Jump to content

Talk:China: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous edit
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Mamin27 (talk | contribs)
390 edits
No edit summary
 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Talk header}}
{{WPCHINA|class=FA|importance=Top}}
{{WP:Countries|class=FA}}
{{FAQ|collapsed=no}}
{{American English}}
{{featured}}
{{Article history
{{mainpage date|March 7|2004}}
|action1=FAC
{{talkheader}}
|action1date=2004-03-15, 01:59:59
''An event mentioned in this article is an [[Template:October 1 selected anniversaries|October 1 selected anniversary]].''
|action1link=Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/People's Republic of China/archive1
<!-- Small templates start here -->
|action1result=promoted
{| align="right"
|action1oldid=2784471
|-
|action2=FARC
|{{WPCD|small=yes}}
|action2date=2006-04-23, 02:55:31
|-
|action2link=Wikipedia:Featured article removal candidates/People's Republic of China
|{{V0.5|class=FA|small=yes|category=Geography}}
|action2result=kept
|}
|action2oldid=49687712
<!--Small templates end here, Archive box begins here -->
|action3=FAR
|action3date=08:29, 15 March 2007
|action3link=Wikipedia:Featured article review/People's Republic of China/archive1
|action3result=removed
|action3oldid=114945583
|action4=GAN
|action4date=2007-03-31
|action4result=listed
|action4oldid=119192127
|action5=GAR
|action5date=21:23, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
|action5result=kept
|action5oldid=245304743
|action6=GAR
|action6date=15 August 2009
|action6link=Talk:People's Republic of China/GA1
|action6result=delisted
|action6oldid=308205953
|action7= GAN
|action7date= 21 October 2012
|action7link= Talk:China/GA2
|action7result= failed
|action7oldid= 518550880
|action8= GAN
|action8date= 16 December 2013
|action8link= Talk:China/GA3
|action8result= listed
|action8oldid= 586320371
|action9= GAR
|action9date= 17 December 2020
|action9link= Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/China/1
|action9result= delisted
|action9oldid=
|maindate=March 7, 2004
|topic=Geography
|currentstatus=FFA
|dyk1date=3 January 2014|dyk1entry=... that '''[[China]]''', with over 34,687 species of animals and vascular plants, is the third-most biodiverse country in the world?
|otd1date=2004-10-01|otd1oldid=6297937
|otd2date=2005-10-01|otd2oldid=24515704
|otd3date=2006-10-01|otd3oldid=78615955
|otd4date=2007-10-01|otd4oldid=161471416
|otd5date=2008-10-01|otd5oldid=242016556
|otd6date=2009-10-01|otd6oldid=317298627
|otd7date=2010-10-01|otd7oldid=388034588
|otd8date=2012-10-01|otd8oldid=515266661
|otd9date=2014-10-01|otd9oldid=627827804
|otd10date=2018-10-01|otd10oldid=862015777
|otd11date=2019-10-01|otd11oldid=919050385
}}
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=B|collapsed=yes|vital=yes|1=
{{WikiProject China|importance=Top}}
{{WikiProject Countries}}
{{WikiProject Asia|importance=Top}}
{{WikiProject Socialism|importance=Top}}
{{WikiProject Politics|importance=Top}}
}}
{{Gs/talk notice|uyghur}}


{{old move
{| class="infobox" width="270px"
| from = People's Republic of China
|-
| destination = China
!align="center"|[[Image:Vista-file-manager.png|50px|Archive]]<br/>[[Wikipedia:How to archive a talk page|Chronological Archives]]
| date = 5 March 2010
----
| result = not moved
|-
| link = Talk:China/Archive 9#Requested move
|[[Talk:China/old|Old]], [[Talk:China/Archive 1|China 1]], [[Talk:China/Archive 2|China 2]], [[Talk:China/Archive 3|China 3]], [[Talk:China/Archive 4|China 4]], [[Talk:China/Archive 5|China 5]], [[Talk:China/Archive 6|China 6]], [[/Archive 1|1]], [[/Archive 2|2]], [[/Archive 3|3]]
|}


| from2 = People's Republic of China
== Reliability of GDP (PPP)? ==
| destination2 = China
Chinese GDP(PPP) goes in U.S.A. after four years. Will you be true? If I continue an anual rate of 10% growth. <small>—The preceding [[Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages|unsigned]] comment was added by [[Special:Contributions/222.146.220.31|222.146.220.31]] ([[User talk:222.146.220.31|talk]]) 10:28, 9 December 2006 (UTC).</small><!-- HagermanBot Auto-Unsigned -->
| date2 = 31 August 2011
| result2 = moved
| link2 = Talk:Chinese civilization/Archive 26#Requested move August 2011
}}
{{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn
|target=Talk:People's Republic of China/Archive index
|mask=Talk:People's Republic of China/Archive <#>
|leading_zeros=0|indexhere=yes
}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config
|archiveheader = {{aan}}
|maxarchivesize = 50K
|counter = 20
|minthreadsleft = 2
|algo = old(30d)
|archive = Talk:China/Archive %(counter)d
}}
{{banner holder|collapsed=yes|
{{external peer review|date=April 30, 2007|org=The Denver Post|comment="simplistic, and in some places, even incoherent.", "mishandled the issue of Korean independence from China", "and the context of the Silk Road in China's international relations." Please [[Wikipedia:External peer review/Denver Post|examine the findings]].}}
{{All time pageviews|93}}
{{Annual report|[[Wikipedia:2008 Top 50 Report|2008]], [[Wikipedia:2010 Top 50 Report|2010]], and [[Wikipedia:2011 Top 50 Report|2011]]}}
{{annual readership}}
}}


