Talk:Tomb of Yue Fei

Sources for future article expansion

This blog post isn't a wp:rs for the article but could be used as a starting point for going a bit more into detail on the somewhat problematic legends concerning what actually happened to Yue Fei's body after his execution and whether it ever made it to the current tomb. Similarly, one rs already in the article did explicitly state that the Red Guards bothered Yue Yun's tomb but left Yue Fei's bones, but other accounts on the internet talk broadly of the tomb being destroyed, with a few non-rses elaborating (or making up) that his remains themselves were scattered or destroyed. It'd be nice to have more sources and clarity either way. — LlywelynII 05:39, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

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: promoted by Earth605 talk 18:03, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

The Tomb of Yue Fei in 2010

The Tomb of Yue Fei in Hangzhou, China (1938)

Bound statues at the Tomb of Yue Fei in 1919

Bared chests at the Tomb of Yue Fei in Hangzhou, China

• ... that the Tomb of Yue Fei in Hangzhou, China, includes bound and kneeling statues of the general's accusers (pictured) that have been ritually reviled for centuries?
  Source: Müller, Gotelind (2022), Tombs and Transnational History in Greater China: A Collection of Case Studies, Berlin: Lit, p. 210.
  • ALT1: ... that the Tomb of Yue Fei in Hangzhou, China, includes bound and kneeling statues of the general's pacifist enemies (pictured) that have been ritually reviled for centuries?
    Source: Müller, loc. cit., and Du, Mara Yue (27 February 2003), "Towards a Nation Defined by State: Tattooed Loyalty and the Evolution of Yue Fei's (1103–1142) Image from the Song to the Present", Journal of Chinese History, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. (The phrasing is tighter as is but explicit mention of Qin & al. supporting Gaozong's peace could be added if this hook is preferred and that felt needed.)
  • ALT2: ... that, despite the Maoist Red Guards' destruction of the Tomb of Yue Fei (pictured) in 1966, Xi Jinping took him as a childhood hero and his tattoo as a personal motto?
    Source: Du, op. cit. (Again the phrasing & content is tighter as is but explicit mention of Xi could be added if this hook is preferred)
  • ALT3: ... that, when the Tomb of Yue Fei (pictured) was reconstructed in 1979, it was rebuilt not as it had been before its destruction in 1966 but as it should have looked during the Song dynasty?
    Source: Kögel, Eduard (2015), The Grand Documentation: Ernst Boerschmann and Chinese Religious Architecture (1906–1931), Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, p. 161.
  • ALT4: ... that statues of Qin Hui, Lady Wang, Moqi Xie, & Zhang Jun (pictured) at the Tomb of Yue Fei in Hangzhou, China, have been ritually pissed on, shat on, & beheaded for centuries?
    Source: Müller, loc. cit., Kögel, loc. cit., and Fu Chonglan; et al. (2019), Introduction to the Urban History of China, Singapore: Palgrave Macmillan, p. 225.
  • ALT5: ... that the Tomb of Yue Fei (pictured) was honored for centuries as a shrine to perfect patriotism & loyalty but destroyed in 1966 because the Song general was felt to have been a feudal oppressor?
    Source: He Libo (16 May 2006), "Pò 'Sìjiù' Fēngcháo de Qiánqián Hòuhòu" 破'四旧'风潮的前前后后 [Ins and Outs of the Campaign to Destroy the 'Four Olds'], Huáxià Wénzhāi Zēngkān, Dì Wǔlíngyī Qí: Wéngé Bówùguǎn Tōngxùn, Dì Sānsānwǔ Qī 华夏文摘增刊，第五〇一期：文革博物馆通讯，第三三五期 [China News Digest, No. 501: Cultural Revolution Newsletter, No. 335] (in Chinese), Gaithersburg: China News Digest International.
  • ALT6: ... that the Tomb of Yue Fei in Hangzhou, China, features boobies (pictured)?
    Source: Müller, loc. cit. & Wikicommons imagery.
    
  • Reviewed: Battle of Cabala
  • Comment:
    1st, don't worry. You only need to check the hook most interesting to you.
    2nd, if you really deeply prefer ALT1 or ALT2, just message my talk page and I'll redo the article to explicitly mention the needed point.
    3rd, kindly do not add any links to the provided hooks. DYK is here to drive traffic to new/improved articles. People curious about Qin Hui or Hangzhou can get there from the links in the Tomb of Yue Fei page and don't need them in the hooks themselves.

5x expanded by LlywelynII (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 89 past nominations.

 — LlywelynII 09:30, 2 August 2025 (UTC).

