This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Feminist (talk | contribs) at 16:15, 18 September 2015 (Undid revision 666622143 by 1.36.78.22 (talk) IP has never contributed to this article). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 16:15, 18 September 2015 by Feminist (talk | contribs) (Undid revision 666622143 by 1.36.78.22 (talk) IP has never contributed to this article)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)Old topics on this talk page are automatically archived by MiszaBot after 9 days of inactivity. To view inactive discussions, please see the archive pages. Once an archive reaches 70K in size, a new one is automatically created. |
Please stay calm and civil while commenting or presenting evidence, and do not make personal attacks. Be patient when approaching solutions to any issues. If consensus is not reached, other solutions exist to draw attention and ensure that more editors mediate or comment on the dispute. |
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the 2014 Hong Kong protests article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is written in Hong Kong English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, realise, travelled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
This article has previously been nominated to be moved. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination. |
Archives |
This page has archives. Sections older than 10 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
Talk:2014 Hong Kong protests\Edit guide
Why is this article written in British English instead of Hong Kong English?
This makes no sense. See {{Hong Kong English}}
. British English and Hong Kong English mostly retain the same spellings, so little would be necessary to change in the article apart from replacing {{British English}}
with {{Hong Kong English}}
. I think there might be some more words in Hong Kong English not present in British English, but as I said, it appears that they mostly use the same spelling. Dustin (talk) 19:51, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
- You're right, as far as I know, and in any case per WP:TIES it should be in Hong Kong English to begin with. I've gone ahead and changed it, if anyone has a problem feel free to revert. —Nizolan 17:04, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
- In fact looking at the archives it looks like User:RGloucester already tagged it as Hong Kong English, which was then removed as "unnecessary", and someone then later incorrectly tagged it as British English. I don't have the patience to look up the diff where that happened, but it doesn't seem to have been discussed, so I think this is really just a rectification reflecting the article as it already stands (Commonwealth English). —Nizolan 17:14, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
Requested move 14 February 2015
- The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the move request was: Not moved. (non-admin closure) — Amakuru (talk) 13:05, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
2014 Hong Kong protests → 2014–15 Hong Kong protests – I noticed this edit by User:George Ho at Template:Anti-government protests in the 21st century, and was wondering if it really makes sense to treat the 2015 protest as a separate thing. Since they are part of the same overall civil conflict should this article not be moved to 2014–15 Hong Kong protests and extended to cover more recent events? I note that the claim the protests ended on 15 December 2014 is not cited in the infobox. In the body of the article, we find that "On 15 December, police cleared protesters and their camps at Causeway Bay with essentially no resistance, bringing the protests to an end"
, which offers two citations, but the one I can view (the BBC one) doesn't say that the protests were brought to an end, merely that CY Leung claimed that they had been. —Nizolan 12:34, 14 February 2015 (UTC) — Quick amendment: just noticed the #Second phase? discussion above. Hopefully this can serve as a more thorough discussion. —Nizolan 12:36, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
- Oppose – These protests ended in 2014. There was a definitive end point. The new protests are clearly a new round. This article is too long, anyway. RGloucester — ☎ 15:36, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
- If the civil conflict has continued into 2015 then I think it should be included in this article, rather than treating the two things as separate just because they happen to fall on two sides of New Year's Day. Otherwise we have no page describing the civil conflict as such, since Umbrella Movement seems to be about a political configuration rather than a series of events. I'm not too invested either way, though, and I certainly take your point regarding the length of the article. —Nizolan 16:59, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
- Oppose - There are significant differences between the protests from organization, to reason, and even scale. ηoian ‡orever ηew ‡rontiers 10:56, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
- Oppose - Not significant to be included as per WP:EVENT. STSC (talk) 19:04, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
- Oppose - The nature of the protests in 2015 are entirely different. -- Ohc 04:55, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
"Thugs?"
"Despite numerous incidents of intimidation and violence by triads and thugs, particularly in Mong Kok, and several attempts at clearance by the police, suffragists held their ground for over two months."
"Thugs" is a pretty loaded word. Could it be changed to something less politicized and one-sided, maybe "vigilante," "assailant," or "government forces?"
GeneralizationsAreBad (talk) 01:49, 18 March 2015 (UTC)
- A bit like "brownshirts", thugs is the word so often used in these cases, even by serious sources. -- Ohc 07:33, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
- You, are an idiot. I remember that you were banned and that I helped ban you. 108.65.249.149 (talk) 09:52, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
Article still too long?
Ever since the protests ended months ago, I have started to recognize the difference between article's length and the topic's importance. So far, elections and politics are far more important than some protest by masses. Even with subpages, like Umbrella Movement, I think more condensation is needed. The "October 2014" section is still too long to me. There might be still unimportant details. --George Ho (talk) 18:58, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Help with a draft article
Hey guys, I was wondering if any of you would be willing to help work on a draft at AfC, Draft:2015 Hong Kong protests. When I'd come across the draft it'd only had a handful of sources and covered about 2 protests, both of which had a pretty low attendance in contrast to what was expected. I was (and still am) worried that if I'd accepted it to the mainspace it'd likely be merged into this article or the one for the Umbrella Movement. There's been a third protest that's been better attended, but I'm still somewhat worried that it'd just get nominated for AfD or be merge/redirected, which would make it harder for it to be accepted later on. Anyone willing to help flesh out the article and add more sources? I do think that as the year progresses there will be more coverage and it'll warrant more coverage later on, but I'm just worried that it might be considered to be too soon since in its current state this article could probably be summed up in a paragraph here. I'm going to post this at the main article for the UM as well to get more people to come in, if there are any that check that talk page and not this one. I'll probably post this at the Hong Kong WikiProject as well. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 03:35, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
Categories:- Misplaced Pages articles that use Hong Kong English
- All unassessed articles
- B-Class Hong Kong articles
- High-importance Hong Kong articles
- WikiProject Hong Kong articles
- B-Class China-related articles
- Low-importance China-related articles
- B-Class China-related articles of Low-importance
- WikiProject China articles
- B-Class politics articles
- Low-importance politics articles
- WikiProject Politics articles
- B-Class sociology articles
- Mid-importance sociology articles
- B-Class social movements task force articles
- Social movements task force articles