Talk:Memorial to the throne
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Uncertain era
editThe petition page had this:
- When petitions arrived in the imperial capital, multiple copies were made of the original by the Office of Transmission (通政司, Tōngzhèngsī). The copies would be filed with the archives at the Office of Supervising Secretaries and the original sent to the emperor.[1]
but it's obviously specific to just one or a few of the dynasties. Include it again when it's clearer which one. — LlywelynII 13:24, 29 November 2013 (UTC)
Memorials/ Official Communications??
editExcellent work by Llywellen on this article, which has both important content and well chosen references. But there is considerable overlap with Official Communications of the Chinese Empire -- in fact some of the same sources and the same topics. How would we feel about merging the two? At least the Official Communications article could be the main article, since it is more general, with sections marked "see also." I'd be happy to have Llywellen make the revisions and decide which topics go where, though I would also be happy to do the shuffling around myself. Cheers and thanks in any case. ch (talk) 16:48, 29 November 2013 (UTC)
Per a post to my talk page:
...there is considerable overlap with Official Communications of the Chinese Empire...How would you feel about merging the two?...Cheers and thanks in any case. ch (talk) 16:36, 29 November 2013 (UTC)
Well, I would be against it, obviously. ^_^
If I had been able to find the "Official..." page before I started in on this, I probably would've just redirected. It's nice enough, even though its present form should pretty much just be retitled "...of the Qing Dynasty". Now that I'm done, some version of this (i.e., Chinese memorial, memorial (China), memorial (Chinese document)) is obviously the common name in English and the material should stay here. If that means paring away some of the duplication from the other article, that's fine; but I don't think it's really a priority. More important would be (here) finding sources and fleshing out some of the institutions and dynasties that handled these puppies (maybe some of the actual examples at the Chinese Wikisource) and (there) removing or rephrasing some of the chattiness and either broadening its treatment or moving it to something more Qing-focused. My 2¢.
Again, thank for the kind words. — LlywelynII 16:51, 29 November 2013 (UTC)
Article expansion
editRight now, there probably is too much that was just adapted from the Official Comm & Petition pages, but it would be a good article to send to WP:DYK if interested parties could include enough new material about other eras (Zhou? Tang?) within the next five days. — LlywelynII 16:56, 29 November 2013 (UTC)