Talk:Marco Polo

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Good article Marco Polo 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.
July 16, 2009 Good article nominee Listed


Wikipedia Version 1.0 Editorial Team / v0.5 / Vital (Rated GA-class)
WikiProject icon This article has been reviewed by the Version 1.0 Editorial Team.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

Good refs not yet in the article[edit]

Please add here any good refs you find:

ican doooooo it  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Minecraftboss57 (talkcontribs) 15:12, 31 January 2017 (UTC) 

Journey to China[edit]

Resolved

Marco Polo, now 17 years old, his father and uncle went to China.this was after his mother died and then he brought up by his uncle, and then they went both on adventures. They all sailed to Acre (now Akko), a port in Palestine. The reason for their stop, was because the Polos didn't think the ships at the port were fit to ride on the ocean. After they got off the boat, they rode camels crossing the deserts and mountains in Asia, until, after about three years, they reached their destination; Kublai Khan's summer palace, in Shangdu (or Shang-tu), near the present day Kalgan. The Khan welcomed the Polos very greatly.

Kublai Khan appreciated the Polo's experience, and knowledge. Marco knew four different languages, and the Khan sent Marco on many tours around the kingdom. These tours lead Marco from China's southern and eastern provinces, and as well as far south as Burma. Marco became a government official in a Chinese city; Yangzhou (also spelled Yang-chou) for three years.

Time passed, and Peublai Khan disagreed with the Polos leaving China. Marco, and his family, started worrying about safely returning home, because believed that if Kublai Khan were to die before they left China, his enemies might capture them, because they are always involved with Kublai. In 1292, Khan's great-nephew, Persia's Mongol ruler, sent representatives to China to bring him a bride. The representatives asked if the Polos wanted to come with them on their return to Persia. The Polos agreed, knowing that this was their chance to "escape". Kublai Khan finally agreed. The same year, the Polos, with a fleet of 14 junks, sailed from Zaitun, (or Quanzhou, also spelled Ch'uan-chou), to a port in southern China.

The feet sailed to present day Singapore. From there, they traveled toward the north of Sumatra, around the southern tip of India, and they crossed the Arabian Sea to Hormuz. There, Marco, and his family, left the wedding party and traveled to the Turkish port of Trebizond (present day Trabzon). The Polos sailed to Constantinople and then, finally, to Venice, about 24 years after the journey began! Their journey round trip probably totaled nearly 15,000 miles (24,100 kilometers).

↑ This info should be merged with the Journey To Cathay and service to the Khan. cite source: "The World Book Encyclopedia", (c) 2004, pub. World Book Inc, Chicago. ISBN 0-7166-0104-4. Book "P" - Volume 15. Pages 648-649.↑

Comment[edit]

