Talk:Tao Te Ching

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Tao Te Ching article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 3 months

	Tao Te Ching is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.
Article milestones Date Process Result January 21, 2001 Brilliant prose Nominated January 19, 2004 Refreshing brilliant prose Not kept December 9, 2005 Peer review Reviewed
Current status: Former featured article

This  level-4 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Religious texts (defunct) This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religious texts, a project which is currently considered to be defunct. China Top‑importance China portal 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. Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Taoism (inactive) This article is within the scope of WikiProject Taoism, a project which is currently considered to be inactive. Philosophy: Literature / Eastern / Ancient High‑importance Philosophy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Associated task forces: /  Philosophical literature Eastern philosophy Ancient philosophy

Individual proverbs

Laozi 1

The Daodejing says that "the name that cannot be named is not the constant name." A.C. Graham takes this to mean not that words are useless, but that they are not always perfect descriptors. The work corrects inadequacies by "balancing" them with their opposites.^[1] FourLights (talk) 06:06, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Propose moving "authorship" up

This section doesn't really contribute to the archaeological discussion, but it's short and it's a relevant background. I will do this if I don't receive negative response.FourLights (talk) 09:44, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Old theory

I'd like to addend an old Tang Chun-i theory to "before Zhuangzi", but I'd have to add disclaimatory commentary. You could always dispute it after, but i am also providing opportunity to dispute beforehand.FourLights (talk) 20:11, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I dont have to go into detail anyway, unless it was specifically requested. Then it wouldn't need much comment. FourLights (talk) 02:49, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wade-Giles vs. Pinyin

Is there a reason why the romanization of Chinese terms in this article is based on the Wade-Giles system rather than the Pinyin system, which is much more commonly used in the 21st century? Philninja99 (talk) 19:19, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Forgot to link articles, sorry

Wade–Giles

Pinyin Philninja99 (talk) 19:20, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No, there is no reason. These people are under the impression that tao te ching is still the common name. I suppose it is possible commercial books are still more commonly sold that way. Scholarship likely uses the term Laozi most commonly.FourLights (talk) 20:34, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

1. Graham 1989, p. 67. sfn error: no target: CITEREFGraham1989 (help)