== Disputing Chongqing's inclusion as a largest city ==


Like Baqotun003 said, most other countries' largest cities are defined by population, not area. The city proper page points out that listing cities by by surface area can cause controversy, particularly in regards to China, and one of the sources on that page mentions that even though the municipal district of Chongqing has a total population of more than 30 million inhabitants, fewer than 6 million actually live in Chongqing city proper. Depending on which classification is used, Chongqing is sometimes listed as the world's largest city and, in other cases, does not even appear in the top rung of urban population rankings. Thus, to avoid controversy, I think Beijing should be listed as the sole largest city of China. [[User:Vesperius|Vesperius]] ([[User talk:Vesperius|talk]]) 03:02, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
== More Pictures ==


Would it be possible for pictures of Tiananmen or the Forbidden City be added to this article. These would certainly add to the overall quality of the article. <small>—The preceding [[Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages|unsigned]] comment was added by [[Special:Contributions/68.79.25.197|68.79.25.197]] ([[User talk:68.79.25.197|talk]]) 04:19, 7 December 2006 (UTC).</small><!-- HagermanBot Auto-Unsigned -->
:According to what ranking is Beijing the largest city? [[Special:Contributions/172.56.165.223|172.56.165.223]] ([[User talk:172.56.165.223|talk]]) 19:36, 4 November 2024 (UTC)


== Extended Confirmed Protected edit request November 21 2024 ==
== Suggestion: Make [[China (disambiguation)]] page as the main page for "China" ==


Move to "Peoples Republic of China",to distinguish from the [[Taiwan|Republic of China]],I am also suggesting to move the Taiwan page to the Republic of China it is a civil war with 2 governments claiming different long form titles [https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/china-taiwan-relations-tension-us-policy-biden#~For20%the20%PRC,20%as20%Chinese20%President20%Xi20%Jinping20%has20%stated,20%the20%199220%Consensus20%reflects20%an20%agreement20%that20%%E2%80%9Cthe20%two20%sides20%of20%the20%strait20%belong20%to20%one20%China20%and20%would20%work20%together20%to20%seek20%national20%reunification.20%%E2%80%9D20%For20%the20%KMT,20%it20%means20%%E2%80%9Cone20%China,20%different20%interpretations,%E2%80%9D20%with20%the20%ROC20%standing20%as20%the20%%E2%80%9Cone20%China.%E2%80%9D]
''The vote has been moved to [[Talk:China#Vote:_Should_we_direct_all_users_who_typed_.22China.22_in_the_Search_box_to_China_.28disambiguation.29_page.2C_instead_of_the_Chinese_civilization_as_it_stands_right_now.3F|'''Talk:China page Here''']] because the discussion is not related to the People's Republic of China'' - [[User:Heilme|Heilme]] 00:53, 7 June 2006 (UTC)


== [[User:141.153.114.88|141.153.114.88]] edits ==


[[User:UnsungHistory|<span style="color: Purple">UnsungHistory</span>]] ([[User talk:UnsungHistory|<span style="color: Purple">Questions?</span>]]) ([[Special:Contributions/UnsungHistory|<span style="color: red">Did I mess up?</span>]]) 19:40, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
[[User:141.153.114.88|141.153.114.88]] keeps repeatedly [http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=People%27s_Republic_of_China&diff=59458948&oldid=59415174 adding] [[Tiananmen Square protests of 1989]] to the "See also" section even though the link is already clearly mentioned in the article. I suspect he is also using his sockpuppet [[User:Chairman LMAO]], to [http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=People%27s_Republic_of_China&diff=59519300&oldid=59518834 evade] the 3RR. [[User:72.65.75.237]] is believed to be the same user editing under a dynamic IP address [http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=People%27s_Republic_of_China&diff=59272298&oldid=59249233]. Are [[User:141.153.114.88|141.153.114.88]]'s appropriate? --[[User:RevolverOcelotX|RevolverOcelotX]]


:I think you might want to look at the 2011 move discussion where this was settled. [[User:Simonm223|Simonm223]] ([[User talk:Simonm223|talk]]) 19:42, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
:"Chairman LMAO" is not me. Other "see also" links appear elsewhere in the article. This is a selective, POV-pushing deletion. [[User:141.153.114.88|141.153.114.88]] 23:49, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
::not sure what you are talking about....what was the exact name of the discussion? <span style="color: Purple">[[User:UnsungHistory|UnsungHistory]] ([[User talk:UnsungHistory|Wrong]] [[Special:Contributions/UnsungHistory|Edit]]!)</span> 00:01, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
:::It is listed at the top of the page. Also, there is an FAQ plainly at the top of the page explaining our [[WP:NC|article title policy]] and how it applies here. <span style="border-radius:2px;padding:3px;background:#1E816F">[[User:Remsense|<span style="color:#fff">'''Remsense'''</span>]]<span style="color:#fff">&nbsp;‥&nbsp;</span>[[User talk:Remsense|<span lang="zh" style="color:#fff">'''论'''</span>]]</span> 01:23, 22 November 2024 (UTC)


== Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 28 November 2024 ==
::Do you have any proof that "Chairman LMAO" is not you? {{user|Chairman LMAO}} have been helping you revert war in this article and the [[Manchukuo]] article. The [[Tiananmen Square protests of 1989]] is clearly inappropriate in the "See also" section. The other "see also" links are broad categories which is clearly China-related. The protests links are already mentioned and it is POV-pushing to redundantly add them multiple times. [[User:RevolverOcelotX|RevolverOcelotX]]


{{edit extended-protected|China|answered=yes}}
:::I can not provide proof that a user is not me as it is impossible to prove a negative; it is also impossible to disprove your positive assertion as you did not provide any evidence for it.


