Wikipedia talk:WikiProject China/Archive/2007
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Confucius is now the core topics COTF
Hi, Confucius has been selected for the Core Topics Collaboration. If you can help bring this up to WP:GA standard, we'd appreciate it. Thanks, Walkerma 06:04, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
Barnstar of national Merit: PRC
Hi, Didn't see any BoNM PRC. Didn't know about the awards on this page 'til just now; have already made a barnstar template and created & uploaded three image options.
I'll leave it to the folks in this project to choose an image option. The current option is created from the PRC flag...
Cheers, --Ling.Nut 20:02, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
- I would call it the PRC Barnstar of National Merit, to avoid POVness. It also avoids using PRC imagery for pre-PRC-era-related articles. --Nlu (talk) 20:52, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
-
- We have done all we could to avoid showing preference for any particular nation/state in this project and I think we need not compromise for this barnstar. Feel free to award this however, but I don't think it should be "endorsed" in any manner by this project. -- 我♥中國 00:46, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
-
- OK, I'll make it go bye-bye. :-) --Ling.Nut 01:08, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- Thank you for your understanding. :) -- 我♥中國 21:01, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
-
Empress Dowager Cixi
Would like a little help resolving an issue on the naming standards for "Empress Dowager". One particular editor insists that the term "Dowager Empress" is just as valid as "Empress Dowager", and regularly changes any reference to the name of Empress Dowager Cixi to "Dowager Empress Cixi". It would be good to get some feedback on whether we should: a) leave the references as "Empress Dowager" as seems to be the standard both in English literature and in Wikipedia, b) decide to change to "Dowager Empress" and change all the relevant Wikipedia articles and names, or c) allow this one article on "Cixi" to have a mix of different terms, while other related articles continue to use "Empress Dowager". Background info on the issue can be found on the Cixi talk page at Talk:Empress_Dowager_Cixi. Ka-ru 14:12, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
- I don't think "Dowager Empress" would be more correct at all. The title, in Chinese, is Huang Taihou (皇太后), with no real correspondence to the word "dowager" in English, anyway. A more literal translation would be "Superior Empress." I'd say that Empress Dowager is the more appropriate term in any case, as if word order is important at all, "Huang" ("imperial") came first in the title. --Nlu (talk) 22:22, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
-
- But in the case of Taishang Huang Huang comes last... what would that mean? -- 我♥中國 21:03, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
- The vast majority of English books that mention Cixi, mention her as the 'Empress Dowager,' not the 'Dowager Empress.' Therefore I am in favor of having all references to her be 'Empress Dowager.'Zeus1234 17:38, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
-
-
Zh-min-nan
What language is it written in? [1]
It's labelled "zh" but it sure ain't Chinese! Is anyone here involved with that language version? What kind of transliteration is it using, and why is it using transliterations and not Chinese? --Sumple (Talk) 21:56, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
- It's written in Minnanhua, using Pe̍h-ōe-jī (白話字) romanisation, which has been in use on Taiwan since the 1870s (mostly by Christians, apparently, prior to the 1990s). It uses a transliteration, I imagine, because that is the way its founding editors felt most comfortable writing it.—Nat Krause(Talk!·What have I done?)
