Talk:2001 Tiananmen Square self-immolation incident: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous edit Next edit →Content deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 05:30, 26 November 2017 editRMCD bot (talk \| contribs)Bots, Template editors1,001,650 edits Notifying of move discussion on Talk:Tiananmen ← Previous edit		Revision as of 03:09, 12 January 2018 edit undoAnother Believer (talk \| contribs)Autopatrolled, Event coordinators, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, File movers, Mass message senders, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers637,453 edits orderNext edit →
Line 2:		Line 2:
	{{Talk header\|search=y}}		{{Talk header\|search=y}}
	{{Ds/talk notice\|topic=fg\|style=long}}		{{Ds/talk notice\|topic=fg\|style=long}}
⚫	{{WikiProjectBannerShell\|collapsed=yes\|1=
⚫	{{WPCHINA\|class=FA\|importance=Mid}}
⚫	{{WPReligion\|class=FA\|importance=low\|NRM=yes\|NRMImp=mid\|FalunGong=yes\|FalunGongImp=Top}}
⚫	}}
	{{ArticleHistory		{{ArticleHistory
	\|action1=PR		\|action1=PR
Line 33:		Line 29:
	\|currentstatus=FA		\|currentstatus=FA
	\|maindate=April 3, 2012		\|maindate=April 3, 2012
		⚫	}}
		⚫	{{WikiProjectBannerShell\|collapsed=yes\|1=
		⚫	{{WPCHINA\|class=FA\|importance=Mid}}
		⚫	{{WPReligion\|class=FA\|importance=low\|NRM=yes\|NRMImp=mid\|FalunGong=yes\|FalunGongImp=Top}}
	}}		}}
	{{OnThisDay\|date1=2008-01-23\|oldid1=186315135\|date2=2009-01-23\|oldid2=265908085\|date3=2010-01-23\|oldid3=339530804\|date4=2016-01-23\|oldid4=701190729\|date5=2017-01-23\|oldid5=761526002}}		{{OnThisDay\|date1=2008-01-23\|oldid1=186315135\|date2=2009-01-23\|oldid2=265908085\|date3=2010-01-23\|oldid3=339530804\|date4=2016-01-23\|oldid4=701190729\|date5=2017-01-23\|oldid5=761526002}}

Revision as of 03:09, 12 January 2018

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the 2001 Tiananmen Square self-immolation incident article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8Auto-archiving period: 2 months

The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to Falun Gong, 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.

2001 Tiananmen Square self-immolation incident is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Misplaced Pages community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.

This article appeared on Misplaced Pages's Main Page as Today's featured article on April 3, 2012.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
September 17, 2007	Peer review	Reviewed
October 11, 2007	Good article nominee	Listed
August 7, 2008	Good article reassessment	Delisted
October 13, 2009	Featured article candidate	Promoted
Current status: Featured article

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.

China Mid‑importance

	China portal 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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Religion: Falun Gong / New religious movements Low‑importance

	Religion portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Misplaced Pages's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is within the scope of Falun Gong work group, a work group which is currently considered to be inactive.
	This article is supported by New religious movements work group (assessed as Mid-importance).

A fact from this article was featured on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the On this day section on January 23, 2008, January 23, 2009, January 23, 2010, January 23, 2016, and January 23, 2017.

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives

Index

Archive 1	Archive 2	Archive 3
Archive 4	Archive 5	Archive 6
Archive 7	Archive 8

This page has archives. Sections older than 60 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present.

Revert

I reverted the latest edit by an IP, who is presumably the same person as "Wykymyst." I have not had time to look through the other edits. I don't know how many of them are useful and how many are along the lines of the one I just undid: not very helpful and don't read well. When I get a moment I will go through the rest of them and make more changes as I consider due, and then make some notes on this page explaining my thinking. The reciprocal will be appreciated by this new editor. TheSoundAndTheFury (talk) 18:19, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

I have reverted the revert of this edit. No explanation as to why. You need to justify the original huge raft of changes. TheSoundAndTheFury (talk) 06:18, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