"In 2010, the annual education expenditure per secondary school student in Beijing totalled ¥20,023, while in Guizhou, one of the poorest provinces, only totalled ¥3,204."
:::As for the dispute, you previously asserted as a reason for its removal that it is mentioned in the article already. This is not a sufficient reason, as other "see also" links appear elsewhere in it as well. The link details an event and period which is notable, important, and commonly cited and discussed in the context of the PRC and its recent history. Deletion of it is selective and betrays a sense of removing critical information. [[User:141.153.114.88|141.153.114.88]] 00:26, 20 June 2006 (UTC)


Under demographics, education
::::Then why are you using constantly changing IP address to [http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=People%27s_Republic_of_China&diff=59385621&oldid=59381276 evade] the 3RR? [[User:141.153.114.88|141.153.114.88]], if you are editing in good faith, why don't you stick to ''one'' username or ''one'' IP address. Using constantly changing IP addresses counterproductive to consensus and allows you to escape accountability.
::::The protest link is way too specific to be in the "See also" section and has little to do with the PRC broadly. Look at the other links in the section. Except for the China link, the other links do not clearly appear in the article at all. The protest link is already clearly in the article and re-adding redundant link is POV-pushing. Broadly speaking, the protests have little to do with the PRC as a whole, its ''one'' single incident in history, if we allow that, it will allow other people to add many other single incidents into the section. [[User:RevolverOcelotX|RevolverOcelotX]]


Very simple request, please add the word "it"
:::::The above is a lie put forward repeatedly by a user who refuses to acknowledge the meaning of dynamic IPs. [[User:141.153.114.88|141.153.114.88]] 00:48, 20 June 2006 (UTC)


"[in Guizhou] '''it''' only totalled ¥3,204"
::::::I agree with [[User:141.153.114.88|141.153.114.88]]'s comment above, although I'd rather attribute it to simply not understanding what a [[dynamic IP]] is. -[[User:Caudax|Caudax]] 11:59, 3 January 2007 (UTC)


if not this then remove the word "in" such that it says
Could not the Boston Tea Party be considered ''one'' single incident in history? Is it not true that one brief incident can have a profound effect on history? I believe that such an incident is clearly China-related, and would argue that it is a broad issue, for such protests will tend to influence and instigate future protests(or in some cases the lack of future protests).--[[User:Tmchk|Tmchk]] 01:50, 20 June 2006 (UTC)


"[Guizhou] only totalled 3,204"
:Yes, but the protest link is already clearly mentioned in the article. It is redundant and POV-pushing to add it in another section. [[Wikipedia:Manual of Style]] clearly states that links should only be linked ''once''. You could also argue that the protest are not broad as the other links in the "See also" section.


Thanks! [[Special:Contributions/2A02:C7E:2F68:AC00:ADA3:23A6:8AB6:4E4|2A02:C7E:2F68:AC00:ADA3:23A6:8AB6:4E4]] ([[User talk:2A02:C7E:2F68:AC00:ADA3:23A6:8AB6:4E4|talk]]) 01:49, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
:Another anonymous IP address, {{user|83.149.72.211}} has just reverted once again and [http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=People%27s_Republic_of_China&diff=59544283&oldid=59539329 re-added] the redundant protest link into the article again. Are [[User:83.149.72.211|83.149.72.211]]'s edits appropriate? [[User:RevolverOcelotX|RevolverOcelotX]]
:Done... - [[User:Adolphus79|Adolphus79]] ([[User talk:Adolphus79|talk]]) 02:27, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
::Thank you and have a nice day [[Special:Contributions/2A02:C7E:2F68:AC00:ADA3:23A6:8AB6:4E4|2A02:C7E:2F68:AC00:ADA3:23A6:8AB6:4E4]] ([[User talk:2A02:C7E:2F68:AC00:ADA3:23A6:8AB6:4E4|talk]]) 02:32, 28 November 2024 (UTC)


== Population ==
== [[User:Joinalex]]/[[User:203.118.157.30]] ==
{{atop}}


China in the mid year of 2024 is recorded to have 1,472 billion people, China’s population is still going up, China is still the most populous country, see (Live) World population clock:
This user continues to add the same POV diatribe involving Chinese governmental agents to the Human Rights section of the article. Access article history to see what I'm talking about.
https://countrymeters.info/en/China


I'm trying to keep the user at bay. I've left notes on both user talk pages in an attempt to resolve this, and will proceed through [[WP:DR]] if necessary. However, as far as this article goes, I'm up against the 3RR and not currently sure if this falls under one of the exceptions.


