This article is within the scope of WikiProject East Asia, a project which is currently considered to be defunct.East AsiaWikipedia:WikiProject East AsiaTemplate:WikiProject East AsiaEast Asia articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Japan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Japan-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project, participate in relevant discussions, and see lists of open tasks. Current time in Japan: 00:35, May 25, 2024 (JST, Reiwa 6) (Refresh)JapanWikipedia:WikiProject JapanTemplate:WikiProject JapanJapan-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Korea, a collaborative effort to build and improve articles related to Korea. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how use this banner, please refer to the documentation.KoreaWikipedia:WikiProject KoreaTemplate:WikiProject KoreaKorea-related articles
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 articles
This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
A fact from Kibi Clan Rebellion appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 22 August 2014 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
Did you know... that in the Kibi Clan Rebellion, Japan lost its hold on the Korean peninsula because of a beautiful woman?
Latest comment: 4 years ago5 comments4 people in discussion
QuickTrial (talk·contribs) removed the content of this article, describing it as "pseudohistory presented as fact". I've restored the content, but marked the article with a {{disputed}} header until someone knowledgeable can take a look at this. -- The Anome (talk) 13:05, 29 February 2020 (UTC)Reply
The source outright describes this whole era as “protohistorical”, with all that implies; stating as fact anything only known from legend isn’t good practice. Qwirkle (talk) 17:11, 29 February 2020 (UTC)Reply
The article relies heavily on century old sources. I find it hard to believe that no modern critical edition of Nihon Shoki exists, or that the story has not been commented on by more up-to-date reliable sources. Reference to these to create a section on the scholarly consensus about the historicity or otherwise of the story seems the way to go.Monstrelet (talk) 09:24, 1 March 2020 (UTC)Reply
Of course, in the end. In the meantime, labeling the problem with a tag is the second-best thing for the unwary reader. Qwirkle (talk) 12:12, 1 March 2020 (UTC)Reply
I agree that this should be made more clear. (not sure whether the disputed template is suitable in this case though). FWIW, Sansom (A History of Japan to 1334), p 41f, considers the time around the year 400 as a cut-off between fiction and somewhat reliable history. Quoting: From this date onwards we enter into the period of recorded history, and can place some trust in the national chronicles. They are not entirely reliable for the first century or so after 400, but what they tell us about the events after 600 is on the whole credible, [..].bamse (talk) 21:01, 2 March 2020 (UTC)Reply
