![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
The expression 'Chinese Malaysian' is unknown in Malaysia. This should be moved to 'Malaysian Chinese'. Andrew Yong 13:48, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
There may be a discrepancy in the article relating to the subtopics of dialect groups, census 2000, and the number of people who speaks the dialects. I suggest this to be amended to clarify which dialect group speaks what dialect, how the census 2000 corresponds with the dialect group. e.g. It was mentioned that "Cantonese constitutes the most populous Chinese dialect in... Selangor" yet the Census shows Cantonese people are ranked 3rd. For an average reader who is not a Chinese or not a Malaysian, I doubt s/he would understand. Dat789 11:31, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
Hi all, I found this page very interesting. Do you know what Malaysian Chinese & Chinese Malaysian is/are?
Same goes for American Chinese & Chinese American. American Chinese is American/Yankees migrated to China, while Chinese migrated to America is called Chinese American.
Anyway, I do not want to fix anything, this topic is open for discussion. -- L joo 08:43, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
Google:
Yahoo
- Others -
MSN
Go.com
Netscape
Lycos
From lead section:
The term Chinese Malaysian is rarely (if ever) used in Malaysia.
i think this is misleading. there are chinese in msia using the term Chinese Malaysian. google search for:
in fact:
furthermore:
I think the second data above proves that the term "malaysian chinese" as being more popular is inconclusive, and deserve a move, as "Malaysian Chinese" seems more ambiguous gramatically and globally. Or at least mention "Chinese Malaysian" in the first sentence of lead section (eg British Chinese) kawaputra 16:27, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
The move debate is getting so enormous that it dominates the talk page and makes it difficult to find discussion about the actual contents of the page. Though the debate is not yet closed, it seems to have died down --- anyone object if I move it to Talk:Chinese Malaysian/Move debate, then prominently link to that page from here? (Please note that location of debate does not indicate endorsement of either name =P). cab 11:11, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
This section is getting very long; most of it should be split out to a separate List of famous Malaysian Chinese and only a few of the most prominent examples retained. The question, of course, is which ones --- comments? cab 11:11, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
how about the affirmative actions limiting the number of ethnic Chinese into top Malaysian universities?
Or, I dunno, the systemic discrimination of the chinese minority by the racist malay state? Malaysian Chinese are a textbook definition of second class citizen. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.242.175.202 ( talk) 06:22, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
I've edited out the redirect to Talk:Chinese Malaysian. The article's name is Malaysian Chinese. Hong Qi Gong ( Talk - Contribs) 21:37, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
I have inserted 2 headings to the article. This article, on first instance, tells about the history of Malaysian Chinese e.g. where Malaysian Chinese originates, where they were educated, what dialect groups they belonged to, etc. However, I do feel a strong need to inform general readers that there is somewhat a difference in terms of what they eat and practices from that of China. The article has successfully mentioned that Malaysian Chinese originates from China -- an undisputed fact. But unless we describe, non-Asians might think we are like them in all ways including the way we think, eat, sleep, educated, speak, etc. We have the -lahs while they don't. So, please elaborate on these two subtopics in anyway you see fit. -- User:Dat789 13:18, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
A brief history of terms use:
Feel free to edit/comment. L joo 00:42, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
Malaysian Chinese are ethnic Chinese, but not Chinese (it refers to citizenship)
It should be in Wiki Project Malaysia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bobk ( talk • contribs)
Who came up with the stuff there? It's unverified information at best and seems more like POV. - Bob K 08:15, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
I have a comment about the name infobox on the right side of the page. It currently reads "马来西亚唐人" (Mǎláixīyà Tángrén, literally "Malaysia Tang people") for the Chinese name. Well it is an acceptable form to refer to ethnic Chinese in Malaysia, it is not in common usage in Mandarin. The terminology usually used in Mandarin is "马来西亚华人" (Mǎláixīyà Huárén, literally "Malaysia Chinese people"). However, the former is more commonly used in other Chinese dialects such as Hokkien (Minnan), Cantonese, etc. Should we add a small note to explain this situation? -- Joshua Say "hi" to me! What have I done? 11:19, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
(Removed content as per WP:FORUM)
This article has become little more than a reinforcement of popular myths and is highly patronising to many people around the globe as a result. In particular, this article:
1.Falsely implies that most Cantonese, Hainanese, Hokkien and Teochew peoples are of Chinese ethnicity. In fact nothing else can be further from the truth. In fact, their ancestors were the victims of one of the worst genocides in world history at the hands of various Chinese armies. Once subjugated, the existences of distinct Cantonese, Hainanese, Hokkien and Teochew ethnic identities (as opposed to 'regional' identities) were 'conveniently' forgotten by most people in the world (and tragically to this day). Thus from this point of view, the label of Han ethnicity was a brutal imposition upon the Cantonese, Hainanese, Hokkien and Teochew peoples against the wills of the said local peoples.
