Talk:Jingnan campaign

Jingnan campaign 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.
Review: May 29, 2025. (Reviewed version).

A fact from Jingnan campaign appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 15 August 2013 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that Yongle Emperor (pictured) took over the Ming Dynasty throne by launching the Jingnan Campaign?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2013/August.

Wikipedia

China: History High‑importance

	China portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject China, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of China related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChinaWikipedia:WikiProject ChinaTemplate:WikiProject ChinaChina-related
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Chinese history (assessed as High-importance).

Military history: Asian / Chinese

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history

Associated task forces:
/
	Asian military history task force
	Chinese military history task force

Sources for article expansion

For those whose Chinese isn't good enough for their page (or who need to check out for pro-Yongle bias), another English-language source: here. — LlywelynII 20:09, 12 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I will be expanding the article in the next few days. Alex Shih ^Talk 06:58, 10 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Article translated

I have finished translating the article from Chinese Wikipedia. After finishing the copyedit, the sources will be manually translated to English when I have time. A machine-translated version is available here for editors concerned with WP:RS. English sources will probably be added gradually. Alex Shih ^Talk 17:10, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

GA review

Pass —Coeusin (talk) 13:44, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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:Jingnan campaign/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Min968 (talk · contribs) 08:29, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Coeusin (talk · contribs) 00:58, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm happy to be reviewing your article. Hopefully we can work together and come to a conclusion on a timely manner. Coeusin (talk) 00:58, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Passed. Congratulations on your work, @Min968:. Coeusin (talk) 12:22, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written. a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): It is factually accurate and verifiable, as shown by a source spot-check. a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism): It is broad in its coverage. a (major aspects): b (focused): It follows the neutral point of view policy. Fair representation without bias: It is stable. No edit wars, etc.: It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate. a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall: Pass/Fail:
· · ·

Links, citation, copyright

Green copyvios check Y Coeusin (talk) 00:58, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've read through all the main sources of the article except for Chan (2005). The article is a fair representation of the subject; should the issues below be addressed, I'll pass it. Coeusin (talk) 13:27, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Prose/structure

The first phrase of the lead is unclear. was a propagandistic term used by the victorious side to refer to the civil war should probably be on a note, as to make things simpler. Coeusin (talk) 01:22, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In ""Reducing the feudatories" policy", the article claims that Zhu di had a personal guard of 15,000 men.; by the start of the war, however, Zhu Di commanded a force of 100,000 soldiers - what soldiers were these? Was the frontier stripped of troops? Coeusin (talk) 01:22, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

- At the start of the rebellion, the Prince of Yen had no advantage in troops. His forces numbered only about 100,000 men; nor did he control any territory beyond his fief in Peking. The Chien-wen court at Nanking maintained a standing army three times the size of the prince's army, possessed abundant resources, and had already eliminated several of the princedoms. But this simple comparison is misleading. The prince's strength lay in his own powers of leadership, in the superior quality of his army—including a large contingent of Mongol cavalry from the Uriyangkhad commanderies, in superior strategy, and in his own unwavering determination to win. By contrast, the imperial forces were handicapped by indecisive and ill-coordinated leadership, and by the court's preoccupation with the much less urgent tasks of government reorganization. Chan (1988). p. 196

The article is organized in a traditional manner, following a timeline. It serves the subject well, though I feel like there is an overly heavy focus on the military happenings and not on the political side of things. The article mentions at some points that there were elements in the emperor's court that were favourable to peace, and also that early in the campaigns Zhu Di blamed his movements on the court officials and not on the emperor. I feel like the article would benefit if this side of the equation also was discussed over time, and not only at the beginning and the end of the timeline. Coeusin (talk) 01:22, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- @Coeusin: Regarding this part, I currently haven't been able to find direction or gather more materials to write further. Perhaps if it reaches FA, I will write in more depth. If you feel it is important and assess that this article does not meet GA standards, I am also willing to agree. Best Regards. Min968 (talk) 17:10, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  I think if you collect what Chan (1988) says on this subject it will enough. If you want to take some time to read through it again and add what you feel like is relevant, I am in no particular hurry. Best regards, Coeusin (talk) 17:44, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

- - @Coeusin: Added content in section 1401. Min968 (talk) 05:01, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In 1401, there is the following passage: However, Zhu Di was unable to capture Dezhou, where the government army retreated. - did the government army retreat to Dezhou, or is that where supposed to be a when? Coeusin (talk) 01:22, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The last paragraph of 1401 has the following phrase: In August, Ping An launched an attack on Beijing from Zhending, successfully pushing the rebels back to the north, but in October, the rebels were able to push government troops back to the south. I feel like it could be worded in a less repetitive manner. Coeusin (talk) 01:22, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

On a minor note, the article could use some images. Off the top of my head, in 1399 an image of Zhengding's walls could be presented, as the city's described as well-fortified; though I have no idea if the gates presented in Zhengding County are any similar to its 15th century defenses. Coeusin (talk) 01:40, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Coeusin: Some points are done. Min968 (talk) 09:03, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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.