–[[User:ArmadniGeneral|ArmadniGeneral]] ([[User talk:ArmadniGeneral|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/ArmadniGeneral|contribs]]) 11:50, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
[[User:Li Xiyun|Li Xiyun]] ([[User talk:Li Xiyun|talk]]) 10:06, 28 November 2024 (UTC) [[Special:Contributions/69.158.246.186|69.158.246.186]] ([[User talk:69.158.246.186|talk]]) 11:17, 28 November 2024 (UTC)


:Those websites do not track "live" figures, they only tick at a steady rates derived from data that has already been collected.
*[[User:Joinalex]] left this message at my talk page:
:Also, this page is not a discussion forum. Please limit discussion to specific suggestions for how to improve the article [[China]]. <span style="border-radius:2px;padding:3px;background:#1E816F">[[User:Remsense|<span style="color:#fff">'''Remsense'''</span>]]<span style="color:#fff">&nbsp;‥&nbsp;</span>[[User talk:Remsense|<span lang="zh" style="color:#fff">'''论'''</span>]]</span> 11:31, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
::I would view the ideals that you have constantly ovwritten mine with as being equally, if not more POV. That you don't realise this, I'd conjecture it to be blunt evidence of a lack of research on your part - something which is just a lil unbecoming of encyclopedic entries. If you wish to ''discuss'' the issue of what is appropriate to put in this section, given the proven horrific human rights abuses in China, I am willing to do so. Until then I am more than willing to continue to attempt to gather full academic references to prove this 'point of view', and to fight to keep it within the realm of reason as opposed to a vehicle of Chinese state propoganda (can countries be guilty of points of view, or are they exempt from bias?). Or at least I would be, but I got an exam tomorrow and have 2 sleep *yawn* goodnight General/Comrade chairman.
::It does track China's live population database. Please correct China's population is 1,472 billion and is the most populous. [[User:Li Xiyun|Li Xiyun]] ([[User talk:Li Xiyun|talk]]) 12:32, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

:::It does not. It does what I said above, like every other population tracker website on the Internet. <span style="border-radius:2px;padding:3px;background:#1E816F">[[User:Remsense|<span style="color:#fff">'''Remsense'''</span>]]<span style="color:#fff">&nbsp;‥&nbsp;</span>[[User talk:Remsense|<span lang="zh" style="color:#fff">'''论'''</span>]]</span> 13:03, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
:Let us please not pretend that the direct appeal for the user to refresh the page "over the next 30 seconds," so he/she can see how the Chinese government has removed [[User:Joinalex|Joinalex]]'s paragraph from Wikipedia, is neither POV nor unencyclopedic. That particular element of your edit is totally over the line.
{{abot}}

:But even if we remove that part entirely, what we have left is nothing more than you totally eliminating a legitimate paragraph about recent developments and the PRC allowance of localized demonstrations. At that point, we have your one sentence (with one cited source about executions), leading right into another, far more detailed paragraph. As a showing of good faith and construction, I've [http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=People%27s_Republic_of_China&diff=60159857&oldid=60156109 added] the execution factoid into the article, with the right percentage and a more comprehensive reference.

:I've done all I can now to help include your contributions. However, again, the specified paragraph should not be removed, and the personal appeal is unencyclopedic.

:–[[User:ArmadniGeneral|ArmadniGeneral]] ([[User talk:ArmadniGeneral|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/ArmadniGeneral|contribs]]) 12:29, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

In all honesty I the request to refresh the page is based on anecdotal beliefs I held, which were the basis for the way I dealt with editing the page, which I felt would not remain in place for more than 30 seconds. That may have been a misguided belief, and I apologise. Nonetheless I am not certain that the attention paid to this page and in particular, this topic is completely free of partisanship, however I have to concede that it would be utterly unencycolpedic and unacademic to have the page left in the state in which I edited it (please remember that I never believed it would remain in this state). I would like, however to deal now with what the page should represent.


It does not reflect reality at all to simply gloss over facticity regarding human rights abuses with purpoted developments. The scope of human rights abuses in China is gargantuan, and the fact that this is denied by the authorities there does not materially change the facts. The PRC government's viewpoint certainly does, again in an encyclopedic sense, deserve to be part of the page, as their stated opinions are a fact in that they exist. However, to summarise - cultural genocide (seriously, I don't just use the term to be melodramatic) has been practiced upon regions that have come into PRC control in recent years. Dissidents are repressed brutally, as are demonstarations by dissidentss, or, as is now happening schoolchildren. There are few limitations to the methods that are used in this repression of political, social, economic or religious freedoms, this is well documented. A dissident who had been jailed for a number of years for reporting on a widening of a river to a relative in the US was released after pressure from Amnesty international a few weeks ago. As he was walking down the street he ws attacked by an 'unknown assailant' who severed his spinal column expertly, leaving him unable to do more than move his eyelids. The shock value of this is not sufficient to justify condemning the PRC government's human right srecord, however thsi kind of behaviour has been reported again and again and ''again'', by the media and by human rights groups, it is not part of popular knowledge, nor is it something many people care about. However it is easily verifiable fact. I would hope that this encyclipoedia cannot be blinded by the simple virtue of repeating a lie often and loudly, and will attempt to steer it towards an accurate representation of fact, at all stages discussing this with the people who have an (independant) interest in this matter.

