Divinity Atlas

Sacred Correspondences
Sign In
Text size
100%
Theme
Source

Jing Fang (reference article)

Wikipedia's own article on Jing Fang, the Han dynasty Yijing scholar known for his system of trigram correlations, is a tertiary encyclopedic source. Its strength is that it reliably records his standard biographical facts. Its limit is the ordinary one for a crowd edited encyclopedia entry: fine for uncontroversial biography, not a substitute for specialist scholarship on Han dynasty Yijing exegesis. This description is adapted from Wikipedia contributors under CC BY-SA 4.0; changes were made. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

Facts
Assessment
Reliability Tier
3
Wikipedia's article on Jing Fang is a community edited tertiary reference rather than a peer reviewed publication, hence the lower tier, though reasonable for his standard uncontroversial biographical facts.
Notes
Wikipedia's article on Jing Fang, the Han dynasty Yijing scholar. A perpetually community-edited reference page rather than a peer-reviewed publication; use for standard, uncontroversial biographical facts, not a contested or specialist scholarly claim.
Citation
Author
Wikipedia contributors
URL
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jing_Fang
Source Type
reference
Connections

Associated With

This source names Yijing directly: "article on Jing Fang, the Han dynasty Yijing scholar known for his system of trigram correlations, is a tertiary encyclopedic source."

Source Jing Fang (reference article)Wikipedia contributors
Claims Backed By This Source (19 claims)

This source backs 19 claims across the atlas. As facts: 14 well-attested. As cited relationships: 1 holds. Plus 4 entities citing it as a general reference with no single fact or relationship attached.

Disposition By Topic

  • Historical Figures, 12 claims: 8 well-attested, 4 general references.
  • Sources, 7 claims: 6 well-attested, 1 holds.

Well-attested

14

Historical Figures

General References

4

Historical Figures

Comments (0)
No comments yet. Be the first to share a thought.
Reader Challenges (0)
No disputes yet. Spotted an error or a better source? Open the first one.