• @LlywelynII: This is just a comment, but I would suggest toning down your "please no links" comments in your nominations moving forward, as other editors may find their tone to be too harsh. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 22:45, 10 September 2025 (UTC)

  @Narutolovehinata5: No idea what you are on about. It's a clear statement and reminder of preference to people who (without ill intent) randomly add links to these things, as encountered numerous times over years of participation in dyk. You don't seem to be speaking for anyone else but, ok, out of morbid curiosity, what would your proposed phrasing be? — LlywelynII 11:13, 12 September 2025 (UTC)

  @LlywelynII: A shorter message, one that does not include bolds/italics/underlines, would probably go a long way. Another solution, one that could work in parallel, would be to avoid mentioning unfamiliar names whenever possible if they're not necessary to the hook, or to at least provide some context. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 11:29, 12 September 2025 (UTC)

  That isn't proposed phrasing, just more criticism of a note that has been effective and unoffensive to everyone apart from yourself, since it already is perfectly polite assuming you're assuming good faith. As for the rest, if you had additional ALTs to propose, you're welcome to but that's what's actually making the entry seem intimidating to prospective reviewers. (Hence the necessity of the 1st comment.) Anyway, thanks for stopping by. — LlywelynII 11:37, 12 September 2025 (UTC)

  I do not understand why you are seemingly accusing me of assuming bad faith. All I said was that the comment seemed needlessly harsh or even aggressive. Even a simple message that went "I would prefer there to be no other blue links in the article" or something to that effect would have worked just as effectively. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 12:57, 12 September 2025 (UTC)

No bad faith, just—since you're still writing and seeking clarification—what comes across as very judgmental and passive aggressive nitpicking without much/any constructive content despite repeated attempts to elicit some. Yes, the current phrasing and formatting are effective and, thus far, have only been offputting to you, an editor who didn't improve the nomination itself, the articles, or perform a review. (See below for a second opinion.) No, the suggested text wouldn't be effective either here or upon promotion. It's too weakly phrased and would be lost in the sea of text from the ALTs, the notes, and the comments. That said, thanks again for the good that you do do & keep on with that, ideally with greater consideration for others and humility going forward. — LlywelynII 13:56, 16 September 2025 (UTC)

• I'll review this in the next 24 hours; so far, my preference is a trimmed version of ALT4.--Launchballer 18:24, 15 September 2025 (UTC)

  @LlywelynII: Long enough, new enough. QPQ complete and Earwig has no valid complaints. You won't be able to put "piss" or "shit" in the main page in this formulation as neither are encyclopedic language, which I adjusted this in the article, and I'd suggest trimming ALT4 to ALT4a: ... that statues at the tomb of Yue Fei (pictured) have been ritually defecated on for centuries?. The Introduction source says that "for centuries, these statues have been cursed, spat and urinated upon by people" and I can't see the Grand Documentation source; per WP:DYKHOOK, I must ask for a quote from the source. Also, I reject Naruto's argument that "kindly do not add any links to the provided hooks" is in the least bit incivil; this is a perfectly reasonable request given WP:DYKMAJOR.--Launchballer 13:23, 16 September 2025 (UTC)

  @Launchballer: Piss and shit are encyclopedic, and it's a bit silly to think that 'urinate' or 'excrete waste material' capture the intended approbation. wp:tone & wp:notcens actually say that things shouldn't be needlessly bawdlerized or reformatted into medical jargon in a cultural article. (See, e.g., enshittification.) That said, you're the reviewer. You don't like it, it's a judgment call, and we can phrase things your preferred way. Thanks for your time, your support, and lemme see about getting you that cite. — LlywelynII 13:56, 16 September 2025 (UTC)

• ALT7: ... that four statues at the tomb of Yue Fei (two pictured) in Hangzhou, China, have been ritually defecated on for centuries?
• ALT8: ... that four statues at the tomb of Yue Fei (two pictured) in Hangzhou, China, were ritually defecated on for centuries?

The other cites underline that it's been a continuing tradition since the Ming but the relevant and directly fecal-related bit from the Grand Documentarian is "Even in the early twentieth century, when Boerschmann visited the temple, male visitors spat and emptied their bowels on the statues. 'The condition of the place, one might easily imagine,' he wrote." The slightly modified phrasing in ALT8 underlines that the shitting really has largely stopped by this point; people still spit &c. but local police would not take kindly to continued indulgence in the less sanitary traditions at the modern tourist spot. If you run into similar problems elsewhere as Google Books continues to grow more and more enfecalized, one current kludge is to make sure you're using &newbks=0 to turn off its most deliberate attempts to not work plus &pg=PA### where ### is whatever the relevant page number is. — LlywelynII 14:19, 16 September 2025 (UTC)

For what it's worth Launchballer, my issue with the message was how it was worded and not the request itself. As I said, if the request was worded differently (and without the bolding/italics/underlining), it wouldn't have been an issue. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 23:14, 16 September 2025 (UTC)

"Not incivil" covered the wording. — LlywelynII 02:35, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

Approving ALT8.--Launchballer 15:11, 17 September 2025 (UTC)