Talk:Ancient Chinese coinage

Although this article seems informative, it needs additional citations to prevent it from either being considered "copied-and-pasted" or "personal opinion." It also needs its sections wikified. --Strangerer 21:44, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

this is very much work in progress davidhartill Davidhartill 19:13, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

strange comments

Is SteinBDJ who keeps adding funny comments to my "Chinese Coins" article a man or a machine? And what do the comments all mean? The article is beautifully laid out, and I cannot do links to other areas as this completely new information that I am adding. I find Wikipedia machinery very difficult to understand.

Regards, DavidDavidhartill 22:56, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Scope of article

Information about the modern and contemporary coinage of China should be added or the article should be renamed Historical coinage of China. — AjaxSmack 21:52, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

No response/changes yet so here goes. — AjaxSmack 19:26, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Ying Yuan

I am of Chinese heritage and understand that Ying Yuan is money that would be carried into the proposed afterlife, just as Egyptian tombs contained object meant to keep for the person's afterlife. However, I cannot find a source for this other than private family documents, which are not published and will never be. Therefore, I did not edit the article. Is it possible that anyone else may be able to find a source for this? Yangosplat222 (talk) 21:30, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for your interest! I know of two types of Chinese mortuary money, of which one is coins or coin-like artefacts (used for almost as long as there have been coins), and more recently "bank notes" (bills) that were/are burned as part of the funeral ceremony. The coins or coin-like things are occasionally found by archaeologists, and they are subject to serious study by numismatists. I don't know of any particular sources, but try following the links I provided and read some of the threads, you'll probably find something. Have a go at it, it's fun and interesting if you like these things. You might also be interested in the Charon's obol article. Alfons Åberg (talk) 12:22, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Copyright

I noticed that large parts of the text are from the book by David Hartill, CAST CHINESE COINS. For instance the part about the Tang dynasty Kai Yuan coin is largely from Hartill's book, p. 103. Shouldn't this be mentioned somewhere? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.212.230.206 (talk) 13:02, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

I am David Hartill and am the originator of this article. The book is mentioned as the main source. David —Preceding unsigned comment added by Davidhartill (talk • contribs) 17:33, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Material posted on Wikipedia is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License, whereby it may be freely used by other people for any purpose, with (almost) no restrictions. Because of this, there are strict procedures that Wikipedia insist on to ensure that material copied from elsewhere are properly handled. If you wish to contribute material that is your copyright (and has not, for instance, been irrevocably assigned to your publisher), then you may care to check out Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. Hope this help. Hallucegenia (talk) 18:07, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Needle tip knives and pointed tip knives

David, could you help clarify the exact types identified here as needle tip knives and pointed tip knives? I gather that needle tip knives are 针首刀 in Chinese. But what is the Chinese equivalent of pointed tip knives? Is it 尖首刀 or 剪首刀 or both of them combined? Thank you! Alfons Åberg (talk) 02:04, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

Verifiability

The only way to sort out an article like this, is to remove all unreferenced 'facts', and to insist that anything added has appropriate reliable sources, conforming to our community-agreed policy on verifiability.

Thus, I record below the sections I just removed. If anyone can reinstate theis information, with appropriate sources, please do. Thanks.  Chzz  ►  02:02, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

<redacted pending verification of permission>

Great info, but useless without references.  Chzz  ►  02:02, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Discussion regarding above removal

Davidhartill (talk · contribs) undid the above edit [1].

Davidhartill responded on my user talk page [2] [3], and I have copied the message here, for discussion.  Chzz  ►  11:29, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

---

"But in practice not everything need actually be attributed." WIKI guidelines.

I think you have overreacted in your editing of my article. The facts are all contained in the literature cited, and there is nothing contentious unless indicated in the text.

As edited by you the article becomes useless.

Hope you will take the time to look at the article and grasp my point.

Davidhartill (talk) 09:32, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

I think you are referring to the Wikipedia policy (not guideline), Wikipedia:Verifiability. It is a core content policy, fundamental to Wikipedia, in conjunction with Wikipedia:No original research and Wikipedia:Neutral point of view.

It does say what you wrote, but you are quoting it out of context. The full paragraph is,

To show that it is not original research, all material in Wikipedia articles must be attributable to a reliable published source. But in practice not everything need actually be attributed. This policy requires that all quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged be attributed to a reliable, published source in the form of an inline citation, and that the source directly support the material in question.

I am challenging the above material. The policy goes on to say that Anything that requires but lacks a source may be removed.

Unsourced information is of no benefit to Wikipedia. Anyone can change the facts, and we have no way to know which is 'correct'.

I am mindful of the need to allow time to reference information, and I am quite happy to allow time. Even though, as shown at the top of this talk page, this issue has been of concern since its inception in early 2007.[4]

The bulk of the article was added by Davidhartill in 2007 [5] [6].

It has remained without footnotes, throughout that time. I believe that, without 'drastic measures' as taken above, the article is unlikely to be corrected to meet the requirement for verifiability. However, I will not re-removed the text, for now; I will I tag the article appropriately, to denote the need for footnotes. I sincerely hope that the article can be improved. I will see if there is anything I can to to help improve it, and will otherwise revisit the footnote concern in a month or so. Best,  Chzz  ►  11:29, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Wikification

We could of course add a reference to a page in my book to every coin. Would this really help?

The article does not contain 'facts'.

Possible Copyright Infrigement

This article is largely taken from my book "Cast Chinese Coins" and I am quite happy for this much of it to be in the public domain.

If I had not had to put unneccessary citations on, we would not have had this problem.

David HartillDavidhartill (talk) 18:47, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Author of "Cast Chinese Coins".