Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 22:56, 8 August 2012

Discussion | Project | Members | To do | Portal | Featured content

China noticeboard
Shortcuts: WP:ZHWNB / WP:CRTNB

• WT:CHINA

China Project‑class

This page is within the scope of WikiProject China, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of China related articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChinaWikipedia:WikiProject ChinaTemplate:WikiProject ChinaChina-related Project This page does not require a rating on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.

Archives

Index 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30 31, 32, 33

This page has archives. Sections older than 60 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

This is the talk page for discussing WikiProject China and anything related to its purposes and tasks.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33Auto-archiving period: 2 months

Reports

I'm looking for aviation accident reports at http://www.caac.gov.cn/ but the site's only in Chinese. Are they hosted on here? Where do I find them? WhisperToMe (talk) 04:07, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

I found a link that translates to 'aviation safety reports' but I get an error when I click on it -- look. In fact I got a whole load of errors and 'cannot find the webpage' results while clicking on various links. Their english version of the site is 'under construction'. Pol430 talk to me 20:42, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for looking into it! Have you tried a Google site search looking for documents with the Chinese words for "accident report" in them? Perhaps that could uncover some reports - Also should I contact the CAAC and inform them that the site has these issues? WhisperToMe (talk) 20:56, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

I'll look into that for you. I have to go offline now for a bit will doit when I get back :) Pol430 talk to me 21:00, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Alrighty :) WhisperToMe (talk) 23:16, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

I couldn't find anything obvious that linked to CAAC reports or any other government site. I did find this which is the China Civil Aviation Information Network. Are you looking for a specific report or just a general source for aviation accident reports in China? Pol430 talk to me 11:48, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Presumably you are aware of http://avherald.com/ ? Pol430 talk to me 11:57, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

I have heard of Aviation Herald, but I haven't considered checking it for specific reports. I'll check if there are reports on it. WhisperToMe (talk) 15:10, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

I'm looking for both - A source of accident reports and specific reports of civil aviation accidents since 1990. I am checking to see if the following incidents have had reports published online, in English, Chinese, or both:

• 2010:Henan Airlines Flight 8387 (B-3130) (report may not yet be out)
• 2004:China Eastern Airlines Flight 5210 (B-3072)
• 2002:China Northern Airlines Flight 6136 (B-1238)
• 2000:Wuhan Airlines Flight 343 (B-3479)
• 1999:China Southwest Airlines Flight 4509 (B-2622)
• 1997:China Southern Airlines Flight 3456 (B-2925)
• 1994:China Northwest Airlines Flight 2303 (B-2610)
• 1993:China Northwest Airlines Flight 2119 (B-2716)
• 1993:China Northern Airlines Flight 6901 (B-2141)
• 1993:China Eastern Airlines Flight 5398 (B-2103)
• 1992:China General Aviation Flight 7552 (B-2755)
• 1992:China Southern Airlines Flight 3943 (B-2523)
• 1990:Guangzhou Baiyun aircraft collision (Xiamen Airlines Flight 8301: B-2510, China Southern Airlines Flight 2812: B-2812)

There is also CAAC Flight 3303 (1982, B-266), but I have doubts it will be online. -- Chinese Misplaced Pages give some reasonable coverage Pol430 talk to me 16:13, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