-
- Looks like Vietnamese. I would assume it's pretty much the same story as latinized Vietnamese. -- 我♥中國 02:47, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
A glance in their village pump (or whatever) gives me this:
- The issues, as you probably suspect, are complex and complicated by contemporary politics. But I'll boil it down to this: editing articles collaboratively is very difficult for lack of a standard in writing Ban-lam-gu using Chinese characters. Since no one believes this will change any time soon and some people do want an encyclopedia in the language, we naturally turn to the Latin tradition of writing Ban-lam-gu. This has the advantage of standardization, a body of literature going back 150 years, new learners in the educational system. It is not without problems, but on the whole it is a useful choice. I'll stop here (this PC being very slow). A-giâu 09:37, 18 Chhit-goe̍h 2006 (UTC)
_dk 03:19, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
Islam in China
we are having Demographics dispute at Islam in China please sort the mess out.7day 12:09, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
Foreign influence on Chinese martial arts
This is a new article and may have various quality issues. Please review the article and provide your feedback. See also Bodhidharma, the martial arts, and the disputed India connection. Shawnc 19:31, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
Portal:China
Portal:China is now a featured portal candidate. Help on whatever is there to improve if you can! Cheers AQu01rius (User • Talk) 18:32, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
History fact check
Can someone check these edits here for accuracy and POV? I'm a bit concerned that this user overwrote quite a bit of information in the process of writing. --Yuje 12:28, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
Fragrant Concubine: Admin help needed
I need help from an administrator to move the page Fragrant Concubine back to its original name. Someone moved the page to the far less common name Consort Rong without discussing it in advance, which has led to a number of double redirects.--Niohe 01:03, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
History of China Trade
Is there some kind of category that deals with the history of China trade? I cannot seem to find a category that would encompass 18th and 19th century trade, and the impact of Westerners in China, from Chinese exports to missionaries and doctors, or the sack of the Summer Palace and the Boxer rebellion. I can find individual articles, but nothing linking all these topics. Any ideas? The Opium wars are listed under History of Hong Kong, but surely we can find a more accurate category.Scotchorama 13:22, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
Attention: New page move campaign
It seems that Highshines has started a new page move campaign, which needs the immediate attention of an administrator. For evidence, please refer to Special:Contributions/Highshines. I have also posted a notice at the Administrators 'noticeboard.--Niohe 01:49, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
- If anyone had any doubt what kind of editor Highshines is, please have a look at the following foul language posted to Jiang's user page for four hours:
- I think Highshines has earned himself/herself a block by now.--Niohe 14:37, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
-
- I left a note/warning on her talk page. Tell me if she does something like that again. -- 我♥中國 20:04, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- I think Highshines should be blocked for a week at the very least. Highshines is already lying about what he said. If he/she can get away with this, it will happen again. Just read how he/she is misrepresenting the remark to an administrator who doesn't know Chinese here and how Highshines calls me a liar for paraphrasing the remarks.--Niohe 21:37, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
-
Reshui
I have a stub of an article about Reshui, but I really do not know anything about it. Anyone want to help fill in more details, add Chinese text etc?--Filll 23:39, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
- Hmmm, okay, for a second there, I thought this was just going to be an article about hot water.—Nat Krause(Talk!·What have I done?) 00:20, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
lol. AQu01rius (User • Talk) 18:48, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
Energy policy of China
Does anyone have the time and knowledge to start an article on the energy policy of China? See energy policy of the United Kingdom, energy policy of the European Union and energy policy of Russia for suggestions... Beagel 12:03, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
Romanization
Hello, apologies if this is addressed elsewhere. The Romanization of Chinese names in WP is a mess! One can haphazardly find Wade-Giles and Pinyin combined in the same articles. I prefer pinyin, as I'm sure most of you. I think this project should somewhere state a preferred Romanization policy so that finicky types like me have a justification for standardizing everything. 140.247.163.157 06:03, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
- It's here--> Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Chinese). Though I think links like this should be more visible in the project page... _dk 06:07, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
need help placing these images of a Chinese bamboo book
I have these four great images of a Chinese bamboo book, found on flickr and now on the commons, but I'm having trouble placing them on Wikipedia. Where should these photos go? Any thoughts? And can anybody tell me what is the title and who is the author?
 unfolded |
 "page" edges |
 binding |
 cover |
Thanks, — coelacan talk — 06:31, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
- This is The Art of War, I would suggest placing the cover image on that article, but uh....the Chinese letters are upside down from this angle. _dk 07:52, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
- Ha! Oh no! I'll email the flickr uploader and see if another shot can be taken. Are they correct in the other images, particularly the "first page" shot that I have labelled "binding"? If so, that would also be a good photo for The Art of War. — coelacan talk — 09:24, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
- Yup, the rest of the images are correct. And it looks like this edition was written by the Qianlong Emperor, for your information. _dk 11:04, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
- Caution: it doesn't look like an actual Qianlong-era antique. The other line of text is "千尋(? not sure about that character... I might be influenced by Spirited Away here)竹齋精製", (exquisitedly made by xxxx bamboo study) which sounds like a modern print.
- I googled 千尋竹齋 and it seems to relate to zh:吳昌碩 (1844-1927). (Quite a bit later than Qianlong era) --Sumple (Talk) 12:14, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
Yue Fei
I've greatly expanded the Yue Fei page, however, the section on his military career is sorely lacking. I used quotations from several books to describe his military career, but it is by no means a definitive chronology of all his military actions (which I would like to see). I am not knowledgeable enough about his military career to make these changes.
