't produce cast iron, they produce pig iron.
• "There were other early theories about earthquakes, developed by those such as the ancient Greeks. Anaxagoras (c. 500–428 BC) believed that they were caused by excess water near the surface crust of the earth bursting into the Earth's hollows; Democritus (c. 460–370 BC) believed that the saturation of the Earth with water caused them; Anaximenes (c. 585–c. 525 BC) believed they were the result of massive pieces of the Earth falling into the cavernous hollows due to drying; and Aristotle (384–322 BC) believed they were caused by instability of vapor (pneuma) caused by the drying of the moist Earth by the Sun's rays." Very interesting. But has this got to do with Zhang Heng?

If these few points and any outstanding from my earlier comments are fixed, I'm about ready to support. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 21:50, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

• Response:
  • No, no, no! (Laughs) You're misinterpreting what "official" means here. In this sense, it means "government official," not "official" as in valid or proven. Should I tack on "government" before "official" to avoid any possible confusion there that other readers might encounter?
    • I know what you meant, I was just employing a comedic effect to make my point. "Government official" is pretty vague. It's obviuously your call, but I'd either say "When Dan Song proposed ..." or, if you know what official position Dan Song held, something like "When the Court Astronomer, Dan Song, proposed ...".

I know it's vague, but there is no article on Dan Song and I have no idea what position he held; I can't just start talking about Dan Song without introducing him first. Otherwise people are just going to ask "Who the hell is Dan Song?"

• • Oops! You're right about the blast furnace. But the Chinese had the cupola furnace which used that pig iron to make cast iron; although the final product was cast iron, Du Shi used the waterwheels (as far as I know) to power the bellows of the blast furnace, not the cupola, although he could have simply applied it to both types of furnaces. As written in the ancient Hou Han Shu passsage about him, he used the power of rushing water to smelt and cast iron; the bloomery process was never used in China (or we simply have never discovered its use) and Donald B. Wagner writes that most, if not all, iron smelted in the blast furnace was remelted in the cupola furnace to make cast iron. Should I mention that in the article?
    • Well, as we know that blast furnaces produce pig iron, not cast iron, why not just change "cast" to "pig"?

I fixed the sentence already. And no, the passage states that he simply used rushing water to smelt and cast iron, not if the blast furnace was exclusively used in this process and not the cupola. Wagner writes that the Chinese always used the blast furnace in conjunction with the cupola furnace. Hence the mentioning of both now.

• • As for the Greek theories, I was simply providing a contemporary contrast to the Chinese theory about yin and yang, as well as Zhang's theory about wind, just to give context about the time period and how Zhang's theory sat with other ancient peoples' thoughts about earthquakes.--Pericles of Athens^Talk 22:02, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
    • Yes, I understand that, but it seems to be losing a bit of focus by drifting off into a general discussion about ancient theories of earthquakes.

You make a good point, and I anticipated such a point by reducing the explanation about the Greeks to one (albeit long) sentence.--Pericles of Athens^Talk 23:20, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

OK, I'm going to support now. It's in many ways a lovely and informative article, and I just couldn't bring myself to oppose it without putting up a fight. Let's hope that enough others agree. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 23:25, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

• Support. I'm happy now. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 23:59, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.