WhisperToMe (talk) 15:09, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Got it! I tried searching the aircraft tail numbers on a google advanced search and only asked for results in simplified Chinese. If you take B-2523 as an example, I found this result (which I have run through Google translate) from Civil Aviation Maintenance Association of China. If you need help deciphering the Chinglish let me know. Pol430 talk to me 15:41, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Disregard, just realized the dates are wrong. Pol430 talk to me 15:47, 9 June 2012 (UTC) No it isn't. Check half way down the page. Pol430 talk to me 15:48, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for finding that! I do not believe it is the final report (a final report would be written by the CAAC) but it is helpful commentary on several accidents. It seems to quote from a final report, so I made a post to Talk:China Southern Airlines Flight 3943, but whatever final report is there doesn't seem to be online. WhisperToMe (talk) 17:10, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, I tried searching the CAAC site for published reports in various ways: Chinese terms for 'accident/incident', 'reports' and 'aircraft reports' and also tried tail numbers, but got almost no results. I don't think the reports are published on their website. Even if the link '航空安全举报' worked, I don't think it relates to individual aircraft incidents. Pol430 talk to me 17:46, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Ah, ok. Perhaps I can e-mail the CAAC sometime and ask how to view their reports. Anyway, thank you very much for your help and efforts! :) WhisperToMe (talk) 18:03, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

You're welcome. Yes, it can't hurt to send them an email. I've added a couple of chinese sources to CAAC flight 3303 and I'll expand the article slightly when I've got time to translate them. Drop me a line if I can be of any more help. Pol430 talk to me 19:27, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Odd naming convention for emperors

Why are the names of the emperors of Ming and Qing dynasties listed with the title "emperor" coming after the name? Perhaps I misunderstood it, but if the title is in English (emperor, king, etc.), you should follow the English convention, only if the title is not originally English (Khan, Huang, Di, etc.) do you follow the convention whatever the original language uses. Therefore you should have Emperor Qianlong, Kublai Khan, Qin Shi Huang, etc. But if you look at some of these pages, you'd find that in the same page you'd have contradictory naming conventions, for example, in Emperor Qianlong, you'd find Qianlong Emperor, Empress Xiaoxianchun, Prince Bao. Why?

If this has been discussed before, please direct me the relevant place. I'm not asking for anything to be changed, just curious about the rationale. Hzh (talk) 23:35, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Qianlong is an era name, not a temple/posthumous/personal name. The order of "" + "Emperor" is meant to avoid the implication, because this way Qianlong can be read descriptively. Some historians such have Pamela Kyle Crossley have instead called the Qing emperors by their personal names on a regular basis (e.g. Qianlong would be Hongli) specifically because of that distinction, but use of personal names runs afoul of the naming taboo and is highly anachronistic.

Emperor Wu of Han is "Han Wudi" in Chinese; the Qianlong Emperor is "Qianlong Huangdi"/"Qianlong Di" - see the difference? The Ming and Qing emperors are posthumously referred to not by their unwieldy posthumous names, or their taboo personal names, but by the name of the era they reigned over. We would be calling Qianlong "Emperor Chun" if we followed the conventions used by previous dynasties.--Jiang (talk) 00:38, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation. However, it doesn't really explain why the distinction needed to be made in English since Qianlong is used in the article (also often in Chinese) to refer to the person, therefore Emperor Qianlong would seem perfectly fine. The page could easily use Qianlong Di or simply Qianlong instead of Qianlong Emperor; using the word "Emperor" after the name just sounds odd because that is not the way English is used normally (and therefore something requiring explanation). It seems to require an article "the" as in "The Qianlong emperor" (which is used in the text) to be grammatically correct. It matters not a lot I suppose, just me wondering aloud (and to reiterate, I'm not asking for anything to be changed). Thanks again. Hzh (talk) 02:52, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

So are you suggesting that we should not translate titles/terms? (such as King Louis of France would be Roi Louis instead or the Duke of Orleans would be Duc d'Orleans. ) I note that the monarch of a country is frequently referred to as the country's name. So using the era's name in such a manner is analogous. 70.24.251.208 (talk) 04:25, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

It is quite common in English to use the title in the original language, like Kaiser Wilhelm II, Kublai Khan, Tsar Alexander II, so there is nothing unusual about that. You can however argue that these titles (also titles like Shah, Sultan) have become standard English terms, whereas Di/Huangdi is not. English have always used King Louis XIV (or more commonly simply Louis XIV or the Sun King), however that is not the case for Qianlong (seems more common to hear Emperor Qianlong or simply Qianlong than Qianlong Emperor). Qianlong Emperor would sound to be as odd to me as Louis XIV King because Qianlong is in fact commonly used to refer to the person. Anyway, I am not suggesting any particular term should be used, just noting that oddity and I'm happy to leave things as they are. Hzh (talk) 10:08, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

