| Revision as of 04:27, 31 March 2012 editSchmuckyTheCat (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers23,945 edits →Move request← Previous edit | Revision as of 04:31, 31 March 2012 edit undoSchmuckyTheCat (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers23,945 edits →Move requestNext edit → | ||
| Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
| *<s>'''Support'''. China, People's Republic of China and Mainland China are different concepts. ] (]) 15:02, 19 March 2012 (UTC)</s><small>blocked and banned as sock</small> | *<s>'''Support'''. China, People's Republic of China and Mainland China are different concepts. ] (]) 15:02, 19 March 2012 (UTC)</s><small>blocked and banned as sock</small> | ||
| *'''Oppose''' this is a redirect. ] (]) <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] |
*'''Oppose''' this is a redirect. ] (]) <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] | ||
| *<s>'''Comment''': In the course of ] it was reaffirmed that other articles, categories, etc., wouldn't be affected. This principle was reaffirmed in CfD in ] and ]. But ] was moved. The move should be reverted. ] (]) 15:25, 19 March 2012 (UTC)</s><small>blocked and banned as sock</small> | *<s>'''Comment''': In the course of ] it was reaffirmed that other articles, categories, etc., wouldn't be affected. This principle was reaffirmed in CfD in ] and ]. But ] was moved. The move should be reverted. ] (]) 15:25, 19 March 2012 (UTC)</s><small>blocked and banned as sock</small> | ||
| ** Coincidentally that's promised by the pro-camp in ]. ] (]) 07:22, 20 March 2012 (UTC) | ** Coincidentally that's promised by the pro-camp in ]. ] (]) 07:22, 20 March 2012 (UTC) | ||
| Line 46: | Line 46: | ||
| *'''Comment''' So, I'd like to close this. I've moved some of the other China-related articles. What do y'all think is the outcome here? I think that what is being asked here is that the previous version in history of ] is supposed to become the new ], and the current ] gets moved to ]. Is that what the requestor wants? Are any of the opposers only opposing because the current ] is a redirect? Do any of the opposers change to supporters if my clarification is correct? - ] ] 21:42, 30 March 2012 (UTC) | *'''Comment''' So, I'd like to close this. I've moved some of the other China-related articles. What do y'all think is the outcome here? I think that what is being asked here is that the previous version in history of ] is supposed to become the new ], and the current ] gets moved to ]. Is that what the requestor wants? Are any of the opposers only opposing because the current ] is a redirect? Do any of the opposers change to supporters if my clarification is correct? - ] ] 21:42, 30 March 2012 (UTC) | ||
| ::Nothing should be moved. The existing article is fine in content and fine where it is. The other commenters (Shrigley, Kauffner, MadGeographer, NULL, JohnBlackburne) made that more explicit as their rationale. Nothing needs to be done. ] (]) 04:27, 31 March 2012 (UTC) | ::Nothing should be moved. The existing article is fine in content and fine where it is. The other commenters (Shrigley, Kauffner, MadGeographer, NULL, JohnBlackburne) made that more explicit as their rationale. Myself, Eraserhead, and Chipmunkdavis all expressed reservations about it being a redirect. While I don't speak for the other two, I believe they are aware of the article's history and their comments express satisfaction with the current arrangement and surprise at the proposal. Nothing needs to be done except close this from further disruption. ] (]) 04:27, 31 March 2012 (UTC) | ||
| ==Move discussion in progress== | ==Move discussion in progress== | ||
Revision as of 04:31, 31 March 2012
 | China Redirect‑class Top‑importance | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
Move
Why was this page moved? This is the only page that links to Demographics of Mainland China so the purpose is defeated. I don't think this is necessary. --Jiang 04:39, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Summary style
Is there any particularly reason for this page to changed from summary style to disambiguation ? — Instantnood 22:24, August 27, 2005 (UTC)
- If there's no particular reason, the summary style should better be restored. — Instantnood 19:02, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
census results 2010
Where can I get census results 2010 year of People's Republic of China with ethnic population?--Kaiyr (talk) 02:38, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
Move request
 | It has been proposed in this section that multiple pages be renamed and moved. A bot will list this discussion on the requested moves current discussions subpage within an hour of this tag being placed. The discussion may be closed 7 days after being opened, if consensus has been reached (see the closing instructions). Please base arguments on article title policy, and keep discussion succinct and civil. Please use {{subst:requested move}}. Do not use {{requested move/dated}} directly. Links: current log • target log • direct move |
- Demographics of China → Demographics of the People's Republic of China
- Demographics of Greater China → Demographics of China
– To conform with the majority of articles on Misplaced Pages, e.g. Military history of China. Jeremy (talk) 10:45, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
- Support -- This is an article about the area now govered by PRC. There is no reason to include the word "greater" in it, even if Sinkiang and Tibet are not (or were not) ethncially Chinese. Peterkingiron (talk) 14:40, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
Support. China, People's Republic of China and Mainland China are different concepts. 119.237.156.246 (talk) 15:02, 19 March 2012 (UTC)blocked and banned as sock- Oppose this is a redirect. SchmuckyTheCat (talk) — Preceding unsigned comment added by SchmuckyTheCat (talk
Comment: In the course of the previous move request discussion in August 2011 it was reaffirmed that other articles, categories, etc., wouldn't be affected. This principle was reaffirmed in CfD in October 2011 and February 2012. But this article was moved. The move should be reverted. 119.237.156.246 (talk) 15:25, 19 March 2012 (UTC)blocked and banned as sock- Coincidentally that's promised by the pro-camp in Talk:ROC. Jeffrey (147.8.202.204) (talk) 07:22, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
- The 'pro camp' made no such promises in either the ROC move request or the PRC move request. Individual editors may have done so on their own behalf, and are free to change their mind as new evidence is presented. This point is effectively 'sour grapes' and has nothing to do with the move request here. – NULL ‹talk›
‹edits› 20:22, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
- The 'pro camp' made no such promises in either the ROC move request or the PRC move request. Individual editors may have done so on their own behalf, and are free to change their mind as new evidence is presented. This point is effectively 'sour grapes' and has nothing to do with the move request here. – NULL ‹talk›