All the best.
Alex.

:I understand your concerns, and do not, by any means, feel that you are outright wrong. If you feel that changes to the article are required, you are always welcome to make them in a strictly encyclopedic way. When making changes, however, please note that the two-paragraph Human Rights section is not intended to cover all available information on the subject. Due to the length of the article, it has been split into multiple subpages. As such, the article you will likely take interest in is located here: [[Human rights in the People's Republic of China]]. (Please note that it is currently protected until an edit dispute is resolved. Discussion is present on talk page.)

:So once again, if you would like to edit either article's content, you are welcome to. Please simply ensure that the final product is fact-neutral (well-cited) and encyclopedic.

:–[[User:ArmadniGeneral|ArmadniGeneral]] ([[User talk:ArmadniGeneral|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/ArmadniGeneral|contribs]]) 20:05, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

== Ethnic groups in China ==

I'd like to ask those who might be interested in the subject of ethnic groups in China to weigh in on the [[Talk:Nationalities_of_China#Let.27s_try_this_again_-_Proposed_Move_and_Split.|curr

==China==

I plan to rename this page to China. Any objections? +-+ [[User:Latouu|Latouu]] 01:37, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
:I think htere will be lots! There is already a [[China]] article. --[[User_Talk:SiobhanHansa|Siobhan Hansa]] 01:40, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
:: Right, the other document currently talks about the Chinese civilization and should be removed to the appropriate page. I think some data on this page can be moved to the [[China]] page. +-+ [[User:Latouu|Latouu]] 04:47, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
:::Well, first, you'll find that you can't do that now. Because there's already an article called [[China]], you won't be able to make the page move. Secondly, the notion that the People's Republic of China is China is still contentious, whatever some may say. There are countries that still recognize the ROC as the legitimate government of China. Perhaps more importantly, having this article, which excludes Taiwan, as [[China]] implies that Taiwan is not part of China, which is an even more contentious point. [[User:Heimstern|Heimstern Läufer]] 14:51, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

::::There are some on the other page, we have been discussing it there. However they appear to be mostly political, which means they can not really be taken into account. Really all we are doing here is alingning this page with the naming conventions. I know there is going to be oposition to it but I think with any luck and some severe explaination of the reasons for moving this page to China we should get some form of agreement. --[[User:Meanie|Meanie]] 19:54, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

== Pronunciation of the local name of China ==
Can we get it in IPA?[[User:Cameron Nedland|Cameron Nedland]] 13:20, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

== Chinese publish regulation ==

I　just went to the Chinese Wikipedia for this page, I noticed the page was locked and there was a notice on the top, saying something like "According to Chapter 2 Article 20 of PRC's [http://zh.wikisource.org/wiki/出版管理条例 Publishing Administration Regulation], all edits from mainland China for this article, must first be approved by the relevant department of government." The regulation basically says anything related to "national security and social order" must get approved. Do you guys think we should post that same notice here? Of course not fully locking the page. --[[User:Voidvector|Voidvector]] 13:35, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
:Isn't WP blocked entirely? -- '''[[User talk:Miborovsky|Миборо]][[User:Miborovsky/B|<font color="#FF0000">в</font>]][[User talk:Miborovsky|ский]]''' 20:10, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
:: No, I was just in China weeks ago. I was able to access English Wikipedia most of the time. It's on and off, not continuous. --[[User:Voidvector|Voidvector]] 20:16, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

::: You need permision to ''publish'' any part of the article, not to edit. The protection on the zh:wiki page is because of a perennial content dispute. --[[User:Sumple|Sumple]] ([[User_Talk:Sumple|Talk]]) 00:13, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
::::注意：根据中華人民共和國《出版管理条例》第2章第20条的规定:
欲在中國大陸出版與此條目相關選題，必須获得有關部門許可。
参看Wikipedia:内容声明。
::::So yes, you need to get approval from "relevant authorities" to publish anything on "this topic". -- '''[[User talk:Miborovsky|Миборо]][[User:Miborovsky/B|<font color="#FF0000">в</font>]][[User talk:Miborovsky|ский]]''' 01:57, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

==Pre-article indent way too long==
We'll have to cut off a substantial part of it. Suggestions? -- '''[[User talk:Miborovsky|Миборо]][[User:Miborovsky/B|<font color="#FF0000">в</font>]][[User talk:Miborovsky|ский]]''' 01:57, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
:''This article is about the politics, government, and economy of the People's Republic of China People's Republic of China (PRC) that currently administers [[mainland China]], [[Hong Kong]] and [[Macau]]. It should also not be confused with the [[Republic of China|Republic of China (ROC)]]. For the people, history, culture, civilization, and geography of China, see [[China]].{{unsigned|SiobhanHansa}}
::3 lines, still a bit too long for my taste. How about
:''This article is about the state known as the People's Republic of China, which should not be confused with the Republic of China. For the non-state concept of China as a civilization, see [[China]].'' -- '''[[User talk:Miborovsky|Миборо]][[User:Miborovsky/B|<font color="#FF0000">в</font>]][[User talk:Miborovsky|ский]]''' 05:34, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