While I'm fine with Qianlong Emperor or Emperor Qianlong, I find that naming of empresses is quite chaotic. For example, Empress Lü Zhi, who is probably most commonly referred to as Empress Dowager Lü, and sometimes Lü Zhi, but rarely Empress Lü Zhi. Also, the naming of early Chinese kings and other rulers is quite arbitrary. For example, there are King An of Zhou and King An of Han. By looking at the English titles, you'd never realize that the former An is the king's posthumous title, while the latter An is the king's personal name (in Chinese, the former is called Zhou An Wang, the latter Han Wang An, differentiated by word order). I think it's time we updated the naming convention to improve the situation. --Zanhe (talk) 18:25, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

D.E. Mungello, in the preface to one of his books, explains this convention as follows: The term "Kanxi" is a reign title rather than a name, and this explains why this book refers to the "Kangxi Emperor" rather than to "Emperor Kangxi". For similar reasons, we would refer to Franklin Delano Roosevelt as the "New Deal President" rather than "President New Deal". Then he continues to explain what the actual names of the Kangxi Emperor were. (The Great Encounter of China and the West, 1500-1800, page xiv). -- Vmenkov (talk) 14:47, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

The only problem with that rationale is that you don't call President Roosevelt as simply "New Deal", whereas people do called Emperor Kangxi as simply "Kangxi", which is in fact done in his wiki article (as well as in a great number of publications) and in Chinese as well. Hzh (talk) 19:50, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Editors who use reign titles as if they were personal names are writing incorrectly, possibly because they are not aware that reign titles are not personal names. If you wanted to do a thorough review of Misplaced Pages articles to correct for the use of reign titles on Misplaced Pages, I would support you.Ferox Seneca (talk) 16:09, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

It's not just wiki editors, since most people do that, in Chinese or English publications. You'd have to try to change how the world use the word. Kangxi is commonly used because people use it to refer to the person, telling them that they are wrong is like saying that you shouldn't call any vacuum cleaner "hoover" because that is a specific brand name, really rather absurd. You can insist on using Kangxi Emperor if you want, but personally I wouldn't tell other people that they are wrong in using Kangxi for the person. We are no longer in Qing China, they won't chop your head off for misusing the Emperor's title. (Just out of curiosity, how do people in the Qing Dynasty or the early Republic call the emperor? My suspicion is that it's been used like that for a very long time, but I don't really know for how long, but at least 50 years I think.) Hzh (talk) 19:33, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Consider "Kangxi" the short form of "Kangxi Emperor", so that is would be more permissible than "Emperor Kangxi" which by word composition cannot be the short form for "Kangxi Emperor". There's no ambiguity in "Emperor Kangxi", but we use "Kangxi Emperor" to be more accurate and proper. To answer Hzh, the situation is somewhat analogous to the Emperor of Japan. People would refer to the reigning emperor as "His Majesty" or "Ten Thousand Years", but never by the existing era name, like how awe would not refer to the current Japanese emperor as "Heisei". The Kangxi Emperor would not be called "Kangxi Emperor" until after his death.--Jiang (talk) 20:35, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

