| Revision as of 23:46, 5 April 2020 editAkira CA (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users2,030 edits →RfC: "mainland China" or "China" in article titles← Previous edit | Revision as of 07:01, 6 April 2020 edit undoMarkbassett (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users13,489 edits →RfC: "mainland China" or "China" in article titles: support what’s appropriate case-by-caseNext edit → | ||
| Line 70: | Line 70: | ||
| :::::Arunachal Pradesh isn’t however Aksai Chin does appear to be included. Can you explain why you will touch Taiwan but not other disputed territories? ] (]) 15:23, 5 April 2020 (UTC) | :::::Arunachal Pradesh isn’t however Aksai Chin does appear to be included. Can you explain why you will touch Taiwan but not other disputed territories? ] (]) 15:23, 5 April 2020 (UTC) | ||
| ::::::{{re|Horse Eye Jack}} I didn't say I {{tq|will touch Taiwan but not other disputed territories}}. Can't explain words I didn't say. {{tq|but I won't touch it}} the pronoun "it" refers to the amendment, not territories. If I was referring to the territories I will use "them" not "it". -- ]😼] 23:02, 5 April 2020 (UTC) | ::::::{{re|Horse Eye Jack}} I didn't say I {{tq|will touch Taiwan but not other disputed territories}}. Can't explain words I didn't say. {{tq|but I won't touch it}} the pronoun "it" refers to the amendment, not territories. If I was referring to the territories I will use "them" not "it". -- ]😼] 23:02, 5 April 2020 (UTC) | ||
| * '''Support''' - it should be available and used when appropriate per ], determining case-by-Case. I think one cannot categorically go either way categorically, “it depends”. Cheers ] (]) 07:01, 6 April 2020 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 07:01, 6 April 2020
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Naming conventions (Chinese) page. |
|
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14Auto-archiving period: 2 months  |
 | The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to the English Misplaced Pages article titles policy and Manual of Style, which has been designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Misplaced Pages, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
 | This topic contains controversial issues, some of which have reached a consensus for approach and neutrality, and some of which may be disputed. Before making any potentially controversial changes to the article, please carefully read the discussion-page dialogue to see if the issue has been raised before, and ensure that your edit meets all of Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines. Please also ensure you use an accurate and concise edit summary. |
 | This project page does not require a rating on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Shortcut
 Archives |
|
/Names |
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 60 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 3 sections are present. |
Renaming the last 3 Song dynasty emperors
The guideline says: "Emperors of the Tang, Song, Liao and Jin (1115–1234) dynasties: use temple names". But Emperor Gong of Song and Emperor Bing of Song are not temple names. Gong is a posthumous name (or is it? I'm not even sure about that, it certainly wasn't mentioned in the annals of History of Song ), and Bing is a personal given name. I'm also not sure that Emperor Duanzong is the best-known name for the 8-year-old fugitive "emperor". I propose using the personal names for the trio like Professor Richard L. Davis in The Cambridge History of China Volume 5, Book 1, Chapter 12. Timmyshin (talk) 04:20, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
- I think that at least, there should be no dispute that "Zhao Bing" would be appropriate given, as you pointed out, "Bing" was the personal name. My opinions about using personal names in general was noted above, but I will note that if there's no temple name, I do think posthumous name is as close as it gets. --Nlu (talk) 02:32, 19 December 2017 (UTC)
Which name is which?
Do we have any resources for determining which part of a Chinese name is the surname, and which part is the personal name?
I have a source ("The Great Tangshan Earthquake of 1976: Anatomy of a Disaster") with six Chinese editors, whose names the publisher presents as "Chen Yong, Kam‐Ling Tsoi, Chen Feibi, Gao Zhenhuan, Zou Qijia and Chen Zhangli", but without indicationg which order they are in. This work is variously cite as "Chen et al." and "Yong et al.", with the names sometimes inverted and sometimes not. (And my Chinese-speaking source says "Chen" can be either a surname or a personal name.)
Short of trying to contact these persons directly (the book is 30 years old), how can I sort these out? Do we have any Chinese librarians on tap? ♦ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 22:43, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
- With a few exceptions, if one part of a Chinese name is monosyllabic and the other is disyllabic, the monosyllable is the surname. That's no help if both are monosyllabic, but here the surname of the first author is Chen: VIAF 304977083. Kanguole 23:41, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
- That helps. Especially the reminder about VIAF. Thanks. ♦ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 20:27, 20 July 2018 (UTC)
RfC: "mainland China" or "China" in article titles
 |
|
Hello everybody, there was a request to move "2019–20 coronavirus pandemic in mainland China" to "2019–20 coronavirus pandemic in China". There was a clear consensus not to move. Because arguments there doesn't necessarily constrain to the virus page only, I want to request for comments from the community if we can apply it to all pages
Should we use "mainland China" instead of "China" in article titles, given that the article covers area under the direct jurisdiction of the People's Republic of China only and excludes the special administrative regions of Hong Kong and Macau and the disputed Taiwan.
