Talk:Solar power in China

message: I've just revised data for 2012 onwards, using Chinese government source data (see refs with the table). Now there is a weird slump in installations for 2011-2012. The original sources listed are problematic: the IEA report 'snapshot of global PV' only makes a statement about Chinese installations in 2013, the  'National Survey Report of PV Power Applications in China 2011' give just a single value for 2011, which is really big jump of 2500 MW.
Another IEA report has timeline for installations 1995-2010, which says was essentially zero PV until 2006, climbing to 500 in 2010. These numbers, too, seem educated guesses (at 10, 20, 40, 80, 160, 500 MW).
I'm not sure what to do now. The data currently present in the table for 1999-2011 seems doubtful, and not backed up by any of the sources given.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jorritg (talk • contribs) 11:23, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Differences in sources on installed capacity data 

message: I check pages listed in :Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of :Solar power in China's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.
Reference named "CleanTechnica":
From Photovoltaics: 
From Growth of photovoltaics: 
Reference named "epia-2014":
From Solar power in the United Kingdom: 
From Photovoltaics: 
From Solar power in Italy: 
From Solar power by country: 
From Solar power in France: 
From Renewable energy: 
From Solar energy in Finland: 
From Solar power in Ukraine: 
I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 09:30, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Orphaned references in [[:Solar power in China]] 

message: This is said to be misleading (first paragraph):
: China became the world's largest producer of photovoltaic power ... By the end of 2016, total PV capacity had increased to over 77.4 GW.
--Mortense (talk) 12:31, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: There is nothing misleading about the statement. The sentence is perfectly clear. If someone does not know what the word capacity means in the context of solar power, this is what wikilinks are for. --Ita140188 (talk) 16:06, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Misleading statement 

message: A user reverted my edits again and again. I've deleted the photo in question, because Hong Kong is not China. I've shown him a more appropriate article for that photo, but he wouldn't listen.
The article is Energy in Hong Kong. 129.127.32.138 (talk) 06:14, 23 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: You didn't want to discuss this in the talk page, which is the correct place for the discussion. You can make your point, but since I disagree, I revert. Then we discuss. see WP:BRD. Then you are supposed to try to convince me with a logical argument and get the input of other editors until there is consensus, not edit war and forcing a change to something that has been stable. That's WP policy for how this is to be handled. For interested editors, there is a related discussion at Talk:Photovoltaic system MartinezMD (talk) 06:32, 23 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: That discussion is also by me. I started the discussion here and there after you told me to.129.127.32.138 (talk) 06:43, 23 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I will revert here, see WP:BRD. This is an image of a solar installation. It is labelled as being in Hong Kong, which is still a part of China, regardless of the politics of leadership involved. You can disagree with the inclusion and make your argument here. Then you can see what other editors have to say to get consensus on the issue. MartinezMD (talk) 17:28, 23 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: To be fair, I think the current image is not good, independently of the political sides. This is mainly because: 1) Mainland China's renewable energy policy as discussed in this article generally do not apply in HK; 2) Solar power statistics as reported in this article generally do not include HK; 3) there are many more representative photos of solar installations in China, as the great majority of solar power installed in China is in very large solar plants outside of city centers. --Ita140188 (talk) 09:09, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

text:  You can revert if you like, Martinez. And I will revert it again. Two editors disagree with you. And yes, as I have stated before, there is  A SEPARATE PAGE for Hong Kong. 129.127.32.138 (talk) 05:06, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I am here to make an encyclopedia, not get into an edit war. If consensus is that it should not be in the article, I don't have a problem with it. You would benefit from learning more WP policy. MartinezMD (talk) 05:19, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

text:  Like I said, two people disagree with you. Therefore, it will be reverted. End of.129.127.32.138 (talk) 05:25, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: 1. You already reverted. 2. Consensus is not a vote. Read WP:Consensus MartinezMD (talk) 05:45, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hong Kong and China 

message: "In 2017 China was the first country to pass 100 GW of cumulative installed PV capacity"
It appears Australia had 9,930 GW in 2017. 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_in_Australia  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.161.188.49 (talk) 07:03, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: That's 9,930 GWh (gigawatt-hour). It refers to generation during a year, not installed capacity. Australia had about 7 GW of solar in 2017 (see Solar power in Australia). --Ita140188 (talk) 09:19, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  100 GW