That wasn't what I was asking, sorry that I didn't make it clearer. I was asking if people during the Qing dynasty and the early Republic era refer to past Qing or Ming emperors by their era name (say, a person in late Qing dynasty or the early Republic era talking about Kangxi). If this is a something that's been done for a long time, then there is no reason to insist that Kangxi is an era name alone, but that it can be taken as his name through common usage. If that is true, then here isn't be any real problem with using Emperor Kangxi, and the distinction that is being made here in English with Kangxi Emperor is just unnecessary pedantry. Hzh (talk) 22:20, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Regarding Hzh's question above: I have not read much about the Qing, but my impression is that at least the Ming Emperors have been usually referred to posthumously by their Temple name. For example, the personal name of the founder of the Ming Dynasty, the Hongwu Emperor, is Zhu Yuanzhang; however, referring him as the personal name sounds definitely as a very modern ("republican") thing to me. Instead, the Ming (and, I assume, Qing) historians of later generation would refer to him by the temple name, (Ming) Taizu (明太祖), which literally means "the Great Ancestor (of the Ming)". I believe that this usage is still quite common in Chinese-language literature (try a Google search on 明太祖). I understand, that for some of the pre-Ming dyansties (e.g. the Song Dynasty) emperors, using the temple name is the standard convention in English-language scholarship as well, and therefore on Misplaced Pages; see e.g. Emperor Huizong of Song. -- Vmenkov (talk) 00:07, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Usage varies for the Ming dynasty, while the first emperior is usually called Taizu of Ming, after his temple name, most emperors are often referred to by era names as well - for example, "the Hongwu Emperor" and "Taizu of Ming" are just about equally recognisable, while his son is probably slightly better known as "the Yongle Emperor" than "Chengzu of Ming"; the last emperor is almost universally referred to as the Chongzhen Emperor (after his era name).

Qing emperors who ruled China proper ("within the Pass") are almost exclusively referred to by their era name, but not those who reigned before the conquest. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 11:50, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

New article series

i hope this is the right place to talk about this. i want to do a series of articles related with the phenomenon of chinese companies coming to US capital markets and being discovered to be frauds. firstly, does this violate npov? secondly, i want to list the articles that would be included:

• main article: US-listed Chinese companies through reverse take-over
• Short sellers of US-listed Chinese companies (including Muddy Waters Research, Citron Research, Alfred Little, &c.)
• certain companies that were frauds, like RINO, CCME, LFT, should all get an article and discuss what the fraud was, auditor resignations etc. SEC is investigating the auditor Deloitte in the Longtop (LFT) case.

does this seem like a good idea and should i just make them? where can i go for help with it from more experienced people?

also there seems to be no articles on Chinese SOEs. is that for a reason or should i make that a project as well?Happy monsoon day

Report on the use of self-published sources

The first version of a report on the use of self-published sources is now available, in Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Misplaced Pages reliability. Some of the self-published sources listed in the report pertain to this project.

Suggestions on the report itself (a discussion has started here), and help in remedying the use of the self-published items that relate to this project will be appreciated. History2007 (talk) 06:18, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Hidden character stone

I'm not sure if this is simply a hoax or the equivalent of an April Fool's joke. Any advice on this would be welcome. Dougweller (talk) 08:19, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Astronaut ranks and positions

Can someone add Chinese positions to Astronaut ranks and positions ? 70.24.251.208 (talk) 06:47, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Perth requested-move notification

An earlier requested-move survey generated lots of controversy and an arbitration case. Therefore, this one is being posted here and in many other places, to gather a very wide range of opinions outside of the Scotland and Australia WikiProjects.

A requested move survey was started at Talk:Perth_(disambiguation)#Requested_move, which proposes to move:

• Perth → Perth, Western Australia
• Perth, Scotland → Perth, Perthshire
• Perth (disambiguation) → Perth

Background: There was a previous requested-move survey which ran from late May to mid June. There was a great deal of controversy surrounding the closure and subsequent events, which involved a number of reverts and re-reverts which are the subject of an ongoing arbitration case. There was a move review process, which was closed with a finding that the original requested-move closure was endorsed; however, the move review process is relatively new and untried. — P.T. Aufrette (talk) 03:39, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Requested move: Decapitalize the word "war" in non-proper noun titles

Concerning the following articles: Sino-Xiongnu War, Gojoseon–Han War, Goguryeo–Wei War, Goguryeo–Sui War, Goguryeo–Tang War, Silla–Tang War, Ming–Kotte War, Ming–Hồ War, Mongol–Jin War, Gaya–Silla War, Goguryeo–Yamato War, Goryeo–Khitan War.

The move request is at .--Cold Season (talk) 02:11, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

RfC on country names

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Macclesfield Bank#RfC. CMD (talk) 00:19, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Problem article - possible fraud?

I just came across an article on jade which is highly dubuious - Ancient Old Jade. Many of the jade pieces look like obvious fake to me, i.e. styles not old enough, or forms unknown in ancient period, or just plain bad. For example, I don't think I have ever seen ancient figures of the terracotta army made of jade, so that looks like a modern invention to me. I don't really know much about jade (I'm not even sure that the category "Ancient Old Jade" exists, it is a very odd term), so I can't pronounce anything definite about them apart from that they look highly suspicious, can someone who know more about this do something about this page? It is possible that this page may have been created for fraudulent purpose, so a deletion may be necessary if a complete rewrite is not possible. Hzh (talk) 10:23, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

I am considering adding a hatnote to warn about the content of this article before the issue is resolved, but not sure of the right way to do it. There are too many fake items in there (perhaps all of them) and it gives me serious concerns. Hzh (talk) 11:05, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

I added a warning to the page although I'm not sure if this is the right way of doing it. A bit more information - it seems that the pieces used for illustration in these pages are sold at auction. For example the piece at this site (which I traced from the uploader's own website here ), the same piece is used to illustrate the article here (the last one in the section). There is a very strong suspicion that wiki is being used to commit crime here, the uploader of the picture and editor of the page is using wiki to give a false impression of authenticity and then sell the items shown in wiki pages. Hzh (talk) 21:01, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

There are specific templates... like {{hoax}} or {{disputed}} or {{verifiability}} -- 76.65.131.160 (talk) 08:21, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Someone has sent it for deletion via AFD -- 76.65.131.160 (talk) 08:20, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

quote

Ancient Old Jade is a jade terminology of jade category to be distinguished from Modern Jade. This jade terminology is well-known by jade dealers and collectors. In Chinese they say 高古玉 (spelling as: Gao Gu Yu) or just 古玉 (spelling as: Gu Yu) as Ancient Old Jade in English.

Basic Concepts of Authenticity Examinations against Fakes of Ancient Old Jades

(1) Scratch Test: Jades are firm enough to resist from Scratch Test by human finger nails.

(2) Semi-Translucence Test: Jades are semi-translucent under the light of portable flashlight.

(3) Sound Test: The sound of a jade knocked slightly on another jade is just like that from a musical instrument and very clear. It’s not such heavy as those sounds knocked by stones or plastic goods.

(4) Soakage Color Test: The soakage color formed in the earth for thousands of years are natural. People are used to put Ancient Old Jades in pure clear warm water for at least one day and one night to see if the soakage color is still remained the same as usual before to judge if it’s dyed manually. From long-term basis, the manually dyed Fakes will fade their false soakage colors into one another gradually.

(5) Age Test: The Ancient Old Jades must have the appearance and totems of Imperial Royal His Majesty Dignity of an Emperor or a King. This is quite different from the modern jade carved work of art designed just for an Art purpose only.

(6) Carvings of Holes Test: The holes of Ancient Old Jades were not straight penetrated from one side. They were penetrated from two sides and formed a curve path gap between two holes from each side.

(7) Carvings of Lines Test: The inclined feminine lines of Ancient Old Jades were not carved by machine tools that make lines straight forward with two sides of line wall straight upward vertically. They were carved one side of line wall straight upward vertically, while another side of line wall plane inclined by ancient bronze jade carving wheels.

