This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Economy of China (disambiguation) page. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This disambiguation page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
Now a dab — Preceding unsigned comment added by SchmuckyTheCat ( talk • contribs) 01:04, 2 April 2005
Following the long discussion at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (Chinese) regarding proper titling of Mainland China-related topics, polls for each single case has now been started here. Please come and join the discussion, and cast your vote. Thank you. — Insta ntnood 14:49, Apr 9, 2005 (UTC)
Huaiwei's and SchmuckyTheCat's edits were reverted. Proposals on disputed entries should not be presented in this way, but at sandbox or at personal namespace instead. — Insta ntnood 16:36, Apr 10, 2005 (UTC)
There are over 100 pages linking here, so having a disambiguation page is really destructive. I will be moving things back if those links havent been fixed a month from now. It can be done using bots. -- Ji ang 07:22, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)
160.39.250.203 removed ROC/Taiwan from the page, with the edit summary "removed POV". If ROC's/Taiwan's economy has to be included in this page, the leading sentence can perhaps be changed to "You may be looking for:" to avoid POV. — Insta ntnood 20:28, Apr 18, 2005 (UTC)
Please stop removing references to taiwan claiming it is not part of China. As long as some people believe Taiwan is part of China, then we must include it here. The term "may include" is used to satisfy those who think it is not part of China. -- Ji ang 20:13, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Here's your reason to include Taiwan: The naming conventions explicitly said not to equate China with the PRC. Refer to the China details for the definition used here. The de facto situation can be interpreted either way to mean that Taiwan is or is not part of China. The way you do this is to follow the naming conventions and say that China is not synonymous with the PRC. It is a cultural/geographic entity divided by an unresolved civil war between the PRC and ROC. Under this argument, Taiwan is part of China. A more outdated argument is that the Republic of China is the legitimate China. Under the argument, Taiwan is also part of China. I can find plenty of people believing the former so it would be POV to ignore that viewpoint. Even if you want to represent the de facto situation, you need to label it as such-- Ji ang 05:03, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I can't help but to interrupt this dated discussion. Even though I have no opinion leaving Taiwan in this article since some people believes Taiwan as part of China, I have to point out that the civil war analysis is only one's POV and not necessarily and that Taiwan vs China issue could be treated in another angle so that Taiwan is not part of China at all. In the article Legal status of Taiwan, one would find many Taiwanese independence activitists suggests the legitimacy of ROC occupying Taiwan is only based on General Order No.1 and thus ROC has no sovereignty over Taiwan. In this angle, Taiwan would have nothing to do with the Chinese civil war. POVs are POVs. This is not to endorse or rejecting either but to buffer the Chinese civil war POV.-- Mababa 05:12, 4 May 2005 (UTC)
"Due to historical colonization by European powers, the economies of Hong Kong and Macau remained separate from that of mainland China, and under the agreements for their return, they continue to remain so."
In short: They are Special Administrative Regions
"From the point of view of Chinese nationalists who view Taiwan as a part of China, they may consider Taiwan's economy to be a part of China's, despite no actual unity between the economy of Taiwan ( Republic of China) and the economy of mainland China. In fact, trade and investment is limited between the Republic of China (ROC) and the People's Republic by ROC law."
In short: Taiwan has a separate economy from the mainland, but some people consider Taiwan to be part of China, along with HK and MO. Thus, "China" would be synonymous with "Greater China" and "economy of China" would be synonymous with "economy of Greater China". Saying that Taiwan is economically part of Greater China, as noted, is not POV. -- Ji ang 08:23, 6 May 2005 (UTC)
you ELIMINTATED commentary not shortened it. Greater China means more than China. You can't backport it to mean China. Greater China is never a synonym for China you should read George Orwell because you're good at that crap. But I feel sorry for you because it seems like you believe your own slippages too.-- 160.39.195.88 16:34, 6 May 2005 (UTC)
the clause "Depending on one's position over the question of the political status of Taiwan" used to modify "the economy of China may include" is not accurate since people often use "China" to mean mainland China, excluding HK and MO. The news media does this when speaking in economic terms.