The main reason I am writing is so that others may critique or add more stuff to the page that I haven't already. The lead paragraph is only a single sentence. It could be expanded as well. The overall page not as good as it could be, but it certainly is better than what it was. The old version was full of folklore that was presented as fact. Tell me what you think. (Ghostexorcist 18:11, 31 January 2007 (UTC))
- A potential FA topic and page. I'll review it when I have time. AQu01rius (User • Talk) 18:21, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
-
- Thanks. (Ghostexorcist 18:30, 31 January 2007 (UTC))
By the way, I transferred all of the Yue bio stuff from my Jow Tong article to the Yue Fei page. I did this because the Jow Tong page was getting too big, plus the Yue page was lacking in background info. (Ghostexorcist 18:42, 31 January 2007 (UTC))
Social Issues
As most of you are aware, currently there are an innumerable list of social issues in the People's Republic of China, but the article is currently only in an introductory stage. I will be working on these articles but would also appreciate any help I can get from interested parties. Please inform me here or on my talk page if you are. Thanks. Colipon+(T) 22:32, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
Articles listed at Articles for deletion
Uncle G 20:09, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
- Controversial topic. I will do some research and join the discussion. I'm leaning toward rename all. AQu01rius (User • Talk) 03:44, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
People's Republic of China FAR
People's Republic of China has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:21, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
Disambiguation
Greetings from WikiProject Disambiguation. Right now I am working on disambiguating [[Wu]]. It's not hard, but it requires a lot of detail work, because Wu (region) is found in the same articles as Wu (state), Wu (linguistics), etc.
Please disambiguate your links. You can't just type "[[Wu]]" (or "[[Yue]]" or whatever), and expect the disambiguation fairies to come along an fix it. Actually, I am a disambiguation fairy, and I am here to fix links, but we are few and over worked. When you make a link, make sure you know where you are linking. In some cases all you need to do is include more text ("[[Kingdom of Wu]]" instead of "Kingdom of [[Wu]]"). In other cases you can use the pipe trick ("[[Wu (state)|]]" expands to "[[Wu (state)|Wu]]").
I confess, whoever invented the pipe trick did not have "Wu" in mind. They were likely thinking something more like [[A Streetcar Named Desire (film)|]]. In fact with Wu it should often be avoided. Don't write "a [[Wu (linguistics)|]] dialect", write "a [[Wu (linguistics)|Wu dialect]]", even though it's two keystrokes more.
And your archive bot is broken. — Randall Bart 09:09, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
Soliciting comments: Double Ten Day
Hi all, I'm soliciting comments at Talk:Double_Ten_Day#RfC:_inclusion_as_a_Chinese_holiday. Would appreciate community input. Thanks. Wl219 21:57, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
Witkey
Just came across this article, and I can't make head or tail of it. Could someone here check it out please, and clean it up/delete it as appropriate? Thanks. J Milburn 22:00, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
- It's hard to say. You might want to list it on AfD. --Ideogram 22:05, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
Oh jeez
Someone has nominated List of common Chinese surnames for deletion along with other lists of surnames based on the reason that they should be transwikied to wiktionary. If you're interested in the AfD, please comment[3]. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 04:00, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
Well, it's been relisted for deletion[4]... See this comment[5] also. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 18:56, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
I started a new discussion on the topic at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of common Chinese surnames. Looking forward to discuss this you there!--Niohe 00:25, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
Gwoyeu Romatzyh
I recently requested feedback on Gwoyeu Romatzyh, which I've worked on since Christmas. I'd welcome any comments.
Incidentally, someone User:Ideogram gave the article a Low importance rating—which seems a bit harsh! Within WP:WPW it has a Mid importance rating; so I would think that in the China project it should be at least Mid too, if only because of its historical importance. --NigelG (or Ndsg) | Talk 10:01, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
- If you can get other people to agree with you I will gladly change it. --Ideogram 13:42, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
- Did you get any other people to agree with you? 218.102.216.204 14:13, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
- I'm rating hundreds of articles. How am I supposed to know if someone disagrees with me until they speak up? --Ideogram 14:19, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
- Did you get any other people to agree with you? 218.102.216.204 14:13, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
--NigelG (or Ndsg) | Talk 15:41, 19 February 2007 (UTC) I haven't conducted a survey of other people's opinion about this, if that's what you mean. I based my assessment on the guidelines on WP:ZH1, which state:
- Mid Subject fills in more minor details, and may have been included primarily to achieve comprehensive coverage of another topic. Important in China, but not necessarily known as well outside of China.