Please, have a say! -- Akira😼CA 01:10, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
I think "China" is generally considered shorthand for "mainland China" and "Greater China" or "the PRC" can be used when one explicitly wants to talk about either entity as a whole. Kdm852 (talk) 07:01, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
support - use mainland China in titles if the article is dealing with post 1949 topics exclusively related mainland China and not involving Hong Kong, Macau and (disputed) Taiwan. Cinema of China, Video games in China seems like good starting points, as the thread starter had mentioned.Newslack (talk) 23:31, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose - use China in titles as the standard. The standard is to use the country name even if there are autonomous and/or geographically detached parts of the state with their own arrangements. e.g. articles on France use "France" not "Metropolitan France". There's no good reason to make an exception for China. Timrollpickering (Talk) 23:53, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
- Support per WP:PRECISE (
Usually, titles should unambiguously define the topical scope of the article, but should be no more precise than that.
) on a case-by-case basis. Cinema of China is an excellent example because the first mainland Chinese film was until 1905 (Dingjun Mountain) and in Taiwan, was not introduced until 1901 with Toyojirō Takamatsu, when Taiwan had already been ceded to Imperial Japan. CaradhrasAiguo (leave language) 05:04, 4 April 2020 (UTC) - Oppose - Use China in the titles as standard, Macao and HK are also a completely different kettle of fish from Taiwan. We should treat Macao and HK the same way we treat something like Puerto Rico or the British Virgin Islands, why have a separate standard for China? Any discussion of disputed territories must include Aksai Chin, Arunachal Pradesh, etc so the wording of the RfC is questionable to begin with, why single out Taiwan? Horse Eye Jack (talk) 14:54, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
- Dear @Horse Eye Jack:, to your last part: because this is not about disputed territory in general but only territories (disputed or not) related to the term "mainland China". "Taiwan" is mentioned 73 times in mainland China. "Hong Kong" is mentioned 24 times. "Macau" is mentioned 18 times. "Aksai Chin" and "Arunachal Pradesh" are mentioned 0 time. That's why I single out Taiwan. Regards. -- Akira😼CA 23:47, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
- Would you amend to include them? I don’t think that anyone would question that they are included under the official Chinese government definition of mainland China. I think most other uses would include them too. Horse Eye Jack (talk) 00:22, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
- @Horse Eye Jack: Arunachal Pradesh is not included in the infobox image and according to the first sentence "geographical area under the direct jurisdiction of the People's Republic of China". You can amend if you find any reliable source (probably discuss in the talk page first), but I won't touch it. -- Akira😼CA 00:41, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
- Arunachal Pradesh isn’t however Aksai Chin does appear to be included. Can you explain why you will touch Taiwan but not other disputed territories? Horse Eye Jack (talk) 15:23, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
- @Horse Eye Jack: I didn't say I
will touch Taiwan but not other disputed territories
. Can't explain words I didn't say.but I won't touch it
the pronoun "it" refers to the amendment, not territories. If I was referring to the territories I will use "them" not "it". -- Akira😼CA 23:02, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
- @Horse Eye Jack: I didn't say I
- Arunachal Pradesh isn’t however Aksai Chin does appear to be included. Can you explain why you will touch Taiwan but not other disputed territories? Horse Eye Jack (talk) 15:23, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
- @Horse Eye Jack: Arunachal Pradesh is not included in the infobox image and according to the first sentence "geographical area under the direct jurisdiction of the People's Republic of China". You can amend if you find any reliable source (probably discuss in the talk page first), but I won't touch it. -- Akira😼CA 00:41, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
- Would you amend to include them? I don’t think that anyone would question that they are included under the official Chinese government definition of mainland China. I think most other uses would include them too. Horse Eye Jack (talk) 00:22, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
- Dear @Horse Eye Jack:, to your last part: because this is not about disputed territory in general but only territories (disputed or not) related to the term "mainland China". "Taiwan" is mentioned 73 times in mainland China. "Hong Kong" is mentioned 24 times. "Macau" is mentioned 18 times. "Aksai Chin" and "Arunachal Pradesh" are mentioned 0 time. That's why I single out Taiwan. Regards. -- Akira😼CA 23:47, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
- Support - it should be available and used when appropriate per WP:TITLE, determining case-by-Case. I think one cannot categorically go either way categorically, “it depends”. Cheers Markbassett (talk) 07:01, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
- Misplaced Pages controversial topics
- Project-Class Hong Kong pages
- NA-importance Hong Kong pages
- WikiProject Hong Kong articles
- NA-Class Macau pages
- NA-importance Macau pages
- WikiProject Macau articles
- Project-Class China-related pages
- NA-importance China-related pages
- Project-Class China-related articles of NA-importance
- WikiProject China articles
- Misplaced Pages requests for comment