2.Fails to make any real distinctions between the concepts of ancestry and ethnicity whatsoever. There is more to ethnicity than simply being descended from a particular ancestor. Naturally, ethnic identities evolve and may even change over time (but not counting genocides). One could even argue that the concept of ancestry is nothing more than a political and social misconstruct since a recent scientific study has proven beyond reasonable doubt that all modern humans were descended from Africans.
The above points, in particular, MUST be taken seriously. Someone who is an expert on the subject matter of this article must edit this article IMMEDIATELY to remove the blatant biases in the article (including population figures).
Note: I would have attempted to correct some of the biases in the article, but owing to the fact that most of the required references are very difficult to obtain (and generally not found on the internet), I have called for an expert to fix the article instead. 122.105.145.169 ( talk) 10:56, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
Since no one has responded to the above concerns in a meaningful way, I have flagged the article as biased and inaccurate. 122.105.149.241 ( talk) 12:09, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
If anyone is willing to see it they can find some indirect evidence at the Wikipedia article
Yue (peoples) that the Chinese were responsible for some of the world's worst
genocides directed against the Cantonese and Hokkien peoples. Of course, the Cantonese and Hokkien peoples were not annihilated; however, their native cultures were almost completely destroyed and they now have to suffer the indignity of being associated with the Chinese ethnicity on a regular basis just like how ethnic
Egyptians and ethnic
Lebanese today have to put up with being labeled '
Arab' on a regular basis. It is hard to believe that many people are simply unaware of the
genocides I have just alluded to. Obviously, some of us need to have a long and hard look at some of the disgusting acts carried out against other peoples throughout world history by the genocidal Chinese.
Please note that the ancient Cantonese and Hokkien peoples did NOT speak a language from the Sino-Tibetan family; they spoke languages from a diverse range of other language families such as
Hmong-Mien,
Tai or
Austronesian. Also note that
genocides do not necessarily result in the extermination of targeted groups; what does happen, however, is that the cultures of the affected groups are severely damaged or even destroyed.
By the way, can user Bobk - or indeed any other user - prove that the aforementioned allegations (very serious) are false? If that happens, then this section can disappear into oblivion; otherwise, we will keep talking about the allegations until we reach consensus.
122.105.150.183 (
talk)
05:28, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
Chan Yin Keen | U T C 07:59, 21 June 2008 (UTC)X is not proven simply because "not X" cannot be proven.
(outdent)So let me try and follow this. What you are saying is that people (not necessarily you or me), potentially find the notion offensive that the Cantonese, Hokkien etc are being implied as ethnically Chinese. The offense stems from the fact that many years ago, southern China wasn't part of China, and thus the people there don't identify as Chinese? Am I following right thus far?
From there I'd also like to point out that I'm still waiting for proof and references. Burden of proof lies with you on this because while we can say that we can't prove it either way, it seems quite established that the likes of the Cantonese, etc are Chinese. Now, I'm not saying that just because it seems established it is right. For all I know they're just lumped as Chinese because they, I don't know, happen to come out of a landmass that is known as present day China. The gist of what I'm trying to say is that what you ask for is to challenge the paradigm that the people in the area of south China are Chinese. This paradigm, as near as I can tell without actually doing any real research, is what you would call a theory. What you wish to do is upend the old theory with your theory that the Cantonese, Hainanese etc are not ethnic Chinese. Until substantial proof arises otherwise, I see no reason why there would be a paradigm shift. Personally, I'm waiting for you to dig this rabbit hole as I'm interested to know rather than refute. Chan Yin Keen |
U
T
C
13:01, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
Stop feeding some trolls.
60.49.75.33 ( talk) 14:26, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
Just a bit of researches of the word CHINESE. The word Chinese derived from Chin which was the name of Chin Dynasty (modern People's Republic of China's pinyin: Qin Dynasty)
Qin ( modern pinyin) or Chin ( Wade-Giles) (778 BC-207 BC), the unification of China in 221 BC under the First Emperor Qin Shi Huang (Wade-Giles: Chin Shih Huang) marked the beginning of Imperial China.....
Read carefully the Wade-Giles pronunciation of Chin, is Cheen, not Tchai. This Chin emperor united/conquered 7 states, the southern Yue state was conquered by Chin, and thus they were assimilated by the Chin and thus they became known as Chinese.