I'm posting here after seeing Silvio1973's thread at ANI, which has been closed as a content dispute. Hzh, you need to use an edit summary for every one of your edits, explaining exactly what you did and why. Silvio1973, if you'd like assistance, post a neutrally worded request at the relevant active WikiProjects, and ask for extra eyes, analysis, etc. Softlavender (talk) 14:33, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Softlavender No problem with asking for other editors' contributions, in fact it would help with some issues that need addressing in the article. For example, I found incorrectly sourced content that have been left unchecked for some time, but attributed to a scholar. This is very wrong as it could be a personal opinion or original research falsely attributed as the opinion of a known academic. I had planned to go over the sources, but if there are people who can also check the sources then it would certainly help. I should also note that the closer of the ANI doubted if it was even a content dispute and should not have been raised at ANI. Hzh (talk) 15:03, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
Softlavander I really do not know what to do. I am reading Hzh's edit one by one but it's a big job. Il will take a week. I assume good faith, but honestly Hzh you make the life of your fellow editors very difficult. Silvio1973 (talk) 15:05, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
I have already explained which sections are my contribution and that I did not touch the rest, and you can read those sections in 10-15 minutes. I have also explained that everything is sourced, so if there are sentences you need clarifying, then it is easy to check the source. I'm frankly puzzled why you think it takes a week. Hzh (talk) 15:11, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
Well, believe it or not, it is not easy to navigate through so many changes. Two comments so far:
  1. IMHO you give undue weight to Ronald Latham's opinion. He might be actually right but the meanstream considers Il Milione a work of Marco Polo. In a nutshell if you want his opinion taking so much place in the article you need to add additional source or perhaps reduce to a more reasonable size Latham's opinion.
  2. "Since the book publication, many have viewed the book with skepticism" it's a strong sentence because you need to evaluate many as opposed to a countable number. I would recommend to replace "many" with "some". Silvio1973 (talk) 19:43, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
I did not add anything by Latham, that has been there for more than a year. I have already told you that I did not add anything on that section apart adding a subsection title. I plan to check the book later to see if what's written is correct. However, I think not over-representing the opinion of any particular scholar is a good idea, and I will see if I can do that with Haw, Wood and Morgan.
The second point is sourced, but I have no problem with changing to some. Hzh (talk) 19:53, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
It's true, you did not change anything. This is the problem when someone posts so many consecutive edits without giving the time to the others to follow. It's difficult to follow now. However, I am going through all edits and I can affirm I do not have big problems with most of them. Silvio1973 (talk) 11:52, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
If it makes anything easier, Haw's book is available on Google Books. Pericles of AthensTalk 12:05, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── @Silvio1973: I must say I'm feeling a bit exasperated now. I have already specified which sections I added content on, which section I did not, you cannot say you can't follow what is done. That is particularly so when you want to revert to a state where the content you complained about already existed for over a year, that means you have a year to follow the edits! I don't have great attachment to what I added, if you feel strongly about reverting to the previous state, then you can, but just remember what I said about problematic content. If you want to know how to revert to an older state, just go an older version, then click edit and save that version. Hzh (talk) 12:52, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 November 2016[edit]

In The Book of Marvels, Polo claimed that he was a close friend and advisor to Kublai Khan and that he was the governor of the city of Yangzhou for three years – yet no Chinese source mentions him as either a friend of the Emperor or as the governor of Yangzhou – indeed no Chinese source mentions Polo at all.

Followed by:

According to the first printed edition (Nuremberg 1477) Marco Polo worked as an ordinary officer in the service of the governor of Mangi. („Ich Marcho polo von meynß hernn des grossen Chams wegen/ pey dem verweser und haubtman des lands Mangi drey gancze iar was.“)

Karl Termolen (talk) 12:00, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Please note that it is already explained in the following paragraph that there were contradictory information in different versions of the book. Therefore should be added in that paragraph if this is to be done. Also the first version is French, so what's so special about the German one? Hzh (talk) 11:11, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

The German version (as the Italian and the Latin versions a translation from an unknown source) is the only one which states clearly that Marco Polo was an official in the service of the governor. I would suggest to add to Assessments (following note 110):

Marco Polo, according to the sinologist Ulrich Neininger[1] became friends with Zufficar, an official in the Imperial Bureau of Mines. Zufficar, who must have been impressed by the scientific talent of the young manCite error: A <ref> tag is missing the closing </ref> (see the help page). According to Ramusio’s edition, he served there as governor. However an earlier German edition states clearly: “I, Marco Polo, ordered by my master, the great Khan, was three years in the service of the governor and captain of the land Mangi.” Cite error: A <ref> tag is missing the closing </ref> (see the help page). Secondly, there was the influence of Rustichello who needed for his text a glorious knight in Kublai Khan’s services and by no means a middle level civil servant. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Karl Termolen (talkcontribs) 09:23, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. -- Dane2007 talk 23:12, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Ulrich Neininger, The Legend of the Venetian Knight-Errant at the Court of Kublai Khan, and the True Story of the Busy Official Marco Polo, how he Grew Rich in China and what he Kept Secret from his Readers, http://ulrichneininger.de/?p=2532)