Changes

==Old talk page for China==

==Old talk page for China==

China's history is in need of revision.  At the beginning of the article, it is stated that Chinese civilization began in the year 2200 B.C.  This begs the questions, of course: began with what; and did nothing precede it?  However, these questions aren't my biggest concern.  Rather, I note that the discovery of silk from the silkworm occurred around 2700 B.C. -- a full 500 years before civilization in China began.  I find the very notion of five centuries of silk makers living without the benefit of civilization to be quite disturbing.  Can we safely take the liberty of adjusting the dates listed in order to resolve the apparent conflict?  History will surely be grateful.

China's history is in need of revision.  At the beginning of the article, it is stated that Chinese civilization began in the year 2200 B.C.  This begs the questions, of course: began with what; and did nothing precede it?  However, these questions aren't my biggest concern.  Rather, I note that the discovery of silk from the silkworm occurred around 2700 B.C. -- a full 500 years before civilization in China began.  I find the very notion of five centuries of silk makers living without the benefit of civilization to be quite disturbing.  Can we safely take the liberty of adjusting the dates listed in order to resolve the apparent conflict?  History will surely be grateful.

:[[User:JC|JC]] 14:11, 15 March 2007 (EDT)

:[[User:JC|JC]] 14:11, 15 March 2007 (EDT)

:: your getting  very close to another ban.--[[User:AustinM|AustinM]] 14:58, 15 March 2007 (EDT)

:: your getting  very close to another ban.--[[User:AustinM|AustinM]] 14:58, 15 March 2007 (EDT)

I neglected to sign my earlier post.--[[User:Blr|Blr]] 01:24, 12 March 2007 (EDT)

I neglected to sign my earlier post.--[[User:Blr|Blr]] 01:24, 12 March 2007 (EDT)

== Great Wall Of China ==

=== Great Wall Of China ===

Shouldn't this section be under something such as "Tourist Attractions" or some kind of unique features of the country, since it links to a whole new article of its own? [[User:Niandra|niandra]] 13:05, 15 March 2007 (EDT)

Shouldn't this section be under something such as "Tourist Attractions" or some kind of unique features of the country, since it links to a whole new article of its own? [[User:Niandra|niandra]] 13:05, 15 March 2007 (EDT)

== Romanization standard ==

=== Romanization standard ===

In articles dealing with China, there should generally be one standard used consistantly for English transliteration. Pinyin is favored by the PRC, the older Wade-Giles is used by the ROC.

In articles dealing with China, there should generally be one standard used consistantly for English transliteration. Pinyin is favored by the PRC, the older Wade-Giles is used by the ROC.

== What so special about 2200 BC?? ==

=== What so special about 2200 BC?? ===

No, seriously, this is getting to be beyond a joke. A critic was kind enough to gently query what was so special about the year 2200 BC that it constituted the beginning of Chinese Civilisation, and asked how it came to be that the production of silk in that region is said (2 pars down) to occur in 2700 BC, a good HALF MILLENNIUM before the advent of“Chinese Civilization". And now, MONTHS later, there appears to be so little interest in the fortunes of a nation of ONE BILLION people in an emerging superpower that this pathetic drivel of an article – 418 words long! – has not received even the most elementary of amendments or extensions. 418 words! - that's just twice the length of THIS little note! Is that an example of "clean and concise" writing?  

No, seriously, this is getting to be beyond a joke. A critic was kind enough to gently query what was so special about the year 2200 BC that it constituted the beginning of Chinese Civilisation, and asked how it came to be that the production of silk in that region is said (2 pars down) to occur in 2700 BC, a good HALF MILLENNIUM before the advent of“Chinese Civilization". And now, MONTHS later, there appears to be so little interest in the fortunes of a nation of ONE BILLION people in an emerging superpower that this pathetic drivel of an article – 418 words long! – has not received even the most elementary of amendments or extensions. 418 words! - that's just twice the length of THIS little note! Is that an example of "clean and concise" writing?  

isn't it anti-conservapedia to have pictures of human fossils in articles, since it relates to evolution and whatnot? and what is the relevance of a skull in an artile about china? -Sundance

isn't it anti-conservapedia to have pictures of human fossils in articles, since it relates to evolution and whatnot? and what is the relevance of a skull in an artile about china? -Sundance

== Number of Muslims? ==

=== Number of Muslims? ===

If anyone has a citation for the number of Muslims in China, then a reliable, ''cited'' estimate of that number would be welcome. But not ''without'' a citation.--[[User:TerryH|TerryH]]^{[[User talk:TerryH|Talk]]} 19:52, 9 October 2008 (EDT)

If anyone has a citation for the number of Muslims in China, then a reliable, ''cited'' estimate of that number would be welcome. But not ''without'' a citation.--[[User:TerryH|TerryH]]^{[[User talk:TerryH|Talk]]} 19:52, 9 October 2008 (EDT)

==Liberal Vandalism==

===Liberal Vandalism===

It seems that some people have managed to insert liberal bias into the article. For example, why does so much of the article present China as though it is an increasingly prosperous nation? What about the human rights issues? What about the fact that nothing has changed the fact that the nation is essentially '''morally bankrupt''' and that this situation will '''not''' change in the foreseeable future? [[User:Handels584|Handels584]] 08:30, 28 October 2008 (EDT)

It seems that some people have managed to insert liberal bias into the article. For example, why does so much of the article present China as though it is an increasingly prosperous nation? What about the human rights issues? What about the fact that nothing has changed the fact that the nation is essentially '''morally bankrupt''' and that this situation will '''not''' change in the foreseeable future? [[User:Handels584|Handels584]] 08:30, 28 October 2008 (EDT)

==rename to China==

==rename to China==

Unless there are objections I propose to reannme the article "China." We want our readers to refer to the place as "China" and not to the people's Republic of China, which makes Communist rule too normal. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 08:53, 26 March 2009 (EDT)

Unless there are objections I propose to rename the article "China." We want our readers to refer to the place as "China" and not to the people's Republic of China, which makes Communist rule too normal. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 08:53, 26 March 2009 (EDT)