Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 19:50, 17 April 2020

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Naming conventions (Chinese) page.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed

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:

Hong Kong This page is within the scope of WikiProject Hong Kong, a project to coordinate efforts in improving all Hong Kong-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other Hong Kong-related articles, you are invited to join this project.Hong KongWikipedia:WikiProject Hong KongTemplate:WikiProject Hong KongHong Kong Hong Kong To-do: edit history watch purge Attention needed (60) ...needing expert attention (4) • ...without infoboxes (33) Collaboration needed Recommend topic Improvement needed GA-Class articles (60) • B-Class articles (298) Cleanup needed C-Class articles (1,068) Image needed (347) Destub needed Start-Class articles (5,533) • Stub-Class articles (6,675) Deorphan needed ...orphans Page creation needed Requested articles Miscellaneous tasks ...maintain popularity • ...assess the un-Class (380) • ...assess the un-Importance (1,343) Macau This page is within the scope of WikiProject Macau, an attempt to better organize and improve articles related to Macau.MacauWikipedia:WikiProject MacauTemplate:WikiProject MacauMacau China This page 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 East Asia (defunct) This page is within the scope of WikiProject East Asia, a project which is currently considered to be defunct.East AsiaWikipedia:WikiProject East AsiaTemplate:WikiProject East AsiaEast Asia

• WT:NC-CHINA

Archives

/Names /monarchical titles /languages and dialects /PRC vs ROC /Archive 1 /Archive 2 /Archive 3 /Archive 4 /Archive 5 /Archive 6 /Archive 7 /Archive 8 /Archive 9 /Archive 10 /Archive 11 /Archive 12 /Archive 13

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

Please consider joining the feedback request service. An editor has requested comments from other editors for this discussion. This page has been added to the following lists: Politics, government, and law Misplaced Pages style and naming 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.

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)

A notification was placed on Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject China at 01:17, 2 April 2020 (UTC). --MarioGom (talk) 19:27, 17 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)

@Timrollpickering: The significant difference, however, is that nobody really confuses French Guiana, Guadeloupe, Martinique, Mayotte, and Réunion with Metropolitan France, and it seems to be common understanding that the word "France" refers to Metropolitan France. The same connot be said of the word "China" though, which itself is an intense contemporary political debate, and thus a disambiguation such as the politically neutral "mainland China" is needed. – PhilipTerryGraham (talk · articles · reviews) 09:38, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

• Support per the failed pandemic article move request and 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)

I think it's reasonable for the RfC to specifically focus on articles that explicitly exclude HK, Macau, and Taiwan. "Mainland China" is a term that is typically used to explicitly exclude them, independent of the status of Aksai Chin, Arunachal Pradesh, Sino-Bhutanese disputed areas, the Spratly Islands, the Senkaku Islands, the Paracel Islands, or a dozen other islands / mountains / relatively unpopulated areas. Also a rather pedantic note, but the official Chinese government definition of mainland China doesn't really exist per se. If one argues that their usage of it in cross-Strait relations is official, then the PRC government's usage technically includes both HK and Macau. — MarkH₂₁ 21:48, 11 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)
• Support – when articles on a topic have separate coverage for Hong Kong, Macau, and/or Taiwan, the use of "mainland China" would be a perfect natural disambiguation to distinguish the majority of China from the politically, culturally, and economically distinct island cultures of Hong Kong, Macau, and Taiwan. If not, readers may confuse a particular article as covering all of China including Hong Kong, Macau, and – for some readers – Taiwan, when the article does not. This would be especially problematic, and this natural disambiguation would serve as a good way to prevent such confusion – PhilipTerryGraham (talk · articles · reviews) 09:22, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
• Support - Hong Kong and Taiwan have media independent of the Communist Party of China, and this treatment is entirely warranted. -- Ohc  10:29, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

• Strong Support - Taiwan, Macau and Hong Kong are very different compared to mainland China in many aspects. Be it the history, people, government, law, media and/or politics among others. This treatment of separating articles by renaming them is not only required but also due. The move would provide readers particular insight and information on the related topics in the specific region as opposed to generalized knowledge, as is the current case. Such articles could also be expanded to contain more relevant facts and material for an overall comprehensive view and understanding of various topics.---Shawnqual (talk) 23:45, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

• Support - As much as I know, Taiwan, Hong Kong (and Makau) have independent media, law, people, history (and many other independent issues); and factually there seems to be remarkable difference(s) in comparison to "mainland China". As a result, applying the mentioned name (of "mainland China)" will logically be more helpful in presenting more precise/useful info. in regards to the mentioned issue. Ali Ahwazi (talk) 20:45, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

• Oppose to such a massive and potentially disruptive change. Analogous situations can be found with the United States and Puerto Rico, the United Kingdom and British Overseas Territories, France and overseas collectivities. I'm not adding a strong oppose because some reliable sources frequently use "Mainland China" and some use just "China", they are usually divided on the convention. --MarioGom (talk) 22:37, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Note that I'm not opposing to the use of "mainland China" for every possible case, I'm just opposing a mass change. I realize that a few other editors want to decide on a case-by-case basis even !voting support. --MarioGom (talk) 22:49, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

• Oppose and could be in conflict with the ]. WP:COMMONNAME already covers most cases, and in most situations, mainland China is referred to as simply China, unless distinction from Taiwan/SARs is paramount. --17jiangz1 (talk) 17:57, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

• Support. While I see the logic behind omitting "mainland", there's still an assumption that Hong Kong and Macau (and at times Taiwan) are homogenous to the rest of China; among a few groups of editors "mainland China" has become WP:COMMONNAME. Currently over at Template:2019-20 coronavirus pandemic data a footnote was added to China to explicitly define the split, but China would probably have to have this footnote in almost every article it mentioned when the SARs and/or Taiwan are also somewhere in the article. Keeping it as "mainland China" is shorter and less of a hassle to consistently do. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:00, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

• Note that some guidelines already exist for this topic at MOS:NC-CN. Whatever the result of this RfC, this page is probably not the right place to implement it. --MarioGom (talk) 19:22, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

• Oppose hard and fast rule, continue to deal with on a case-by-case basis. Use "China" when unlikely to cause confusion, but "mainland China" if it would make the statement more clear. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 19:50, 17 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