Talk:Han Fei

Title

Shouldn't this page be titled "Han Fei"? Han Feizi was the name of the book which Han Fei wrote, which contained the Legalist ideas. I might be wrong, though, I just learned this in school.

Yeah, this person is right. Why didn't you guys catch that? jettofabulo

actually, the ending "zi" in these names means master, like, master han fei, thats why confucius' real name is kongzi, master kong. all the philosophers names end that way.

I have moved Han Feizi into Han Fei. 'zi' (子) can mean master, but in this case it indicates that it is a book written by Han Fei.

Actually, Han Feizi correctly referrs to both the book and the thinker himself. However, it is often the case that in English, writers use Han Fei to refer to the author and Han Feizi to the book for the sake of clarity. Initially, of course, Han Feizi was referred to in the Chinese literature as Hanzi. The "Fei" was added to distinguish him from another author, who is known as "Hanzi".

I think the article should be moved back to Han Feizi, as that is the normal name of the thinker. The idea that Han Fei was his name and Han Feizi was his book is just a misconception. "Zi" (子) means master and it is the same case as Zhuangzi (Master Zhuang) or Xunzi (master Xun), who also wrote the books that are known by their names. --AngelRiesgo 15:42, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Actually, I've just checked the article in Chinese Wikipedia, and they use the Han Fei form. I thought Han Feizi was the more common form. Anyway, maybe the article can stay as Han Fei if this form of the name is nowadays more common than the three-syllable Han Feizi, the one I'm more familiar with. In any case, there doesn't seem to be any reason to make a difference between the name of the man and the name of his book. --AngelRiesgo 16:21, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

"Han Fei was persecuted by Li Si and committed suicide in prison." -It is my understanding that Li Si murdered Han Fei. Please verify this information. ("A Brief History of Chinese and Japanese Civilizations." 3rd Edition. pg 46.)

韓非到秦國後，受到秦王政的欣賞，準備重用他，但招李斯忌妒，對秦王進讒言，陷害韓非入獄，最後在獄中服毒自盡。(Translate)

Death

I happened to be reading this annotated translation of the Thousand Character Classic and it mentions that Han Fei "was wrongly accused by enemies and, ironically, died during harsh punishment under his own retributive code."

Is this generally believed, or a commonly-circulated story about him? If so, it should be mentioned here. --Saforrest (talk) 17:58, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

At least it is what the only relatively reliable source of the time says, so it should be in the article. --93.217.220.237 (talk) 12:32, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Han Fei. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150808084724/http://www.chinaculture.org/gb/en_aboutchina/2003-09/24/content_23104.htm to http://www.chinaculture.org/gb/en_aboutchina/2003-09/24/content_23104.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:25, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

Neutrality

A banner at the top of the page said that there is an issue with the neutrality of the page. I wrote this page less than other Legalist pages. But talk to me about this and I will try and fix it.FourLights (talk) 20:21, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

I think the issue was Tran Ngoc Vuong saying that Han Fei is superior to Machiavelli. This is held to be the case even among many westerners. It is fine to state his opinion.FourLights (talk) 20:23, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi @FourLights: I believe what the IP editor was concerned about was actually WP:UNDUE rather than POV as such, and citing only a couple of relatively obscure 20th-century Vietnamese writers out of the entire 2,200-year history of Han Fei reception is pretty obviously giving them undue weight. There is no requirement that every statement someone has made on a topic needs to be listed on that topic's article, particularly when those statements are poorly sourced and/or don't appear to be particularly novel in the context of that history of interpretation. I've trimmed the section substantially anyway; it can probably be retained alongside more notable Chinese and other interpreters if and when those are added. —Nizolan ^{(talk · c.)} 20:25, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

In December 2022 I judged the content in question to be a better fit for the book page. The decision was corroborated by DanCherek.FourLights (talk) 00:17, 18 June 2023 (UTC)

the heck

Han Fei Zi is a million times better than Niccolò Machiavelli, who was just uttering gibberish. It's like comparing trash can with a can of gold. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.222.81.151 (talk) 21:40, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

Han Fei image

A while ago I noted that the current picture illustrating this article is not, as the uploader claims, from the Warring States, but likely from the late 20th or even early 21st centuries. I see that the picture is still here on wikipedia, despite it not likely to be an out-of-copyright work. My suggestion is that this picture should be removed unless proof that it's out of copyright can be obtained. Retinalsummer (talk) 23:27, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Portrait of Han Fei.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 18:07, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Zhuge Liang in the lead

To avoid going back and forth in the edits, I thought it'd be better to clear this issue up here first. The lead currently says "Zhuge Liang is said to have attached great importance to the Han Feizi, as well as Shen Buhai." Firstly, "is said to" are weasel words. Is the claim accurate or not? If not, it should be removed from the lead. Secondly, the claim is poorly sourced. The (very good) Pines Stanford article only mentions that Zhuge Liang liked Legalism and says nothing about Zhuge Liang and Han Fei specifically. The other source (China in Search of a Harmonious Society) is a book about modern China and is not an appropriate source for a figure from nearly 2,000 years ago. I'd be happy to see something about Zhuge Liang and Han Fei in the lead, but this all needs to be cleaned up. Retinalsummer (talk) 20:33, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

With a quick google books search I am able to add at least one more reference, but it's an indirect reference to an 1904 work from the Dao Companion to Han Fei.FourLights (talk) 00:27, 18 June 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for adding the Dao Companion reference. However, both that and the China in Search of a Harmonious Society reference are chapters in edited volumes, so if you have time could you please change the citations to reflect this? I'm going to remove the Pines citation as its a ref fail for the claim being cited. Also, please remember to preface your replies in talk pages with a ":". I have reminded you to do this multiple times (the last time was two days before you made the above reply). Retinalsummer (talk) 12:47, 20 June 2023 (UTC)

Pronunciation

{{IPAc-en|h|ɑː|n}};<ref>[http://www.dictionary.com/browse/han "Han"]. ''[[Random House Webster's Unabridged Dictionary]]''.</ref>

Removed per WP:NOTDICTIONARY. I get that the impulse is to tell people that pronouncing the name like Han Solo is "wrong", but it isn't. It's just English in the same way that yin-yang sounds different in any actualAt Chinese dialect. If a pronunciation were included, it needs to include both common pronunciations per WP:FRINGE, WP:BIAS, WP:READER, &c. At that point, there's no reason to include it at all, since there's only those two ways any person able to read the English in the rest of the page would pronounce it. Listing them and going into why we prefer one ("more authentic") to the other would involve extensive discussion that would be WP:UNDUE in the WP:LEADSENTENCE.

Shorter version: It's fine to reinclude this but it would have to give the full name, it would have to include /hæn.fei/ as a perfectly common alt English pronunciation, and it's so extraneous at that point that it belongs in the #Name section and not the lead. Remember we have the infobox to link directly to extensive coverage of the correct Chinese forms for anyone who really wants it. — LlywelynII 06:47, 17 December 2022 (UTC)