It seems you didn't go back far enough to effectively undo this huge raft of changes. I just restored the lede and background sections to be much closer to what they were under the previous version, adding a few bits here and there of research that I read recently and was reminded of. There were other places in the article where I found that someone had inserted repetitious points of evidence pointing to a hoax in various places where it didn't belong, and other instances of sub-par writing, so I tried to clean it up where I could. Every time I read this article I feel that there's a lot we could do to tighten it up, though I recognise that would be a difficult and potentially controversial thing to do.—Zujine|talk 05:18, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

Looks like it happened again. I'm reverting this, and here's why:

The government didn't initially claim that this was a protest against mistreatment.
It's repetitive, with the Falun Gong perspective repeated twice in the same short paragraph
There's extraneous information that should be buried much deeper in the article, instead of in the establishing paragraph
Overall it detracts from the clarity and objectivity of the introduction.TheBlueCanoe 14:33, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi, I am the Wykymyst editor who had done the changes. And my rationale was going by the best of sources available - Peter Pan, Ian Johnson, to documentaries done by respectable folks - ALL OF WHICH say the same thing. IT WAS STAGED. And a bit of human sense - I mean how much more obvious could it be. But then human sense has no place in an encyclopedia you can argue. And my edit and each sentence were supported by multiple sources. Do not let other users set up an inital bias in your brain, which then will lead you to echo things from their biased viewpoint. Wiki Chymyst 12:10, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

I'm biased towards good writing. You didn't address the reasons for the revert, which was that your edits made the introductory section less clear, coherent, and readable.TheBlueCanoe 14:56, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Huh?

Looking for an explanation for this change. I added a source to the point about how officials were calling for an intensified propaganda effort just weeks before this event took place, and it was removed. Also, I don't think the editor's change to the opening of the paragraph in question is an improvement in any sense. It does not make the meaning any clearer.

I'm also going to address a couple other things this editor removed. I like some of the edits, but the lead section needs to have more explanation of the dispute and sources of contention. Also (and I meant to change this in my last edit--sorry) it doesn't seem kosher for Misplaced Pages editors to be issuing declarations about what's "heterodox." Finally, the 610 Office was formed with a single mandate, which was to target Falun Gong. I'll make these changes now. Happy to discuss. TheBlueCanoe 03:16, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

I’m afraid Ohconfucius is generally not wont to discuss his changes on the talk page; in this case he opted to violate the 3RR rather than try to reach a consensus.

But you are right about the 610 Office. It was formed in 1999 with the sole objective of targeting the Falungong. At the time of this incident in 2001 this was still its only mandate. It was not until 2003 that its parent organisation changed its name from the “Central Leading Group for Dealing with Falun Gong” to the ’’Central Leading Group on Dealing with Heretical Religions.” When writing about an event that took place in 1999 or 2001, referring to the latter is anachronistic.

I also have to agree that the lede must include mention of at least some of the evidence that challenged the government’s story. Many people don’t read past the lede section, and without referencing Pan’s findings or other incongruities, they’ll have no idea whether there is any real basis for the disagreement.

Also looking at this edit: While Ohconfucius says his goal is to remove “excessive characterisation” and use the “factual/official” explanation for the ban, he does just the opposite. He adds all sorts of unnecessary qualifications about the “massive propaganda campaign” description (a term used by Ownby as well as Amnesty International), and uses a highly compromised primary source (Chinese state-run media agency) to make assertions about the factual basis for a political persecution campaign. Altogether this is just not a useful edit from any perspective.—Zujine|talk 21:56, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Tiananmen Square self-immolation incident. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20140706224534/http://culteducation.com/group/1254-falun-gong/6781-one-way-trip-to-the-end-in-beijing.html to http://www.culteducation.com/group/1254-falun-gong/6781-one-way-trip-to-the-end-in-beijing.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—_{Talk to my owner:Online} 03:39, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141028001341/http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/asset/ASA17/011/2000/en/7a361a8e-df70-11dd-acaa-7d9091d4638f/asa170112000en.html to https://www.amnesty.org/en/library/asset/ASA17/011/2000/en/7a361a8e-df70-11dd-acaa-7d9091d4638f/asa170112000en.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:12, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Tiananmen Square self-immolation incident. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:59, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Tiananmen which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 05:30, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

Categories: