Article snapshot taken from[REDACTED] with creative commons attribution-sharealike license.
Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat.
We can research this topic together.
The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, which has been designated as a contentious topic.
The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.
Xi Jinping was a Social sciences and society good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Misplaced Pages's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
This article 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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics 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.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Socialism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of socialism 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.SocialismWikipedia:WikiProject SocialismTemplate:WikiProject Socialismsocialism
This article was copy edited by Twofingered Typist, a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, on 29 October 2018.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Xi Jinping article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Question
Should we additionally describe xi jinping as an "authoritarian leader" besides dictator? (see the discussion above)
A: we refer him as both authoritarian leader and dictator
Can we change his place of birth to Shaanxi China? He wasn't born in Beijing. He was a farmer from northwest China Shaanxi province. The same province of Xi'an. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.4.205.67 (talk) 21:39, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
B for me -- dictators have a characteristic of systematically removing high level opponents. that's new in China since mao's death and can be linked to Xi article. authoritarianism is a characteristic of last 70+ years. Rjensen (talk) 13:07, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
Dictator only. Trying to shoehorn in "authoritarian leader" would make it appear that Xi Jinping has similar levels of control as Donald Trump or Jair Bolsonaro, who operate within semi-functional democracies. Xi Jinping's China, on the other hand, fulfills the qualities of Dictatorship in being a One-party state employing widespread political propaganda, having no tolerance for dissenting groups, and no having tolerance for actual independent media. BirdValiant (talk) 14:09, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
A He is often described as both. While there is a significant overlap between the two labels, it is (theoretically) possible for a dictator to not be an authoritarian leader. A dictator is somebody who performs a specific function in a type of government. "Authoritarian leader" describes a specific type/style of ruler. TucanHolmes (talk) 16:14, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
A, normally I would expect to say 'dictator' only since 'authoritarian leader' is largely a milder 'dictator' and risks being tautologous. However, given that this is in the sentence "Xi has often been called a dictator or an authoritarian leader by political and academic observers". I think it legitimate to say both - ie the jury is still out on which he is. Pincrete (talk) 16:21, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
B, if one takes into account the context in relation to the following sentence in the entry, "citing an increase of censorship and mass surveillance, a deterioration in human rights, the cult of personality developing around him, and the removal of term limits for the leadership under his tenure." Normchou (talk) 21:31, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
There is no distinction between the two. My preference is to use "Xi rules an authoritarian regime" but I do not oppose saying "Xi is a dictator". I do think it's clunky to say he's both an authoritarian and a dictator (because they are the same thing). Snooganssnoogans (talk) 13:33, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
Neither, He was voted in by the People of China. Granted, this was not the entire population, only a select few are given the right to vote, this is "China Style Democracy" and shouldn't be confused with western style democracy.
Discussion
As I read the article, I noticed that nothing was said about China’s responses to climate change. The leader of China must have policies relevant to global warming. His many other major agendas were discussed. I think the omission of this topic should be addressed. Janice Vian, Ph.D. (talk) 05:41, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Suggestion: Include a pinyin (with tone marks) transliteration of his name
I notice that, unlike with other major Chinese figures, there is no complete pinyin (including tone marks) transliteration of his name. That would be a nice addition if anyone is able to do it. Ricklaman (talk) 01:19, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
Whitewashing his status as a dictator/authoritarian
There is no dispute in reliable sources that Xi Jinping is an authoritarian leader or dictator (there is no distinction between the two despite some of the bickering on this talk page about which term to use). It is not acceptable for the lead to present Xi's status as an authoritarian leader as an attributed pov ("He has been described as an authoritarian leader"). The lead should simply say in Misplaced Pages's voice that Xi Jinping rules an authoritarian regime (or is a dictator). This edit should be reverted ASAP. Snooganssnoogans (talk) 13:25, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