(8) Totems test: The Ancient Old Jade must have Jade Carving Totems used in that dynasty to be presented to the Imperial Royal His Majesty Dignity of an Emperor or a King.

(9) Smooth Carvings Test: The Ancient Old Jades were carved by imperial skillful hand-made jade carving masters and must be carved simply, clearly and smoothly upon specially selected solid fine jades. This kind of carving is not existed in modern world by machine tools and art carving artists or sculptors.

(10) Weight (Density) Test: A true experienced jade collector or dealer can easily tell the difference between a Jade and other stones by just holding a Jade in hand to feel its heavy weight of high density.

(11) Surface Test: The surface of a jade is very smooth and quite different from other stones. A true experienced jade collector or dealer can easily tell the difference between a Jade and other stones by just touching the surface of a jade carved work of art gently with his fingers.

(12) Color Test: A true experienced jade collector or dealer can easily tell the difference between a Jade and other stones by just examining its natural beautiful color appeared in front of human eyes.

unquote

The above contents have been added in the article of Ancient Old Jade to avoid unnecessary mistakes and misunderstandings of readers outside of jade world. -- Orionandhsu (talk) 09:04, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

It's just an article written on a subject of Ancient Old Jade and has nothing to do with Possible Fraud guessed by somebody. If someone has different opinions about the contents of this article, he should then join to edit the contents to improve this subject. It's really not good to delete the whole subject of Ancient Old Jade for interfering the readers' rights to understand this subject. -- Orionandhsu (talk) 14:31, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Orionandhsu (talk · contribs) is under investigation for spamming and sockpuppeting, see Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Orionwebmuseum -- 76.65.131.160 (talk) 05:54, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

All three Orionxxx users have been blocked. -- 76.65.131.160 (talk) 03:14, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

A genuine, well researched article about this subject with appropriate illustrations would be welcome. Deletion was based on the phoney promotional nature of this particular article, which was little more than an advertisement, and for fake, not even close, stuff. User:Fred Bauder Talk 12:36, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Help with chinese webpages and chinese astronomy at Corona Australis

Hi all, I am improving the Corona Australis article and need some more information about this website, which google translate can't read - i.e. what institution it is and other information that I can add into its reference template. Also, is it a reliable source?

While I am here, I am trying to look around to embellish the chinese folklore/astronomy section of the article (chinese characters for chinese words would be greatly appreciated). I have found this and referenced a bit of it - some others turn up on google books too. Anyone more familiar with folklore would be most welcome to help out....cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:52, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

RfC on Vietnamese diacritics

RfC: Should the spelling of Vietnamese names follow the general usage of English-language reliable sources? Examples: Ngo Dinh Diem, Ho Chi Minh, and Saigon, or Ngô Đình Diệm, Hồ Chí Minh, and Sài Gòn. The RfC is here. Kauffner (talk) 12:31, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Note: this is a misleading description of the RfC; Kauffner is proposing that all diacritics be removed unless Brittanica or other encyclopedias use them; but in this case, Brittanica has chosen to not use VN diacritics, so the result is, all VN diacritics will be removed as a matter of course, regardless of usage in other sources. The examples he gives above of Saigon/Ho Chi Minh are misleading, as no proposals have been mooted to move those words which have very common usage in english. This move would affect much less common names, that do not have wide use in english.--KarlB (talk) 17:37, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Chinese Postal Map Romanisation in the lede of location articles

I'm not sure what to think about this sort of addition. Examples:

• Changjiang Li Autonomous County
• Sanshui District
• Chenghai District

Should it be in the lede? History section instead? Infobox? Not at all? I guess it's more information, so that's good. But is it useful? Plus, the "Chinese Postal Map Romanisation" seems so long, and rather dominates the first sentence of the lede. I'm not that sure it serves most of the visitors most of the time.

I can see it being challenged later on, so best see what folks think before zillions are added. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 08:13, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Abbreviate it to "CPMR" but keep the link? The name is quite long and potentially distracting. The {{bo}} template abbreviates Zangwen Pinyin to "ZWPY". -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs email 08:47, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

I don't see anything wrong with including the Chinese Postal Map Romanisation spellings in the lede. They may not be very useful, but the inclusion of them does no harm - it only gives readers an extra piece of information which they'll skip, as they're naturally able to, if they aren't interested. I don't think the mere four words (i. e. 'Chinese', 'Postal', 'Map' and 'Romanisation') seem to be long. Other information, such as the place name in Chinese, are also included in the brackets immediately after the place name in the lede - there's also the same question of whether they serve most of the readers most of the time. Is Anna suggesting that we should create a seperate section for each of the information (e. g., 'The place name in Chinese characters' and 'Pronunciation in Mandarin') in the brackets?

I'll even go as far as saying that Chinese Postal Map Romanisation spelling deserves a place in the lede - it's the traditional way of spelling place names of China in English; it's analogous to 'Munich' as opposed to 'München', or 'Calcutta' as opposed to 'Kolkata'. Including the Chinese Postal Map Romanisation spelling in the lede in the brackets can achieve two things - by not replacing the Hanyu Pinyin spelling with the Chinese Postal Map Roamnisation spelling, an implied acknowledgement of the existence of and China's preference to Hanyu Pinyin spelling is given; on the other hand, the value of Chinese Postal Map Romanisation spelling as the traditional way of spelling place names of China in English can be acknowledged when readers can be reminded of or introduced to it in the lede.

By the way, I think we can adopt Benlisquare's idea if we do think 'Chinese Postal Map Romanisation' is too long.

Douglas the Comeback Kid (talk) 09:10, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Agree with both of the two above, and want to add that it is my opinion that only total name changes, i.e. Chang'an to Xi'an, should be included in infoboxes. Obviously, where there are too many major former names, as with Beijing and Suzhou, they shouldn't be all included, and rather, for sake of fairness, not be included at all. GotR 15:40, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Anna asked for my opinion. In general, I think they should be removed, unless the places themselves have had a nontrivial amount of mentions under those names in English sources prior to the widespread use of Pinyin (as is the case for Beijing / Peking), thus giving significance to those names. The names in Chinese are different—they are significant as common names by definition, and as the sources from which the English names are transliterated.

If we end up having them stay, I think the full "Chinese Postal Map Romanization" is too long, but I don't really have any better ideas either. If others haven't abbreviated it, I don't think we should be doing it. wctaiwan (talk) 16:10, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

I think we should include them, since they were once a standard way the refer to locations. If you are looking at older material, it would be useful to have a crossindex on what they were called in different periods of romanization. -- 76.65.131.160 (talk) 04:24, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Dunhuang Project editing event

Hi all,

This is to let you know that I've been working with the International Dunhuang Project group at the British Library to plan a multi-day editing event in late October focused on Central Asian archaeology (details). As well as contributions from IDP staff, we're hoping to get involvement from academics and students at UCL, and planning a session for interested Wikipedians.

If you're interested in taking part (online or offline), or you'd like further information when we've more details organized, please let me know or sign up here. Andrew Gray (talk) 13:18, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

ethnic composition of China prefectures and counties

Where I get ethnic composition of China prefectures and counties by cencus?--Kaiyr (talk) 16:26, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

You can find general information about Chinese ethnic groups at the List of ethnic groups in China, but you will need to be more specific if you are looking for the ethnic composition of a specific region (for example, Changji Hui Autonomous Prefecture lists a table for the entire ethnic composition of that prefecture). I don't know that a complete list of ethnic composition for every region in China exists on Misplaced Pages.