- Low Subject is peripheral knowledge, possibly trivial.
It would surely be absurd to describe GR as "trivial" knowledge. It certainly has been "important in China" in the past (even though it is no longer used); and it is known outside China—not to everyone, of course, but to those who study China & Chinese culture.
I hope that others will support my Mid Importance assessment. While they're at it, I would also appreciate some substantive feedback about the article itself. --NigelG (or Ndsg) | Talk 15:05, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
- I can see your point, so I'm not really going to argue with you. However, you are obviously biased, so it would be better to get an outside view. --Ideogram 15:19, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
That's fine by me: that's why I'm here! --NigelG (or Ndsg) | Talk 15:41, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
- Gwoyeu Romatzyh: "GR was used as the official form of romanization in the Republic of China until 1949". I would assume that's enough to prove that the subject is not "peripheral knowledge". However, the subject has passed its prime, and is no longer significant at present, so a Mid importance rating would be most likely appropriate. AQu01rius (User • Talk) 18:53, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
- (Edit conflict)Just to put my two cents in as a frequent rater of articles, this article merits a "Mid" ranking in my view, for the reasons stated by Nigel above. No worries, though, rating importance is such a subjective process, as I have said before.--Danaman5 18:56, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
- Ok, I'm fine with it. Apparently it has already been changed. --Ideogram 21:11, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
- (Edit conflict)Just to put my two cents in as a frequent rater of articles, this article merits a "Mid" ranking in my view, for the reasons stated by Nigel above. No worries, though, rating importance is such a subjective process, as I have said before.--Danaman5 18:56, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
Thanks to all who responded. --NigelG (or Ndsg) | Talk 22:38, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
- I'm having difficulty finding a non-copyright photo of Yuen Ren Chao (Zhào Yuánrén) for inclusion in the GR article. The article on Chao hasn't got one either. Can someone help, please? --NigelG (or Ndsg) | Talk 17:25, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
Badagnani
Badagnani (talk • contribs) and I are having a couple of disagreements. First, I believe Ethnic minorities in China should be rated Mid importance, while he thinks it should be High. Second, he seems to think that List of qinpu belongs in Category:Chinese music even though it is already in Category:Guqin which is included in Category:Chinese musical instruments which is included in Category:Chinese music. Please offer your opinions. --Ideogram 08:08, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
- Looking at the criteria in WP:ZH1, I would say ethnic minorities ought to be at least High, perhaps even Top if one considers Tibet & Xinjiang. No doubt it would be politically convenient to brush them aside as Mid; but that's not WP's job.
- My comment relates to the intrinsic importance of the subject, not the quality of the article, which I haven't studied in any great detail. --NigelG (or Ndsg) | Talk 10:04, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Criteria for Mid importance: "Subject fills in more minor details, and may have been included primarily to achieve comprehensive coverage of another topic. Important in China, but not necessarily known as well outside of China."
By labelling the article in mid importance does not mean that it is not of high importance. It's just that, the subject is not as significant outside of China as it is in China. The Ethnic minorities in China fills in the details of List of ethnic groups in China, which is a broader subject.
There is no harm of having multiple categories. It would have been different if he was replacing the categories. AQu01rius (User • Talk) 18:42, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
Importance ratings
Actually I think the importance ratings themselves need to be reviewed. It's kind of lacking that the ratings are so dependent on how important the subject is outside of China. To use the current criteria, really, Geography of China should be rated Mid or Low. I don't know how the geography of China has such a big "impact" on the outside world. Same would go for many of the history articles. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 19:10, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
- I somewhat agree. As a student of China myself, I think that a lot of things that I rate are quite important (ethnic minorities, provinces, famous dynasties, etc.). However, the guidelines say that "popular importance" (it's above the guidelines box, actually) should be considered. I just can't justify to myself that the average reader is going to look up the ethnic minorities of China, or even the general minority situation in China, with any consistency, so I rated them all Mid. It's a tough question between what is really important in the study of China and what the average reader cares about.--Danaman5 19:40, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
Well, I suppose that "average readers" may be pretty parochial in their outlook—& for all I know they may be under 20 years old. Nevertheless, most people with a modicum of interest in current affairs are likely to want to know something about the status & condition of Tibetans in China. And if they don't, perhaps they should ...
