Contents

Talk:Zhu Bajie

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

China High‑importance 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 articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Animals in media (inactive) This article is within the scope of WikiProject Animals in media, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Animals in mediaWikipedia:WikiProject Animals in mediaTemplate:WikiProject Animals in mediaAnimals in media articles Fictional characters This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fictional characters, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of fictional characters 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.Fictional charactersWikipedia:WikiProject Fictional charactersTemplate:WikiProject Fictional charactersfictional character articles

This article was nominated for deletion on 24 July 2012. The result of the discussion was keep.

I propose that the content of the article Nine-toothed Rake, limited as it is and specific as it is to the topic of Zhu Bajie himself, be merged into this article. Mendaliv (talk) 21:50, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Having watched much of a DVD series of Xiyouji many years ago, I don't think an article on Zhu Bajie's weapon could be that long. Sun Wukong's magical wand doesn't even have an article to itself. Even the Chinese Wikipedia does not have an article on the rake. Mathpianist93 (talk) 01:02, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Horse sense. I will merge now. I'm wondering why the article is called Zhu Bajie though, and not Pigsy? Homunculus (duihua) 12:00, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done. It's amazing that that request had been standing for two years. Homunculus (duihua) 12:05, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Zhu Bajie. 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 http://web.archive.org/web/20120802022436/http://afe.easia.columbia.edu:80/webcourse/key_points/kp_4.htmtohttp://afe.easia.columbia.edu/webcourse/key_points/kp_4.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to trueorfailed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 18:03, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

the wiki about journey to the west often says that Tang Sanzang has 3 helpers but it is 4, people usually forget the dragon white horse

Thus seems like a very obscure word for a common concept (gluttonous). Is there a reason for preferring it?

While I'm on the subject, "demerits" seems like the wrong word for "flaws" or "defects." All of these have been in the article since 2012, so I guess someone is committed to them. But they seem awkward. Thoughts? · rodii · 16:16, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that edacious is an unusual word; I don't think I've ever seen it. Gluttony instead?

However I do like the parallelism of merit/demerit -- the only alternative I can think of at the moment would be positive qualities/negative qualities. -- SSBDelphiki (talk) 02:00, 29 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]