Is there something more specific that you are looking for?Ferox Seneca (talk) 19:49, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

• • Especcially autonomy refectures and counties.--Kaiyr (talk) 19:21, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

I don't think that any complete list of ethnic composition for every region in China exists on Misplaced Pages, but I would suggest looking through Misplaced Pages's lists of counties and autonomous prefectures if you are looking for information about specific regions.Ferox Seneca (talk) 21:31, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

The China Data Center at the University of Michigan sells excel spreadsheets with such data. The New York Times used it to make this map. But if you can't pay, I guess you could look through the page histories for whoever added the ethnic composition for counties and asking them where they got their data. Shrigley (talk) 18:41, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Bopomofo --> Zhuyin fuhao_Zhuyin_fuhao-2012-07-24T14:07:00.000Z">

I have requested a move for the article bopomofo, an article covered by this Wikiproject, to Zhuyin fuhao. Your participation in the discussion would be appreciated. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 14:07, 24 July 2012 (UTC)_Zhuyin_fuhao"> _Zhuyin_fuhao">

Mass generation of Chinese subdivision stubs

Please see here. A user who can't read Chinese is using district lists to generate township substubs. I don't think it is a very good idea to do that without at least making sure zh interwikis and preemptive disambiguation. (A well-written bot would probably do better work than this user). Please see also the history at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents/User:Jaguar and then comment at Misplaced Pages:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#User:Jaguar_again. —Kusma (t·c) 13:56, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

I had created 9000 Chinese townships. Nearly all deleted. This morning I created 18. Every article already has been disambiguated. Interwikis can be added by a bot. But wait - do we need a bot for 18 articles!? ☠ Jaguar ☠ 14:56, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

We need a bot for 9000 good stubs. Nanguan Subdistrict is ambiguous (and so it has various wrong incoming links). This is not surprising when one checks zh:南关街道, which happens to be a disambiguation page. If you do any work on this, why not do it properly? —Kusma (t·c) 15:10, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

I'm sorry, maybe I was wrong. User:Guerrilla of the Renmin was the one who disambiguated many of the Chinese Townships, maybe some of them haven't been properly disambiguated. ☠ Jaguar ☠ 15:13, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Kusma and Jaguar, please do not call ambiguous titles as disambiguation mistakes or improperly disambiguated; it is not the same as calling as a location in Shijiazhuang as being in Baoding. Keep in mind I created these lists before the bots at ZH-Wiki created the township lists (which are automatically free of ambiguity) from National Bureau of Statistics data. My work is not free of errors, but the occurrence of them is quite minimal. GotR 12:46, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Percent of Taiwanese aborigines by Counties of Taiwan

Where I get Percent of Taiwanese aborigines by Counties of Taiwan?--Kaiyr (talk) 14:33, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Reassessment request

Requesting a reassessment for Stroke (CJKV character). A number of significant updates have been made since this was last assessed. Missylou2who (talk) 20:07, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Censorship in the Republic of China

Censorship in the Republic of China has been requested to be renamed, see Talk:Censorship in the Republic of China -- 76.65.131.160 (talk) 05:15, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Census data for spaekers of language of PRC

Are there Census data for spaekers of language of PRC? Where I get it? For example quanty of miao language by Chna census?--Kaiyr (talk) 16:52, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Good links

Good links about China division http://chinadataonline.org/cgepublic/cityclient16/# --Kaiyr (talk) 19:18, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Tea map china province locator

Template:Tea map china province locator has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. DH85868993 (talk) 07:36, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Depopulation

It is strange that 12 ethnics depopulated in 2000-2010. Why? Mistake in census?--Kaiyr (talk) 07:10, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Burma → Myanmar requested-move notification

This is a bit off-topic, but is posted here because China is a neighboring country and it is desirable to get as wide participation as possible for a potentially controversial title change.

A requested move survey has been started (by Marcus Qwertyus (talk)) at Talk:Burma, which proposes to move:

• Burma → Myanmar

Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. — P.T. Aufrette (talk) 22:56, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

• Project-Class China-related pages
• NA-importance China-related pages
• Project-Class China-related articles of NA-importance
• WikiProject China articles