Anyway, it probably doesn't matter much what WP's internal assessment of the importance is: if people want to find out about a subject, they'll look it up. Maybe we'll end up using consumers' choice to determine the importance, a bit like Google's weighting algorithm! --NigelG (or Ndsg) | Talk 21:25, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
- The importance of Tibet is reflected in the fact that Tibet Autonomous Region is Top when it would otherwise be only High. The fact that Tibetans are considered an ethnic minority and therefore one of many ethnic minorities in China is an indirect relationship and does not by itself qualify Ethnic minorities in China as Top. --Ideogram 21:36, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
- The assessment is being done as part of the Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team which will determine which articles are included in various print and offline versions. Since these ratings will determine which articles some readers actually have access to, they are quite important. --Ideogram 21:39, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
For Top level importance, I think, what is the average Wikipedia reader most likely to look for in China-related topics? These include: first level headings in a print encyclopedia article on China thus Geography of China and Tourism in the People's Republic of China; Chinese cuisine has become popular in the West so a lot of food items; events that changed the course of Chinese history should be well known even if they are not so 1972 Nixon visit to China and UN General Assembly Resolution 2758; Current and significant past paramount leaders; recent issues that are likely to be looked up such as Internet censorship in mainland China and Tiananmen Square protests of 1989.
High level importance articles would be those that just miss Top importance or first level headings in Top importance articles. This is a major reason I decided to make all province articles High. --Ideogram 21:36, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
My 2 cents - Certainly Tibet Autonomous Region (TAR) and Tibet-related issues get a lot of international media attention because of the controversy in PRC's rule, and that makes it probably top importance in a politics-related WikiProject like Wikipedia:WikiProject Power in international relations. But how important is it in the context of China as a country/nation/civilisation/etc? Not "top" importance, in my opinion, for a WikiProject specifically about China. And it's kind of subjective to think that Tibet-related issues should be "top" importance in a WikiProject about China overall. What I would think of as top importance for this WikiProject would be articles that are about China as a whole. Geography of China, Tourism in the PRC, Government of the PRC, etc etc. It shouldn't be a topic about some specific part or attribute of China that may not cover anything else about China. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 21:52, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
- The assessment is part of the WP1.0 effort so we should consider our audience. Most people reading the print and offline versions will not be in China, so importance should be rated according to what they are interested in or should know. --Ideogram 22:13, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
- Sure. Rate it "top" for Wikipedia:WikiProject Power in international relations then. The TAR itself, being a province-level administrative region, should be given the same importance level as the other provinces, which I don't think should be "top". For one thing, the article on the TAR doesn't even concentrate on the political controversy. That's handled by other articles. The current criteria is pretty subjective and basically lets any editor to come in and bump up the importance level on any of their favourite political controversy. It lets people push a political agenda. In my opinion, only articles that cover the whole of China should get Top importance for this WikiProject. Anyway, that's just my 2 cents. I haven't really been involved in this WikiProject. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 22:49, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- Well, we are trying to work together to develop a consensus on importance ratings. You are more than welcome to join us. I personally plan on patrolling the logs to watch for changes. --Ideogram 23:13, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
-
Importance of food
I strongly disagree with food items should make it to Top importance, unless it is so influential, and so wide spread, as to have "changed the world" - say Chinese cuisine or (less confidently) Yum cha (no rating yet on the latter btw). --Sumple (Talk) 05:42, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
- I must have been hungry when I made that decision.
- Seriously, if other people agree with you, I will gladly move them down. --Ideogram 06:00, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
- The only articles I think this affects are Chow mein, Egg roll, and Wonton. I think Chinese tea, Chopsticks, Dim sum, Rice, Soy sauce and Tofu should still be Top. Thoughts? --Ideogram 02:00, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- Fixed. --Ideogram 02:26, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
-
Prehistory of Taiwan
I have rated this article Low-importance and Jerrypp772000 (talk • contribs) wants it rated High. Opinions, please. --Ideogram 02:15, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
- Tough to say. It doesn't seem to have affected other countries enough to be "high", but it might be important enough in China to warrant a "Mid". You might try that as a compromise. If Jerry changes it back to high a second time, just leave it. It is really not important enough to edit war over.--Danaman5 04:20, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
- Definetly not Low importance. High importance is also not suitable, but since it's for WikiProject Taiwan, it's acceptable. If other users raises concern on this, a change to Mid importance would seem to be a solution. AQu01rius (User • Talk) 18:21, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- I don't think it'll even be part of this project, the prehistory of Taiwan has nothing to do with China.--Jerrypp772000 18:27, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
- It doesn't. Taiwan in general only has to do with China because people living their are a Chinese people, the way many Singaporeans or Chinese Americans are. And? Republic of Chinese America! Yeah!DownUnder555 21:05, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
Chinese zodiac pages
If anyone has some spare time, please take a look at the "Chinese zodiac" pages: e.g. Tiger (zodiac). Of particular concern to me are the the "Traditional Attributes/Associations" sections, e.g. Rat#Traditional Rat Attributes/Associations. They are invariably unreferenced, and seem too ridiculous to be real: e.g. the Rat is apparently associated, among other things, with "Germany, Austria, Sweden, Netherlands, Brazil, Colombia". I really don't see what's so ratty about these countries, or how the Rat could have been "traditionally" associated with these countries, given that some of them weren't even countries in "ancient times".
