Talk:Science and technology of the Han dynasty
Science and technology of the Han dynasty has been listed as one of the History good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Science and technology of the Han dynasty is part of the Han Dynasty series, a featured topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so. | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors |
Hello
editI just created this article; if there's any suggestions on how to improve it, please leave a message here! Thanks.--Pericles of AthensTalk 11:07, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
- It's probably best to wait for Diffusion of technology in Canada to be copyedited before submitting this to article review. Ottre 02:19, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
- Why? The Canada article is much, much larger and in need of many more citations, whereas this article is within acceptable size limits and heavily cited. Surely, this article just needs a little polishing and it will be featured material, whereas the Canada article looks like it is going to need a year of verification research, parsing, simplifying, rewording, etc. to make it more manageable. Plus, this article is just part of my ongoing project for the Han Dynasty (which I now have two other articles for).--Pericles of AthensTalk 06:06, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
- I'm pretty sure you can't take an article of this breadth straight to FAC. And seeing how the Canada article is handled might speed up the review significantly, I should think. Sorry if that wasn't obvious. Ottre 17:54, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
- Why? The Canada article is much, much larger and in need of many more citations, whereas this article is within acceptable size limits and heavily cited. Surely, this article just needs a little polishing and it will be featured material, whereas the Canada article looks like it is going to need a year of verification research, parsing, simplifying, rewording, etc. to make it more manageable. Plus, this article is just part of my ongoing project for the Han Dynasty (which I now have two other articles for).--Pericles of AthensTalk 06:06, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
I'm pretty sure that the bronze gear mold is for a racket and not a gear. They are really quite different things. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.102.112.242 (talk) 23:14, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
Blast furnaces and Iron fining processes
edit- According to Donald B. Wagner in The earliest use of iron in China, in China, blast furnaces were certainly invented far after bloomery. Bloomeries produced wrought iron blooms, which were smelted into cast iron with "chinese cupola furnaces". Findings of cast iron artifacts is not an evidence of blast furnace. The reason is, that blast furnaces both reduce and melt iron, which needs a powerful blast. It is more logical to split these two operations into two different furnaces.
- It is also impossible to decarburize in a cupola furnace, which runs a reducing process
WP:ERA
editThis article was begun using BCE/CE dates, so should have been left like that. --John (talk) 12:32, 10 May 2018 (UTC)
- Also claim was "WP:ERA; either BC/AD or BCE/CE is fine, but don't use both" but I only found 1 BC/AD (may have missed a couple) but ~100 BCE/CE - so clearly the neutral chnage would have been to BCE/CE not the mass change the other way. KylieTastic (talk) 15:22, 10 May 2018 (UTC)
- It's fixed now. --John (talk) 15:52, 10 May 2018 (UTC)
Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion
editThe following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussions at the nomination pages linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 09:57, 30 June 2021 (UTC)