I changed the following monstrosity:
:<div class="dablink">''This article is about the politics, government, and economy of the {{flagicon|People's Republic of China}} People's Republic of China (PRC) that currently administers Mainland China. The term "[[mainland China]]" is sometimes used to denote the area under PRC rule, but usually excludes the two [[Special Administrative Region (China)|Special Administrative Region]]s, {{HKG}} and {{MAC}}. It should also not be confused with the {{flagicon|Taiwan}} [[Republic of China|Republic of China (ROC)]] that currently administers the islands of [[Taiwan]], [[Matsu]] and [[Kinmen]]. For the people, history, culture, civilization, and geography of China, see [[China]].''</div>
to the following:
{{distinguish2|the [[Republic of China]]. For a general overview of the cultural and geographic entity, see [[China]].}}

First, it is not necessary to include flags in the disambiguation. They may be pretty, but the name is all that is needed to get the job done. Second, the first sentence "This article is about the politics, government, and economy of the {{flagicon|People's Republic of China}} People's Republic of China (PRC) that currently administers Mainland China." is pointless. This article is on the People's Republic of China PERIOD. It is not on some segment of the PRC, so the list will go on forever. The sentence is pointless and says nothing. Third, the second sentence, "The term "[[mainland China]]" is sometimes used to denote the area under PRC rule, but usually excludes the two [[Special Administrative Region (China)|Special Administrative Region]]s, {{HKG}} and {{MAC}}." is irrelevant. This article is not titled "mainland China" nor can it be confused with such a name, so there is no need to define "mainland China" here. You do not put up a disambiguation link to something specific under the title of something more general. That belongs in the article text. Fourth, any confusion with the name "Republic of China" extends only to the similarity of names. It is not necessary to state that the ROC administers Kinmen and Matsu. Fifth, the "people, history, culture, civilization, and geography of China" is also covered in this article. Again, people do not go to a specific title, "People's Republic of China" in search of something general while the converse is very reasonable and true.

If you haven't already, please acquaint yourselves with the [[Wikipedia:Disambiguation]] conventions and guidelines. Dab links always appear before the article text (infobox included) as they are not part of the article itself and such messages should always contain the minimum of information to redirect users to their desired location. The disambiguation notice is not supposed to summarize the lead section of every article linked within it. Please don't write an entire article there; stick with the basics.--[[User:Jiang|Jiang]] 03:37, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

:I don't know what you were talking about. Anyway! keep this notice is quite necessary. PRC rules only Mainland China. On the other words, this topic is talking about Mainland China istself. According to the Basic Laws of Hong Kong and Macao, these SARs admin. themselves and should not be mixed with the topic of PRC. leungli (Yee leung) 03:53, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

If you don't know what I am talking about, then perhaps you should read what is available at [[Wikipedia:Disambiguation]] and flip through some pages linking to [[Template:dablink]] to see how it is usually done. Having a whole chunk of text summarizing remotely related concepts is not a disambiguation. --[[User:Jiang|Jiang]] 03:58, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

:OK. [[User:75.73.13.46|75.73.13.46]] 09:33, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

==Feeling territorial==
I don't see any mention of the territory disputed with Russia (or SU). Can somebody add? [[User:Trekphiler|Trekphiler]] 02:18, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
:They're already mentioned under the "territorial disputes" section. -- [[User:Ran|ran]] ([[User talk:Ran|talk]]) 02:40, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

== I would like to Congratulate the editors of the PRC article! ==

The [[People's Republic of China]] article is very well written, concise yet informative. Unfortunately, the [[China]] article is currently a huge mess (half the China article is about names like "Seres" and debate between "Middle Kingdom" and "Central Kingdom"). I believe most uninitated readers will never realize that there is a difference between the PRC article and the China article. I see many articles that are specifically talking about the PRC government being instead linked to the [[China]] article. This is a problem that I think needs to be better addressed. [[User:Mamin27|Mamin27]] 03:21, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

:Thank you for your compliments. I have just moved the Names section out of [[China]]. As for the links in other articles, we would be very grateful if you would fix them. --[[User:Ideogram|Ideogram]] 07:32, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

==Hmm==

I just ran into this article, and cannot believe that it is FA. Seriously folks, this article wouldn't even pass GA at its current state. There are whole sections without references, the structure of the article is not correct etc. Regular contributors of this article should take a look at [[Canada]] for example. I am seriously considering asking for a review, there are articles with as many references that barely make the GA. I know that the FA was passed in 2004, and that the standards have risen since then, but some keep-up work must have been done to improve it constantly. Again: a)it needs to be restructured b)must be referenced much much more. If not there should be FA re-review. [[User:Baristarim|Baristarim]] 06:30, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

:So anybody out there? :) I hope that this article can be cleaned up soon, otherwise this article cannot stay as FA... [[User:Baristarim|Baristarim]] 09:04, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

:* Um, hello? This article is one of the most well-cited country article in all of Wikipedia with about 90 references. Nearly every paragraph is referenced, some paragraphs are referenced for every sentence. The [[Canada]] article (your example) has 1/3 LESS references than the PRC article. Also, the PRC article has been FA reviewed as recently as '''Summer 2006''' (not 2004). Your proposal to remove FA status for this article will be denied by other editors just so you know. This article is not edit protected (unlike the Canada article), so new edits are made all the time, and at any particular point there might be some edits without proper sourcing, but this does not merit an FA review every 6 months, as references are actually quickly added and updated by other editors (maybe not quick enough for you, but certainly within weeks). Hyperbolic charges that this article doesn't even merit GA make you uncreditable as a critic. Well-referenced GA articles that barely make GA usually have highly controversial and narrow topics, the PRC is a country article, not a specific controversial topic. --[[User:Mamin27|Mamin27]] 09:02, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
::The structure can be still improved. I am sorry, but I could only count four references in the history section, only three in the foreign relations section, '''zero''' in the population policy section, and only one in the culture section. There shouldn't be many subsections to begin with, preferably public health and transport sections combined, and religion and education sections merged to demographics + sports directly combined to culture. Take a look at [[Turkey]] for example. The difference is, that article and Canada have a seperate references section. The notes cited are also not in the correct format and present citation problems, (see [[WP:CITE]]). That can be corrected I suppose, however I can't say the same for references. The whole article can use more solid citations all around. Preferably CIA Factbook shouldn't be used either. There shouldn't be see alsos either (see [[WP:GTL]] and *{{tl|See also}}). I still stand behind what I said, however if the regular contributors are willing to improve the article, there might not be a need for a listing in FAR. Nobody is asking for the article to be delisted, however it should conform to FA standards. If it does, then it can stay. That's all. Cheers! [[User:Baristarim|Baristarim]] 09:52, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
::And please watch for civility, "maybe not quick enough for you" or other personal comments are not appropriate. I have experience with GA and FA, so pls don't do ad hominims by saying "make you uncredible as a critic". Thanks. [[User:Baristarim|Baristarim]] 09:56, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

::: It doesn't matter whether you have experience or not regarding GA and FA articles, I was not commenting on your experience, I was calling out your hyperbolic yet vague language used in your first comments. The "maybe not quick enough for you" statement was addressing your second paragraph "So anybody out there?" that you wrote '''one day''' after your first paragraph. Yes, we are out there, but it's holiday season, a lot of the PRC articles editors are unavailable and busy. Thank you now for clarifying and delineating what needs to be worked on for this article, which is what you should have written in your earlier comments, instead of first threatening to delist this article from FA status. I apologize if I hurt your sensitivities, but your earlier comments weren't exactly restrained or to the point either. --[[User:Mamin27|Mamin27]] 10:36, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

:::: Ok, no worries. I am sorry to if I hadn't explained myself earlier, I apologize. I am also sorry about my poor attempt at humor with my second post :) I was not trying to be sarcastic. Don't get me wrong, I don't want to see this article delisted or anything, in any case FA delistings are extreme cases, and generally don't happen. Anyways, maybe I am getting to stressed since I haven't been sleeping too much lately. No rush for the cleanup, as you said, it is the holidays! [[User:Baristarim|Baristarim]] 12:03, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

== Traditional Chinese or no? ==

An editor has recently removed the traditional Chinese from the infobox. I reverted this, and then the editor reverted with this invisicomment: [http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=People%27s_Republic_of_China&curid=5405&diff=96777202&oldid=96776688]. Historically, I believe we have preferred to use both versions, even when referring to the PRC, which doesn't use traditional. Could someone confirm if I am right? I don't want any revert wars, so I'd rather have some discussion. [[User:Heimstern|Heimstern Läufer]] 18:45, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

:Technically not true. Both Hong Kong and Macau are undisputedly part of the PRC, and both places use Traditional. [[User:HongQiGong|Hong Qi Gong]] <small>([[User talk:HongQiGong|Talk]] - [[Special:Contributions/HongQiGong|Contribs]])</small> 19:34, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
::Good point. It must stay, then. [[User:Heimstern|Heimstern Läufer]] 21:05, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

== International Rankings ==

User 202.129.0.182 (of Bangkok, Thailand) has continuously tried to add a list of POV "international rankings" for this article. Not only is the list extremely POV, it is also against the country template. This list should at best be put in a separate article (relating to Human Rights or Economy of China) and need to be greatly expanded to cover POV issues. I and other editors will continue to remove such POV and unnecessary lists from the main PRC article. --[[User:Mamin27|Mamin27]] 09:09, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

{| class="wikitable"
|-
! Organisation
! Survey
! Ranking
|-
| [[Heritage Foundation]]/''[[The Wall Street Journal]]''
| [[Index_of_Economic_Freedom#Current ratings|Index of Economic Freedom]]
| 111 out of 157
|-
| ''[[The Economist]]''
| [http://www.economist.com/theworldin/international/displayStory.cfm?story_id=3372495&d=2005 Worldwide quality-of-life index, 2005]
| 60 out of 111
|-
| [[Reporters Without Borders]]
| [[Reporters Without Borders#Worldwide press freedom index|Worldwide press freedom index]]
| 163 out of 167
|-
| [[Transparency International]]
| [[Corruption Perceptions Index]]
| 70 out of 163
|-
| [[United Nations Development Programme]]
| [[List of countries by Human Development Index|Human Development Index]]
| 81 out of 177
|}

I believe that the inclusion of International Rankings is consistent with Wikipedia policy:
*[[Wikipedia:Neutral point of view]]
*[[Wikipedia:Verifiability]]
*[[Wikipedia:NPOV tutorial]]
*[[Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Examples]]