I don't want to go through and delete them, though, just in case I am wrong and there is such a country association with the zodiacs.... --Sumple (Talk) 05:48, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
Merging Wang Mang and Xin Dynasty
The current Xin Dynasty article is stub and I don't envision anyone adding a lot more content that wouldn't overlap the Wang Mang article. I'm following the example of the Wu Zetian article, which is where Second Zhou Dynasty redirects. Haven't heard much since the merge templates came up so I thought I'd give fellow Sinologists a heads-up for discussion. Kelvinc 00:00, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
- Although Xin Dynasty was more significant than Second Zhou Dynasty, the subject is not of public interest, so if anyone is up to redirect right now, feel free to do so. I will work on the article in the future if no one else is up to it. AQu01rius (User • Talk) 04:44, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Which article will you be working on? The Xin one or the Wang Mang one? Kelvinc 10:32, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
- Obviously the Xin one. Wang Mang is very well written (may need some clean-up). AQu01rius (User • Talk) 16:40, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Well if you have more information to add to the Xin one, then it's probably not a good idea to merge the two. Kelvinc 20:26, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
Much of the content about how Wang Mang ruled can probably be moved onto the Xin dynasty article. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 20:52, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
Goguryeo
I tried to rate this article Low-importance. Some people apparently think it should be Top. --Ideogram 00:26, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
- This is exactly why the importance level should not be dependent on how much "impact" it had outside of China. It's very subjective. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 01:51, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
- Ignore the "official" guidelines (they were never accepted by consensus anyway). What do you think the importance should be? --Ideogram 01:54, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
- I would rate it Mid importance. I think Top importance should be reserved for articles that cover a category of information for all of China. High importance should have some amount of national prominence and notoriety. Mid should be for those subjects that are more of regional importance. And Low should be reserved for subjects that are very local in nature. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 02:10, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
- Ignore the "official" guidelines (they were never accepted by consensus anyway). What do you think the importance should be? --Ideogram 01:54, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
I almost think that you could get by with Low on this one, because from my (admittedly cursory) reading of the article, it seems to be a Korean kingdom that warred with the Sui dynasty at some point. It is important to Korea, not China. Then again, I may just be missing some key fact.--Danaman5 06:41, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
- Well, some Koreans are accusing the Chinese government of claiming Goguryeo as a "Chinese" kingdom. The Chinese government has registered some sites in what used to be northern parts of Goguryeo, and now Chinese territory, as World Heritage Sites. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 07:11, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
Aid needed on expansion of Gwoyeu Romatzyh
Hello, fellow wikipedians. I have an article in need of attention by editors familiar with chinese romanization, Gwoyeu Romatzyh. The article has been largely created by Nigel G, who has contributed sample texts and cleaned up the entire thing. He needs help finding images and expanding the content. If anyone is interested, please help out or leave a note on the talkpage of the article, Nigel's talkpage, or my talkpage. Thank you for your time. The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 02:46, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
Fortune cookie
Should this be part of WPCHINA? --Ideogram 11:11, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
- Even if it should, I don't think it should be high importance.... It's not Chinese food. It's just food that happens to be served in some Chinese restaurants. --Sumple (Talk) 11:57, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Let's decide if it should be included first, then we can decide what importance it is. --Ideogram 12:00, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
- I think it should definitely be included. But high importance doesn't make sense, unless we had a Cuisine Workgroup, which would then be suitable. I think Low would be better if assessed for WikiProject China in general. AQu01rius (User • Talk) 17:18, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- This definitely should be included, though I wouldn't rate it very highly. Low sounds fine. --Danaman5 18:42, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
Original research
There is a dispute about original research on Yuan (surname), one of WikiProject China's featured articles. The balanced views of those who have familiarity with Chinese sources would be appreciated. See Talk:Yuan (surname). Yeu Ninje 23:33, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
Why has the article on Xuanzang been given a "low-importance rating"?
