Talk:Emperor Taizong of Tang
Appearance
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Emperor Taizong of Tang article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Emperor Taizong of Tang is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination failed. For older candidates, please check the archive. | ||||||||||
|
This level-4 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Archives (Index) |
This page is archived by ClueBot III.
|
Elimination of fringe content
[edit]The mainstream historians have always emphasized Emperor Taizong's support for various religions, such as Confucianism, Buddhism, Daoism etc, besides Taizong's pragmatic approach to using them as a tool for imperial political stability.[1][2]
The vast majority of sources verify that Taizong never declared Buddhism or any other religion superior to Chinese religion, so Amy Chua's claims that Taizong's declaration of Buddhism is superior to Chinese religion are fringe. As Amy Chua's claims can be biased and inconsistent with mainstream historical views, her claims will be unreliable as a source to be used. WP:FRNG WP:RELY 103.42.156.130 (talk) 12:08, 5 June 2024 (UTC) 103.42.156.130 (talk) 12:08, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
- Nothing in that supports a removal of the reported views on syncretism. "I don't like the author" is not a sufficient reason for removal of content; you will have to come up with a better justification. Restored until such is provided. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 13:28, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
- I never said "I don't like the author".
- There is not an one inch evidence for the claim that Taizong ever "declared" Buddhism or any other religion as "superior to the Chinese religions." Amy Chuclaimed d it in her book without providing any sources for and never got verified any other historians as well. Her view is a self proclaimed minority view and should not given any weight.l. 103.42.156.130 (talk) 16:16, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
- ^ Twitchett, Denis Crispin; Fairbank, John King (1978). The Cambridge History of China. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-24332-2.
- ^ Ropp, Paul S. (2010). China in World History. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-538195-5.
Categories:
- C-Class vital articles
- Wikipedia level-4 vital articles
- Wikipedia vital articles in People
- C-Class level-4 vital articles
- Wikipedia level-4 vital articles in People
- C-Class vital articles in People
- C-Class biography articles
- C-Class biography (military) articles
- Low-importance biography (military) articles
- Military biography work group articles
- C-Class biography (politics and government) articles
- Low-importance biography (politics and government) articles
- Politics and government work group articles
- C-Class biography (royalty) articles
- Top-importance biography (royalty) articles
- Royalty work group articles
- C-Class biography (core) articles
- Core biography articles
- Top-importance biography articles
- WikiProject Biography articles
- C-Class China-related articles
- Top-importance China-related articles
- C-Class China-related articles of Top-importance
- C-Class Chinese history articles
- Top-importance Chinese history articles
- WikiProject Chinese history articles
- WikiProject China articles
- C-Class military history articles
- C-Class Asian military history articles
- Asian military history task force articles
- C-Class Chinese military history articles
- Chinese military history task force articles
- C-Class Medieval warfare articles
- Medieval warfare task force articles