Country pages with International Rankings sections (not created by me) include: [[Chile#International_rankings|Chile]], [[Denmark#International_rankings|Denmark]], [[Finland#International_rankings|Finland]], [[Singapore#International_rankings|Singapore]],
[[Estonia#International_rankings|Estonia]], [[New_Zealand#International_rankings|New Zealand]]

[[User:Heroeswithmetaphors|Heroeswithmetaphors]] 07:05, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

* Sorry, no cigar. PRC is a [[Wikipedia:Featured articles|Featured Article]] (FA), none of the country articles you listed above is an FA. PRC is also too large and controversial to have an adequate and NPOV list of international rankings in a summary article. Look at that list of countries you have again. The largest country in your list is Chile with 15 million people, the size of a Chinese city. If you want that rankings table in Wikipedia, make a separate article called [[International rankings of China]]. Your table has no place on the PRC main article. If you revert one more time, I will report you for breaking the 3-revert rule (final warning) and also open a vote to settle this issue. --[[User:Mamin27|Mamin27]] 21:38, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

== Chinse military spending ==

... is disputed, but the higher end figure is presented as a fact here. <small>—The preceding [[Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages|unsigned]] comment was added by [[Special:Contributions/24.69.245.6|24.69.245.6]] ([[User talk:24.69.245.6|talk]]) 01:13, 29 December 2006 (UTC).</small><!-- HagermanBot Auto-Unsigned -->

== translation error ==
dragon boat race should be translated to "龙舟"，not “龙小船”. I have changed it. [[Anthony X Li]] Dec 30, 2006

Latest revision as of 18:29, 13 December 2024

Former featured articleChina 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.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on March 7, 2004.
Did You KnowOn this day... Article milestones
DateProcessResult
March 15, 2004Featured article candidatePromoted
April 23, 2006Featured article reviewKept
March 15, 2007Featured article reviewDemoted
March 31, 2007Good article nomineeListed
October 14, 2008Good article reassessmentKept
August 15, 2009Good article reassessmentDelisted
October 21, 2012Good article nomineeNot listed
December 16, 2013Good article nomineeListed
December 17, 2020Good article reassessmentDelisted
Did You Know A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on January 3, 2014.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that China, with over 34,687 species of animals and vascular plants, is the third-most biodiverse country in the world?
On this day... Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on October 1, 2004, October 1, 2005, October 1, 2006, October 1, 2007, October 1, 2008, October 1, 2009, October 1, 2010, October 1, 2012, October 1, 2014, October 1, 2018, and October 1, 2019.
Current status: Former featured article

Disputing Chongqing's inclusion as a largest city

[edit]

Like Baqotun003 said, most other countries' largest cities are defined by population, not area. The city proper page points out that listing cities by by surface area can cause controversy, particularly in regards to China, and one of the sources on that page mentions that even though the municipal district of Chongqing has a total population of more than 30 million inhabitants, fewer than 6 million actually live in Chongqing city proper. Depending on which classification is used, Chongqing is sometimes listed as the world's largest city and, in other cases, does not even appear in the top rung of urban population rankings. Thus, to avoid controversy, I think Beijing should be listed as the sole largest city of China. Vesperius (talk) 03:02, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

According to what ranking is Beijing the largest city? 172.56.165.223 (talk) 19:36, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Extended Confirmed Protected edit request November 21 2024

[edit]

Move to "Peoples Republic of China",to distinguish from the Republic of China,I am also suggesting to move the Taiwan page to the Republic of China it is a civil war with 2 governments claiming different long form titles [1]


UnsungHistory (Questions?) (Did I mess up?) 19:40, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think you might want to look at the 2011 move discussion where this was settled. Simonm223 (talk) 19:42, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
not sure what you are talking about....what was the exact name of the discussion? UnsungHistory (Wrong Edit!) 00:01, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It is listed at the top of the page. Also, there is an FAQ plainly at the top of the page explaining our article title policy and how it applies here. Remsense ‥ 论 01:23, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 28 November 2024

[edit]

"In 2010, the annual education expenditure per secondary school student in Beijing totalled ¥20,023, while in Guizhou, one of the poorest provinces, only totalled ¥3,204."

Under demographics, education

Very simple request, please add the word "it"

"[in Guizhou] it only totalled ¥3,204"

if not this then remove the word "in" such that it says

"[Guizhou] only totalled 3,204"

Thanks! 2A02:C7E:2F68:AC00:ADA3:23A6:8AB6:4E4 (talk) 01:49, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done... - Adolphus79 (talk) 02:27, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you and have a nice day 2A02:C7E:2F68:AC00:ADA3:23A6:8AB6:4E4 (talk) 02:32, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Population

[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

China in the mid year of 2024 is recorded to have 1,472 billion people, China’s population is still going up, China is still the most populous country, see (Live) World population clock: https://countrymeters.info/en/China


Li Xiyun (talk) 10:06, 28 November 2024 (UTC) 69.158.246.186 (talk) 11:17, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Those websites do not track "live" figures, they only tick at a steady rates derived from data that has already been collected.
Also, this page is not a discussion forum. Please limit discussion to specific suggestions for how to improve the article China. Remsense ‥ 论 11:31, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It does track China's live population database. Please correct China's population is 1,472 billion and is the most populous. Li Xiyun (talk) 12:32, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It does not. It does what I said above, like every other population tracker website on the Internet. Remsense ‥ 论 13:03, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:China&oldid=1262921661"