What possible justification can be given for rating this article of "low importance" (i.e. "Subject is peripheral knowledge, possibly trivial"?)
Xuanzang is one of world history's most famous travellers and his book of travels and Biography contain so much historical information on the many countries he travelled through that they are by far the most important historical documents on this period for many places in Central and South Asia.
Moreover, he was one of the greatest and most prolific translators of Buddhist texts into Chinese and was a major influence on all who followed him, and on the development of Chinese Buddhism in general. He is also important for the influence he had on the development of later Chinese literature notably the enduring and important Ming novel Journey to the West with it's world-famous character, Monkey, based on the life of the great pilgrim himself.
Please, I strongly urge that the "importance rating" of this article be reconsidered and considerably upgraded.
Sincerely, John Hill 06:01, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
- I think that a Low rating is indeed insufficient, but I can't decide between Mid and High as a replacement. Was he influential outside of China as well as inside? If so, than "High" is warranted. If not, maybe a Mid.--Danaman5 06:48, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
- Dear Danman - thank you for your prompt reply. Yes, Xuanzang was (and is still) very influential both inside and outside China. His accounts are are our very best and most detailed historical records of northern India and much of Central Asia during the 7th century. He plays a role rather like that of Marco Polo in many ways - but, with additional importance to the history and development of Buddhism. Historians constantly refer to his writings as they are filled with all sorts of acute and accurate observations (with the rider, of course, as was natural for a person in his position at that time, to be rather credulous when it came to Buddhist stories, miracles, and the like). He also was befriended by a number of important monarchs and left the best records we have of their courts and, similarly, with the great Buddhist universities of the time such as Nalanda in India. I, myself, would rate him as amongst the greatest travel writers and recorders of historical information of all time (and I don't think I am overstating the case). Cheers, John Hill 07:21, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- You know, these facts are not apparent from reading the lead paragraph of the article. You need to rewrite the lead to explain to the reader why Xuanzang was important and what his greatest accomplishments were. See WP:LEAD for more about writing the lead paragraph. --Ideogram 07:32, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
- The lead actually sums up pretty well. It tells that Xuanzang's accomplishments includes the translation of thousands of original Sanskrit scriptures which he brought back from India, and with his influence, it led to series of movement in Chinese Buddhism.
Few more things should be mentioned. The cultural interaction he brought was both influential in Indian and Chinese Buddhist history. The book he wrote, "Journey to the West in the Great Tang Dynasty", was translated to many other languages, and is considered to be a highly valuable source to the life of Central Asia at the time. The book was also the inspiration for the Ming novel Journey to the West, which is one of the Four Great Classical Novels in Chinese literature.
To User:Ideogram: Xuanzang is actually a household name to average Chinese readers. Unless you weren't educated in Chinese (I don't know your nationality), you probably shouldn't have rated this article as low importance. It is quite offensive, frankly. The lead section was enough for a Mid importance at least to a unaware reader. I have re-assessed the article as High importance, but separated it out to the Chinese History workgroup, which is more appropriate. CheersAQu01rius (User • Talk) 08:30, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
AQu01rius (User • Talk) 08:30, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
- I agree. Xuanzang, whether because of Journey to the West or not, is one of the best known ancient Chinese personalities in China of all time. --Sumple (Talk) 09:09, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
No, I wasn't educated in Chinese. It was an honest mistake. If you are going to criticize a mistake in rating Importance as "offensive" you had best not have importance ratings at all. Or maybe you can find someone else to help you on "your" project. --Ideogram 22:46, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
- I am sad to see all this has turned so personal. As "Ideogram" says it was an honest mistake and it has been corrected now. Let's just leave it at that and get on with more important things. Best wishes to you all. John Hill 03:10, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
I agree that we should move on. Ideogram has taken the intitiative, and others should be assisting him positively instead, including giving constructive comments if there are disagreements over the importance ratings.--Huaiwei 14:15, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
AfD nomination of Yang Chou
The article Yang Chou has been nominated for deletion. The nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not"). Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yang Chou and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. --Eastmain 03:33, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
- Yang Qiu, Yang Hong, Yang Huai, and Yang Song, also people of the Three Kingdoms, were AFD'ed as well. _dk 04:25, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- I rather see those articles deleted. Really have no interest in minor Romance of the Three Kingdoms characters. AQu01rius (User • Talk) 05:37, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
