Talk:Si Renfa

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. You can locate your hook here. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: withdrawn by nominator, closed by Launchballer talk 20:14, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that Si Renfa's conflicts with the Ming dynasty sparked the Luchuan–Pingmian Campaigns, resulting in the fall of Möng Mao?

• Source: https://www.burmalibrary.org/en/crucible-of-war-burma-and-the-ming-in-the-tai-frontier-zone-1382-1454

• • ALT1: ... that Si Renfa's wars with the Ming dynasty led to a series of campaigns that brought about the collapse of his kingdom of Möng Mao?
  • Reviewed:

Moved to mainspace by 瑞丽江的河水 (talk) and Hazelnut79 (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

Xiliuheshui · chat 21:43, 15 August 2025 (UTC).

• A new hook is needed here, as the current hook may not meet WP:DYKINT: it may not be understandable to readers unfamiliar with Chinese history. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 01:00, 18 August 2025 (UTC)
  • @Narutolovehinata5: Hi, thank you for your comment, I have provided another alt hook, do you have a specific suggestion?--Xiliuheshui · chat 07:15, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Yes, that's better. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 22:43, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy compliance:

• Adequate sourcing: - n
• Neutral:
• Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

QPQ: None required.

Overall: Article is new and long enough, and neutral. Hook is cited and interesting. QPQ not needed. The big problem is that the article contravenes core content policy, specifically WP:PSTS: "Wikipedia articles should be based on reliable, published secondary sources". Nearly the whole article relies on centuries-old primary sources. As such, it is not suitable for Wikipedia and needs considerable improvement from its current state. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 13:23, 16 September 2025 (UTC)

@瑞丽江的河水 and Hazelnut79: Please address the above.--Launchballer 17:46, 24 September 2025 (UTC)

@Launchballer: Hi, Hazelnut79 has added some footnotes from modern research. Hopefully the current version addresses some of the concerns and is an improvement.--Xiliuheshui · chat 13:40, 26 September 2025 (UTC)

@瑞丽江的河水 and Hazelnut79: I'm not sure adding another two references to 21 is going to do much, but pinging @AirshipJungleman29: for his thoughts.--Launchballer 14:35, 3 October 2025 (UTC)

Not really, no. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 15:05, 3 October 2025 (UTC)

@瑞丽江的河水 and Hazelnut79: This times out in a little over 72 hours.--Launchballer 20:06, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

We have done our best, but due to the limitations of existing research, such detailed information cannot be provided based solely on modern studies and without historical records. I'd like to withdrawl the DYK nomination.--Xiliuheshui · chat 20:12, 11 October 2025 (UTC)