Talk:Chairman Mao Memorial Hall

message: This is just to note that the stuff from China Pictorial was written by me, except that somehow I wasn't logged in.  I got the "China Pictorial" magazine from the Main Stacks of the UC Berkeley Library.
Allentchang 02:19, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Should this article mention (or refer to) the detailed description of the embalming process provided by Li Zhi-Sui in his book 'The Private Life of Chairman Mao' based on apparent first hand experience? If this convincing and authoritative book is to be believed there should be little doubt over the body.
Also I visited the mausoleum some years ago and was certainly not rushed as implied in this article. The queue of people shuffled through at steady, sombre pace.
I accept this article is about the mausoleum itself and not specifically the embalming process but I wondered if anyone else had an opinion on this. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by RogMcDog (talk • contribs) 09:36, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Embalming process 

message: Controversy section. It doesn't have any sources (though I'm more - than - confident that some can be cited), however it's also, to me, rather blatantly disregards neutrality. I've emboldended the statements I take issue with, and added a * to those which need sources:
"After the reform started in 1979 in China, however, it was revealed that the symbolic voluntary labor was, allegedly, a complete waste of time and other resources, because the significant majority* of the voluntary work performed was nothing other than a political propaganda showpiece*: the 'volunteers' would come to the construction site to form a human chain and pass the bricks from one end to the other, and the next day, a different group of the 'volunteers' would repeat the task, except the bricks were passed back to the original spot*. Actual work that would really help the construction was never done*. As a result, the construction of the mausoleum of Mao cost (measured in 1977 prices) ten times more* than that of the Great Hall of the People (measured in 1959 prices). This waste of resources was used by the reformers within the communist party to criticize Hua Guofeng and his followers, but once the reformers had consolidated their power after Hua Guofeng was removed, further discussion on this sensitive topic was banned."
Now, I'm not arguing with a pro - Maoist stance (though it is true that I support the Marxist theory), but I'm sure we could tone this wording down so that it doesn't sound that someone has a chip on their shoulder (and, obviously, the problem with sources). Any thoughts? Thanks! Sporker (talk) 11:41, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This section is out of context. If no work on construction was done, there would be no mausoleum! There ought to be a surrounding section about the building work that did happen - this currently leads straight on from the crystal coffin. Leushenko (talk) 00:36, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV 

message: From the article:
:According to China Pictorial, Issue 9, 1977, people throughout China designed and built the mausoleum. Material from all over China was used for the construction: granite from Sichuan Province, porcelain plates from Guangdong Province, pine trees from Yan'an, Shaanxi Province, saw-wort seeds from the Tian Shan Mountains in the Xinjiang Autonomous Region, earth from the quake-stricken Tangshan, color pebbles from Nanjing, milky quartz from the Kunlun Mountains, pine logs from Jiangxi Province, and rock samples from Mount Everest.  Water and sand from the Taiwan Straits were also used to symbolically emphasize the People's Republic of China's claims over Taiwan.  700,000 people from different provinces, autonomous regions, and nationalities did symbolic voluntary labour. It was closed for renovation until September 20, 2007. [Bold for emphasis]
Now, based on this paragraph, it appears to me that construction of the Mausoleum began in 1977 and it finally opened on Sept. 20, 2007!  Clearly, that's not the case.  So the final sentence should say something like, "It was closed for renovation on <date>, and formally re-opened on Sept. 20, 2007."  Maybe even a sentence or two should be added explaining the nature of the renovation? —MicahBrwn (talk) 06:10, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Intro is confusing 

message: Is it just me, or do many parts of the building of the glass coffin sound like they were taken from a propaganda piece?
:During the welding process, the metallic protective gear worn by Shi Weicheng (石维成) began to smoke due to the high temperature, and he had to stand in a specially designed pool while other workers poured water on him to cool him down; when he was finished, the water level reached his ankles. The resulting purity reached 99.9999%, a world record that has not yet been broken since.
:At this time, Beijing was frequently struck by the aftershocks of the 1976 Tangshan earthquake; during these aftershocks, workers would reportedly stop the machine and throw themselves on top of the plates, using their own bodies to shield the plates from falling debris.
:In order to eliminate reflections, as well as obtaining the strongest strength, the crystal plates had to be connected at precise angles. Optical engineer Wang Daheng(王大珩) was enlisted to help and after numerous calculations the best angles were obtained. It was discovered that the selection of the angles was so precise that even without the adhesives and other methods of connection, the plates would not collapse. The dimensional tolerance was up to 10 micrometres.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.109.67.245 (talk) 03:43, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I had the exact same reaction to this article.  Way too much unreferenced detail that reads like a propaganda film script.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 158.35.225.231 (talk) 20:25, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Same to me. This is bad propaganda. And I wouldn't see why producing a crystal coffin is worth that much description anyway. (It is not exactly King Tut's coffin.) And if we go into such detail I would expect to get info on the machinery which prevents the body from rotting away, i.e., the "non crystal glass" part of this coffin story - but that is not part of the usual propaganda you would get from Chinese sources, is it? 24.34.207.61 (talk) 21:41, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  Indeed. There are entire sections here that sound like the sort of stuff coming out of North Korea about Kim. I would remove all of it but there would be very little structure left to the article. In fact that page that linked to it (mao zedong) sounds very similar and was largely written by the same person(s). The anecdotal paragraphs have got to go. But I will have to leave it to someone with more grasp of WP semantics. -173.166.45.177 (talk) 18:59, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  Since it has been at least two and a half years that these sections have gone unsourced (although the blatantly propagandist material has been removed, no sources have been provided for the pared down version), I have deleted the offending section. Luna (talk) 02:59, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Propaganda? 

message: Can pictures and/or video be taken in the Mausoleum of Mao Zedong?  The article does not mention anything about it yet it is mentioned in the mausoleums of Lenin and Ho Chi Minh.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.181.116.235 (talk) 07:02, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Can Pictures/Video be taken in the Mausoleum? 

message: The Chinese Wikipedia article (:zh:毛主席纪念堂) mentions 5 sculptures, including a statue of Zedong inside the mausoleum and 4 sculptural groups outside. Could someone translate this content for the English Wikipedia article? ---Another Believer (Talk) 15:00, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sculpture