- Coincidentally that's promised by the pro-camp in Talk:ROC. Jeffrey (147.8.202.204) (talk) 07:22, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
- Oppose. The country is China so the article Demographics of China has the right name and is in the right place. As for Demographics of Greater China that currently is a redirect, and was before it was a summary article of different countries' demographics, not just that of China, so in either case moving it would be inappropriate.--JohnBlackburnedeeds 17:11, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
It was agreed that other articles should not be affected by the PRC → China move. 119.237.156.246 (talk) 17:49, 19 March 2012 (UTC)blocked and banned as sock- That's just a link to this page, and I don't see anything in the other discussions (two closed 'no consensus' so nothing was decided, the other was the page move to China which established that's the common name for the country).--JohnBlackburnedeeds 18:27, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
- Comment. Demographics of Greater China should not exist as an article. It should be a disambiguation page either at Demographics of China or Demographics of China (disambiguation).--Jiang (talk) 18:07, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
From what's mentioned above in this talk page this entry, currently an article with four short sections in summary style, had used to exist as a disambiguation page. 119.237.156.246 (talk) 18:17, 19 March 2012 (UTC)blocked and banned as sock- When? (Is there any SPI evidence, by the way?) Jeffrey (147.8.202.204) (talk) 07:22, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
- Ask one or both of the administrators who commented on the block directly. This question has nothing to do with the move request. – NULL ‹talk›
‹edits› 20:22, 20 March 2012 (UTC) - There was simply no. 119.237.156.246 (talk) 17:04, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
- Ask one or both of the administrators who commented on the block directly. This question has nothing to do with the move request. – NULL ‹talk›
- When? (Is there any SPI evidence, by the way?) Jeffrey (147.8.202.204) (talk) 07:22, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
- Er this article is a redirect... What the hell is being done here? -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 18:28, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
- I recently changed the article into a redirect as I saw no reason for its existence. It was orphaned anyway. If this seems to be controversial, then revert and go through the bureaucratic processes. If we had comprehensive Greater China statistics then perhaps there is a reason to keep it - anyone want to add the numbers? --Jiang (talk) 01:02, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
- It's orphaned because it was moved to an unusual title. But Greater China definitely isn't the PRC by whatever meaning. Jeffrey (147.8.202.204) (talk) 07:22, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
- I recently changed the article into a redirect as I saw no reason for its existence. It was orphaned anyway. If this seems to be controversial, then revert and go through the bureaucratic processes. If we had comprehensive Greater China statistics then perhaps there is a reason to keep it - anyone want to add the numbers? --Jiang (talk) 01:02, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
- Oppose. The community already agreed that 'China' means the People's Republic of China. I don't understand what other definition of 'China' you're using. Shrigley (talk) 20:53, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
- Oppose - "China" is the title of the country article, so logically we should have "Demographics of China". "Demographics of the People's Republic of China" could be potentially confusing to the reader (...are China and the People's Republic of China different countries? if not, why different names? etc...). mgeo talk 21:44, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
- Oppose. The main article was moved to "China", so the title of the demography article should correspond. Descriptive titles should be consistent with the corresponding main title, not with each other. A lot of "People's Republic of China" articles really need to be moved now. Kauffner (talk) 06:16, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
- Support, either as a disambig page or in the summary style. Jeffrey (147.8.202.204) (talk) 07:22, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
- Oppose, this title is a redirect, and the Demographics of China article is correctly placed in reference to the country of China. – NULL ‹talk›
‹edits› 13:35, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
- Support. Consistency should applied across articles such as Culture of China, History of China, etc., where the word 'China' covers both Chinas of the divided China. Jeremy (talk) 10:29, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
- The nominator doesn't generally vote on his own nomination, Jeremy. – NULL ‹talk
‹edits› 01:48, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
- The nominator doesn't generally vote on his own nomination, Jeremy. – NULL ‹talk
- It was a response on consistency. Jeremy (talk) 10:12, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
- Question The proposal is to...create a double redirect? I don't really think this redirect should exist at all, there's nothing it can really redirect to. CMD (talk) 14:45, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
- Comment So, I'd like to close this. I've moved some of the other China-related articles. What do y'all think is the outcome here? I think that what is being asked here is that the previous version in history of Demographics of Greater China is supposed to become the new Demographics of China, and the current Demographics of China gets moved to Demographics of the People's Republic of China. Is that what the requestor wants? Are any of the opposers only opposing because the current Demographics of Greater China is a redirect? Do any of the opposers change to supporters if my clarification is correct? - UtherSRG (talk) 21:42, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
- Nothing should be moved. The existing article is fine in content and fine where it is. The other commenters (Shrigley, Kauffner, MadGeographer, NULL, JohnBlackburne) made that more explicit as their rationale. Myself, Eraserhead, and Chipmunkdavis all expressed reservations about it being a redirect. While I don't speak for the other two, I believe they are aware of the article's history and their comments express satisfaction with the current arrangement and surprise at the proposal. Nothing needs to be done except close this from further disruption. SchmuckyTheCat (talk) 04:27, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
Move discussion in progress
There is a move discussion in progress which affects this page. Please participate at Talk:Demographics of Greater China - Requested move and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RM bot 10:40, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
Categories: