Talk:Deng Shi

GA review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

This review is transcluded from Talk:Deng Shi/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Generalissima (talk · contribs) 04:22, 14 July 2026 (UTC)

Reviewer: Kisseran (talk · contribs) 06:06, 14 July 2026 (UTC)

Claiming this because it's cool and I've already retrieved some of the sources. Let me know when you're ready if you want to integrate the Chinese language sources first. Kisseran (talk) 06:06, 14 July 2026 (UTC)

@Generalissima: See review:

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, spelling, grammar, and understandability): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   See below.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable, as shown by a source spot-check.

   a (reference section): b (inline citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

   See below. Earwig returns 0.0%.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

   Page 64 of Ding 2019 has a public domain image of Deng, because it was published abroad the US before 1931, and it is also public domain in China.

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Spot check

This table lists 6 random passages from throughout the article (20.0% of 30 total passages). These passages contain 7 inline citations (20.6% of 34 in the article). Generated with the Veracity user script.

Reference #	Letter	Source	Archive	Status	Notes
Deng received the courtesy name Qiumei (秋枚), but was also known as Meizi (枚子) or Yecan (野残).
1	b	Wu 2003, p. 28.		Y
Deng strongly emphasized the development of 'national studies' (國學; guoxue), seeking to modernize Chinese thought while preserving elements of traditional scholarship.
7		Hon 2013, pp. 42–43.		Y
The society was soon joined by a number of other prominent scholars, such as Liu Shipei, Liu Yazi, Ma Xulun, and Wang Guowei. The philologist Zhang Taiyan, imprisoned during the society's founding, gained prominence among the group by writing articles.
6	c	Ding 2019, p. 19.		*
8	b	Wei 2024, p. 26.		*	Neither source mentions Wang Guowei on the cited pages.(Fixed this -G)
Deng published several compilations of rare books and manuscripts his publishing house Fengyulou (風雨樓, 'Wind and Rain House'), a name used on many of his personal seals.
16		Ding 2019, pp. 48–50.		N	There's a prose error here but I do not think the sources talk about a publishing house of the name Fengyulou, but rather that Deng published under the name Fengyulou. I'm pretty sure this was part of a broader practice among traditional Chinese scholars to publish under the name of their residence. (Oops, my bad. Reworded.-G)
Deng was strongly influenced by the 1904 Chinese translation of British writer Edward Jenks' A History of Politics, which described human society evolving through three stages; tribalism, feudalism, and nation-states, a purportedly linear progression governed by the "law of social evolution".
20		Hon 2013, p. 30.		Y
Deng described guoxue as in opposition to junxue (君學; 'learning for the emperor'), arguing that due to the absolute status of the emperor over scholars, China had no independent school of "national learning".
22		Hon 2003, pp. 251–252.		Y

Prose

This is mostly beyond the GA criteria, to be honest:

• rebuild from its humiliation to European powers — perhaps "recover" is a bit clearer? rebuild being used intransitively here somewhat confused me
  • Fixed.-G
• strongly emphasized — unless he weakly emphasized other notable things
  • Fixed.-G
• gained prominence among the group by writing articles — this is somewhat unclear to me. why would someone gain prominence among a group of writers by writing articles? did he write particularly good or many articles or write them in unusual circumstances?
  • He seems to have participated from prison in some extant, but the source is a little vague. I reworded it.-G
• political power shifted towards coalitions of warlords in the Warlord Era → China entered the Warlord Era as political power shifted towards coalitions of warlords
  • Fixed.-G
• Edward Jenks's — MOS:POSS
  • Fixed.-G
• 20th revival — 20th century revival?
  • Fixed.-G
• wikilink Qin dynasty and Han dynasty?
  • Done.-G

Kisseran (talk) 09:07, 14 July 2026 (UTC)

@Kisseran: Thank you so much! I think I got to everything. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 12:31, 14 July 2026 (UTC)

Looks good to me! I'll promote to GA now. Kisseran (talk) 12:45, 14 July 2026 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Did you know nomination

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that Deng Shi called for China to undergo its own version of the Renaissance?

• Source:Hon, Tze-ki (2003). "National Essence, National Learning, and Culture: Historical Writings in Guocui xuebao, Xueheng, and Guoxue jikan". Historiography East & West. 1 (2). doi:10.1163/157018603774004511. Among the Guocui historians, Deng Shi 鄧實 (1877-1945?) made elaborate comparisons between the revival of the pre-Qin cultural practices and the Renaissance humanists’ recovery of Greek and Roman literature. To make the parallel look indisputable, he stressed the theme of “rebirth,” the root meaning of renaissance. He called the recovery of pre-Qin cultural practices “the rebirth of ancient studies” (guxue fuxing 古學復興). “Just as Europeans underwent their rebirth of ancient studies in the fifteenth century,” he wrote, “the Chinese experienced their rebirth of ancient studies in the twentieth century.”

• • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Obanosa

Created by Generalissima (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 154 past nominations.

Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 15:10, 14 July 2026 (UTC).

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

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

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

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Min968 (talk) 17:36, 14 July 2026 (UTC)