- Yang Yi and Yang Zuo were AFD'ed as well. _dk 06:41, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
Felice Beato
Does this article really belong in WPCHINA? --Ideogram 15:07, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
- Though he is most well-known for his photography of Japan, Beato did spend some time in China, and, according to the article, his photos of the Second Opium War and a number of other Chinese subjects remain among the key images of those subjects. I don't know what the feeling is around here, but in most WikiProjects I'm with the idea of what does and does not fit under the umbrella is quite broad and loose.LordAmeth 16:34, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
- I don't think we should be tagging every westerner that ever made a pitstop in China in the 1800s. He took some of the earliest photos of China, and that makes him taggable on other WikiProjects. But just from the information on the article, I would say he's not important enough to be tagged for this WikiProject. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 17:26, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
- But are we adding China tags to every Westerner who made a "pitstop" in China? I didn't add the China tag to Jules Itier, an article I created on the first person known to have taken photographs in China, because I didn't feel he stayed long enough. By contrast, Beato stayed in East Asia for most of his life and made important contributions to our knowledge of the history of that region. We clould add quite a few tags on the talk page here.--Niohe 22:18, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
- I don't think we should be tagging every westerner that ever made a pitstop in China in the 1800s. He took some of the earliest photos of China, and that makes him taggable on other WikiProjects. But just from the information on the article, I would say he's not important enough to be tagged for this WikiProject. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 17:26, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
Congee
I don't know how many people are paying attention to Rice congee. So I'll repost the question here that I posted there[6]. The article says that congee is called 粥 in Mandarin. I know that's what it's called in Cantonese, but I thought in Mandarin, it's called 稀飯? Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 17:58, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
- I'm sure it's 粥 in Mandarin also. 稀飯 is kind of different, and is between rice and congee. AQu01rius (User • Talk) 21:32, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- According to my dictionary 稀飯 means 粥 made from rice or millet.
- 粥 on the other hand, is more general, means congee/porridge made from any grains + any other ingredients.
- I'm sure 粥 is used in northern China too. But 稀飯 I don't think is used in southern China. --Sumple (Talk) 21:39, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
- Alright then. I didn't know there was a difference. I always just called it 稀飯 in Mandarin. Don't remember who taught me that. It might have been somebody from HK. What do they call it in Taiwan? Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 22:06, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
My impression (based on two trips to China, including one for work in Chengdu) is that zhōu is the formal, written form & xīfàn the more colloquial form. I don't think I ever saw xīfàn written on a menu. I don't know about regional variations, though. --NigelG (or Ndsg) | Talk 22:17, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia:WikiProject Chinese surnames
Anyone mind if I turn this project into a workgroup of WikiProject China? So we can tag surname articles by just adding surname=yes parameter. AQu01rius (User • Talk) 02:01, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
- I want to ask, is there any interest in creating a template for Chinese surnames? Something that'll list both Trad/Simp characters, the common romanisations, and link to useful articles like Chinese surname and List of common Chinese surnames. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 17:35, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Like the name infobox in Sun Yat-sen? Is there a template for that? If not, should we make a standard template for those uses? AQu01rius (User • Talk) 18:02, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- Something that'll go on the top left like the biographical infobox on the Sun Yat-sen article. I was thinking that since a lot of the surname articles have sections or paragraphs that explain and list the romanisations and different pronounciations, we might as well create an infobox template for that kind of stuff. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 18:18, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
-
Subpages
I don't think it's a good idea to move an active discussion to a subpage. Most people won't click on it. --Ideogram 04:28, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
- That discussion is currently 33 kb though. I thought keeping it in the main discussion page is a drag. It might be a little bit too early to move it to a subpage though, so you can move it back if you want. AQu01rius (User • Talk) 06:21, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject China/Archive/April 2007 Wikipedia talk:WikiProject China/Archive/May 2007 Wikipedia talk:WikiProject China/Archive/June 2007 Wikipedia talk:WikiProject China/Archive/July 2007 Wikipedia talk:WikiProject China/Archive/August 2007 Wikipedia talk:WikiProject China/Archive/September 2007 Wikipedia talk:WikiProject China/Archive/October 2007 Wikipedia talk:WikiProject China/Archive/November 2007 Wikipedia talk:WikiProject China/Archive/December 2007