i'm not sure how the change of "considered part of the Greater China economy with the PRC" to "many considered it part of the Greater China economy with the PRC" is necessary. who disputes that the term "Greater China" includes TW? -- Ji ang 04:17, 7 May 2005 (UTC)
The following content is from an article that was nominated for deletion. (See Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Dates of Chinese Economy in Wartimes(1937-44)). The concensus of that discussion was that the content could be kept but the article title was completely wrong. The best recommendation at the time was to merge the content here. This is, however, a disambiguation page. None of the currently-listed articles appear to apply. The mainland China article appears to be closest but starts well after the content discussed here. Could someone with more content knowledge than I please move this into the appropriate article? Rossami (talk) 5 July 2005 23:37 (UTC)
Before the Second Sino-Japanese War, in 1930, Chinese per capita income was US$ 11. Subsequently, the Chinese dollar fell in value to 7% of its gold valuation. By the end of 1942, having lost more than 95% of its value, the money supply in circulation had risen 50 times, and inflation continued.
In the part of China occupied by Japanese forces, the prices of basic goods rose much over their real value; in Shanghai during 1941, the nominal monetary values were at 11 times of the real ones. In Manchukuo there occurred a similar disparity, despite Japanese centralized economic control.
The Japanese occupation caused severe damage to the Chinese economy, adding to previous troubles before the all-out conflict. Before the Japanese invasion in 1937, Chinese bonds selling overseas had a return of some 16% to compensate for risk; now Chinese credit had to be reorganized and reinforced with international support. Around 200 millions of Chinese citizens were in occupied territories. Smuggling and participation in the black market to cover minimum needs became common.
If that's all there is, then one of the history pages would be a good place to put it. Or add a history section to Economy of the PRC. SchmuckyTheCat 6 July 2005 02:04 (UTC)
I guess we can have a new article on
economic history of China, with the
content (
hist) from the article mentioned above as one of the sections. There are already some articles on the
economic history of certain countries.
Economic history of Britain and
economic history of Canada would be good examples to follow. —
Insta
ntnood July 6, 2005 07:56 (UTC)
NPOV does not mean giving respectability to bad ideas. It is not true that just because one person in the world thinks that the world is one way, that it must make its way into Wikipedia. First, how the hell is economic history an economy? Second, when is PRC's economy ever NOT included in economy of China?
Third--I regret that I'm even considering that there exists some "economy of China" that includes HK, Macau, and Taiwan. Hello folks? The fact is that the economies are separate regardless of political questions. What in the world does this have to do with whether ROC or Taiwan or whatever is "legitimate"? It empirically exists as a separate economy. I don't care if you think it. It does not give such a "POV" legitimacy. Explain what grounds (they better be economic ones...) Taiwan should be included in some so-called "economy of China". I hope you can define an economy and then show everyone why economy of China should include that of the PRC and that of Taiwan. This is not a POV question.
I'm really frustrated. You won't have an effect on the real world by trying to define an independent Taiwan away on, of all places a disambiguation page of Wikipedia!! Again, NPOV does not mean giving any nonsense idea consideration. Anyone want to revise Earth based on the fact that there is at least one society that believes in a flat earth out there? Come on. Tell them that they are not being NPOV. Do it. No really. It's the exact same ridiculous logic.-- DownUnder555 14:31, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
Jiang writes in an edit summary: the article is solely on mainland China, excluding HK and MO, so this info must be presented as such
SchmuckyTheCat 01:26, 3 September 2005 (UTC)
-- Ji ang 07:19, 3 September 2005 (UTC)
I just opened every incoming link for this article, found this article, and figured out where it was supposed to come from.