Disagree, I would have reverted too. The lead is carefully constructed and well written, "He has often been described as a dictator or an authoritarian leader" is enough. We're not in the business of flat out (and unequivocally) labeling someone as a dictator, that's not a NPOV. The characterization is widely accepted in the Western world, but by no means universally accepted in the world as whole; China has enough allies to find some academic support, and I suspect a lot from the scholars in China it self. Aza24 (talk) 15:26, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
by Eric X. Li, anything by Hu Angang (), from a quick search, I can't read Chinese but I'd expect a lot from there. But let me make this clear, that's not the point. The point is that calling someone an unequivocally, universally authoritarian leader, is the farest thing possible from NPOV. Look at Bashar al-Assad's article "Political scientists have characterised the Assad family's rule of Syria as a personalist dictatorship" not "Assad is a...". You're accusations of "whitewashing" (a term which makes no sense in this context) are foundationless, saying that the current world leader of a major country has "often been described as a dictator or an authoritarian leader" is an extremely powerful statement alone (not to mention the evidence given directly after the fact), if readers can't see that, that's on them. Aza24 (talk) 16:08, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
That Li article is not an academic source and it doesn't say Xi doesn't rule an authoritarian regime. I see nothing in the description of the Hu Angang book (authored by someone with a PhD in Engineering) that disputes that Xi rules an authoritarian regime. The Assad lead is far stronger in characterizing Assad's authoritarian rule than the Xi lead, but both leads should simply reflect what RS say and describe them as authoritarians in Misplaced Pages's voice. Snooganssnoogans (talk) 16:16, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
The Li article is by a political scientist... and the Hu book is by someone lauding Xi's economic policies (hence by an economist). "Authoritarian" and "dictator" imply a negativity connotation, these people are disputing that. Thus far you have only been complaining and are yet to propose a new wording. Your former "Xi rules a dictatorship or authoritarian regime in Xhina" () would be more effective if you phrase it like Assad's article, e.g. "Political and academic observers characerize Xi's rule as dictatorship or authoritarian regime." But regardless, you are going to have to form a consensus for whatever you propose. Aza24 (talk) 16:27, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
Your phrasing in that edit presents Xi as a universally disliked and oppressive figure (because, guess what, the vast majority of readers see those terms in that light), but this is WP:UNDUE. () Once again, you continue to complain without formally offering a specific proposal. Aza24 (talk) 17:02, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
When discussion has ended, remove this tag and it will be removed from the lists. If this page is on additional lists, they will be noted below.
Should the lead of the article state that (A) "Xi Jinping rules an authoritarian regime" or (B) that "Xi Jinping has been described by political and academic observers as ruling an authoritarian regime"? Snooganssnoogans (talk) 13:53, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
Survey
A. There is no dispute in academic sources and other RS that Xi Jinping is the head of an authoritarian regime. To attribute the regime type designation to some "observers", the lead misleadingly frames this as a subject of active contention when there is zero dispute in RS about the regime type status. Snooganssnoogans (talk) 13:55, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
Question What warrants the change of the lead? Something similar to what you suggest is already part of the article He has often been described as a dictator or an authoritarian leader by political and academic observers, citing an increase of censorship and mass surveillance, a deterioration in human rights, the cult of personality developing around him, and the removal of term limits for the leadership under his tenure. Do you feel this is somehow misleading? CPCEnjoyer (talk) 14:12, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
There's a difference between stating clearly that he heads an authoritarian regime and attributing it as a claim advanced by some people. Snooganssnoogans (talk) 14:15, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
You have attempted to force in the same edit a month ago and it has been explained to you that pushing for such inclusions is WP:UNDUE. To say in wikivoice that Xi Jinping rules an authoritarian regime means to imply that there is no political plurality, which is a false notion. CPCEnjoyer (talk) 14:27, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
is generally considered to rule an authoritarian regime, perhaps? The "has been described by..." verbiage I personally find both clunky and boilerplate-like, but I also take issue with the encyclopaedia making statements in Wikivoice as facts that are subjective by their nature (as a matter of style; I don't think there's any reasonable question of whether Xi Jingping rules an authoritarian regime, which is why it's fine to say "is generally considered to", but it's bad encyclopaedic style to say that he does without any kind of qualifier. Firejuggler86 (talk) 14:55, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
Support status quo, or B. The claimed lack of dispute in RS does not, on its own, preclude the use of attribution here, as should be done in case of a possibly contentious label such as this, especially referring to a living person. For precedence, compare: Pol Pot (attributed), Muammar Gaddafi (attributed), Ruhollah Khomeini or Ali Khamenei (Wikivoice, but describes leadership in a purely factual manner rather than using contentious labels directly). Wikivoice in this regard generally seems to be reserved for extremely influential, universally known figures - contrast: Mao Zedong, Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin (but oddly not Lenin, for whom the label is attributed). Should be noted also that successive leaders in countries usually not considered democratic (such as the PRC) are (generally) not repeatedly described as "authoritarian" in their leads (Nikita Khrushchev, Leonid Brezhnev, Yuri Andropovet al. in the case of the USSR, Deng Xiaoping, Jiang Zemin for the PRC - although notably skewered in the case of DPRK, where the label is omitted in the case of Kim Jong-unandKim Il-sung, but not Kim Jong-il, where the label is Wikivoice). I don't see the purpose of reiterating this here at all, myself (although not to the point where I would argue for this sentence's removal) - and out of the two options presented, especially not in Wikivoice. The key question here is - does switching from attribution to Wikivoice here meaningfully improve the article? I don't see how it does, and it shifts responsibility for this living-person attribution to Misplaced Pages. As a closing note (and an aside) I would say the RfC is quite oddly named, as the question here is whether or not the use of Wikivoice is appropriate; there is no debate about the facts (ie. the PRC, or Xi Jinping's regime being considered authoritarian) here. EuanHolewicz432 (talk) 17:56, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
Support status quo/b—this RFC is a mess, the name implies that the fact is up for debate, but the option imply that the only thing up to debate is how to present it. Do I think that the English Misplaced Pages should unequivocally present the current leader of one of the most powerful countries in the world as an authoritarian dictator? No, I mean come on, the current description is fine. Huge BLP risks here. This seems hard for the nominator to accept, as demonstrated in the thread above this, but words like "dictator" and "authoritarian" have an extremely negative connotation in the modern west, and the vast majority of our readers will only see it this way. Because of this, when we unequivocally assign it to someone, it makes it appear as if they are universally considered to be "doing the wrong thing"—but that's just not true. There is quite a bit of support for Xi in China (), Africa and much of Asia. The current wording seems like the ideal compromise to preserve the actual meaning of authoritarian/dictator, while not compromising weaponizing the terms based on the extremely negative perception they have. I see no improvement coming out of this; the only thing A would result in are the risks admirably explained by Euan above. Aza24 (talk) 18:31, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
Comment No strong opinion here. It does not have to be either/or. We could describe him as "the supreme leader of an xxxxx regime" for example, where any of several near-synonymous terms might fit in the spot where I've written "xxxxx". Adoring nanny (talk) 01:03, 12 May 2021 (UTC)
Support status quo/b. You'd be surprised at how many non-Anglophone writers disagree. See WP:BIAS. Perhaps it might be worth including any significant sources disputing that interpretation but I'm fairly sure you'd have to venture out beyond the English-speaking Internet. I agree with what was mentioned above too. FelipeFritschF (talk) 07:36, 12 May 2021 (UTC)
Can you please elaborate? I'm not sure I understand what you mean. Do you think non-Anglophone editors are more likely to brand Xi as an outright dictator than native speakers? Why would that be? PraiseVivec (talk) 13:17, 12 May 2021 (UTC)
I believe he meant the opposite, as he supports the status quo which means attributing such claims to the claimants instead of using wikivoice. CPCEnjoyer (talk) 14:42, 12 May 2021 (UTC)
Comment Both sides of this discussion are missing the point. "Authoritarian" (or even "dictator") does not have anything to do with whether someone or their policies is good or bad, popular or unpopular. It is a descriptive word and means (in the context of politics) usually just one thing: are they a ruler of a country without being democratically elected in free and fair elections? There is no reliable source that disputes that Xi Jinping rules China and that he wasn't elected in a free and fair election. The reason why the word "authoritarian" is negative to many people is precisely because many Westerners place a high value on democracy. (Likewise, the word "genocide", because of what it is, inherently carries an extremely negative connotation as well. However, we don't write, "Many historians and other researchers have characterized the Holocaust as a genocide.") Thus, it would be completely appropriate to describe him in wikivoice as leading an authoritarian government. However, I'm not convinced that putting it in wikivoice would make the statement stronger, for the simple reason that many of our readers would consider academic sources to be more reliable than Misplaced Pages is. (t · c) buidhe09:05, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
Authoritarianism is a complex political topic and checking if, at a glance, a country's government checks some boxes in an Oxford companion book is not how one reaches these sort of conclusions. "Genocide" (as you brought up) in the case of the Holocaust, much as the title of "dictator" in the case of Adolf Hitler, is so notable and undisputed worldwide that the use of Wikivoice is appropriate. Compare to the Holodomor - entirely different story. As some editors already pointed out one could find a lot of non-Anglophone academic sources disagreeing with the Western consensus describing China in its current state as authoritarian due to various reasons that need not be iterated upon here, because regardless if the words "authoritarian", "dictator", "totalitarian" etc. have technical meanings, their negative connotation is obvious, as you stated yourself, and this is a BLP article - attribution is appropriate and the point of Misplaced Pages is not to make people aware of how authoritarian certain leaders are with "strong" statements but to relate information neutrally. --EuanHolewicz432 (talk) 10:55, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
Again, what source says that Xi Jinping does not govern the country in an authoritarian way? What source says there are free and fair elections, freedom of speech, freedom to form associations in China? No reliable sources contest this. Any dispute is over whether this ruling style is good or bad not whether it is undemocratic or authoritarian. (The Holodomor is not a good example because there is debate over whether there was specific intent required for it to be a genocide, or whether it was a non-intentional famine. If we were following your advice, the Armenian genocide article would have to be moved to Armenian genocide allegations and rewritten because Turkey and Azerbaijan dispute most of the article, making it not "undisputed worldwide". ) (t · c) buidhe11:44, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
I cannot give you any sources because I don't speak the languages required to understand them - perhaps a Mandarin-speaking editor can help here - but to my own personal knowledge Chinese scholars contest that a multi-party system is an essential element of democratic rule and instead champion a concept of intra-party democracy, and insist that Western liberal democracy is incompatible with Chinese culture - again, this is pointless to discuss as this isn't even the topic of the RfC, despite what the name of it would have you believe. Nobody is suggesting to remove the reference, nobody is contesting that the overwhelming majority of Western sources agree on this. This article is BLP and needs to be treated accordingly; and I don't see any RfCs demanding the same statements being inserted into leads of such articles as Deng Xiaoping or Jiang Zemin - other Chinese paramount leaders, one of whom is not even bound by BLP as of now - so what gives for Jinping? EuanHolewicz432 (talk) 14:19, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
@EuanHolewicz432: It's worth bearing in mind that concepts like authoritarianism, dictatorship, and democracy have quite distinct meanings in Marxist-Leninist discourse (certainly the latter two do), e.g. "dictatorship" in certain contexts is in fact a positive term used by the Chinese Communist Party itself, so you might be surprised by the number of Chinese scholars who'd be prepared to affirm that China is all three at once. That's an additional nuance at any rate. —Nizolan04:06, 14 May 2021 (UTC)
Please see my comment "The current wording seems like the ideal compromise to preserve the actual meaning of authoritarian/dictator, while not compromising weaponizing the terms based on the extremely negative perception they have". You have too much faith in our readers; authoritarianism/dictator will mean something extremely negative for 99% of our readers, no matter the reason why. Thus unequivocally assigning it to the current leader of China is undesirable. You yourself seem to be arguing against some myserteous group of users that is denouncing the use of the term at all—this group is nonexistent. Aza24 (talk) 17:19, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
Support status quo / b — I don't have much to add to the points made above; the POV issue is obvious enough, but I'll say I'm a little confused by this proposal since it seems to me, at least, that proposal a actually makes the statement seem less strong by removing the authority for it and phrasing it as an unsupported assertion—presumably not the intent. —Nizolan03:50, 14 May 2021 (UTC)
A per WP:SPADE - it must be stated straightforwardly and succinctly. Academics' and political observers' opinions can be referenced as support for the sentence. We should also distinguish "authoritarian" from "totalitarian" - the former, as buidhe rightly notes, is a normally rather neutral term symbolising the fact China is not a democratic country, on which there is scholarly consensus; "totalitarian", however, is much stronger and I agree it's a POV description that should be avoided unless there is a consensus of scholars on that. I am aware of a lot opinions (including in reputable scientific journals, distinguished scholars and simply RS) of China being totalitarian under Xi, but I'm not sure if there is a consensus on that topic; AFAIK there is, however, consensus that Xi oversaw China hardening its grip over the general population. Szmenderowiecki (talk) 15:28, 14 May 2021 (UTC)
Oxford Reference definition of authoritarianism: "Nondemocratic regimes share the following characteristics: those governing are self-appointed and, even if elected, cannot be displaced by citizens' free choice among competitors; and there is no freedom to create a broad range of groups, organizations, and political parties to compete for power or question the decisions of the rulers."
