Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (Chinese)/Archive 5

message: (08:43, 31 Mar 2005)
Any votes here aren't really votes. They're non-votes. This is a non-poll.
Those of us who like the terminology suggested by Instantnood
#Node 08:43, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Non-poll

message: "China" and "Chinese" is an acceptable but not preferred, term when referring to the People's Republic of China. An article that might be confusing with the name "China" (such as "Economy of China") can mention what it does not refer to (such as Taiwan or Macau) with a short text and link inside the article. Even better is a specific article for the other entity. Linking articles should provide the reader, by context, the NPOV of whether the linking article is about the PRC or something else. We should not rename articles from China to mainland China or to the People's Republic of China simply because of a naming convention.
* Hesitantly Agree -- Although the term "China" is often used to refer to the PRC only, it does do the reader a disservice by not adequately making it be known that there are political implications behind it.  I would support it if a statement at the top of each article named "xxx of China" specifically states that it refers to the PRC and not to the ROC, et al.  We should even make this statement a template so that it's consistent across all articles. --Umofomia 08:04, 16 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Statement 2.

message: "Taiwan" is an acceptable, but not preferred, term when referring to Taiwan or the Republic of China. An article that might be confusing with the only the term Taiwan or ROC (such as ROC controlled islands) should explain it's context in the article. We do not need to rename articles to "Republic of China" simply because of a naming convention.
* Hesitantly Agree -- it probably is a little silly renaming every article to "xxx of the Republic of China" and that most people would not readily know that the ROC refers to Taiwan, since many are ignorant of Chinese history.  However, using Taiwan for the ROC also does the reader a disservice like I explain for statement 2.  Again, perhaps we can have a templated statement at the top of any article named "xxx of Taiwan." --Umofomia 08:11, 16 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Statement 3.

message: The primary articles on China and the People's Republic of China should mention that neither "China" nor the PRC is homogenous in laws, language, custom, etc. The extremely loose federated system for provincial control in the PRC allows a wide variety of systems to be practiced. Individual articles should detail how things are different.
* Comment -- I don't exactly know what you mean here.  In my opinion, the main article on China is fine as it is since it talks about things under the geographic and historical definition of China.  The main article on the PRC is fine as well since it talks about the political entity. --Umofomia 08:17, 16 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Statement 4.

message: The primary article on "China" should contain a short section titled "Mainland China". This short section should link to the main article "Mainland China". Most articles should link to "China#Mainland China" and not "Mainland China". The term "mainland China" is POV dependent and might mean several things, thus, it is up to the linking article to maintain context if it links to that term.
* Somewhat Disagree -- I typically don't like linking to subsections of articles since subsections can end up getting renamed or removed.  Also, I don't think mainland China is POV at all because it refers to the geographical entity, which also happens to coincide with the areas administered by the PRC excluding HK and Macau.  In my opinion, it's on the same level as calling the ROC Taiwan, which you seem to support. --Umofomia 08:26, 16 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Statement 5.

message: There is no entity called "mainland China". Unless necessary, articles and categories should not be titled with it. Articles categorized with "China" or "the People's Republic of China" that have some unique situation that differentiates them from the main body of "China" should list that situation in their own articles.
* Somewhat Disagree -- I don't see why you keep insisting that there is no such entity called "mainland China" (大陸).  Even the PRC uses the term all the time when it wants to refer to itself excluding HK and Macau.  However, I am in favor of using the term only to refer to the geographical entity rather than a political entity.  I have no problem with articles entitled "xxx in Mainland China" if they talk about places or things situated in the PRC excluding HK and Macau.  But if it refers to something that relates more to politics or has governmental influence, then I would be in favor of using "xxx in the People's Republic of China."  --Umofomia 08:33, 16 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Statement 6.

message: Hong Kong and Macau are part of the People's Republic of China. They are also special. They should not be categorized or treated as seperate from China. Articles about Hong Kong and Macau have the responsibility to state why and how they are different from the People's Republic of China, not vice versa. The differentness of HK and Macau shouldn't be used to rename other Chinese entities.
* Disagree -- HK and Macau are definitely part of the PRC, but because they are special, they often have radically different systems from the PRC, which justifies them having their own separate articles.  I don't think making them separate is an implicit endorsement of them being equal political entities to the PRC.  The same can apply to any place in China.  For instance, if there is something in Shenzhen or Shanghai or whatever that has its own special situation different from the PRC that takes more than a few paragraphs to explain, then they also could have their own separate articles.  Conversely, if there are things in HK or Macau that aren't too different or don't particularly have enough content to justify separate articles, then they could be merged into an article on the PRC, but trying to place everything under the umbrella of the PRC would make some rather unwieldy articles.  --Umofomia 08:43, 16 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Statement 7.

message: I thought I'd better advertise here, so please come and have look at it: Talk:Mainland_China#Proposed_revision. -- User:Alassius (talk) 17:24, 19 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed revision on [[Mainland China]]