Talk:Battle of Zhuolu
A fact from Battle of Zhuolu appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 30 April 2006. The text of the entry was as follows:
|
| This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
This article states that the Battle of Zhuolu is the second earliest in Chinese history. Would the Battle of Banquan be the earliest recorded battle? -- llywrch 17:55, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
There looks to be nothing beyond mythology to record this battle. Is there any historical evidence, or just mythology? If it is mythological, should this article be rewritten to reflect as much?
"Korean Account"
editWhat was that "history" book, that should have been referenced here, called? Hanfresco 05:58, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
- What language that "Korean history" book was written?? Chinese??jeeez... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.250.38.49 (talk) 10:34, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
it was a book that claimed the korean empire stretched all the way to iraq, and claimed all civilization comes from korea.... its obviously a load of trash.70.107.79.57 (talk) 20:21, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
This is not the mainstream history at Korea. So, I erased it. Thank you. --Idh0854 (talk) 09:19, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
- Who gets to declare it a "fringe theory"? Have you even read WP:FRINGE? Per WP:NPOV, we give space to all schools of thought on a topic, not just your favorite one. Of course, if you have something like a "reference" (beside yourself) actually calling it a fringe theory, then maybe we can add something like "however, so-and-so holds the viewpoint that this is a fringe theory." Til Eulenspiegel (talk) 01:52, 13 February 2012 (UTC)