See talk:Economy of the People's Republic of China, where the usage of "Economy of China" is up for discussion -- 65.92.180.137 ( talk) 05:45, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
This disambiguation page is suffering from WP:RECENTISM per Emmette Hernandez Coleman comments that anything that is not today is not "economy of China" -- 65.92.180.137 ( talk) 06:54, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Economy of China (disambiguation) page. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This disambiguation page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
Now a dab — Preceding unsigned comment added by SchmuckyTheCat ( talk • contribs) 01:04, 2 April 2005
Following the long discussion at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (Chinese) regarding proper titling of Mainland China-related topics, polls for each single case has now been started here. Please come and join the discussion, and cast your vote. Thank you. — Insta ntnood 14:49, Apr 9, 2005 (UTC)
Huaiwei's and SchmuckyTheCat's edits were reverted. Proposals on disputed entries should not be presented in this way, but at sandbox or at personal namespace instead. — Insta ntnood 16:36, Apr 10, 2005 (UTC)
There are over 100 pages linking here, so having a disambiguation page is really destructive. I will be moving things back if those links havent been fixed a month from now. It can be done using bots. -- Ji ang 07:22, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)
160.39.250.203 removed ROC/Taiwan from the page, with the edit summary "removed POV". If ROC's/Taiwan's economy has to be included in this page, the leading sentence can perhaps be changed to "You may be looking for:" to avoid POV. — Insta ntnood 20:28, Apr 18, 2005 (UTC)
Please stop removing references to taiwan claiming it is not part of China. As long as some people believe Taiwan is part of China, then we must include it here. The term "may include" is used to satisfy those who think it is not part of China. -- Ji ang 20:13, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Here's your reason to include Taiwan: The naming conventions explicitly said not to equate China with the PRC. Refer to the China details for the definition used here. The de facto situation can be interpreted either way to mean that Taiwan is or is not part of China. The way you do this is to follow the naming conventions and say that China is not synonymous with the PRC. It is a cultural/geographic entity divided by an unresolved civil war between the PRC and ROC. Under this argument, Taiwan is part of China. A more outdated argument is that the Republic of China is the legitimate China. Under the argument, Taiwan is also part of China. I can find plenty of people believing the former so it would be POV to ignore that viewpoint. Even if you want to represent the de facto situation, you need to label it as such-- Ji ang 05:03, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I can't help but to interrupt this dated discussion. Even though I have no opinion leaving Taiwan in this article since some people believes Taiwan as part of China, I have to point out that the civil war analysis is only one's POV and not necessarily and that Taiwan vs China issue could be treated in another angle so that Taiwan is not part of China at all. In the article Legal status of Taiwan, one would find many Taiwanese independence activitists suggests the legitimacy of ROC occupying Taiwan is only based on General Order No.1 and thus ROC has no sovereignty over Taiwan. In this angle, Taiwan would have nothing to do with the Chinese civil war. POVs are POVs. This is not to endorse or rejecting either but to buffer the Chinese civil war POV.-- Mababa 05:12, 4 May 2005 (UTC)
"Due to historical colonization by European powers, the economies of Hong Kong and Macau remained separate from that of mainland China, and under the agreements for their return, they continue to remain so."
In short: They are Special Administrative Regions
"From the point of view of Chinese nationalists who view Taiwan as a part of China, they may consider Taiwan's economy to be a part of China's, despite no actual unity between the economy of Taiwan ( Republic of China) and the economy of mainland China. In fact, trade and investment is limited between the Republic of China (ROC) and the People's Republic by ROC law."
In short: Taiwan has a separate economy from the mainland, but some people consider Taiwan to be part of China, along with HK and MO. Thus, "China" would be synonymous with "Greater China" and "economy of China" would be synonymous with "economy of Greater China". Saying that Taiwan is economically part of Greater China, as noted, is not POV. -- Ji ang 08:23, 6 May 2005 (UTC)
you ELIMINTATED commentary not shortened it. Greater China means more than China. You can't backport it to mean China. Greater China is never a synonym for China you should read George Orwell because you're good at that crap. But I feel sorry for you because it seems like you believe your own slippages too.-- 160.39.195.88 16:34, 6 May 2005 (UTC)
the clause "Depending on one's position over the question of the political status of Taiwan" used to modify "the economy of China may include" is not accurate since people often use "China" to mean mainland China, excluding HK and MO. The news media does this when speaking in economic terms.
