| Revision as of 09:41, 7 June 2002 editRoadrunner (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users11,923 editsmNo edit summary | Revision as of 09:44, 7 June 2002 edit undoRoadrunner (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users11,923 editsNo edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 20: | Line 20: | ||
| Misplaced Pages entries should avoid taking sides on issues such as the status of Taiwan and Tibet. In particular the word China should not be used to be synonymously with areas under current administration by the People's Republic of China or with Mainland China. The term "Mainland China" is a non-political term to be can used when a comparison is to be made with Taiwan, and "China proper" is a non-political term which can be used when making a comparison with Tibet. Although the used of the term "Manchuria" is considered by some to be somewhat objectionable when used in Chinese, it is largely considered a non-political and non-objectionable term when used in English. | Misplaced Pages entries should avoid taking sides on issues such as the status of Taiwan and Tibet. In particular the word China should not be used to be synonymously with areas under current administration by the People's Republic of China or with Mainland China. The term "Mainland China" is a non-political term to be can used when a comparison is to be made with Taiwan, and "China proper" is a non-political term which can be used when making a comparison with Tibet. Although the used of the term "Manchuria" is considered by some to be somewhat objectionable when used in Chinese, it is largely considered a non-political and non-objectionable term when used in English. | ||
| Taiwan should not be described either as an independent nation or as a part of China. When it is necessary to describe the political status of Taiwan, special note should be made of Taiwan's confused political status. | |||
| Also note that there are potential landmines when using the term Chinese. | Also note that there are potential landmines when using the term Chinese. | ||
Revision as of 09:44, 7 June 2002
There are a number of special issues with regard to Chinese names....
Characters
All entries with Chinese names should have the Chinese characters for the name included in unicode.
Romanization
Romanization presents some difficult issues in that it is a highly political issue. The most often used romanization is pinyin but many outside of the People's Republic of China dislike it because of its association with that government.
In general, Chinese entries should be in pinyin except when there is a more popularly used form in English or when the subject of the entry is likely to object to romanization in pinyin. When an entry is not in pinyin form, there should be a link to the article from the pinyin form.
Names
Chinese names unlike English presents names last name first. Unlike other instances were this occurs, it is standard practice in English to also present a Chinese name last name first (i.e. Mao Zedong, Deng Xiaoping). Chinese names should be in pinyin unless there is a more common name used in English (i.e. Chiang Kai-Shek, Sun Yat-sen) or when the subject of the article is likely to prefer a non-pinyin phonetization as is likely the case with personages from Taiwan (i.e. Lee Tenghui).
When using pinyin for a Chinese name, pinyin spacing and capitalization conventions should be used. This includes keeping the last name separate and the given name capitalized with the different characters not indicated by spacing, hyphenization, or capitalization.
Political NPOV
Misplaced Pages entries should avoid taking sides on issues such as the status of Taiwan and Tibet. In particular the word China should not be used to be synonymously with areas under current administration by the People's Republic of China or with Mainland China. The term "Mainland China" is a non-political term to be can used when a comparison is to be made with Taiwan, and "China proper" is a non-political term which can be used when making a comparison with Tibet. Although the used of the term "Manchuria" is considered by some to be somewhat objectionable when used in Chinese, it is largely considered a non-political and non-objectionable term when used in English.
Taiwan should not be described either as an independent nation or as a part of China. When it is necessary to describe the political status of Taiwan, special note should be made of Taiwan's confused political status.
Also note that there are potential landmines when using the term Chinese.