![]() | The use of the contentious topics procedure has been authorised by the community for pages related to Uyghurs, Uyghur genocide, or topics that are related to Uyghurs or Uyghur genocide, including this page. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be sanctioned. |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
There are a lots of chinese news sources, but those doesn't put their rss channels icon to the main page. Xinhua - yes, Business China - Business - yes, Economic Observer: Economic - yes, People's Daily Online: Business - yes, CNTV: World - yes.
The Shanghai RSS channel is not xml format. The other chinese sources should put an RSS icon, to thier Main page. Strange that the
Sina english (and
Global Times) don't have RSS channel, one of the best chinese news web page they write.
Hello somebody ?! Can you make RSS channels to these chinese pages? THX. --
Chinese RSS Channels (
talk)
06:58, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
Looks like the article hasn't been updated in awhile. Most sources come from right after the publication launched. Does anyone have some good sources to show its performance and reception in the last year or so? —Zujine| talk 17:17, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Global Times. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 19:32, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
The article in its current state describes the Global Times as a publication that focuses "on international issues from the Chinese government's perspective"
. This is not quite true: while the Global Times also undergoes
Chinese state censorship, most reliable sources consider the Global Times to be a sensational tabloid that publishes inflammatory editorials that tend to be more aggressive than the official party line. Frequently, content in the Global Times is misinterpreted as the "voice of China" in Western publications, when the Global Times is not representative of the Chinese government's position.
Here are some sources, taken from WP:RSN § Chinese news sources:
Quotes about the Global Times from reliable sources
|
---|
"China's Angriest Newspaper Doesn’t Speak for China", Foreign Policy
"China's Global Times plays a peculiar role", The Economist ( RSP entry)
"Inside the Global Times, China’s hawkish, belligerent state tabloid", Quartz
"The man taking on Hong Kong from deep inside China's propaganda machine", CNN ( RSP entry)
|
— Newslinger talk 05:27, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
I would like some Wikipedia contributors to assist with the following two paragraphs. They have been removed from this article twice, but I feel that they are relevant. An argument could be made that both editors made bad faith reverts. Nonetheless, I understand how people act.
First, both paragraphs were removed because somebody said it was my opinion. Consequently, I added the first paragraph, “According to
MSNBC's
Morning Joe program on May 5, 2020”. Next, both paragraphs were removed because somebody said it was a “very poorly worded phrase”. You can see in the page’s history.
I am not here to fight anybody or win an argument. I want what is best for Wikipedia and for the people that read it. Here are the two paragraphs in question. Please give me your feedback.
1.
According to
MSNBC's
Morning Joe program on May 5, 2020, in response to Secretary of State
Mike Pompeo’s 2020 comments about the 2019 Novel Coronavirus (
COVID-19) coming from a laboratory in
Wuhan,
China, the Global Times editorial board wrote an article highly critical of Pompeo’s
Christian faith. The article called, “Pompeo betrays Christianity with lies” cites Christian doctrine and the
Ten Commandments.
[1]
2.
The United States is blocking Americans from accessing the Global Times website and other
.cn websites like Xinhuanet.cn (
Xinhua News Agency) with a traditional web browser.
Jasonagastrich (
talk)
07:19, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
Jasonagastrich (
talk)
12:40, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
Is not the English title of a political party the English title it has registered itself? That would be Communist Party of China (CPC), Not CCP. CCP is inaccurate, isn't it 49.182.42.137 ( talk) 11:17, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
![]() | The use of the contentious topics procedure has been authorised by the community for pages related to Uyghurs, Uyghur genocide, or topics that are related to Uyghurs or Uyghur genocide, including this page. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be sanctioned. |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
There are a lots of chinese news sources, but those doesn't put their rss channels icon to the main page. Xinhua - yes, Business China - Business - yes, Economic Observer: Economic - yes, People's Daily Online: Business - yes, CNTV: World - yes.
The Shanghai RSS channel is not xml format. The other chinese sources should put an RSS icon, to thier Main page. Strange that the
Sina english (and
Global Times) don't have RSS channel, one of the best chinese news web page they write.
Hello somebody ?! Can you make RSS channels to these chinese pages? THX. --
Chinese RSS Channels (
talk)
06:58, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
Looks like the article hasn't been updated in awhile. Most sources come from right after the publication launched. Does anyone have some good sources to show its performance and reception in the last year or so? —Zujine| talk 17:17, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Global Times. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 19:32, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
The article in its current state describes the Global Times as a publication that focuses "on international issues from the Chinese government's perspective"
. This is not quite true: while the Global Times also undergoes
Chinese state censorship, most reliable sources consider the Global Times to be a sensational tabloid that publishes inflammatory editorials that tend to be more aggressive than the official party line. Frequently, content in the Global Times is misinterpreted as the "voice of China" in Western publications, when the Global Times is not representative of the Chinese government's position.
Here are some sources, taken from WP:RSN § Chinese news sources:
Quotes about the Global Times from reliable sources
|
---|
"China's Angriest Newspaper Doesn’t Speak for China", Foreign Policy
"China's Global Times plays a peculiar role", The Economist ( RSP entry)
"Inside the Global Times, China’s hawkish, belligerent state tabloid", Quartz
"The man taking on Hong Kong from deep inside China's propaganda machine", CNN ( RSP entry)
|
— Newslinger talk 05:27, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
I would like some Wikipedia contributors to assist with the following two paragraphs. They have been removed from this article twice, but I feel that they are relevant. An argument could be made that both editors made bad faith reverts. Nonetheless, I understand how people act.
First, both paragraphs were removed because somebody said it was my opinion. Consequently, I added the first paragraph, “According to
MSNBC's
Morning Joe program on May 5, 2020”. Next, both paragraphs were removed because somebody said it was a “very poorly worded phrase”. You can see in the page’s history.
I am not here to fight anybody or win an argument. I want what is best for Wikipedia and for the people that read it. Here are the two paragraphs in question. Please give me your feedback.
1.
According to
MSNBC's
Morning Joe program on May 5, 2020, in response to Secretary of State
Mike Pompeo’s 2020 comments about the 2019 Novel Coronavirus (
COVID-19) coming from a laboratory in
Wuhan,
China, the Global Times editorial board wrote an article highly critical of Pompeo’s
Christian faith. The article called, “Pompeo betrays Christianity with lies” cites Christian doctrine and the
Ten Commandments.
[1]
2.
The United States is blocking Americans from accessing the Global Times website and other
.cn websites like Xinhuanet.cn (
Xinhua News Agency) with a traditional web browser.
Jasonagastrich (
talk)
07:19, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
Jasonagastrich (
talk)
12:40, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
Is not the English title of a political party the English title it has registered itself? That would be Communist Party of China (CPC), Not CCP. CCP is inaccurate, isn't it 49.182.42.137 ( talk) 11:17, 24 August 2022 (UTC)