i'm not sure how the change of "considered part of the Greater China economy with the PRC" to "many considered it part of the Greater China economy with the PRC" is necessary. who disputes that the term "Greater China" includes TW? -- Ji ang 04:17, 7 May 2005 (UTC)
The following content is from an article that was nominated for deletion. (See Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Dates of Chinese Economy in Wartimes(1937-44)). The concensus of that discussion was that the content could be kept but the article title was completely wrong. The best recommendation at the time was to merge the content here. This is, however, a disambiguation page. None of the currently-listed articles appear to apply. The mainland China article appears to be closest but starts well after the content discussed here. Could someone with more content knowledge than I please move this into the appropriate article? Rossami (talk) 5 July 2005 23:37 (UTC)
Before the Second Sino-Japanese War, in 1930, Chinese per capita income was US$ 11. Subsequently, the Chinese dollar fell in value to 7% of its gold valuation. By the end of 1942, having lost more than 95% of its value, the money supply in circulation had risen 50 times, and inflation continued.
In the part of China occupied by Japanese forces, the prices of basic goods rose much over their real value; in Shanghai during 1941, the nominal monetary values were at 11 times of the real ones. In Manchukuo there occurred a similar disparity, despite Japanese centralized economic control.
The Japanese occupation caused severe damage to the Chinese economy, adding to previous troubles before the all-out conflict. Before the Japanese invasion in 1937, Chinese bonds selling overseas had a return of some 16% to compensate for risk; now Chinese credit had to be reorganized and reinforced with international support. Around 200 millions of Chinese citizens were in occupied territories. Smuggling and participation in the black market to cover minimum needs became common.
If that's all there is, then one of the history pages would be a good place to put it. Or add a history section to Economy of the PRC. SchmuckyTheCat 6 July 2005 02:04 (UTC)
I guess we can have a new article on
economic history of China, with the
content (
hist) from the article mentioned above as one of the sections. There are already some articles on the
economic history of certain countries.
Economic history of Britain and
economic history of Canada would be good examples to follow. —
Insta
ntnood July 6, 2005 07:56 (UTC)
NPOV does not mean giving respectability to bad ideas. It is not true that just because one person in the world thinks that the world is one way, that it must make its way into Wikipedia. First, how the hell is economic history an economy? Second, when is PRC's economy ever NOT included in economy of China?
Third--I regret that I'm even considering that there exists some "economy of China" that includes HK, Macau, and Taiwan. Hello folks? The fact is that the economies are separate regardless of political questions. What in the world does this have to do with whether ROC or Taiwan or whatever is "legitimate"? It empirically exists as a separate economy. I don't care if you think it. It does not give such a "POV" legitimacy. Explain what grounds (they better be economic ones...) Taiwan should be included in some so-called "economy of China". I hope you can define an economy and then show everyone why economy of China should include that of the PRC and that of Taiwan. This is not a POV question.
I'm really frustrated. You won't have an effect on the real world by trying to define an independent Taiwan away on, of all places a disambiguation page of Wikipedia!! Again, NPOV does not mean giving any nonsense idea consideration. Anyone want to revise Earth based on the fact that there is at least one society that believes in a flat earth out there? Come on. Tell them that they are not being NPOV. Do it. No really. It's the exact same ridiculous logic.-- DownUnder555 14:31, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
Jiang writes in an edit summary: the article is solely on mainland China, excluding HK and MO, so this info must be presented as such
SchmuckyTheCat 01:26, 3 September 2005 (UTC)
-- Ji ang 07:19, 3 September 2005 (UTC)
I just opened every incoming link for this article, found this article, and figured out where it was supposed to come from.
See talk:Economy of the People's Republic of China, where the usage of "Economy of China" is up for discussion -- 65.92.180.137 ( talk) 05:45, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
This disambiguation page is suffering from WP:RECENTISM per Emmette Hernandez Coleman comments that anything that is not today is not "economy of China" -- 65.92.180.137 ( talk) 06:54, 22 March 2013 (UTC)