The word Chin was first introduced to the ancient Indian, Persian and Roman traders, such as: Cina, Zhina, Shina, etc.
Parameswara himself visited Cina 2-3 times and he brought back the yellow regalia stuffs, thus the name Orang Cina appeared in Malaya.
Teoh SK 60.48.230.117 ( talk) 03:53, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
As I understand, an IP believes I'm out to make a point while disrupting this article. I've been meaning to discuss the revert but it's a different IP everytime so let's just get down to the gist of it. It looks like I'm moving the goalposts a bit but the whole section isn't just reverted because it's got no citation. I didn't want to go and write a whole paragraph on the edit summary so I just tossed up ONE reason for why the section shouldn't be there. Anyway, the issues;
1. The citation. Can we at least properly put it down to the right page of the book? My apologies, you did your work.
2.
WP:WEIGHT. It feels like not all POVs are being represented.
3. Tone.
The gist of what I'm trying to say here is, I have no inherent issues against it. What I do not agree with is how the section is presented in a sensationalist fashion over a plight that some of the minority written about in that book isn't even aware of. I'm sure what you want to put into the article has a place somewhere, I'm just not sure it's deserving of a place in it's current state until it comes off a little more NPOV. Feel free to disagree. Chan Yin Keen | U T C 13:21, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
被专制的白种蛮夷亚当子孙基督迷信邪教徒(维基百科管理员)删除的内容
马来西亚华人主要信华夏传统信仰、道教、佛教吧?以及无神论、无信仰吧?。只有少数是基督教、回教乃至其它各种教之类的吧? - Dicting ( 留言) 2008年9月18日 (四) 10:18 (UTC)
以我的感觉,改信了基督教、伊斯兰教之类的华人,是不是背叛华族?或者是在极端艰难的社会生存环境下的被迫选择? - Dicting ( 留言) 2008年9月18日 (四) 16:58 (UTC)
基本上,马国人是不敢公开大声说:“我不信神,我无神论、我无信仰”。那些信神的人们认为“不信神,无神论、无信仰”比任何一切的坏人更坏。 阿华仔 ( 留言) 2008年9月19日 (五) 04:55 (UTC)
极端艰难的社会生存环境下的被迫选择? 是的,有很多当年穷,为了吃饭,就投靠教会了。 阿华仔 ( 留言) 2008年9月19日 (五) 05:39 (UTC)
刚才看了前面的讨论,看到一段:
中国解决了台湾的问题后就会来救我们(指救马来西亚华人)
我觉得历来海外华人对祖国(祖先之国)帮助很大,而我们中国政府对海外华人同胞做得却很少,对不起他们,特别是老一代的华侨。
中国过去受制于马列主义意识形态,政府的专制连本国人民的权益都不能保障,再加上比较实力弱,基本没有考虑在海外的华人同胞的权益。将来恢复中国,强大以后,应该如何帮助海外华人?像马来西亚华人等等?我觉得最起码要敦促这些国家取消歧视政策,实现公民平等、自由权利吧?还有,帮助当地土著变得文明起来,不要那么野蛮,动不动就是骂啊威胁啊打啊杀的。如果是那样,只能采取对待野蛮人的办法。 Dicting ( 留言) 2008年9月18日 (四) 10:28 (UTC)
还有,你的国民党军官要等中共来救的理论太可笑了吧? 看来你很幼稚,我们通常对付幼稚的人就是直接揭穿他的底。其实,这位 Ongss是 巫统派来当卧底的“网络监察人员”,他们是属于公务人员领取月薪的一族,他当然是马来人,他也是日本人后裔,因为他的名字“白布飘扬”就是典型日本人的名字,很大可能性他的上一代在日本侵略马来亚的那段期间生下了他。巫统的人最拿手玩弄种族政治,派了一位懂得中文的卧底来删除我们编写的一切真相,同时又挑起种族歧视言论来让各界议论纷纷,让某族群仇视某族群,而趁机鱼翁得利。 Ongss确实是一位巫统卧底,也当然是白布的傀儡,他提倡违反人权和违反言论自由,一再地把我们所写的真相删除掉,至今,被他删除的文章包括 《回到馬來亞:華馬小說七十年》所提到的“华裔馬華文學、华裔馬英文學、华裔馬來文學,这三个语言不相同的华人老死不相往來”,华文教师欧宗敏写的《那一群华人》,还有很多,很多,就连华人取洋名,英文教育,中国情意结,这些都是有可靠来源的文章,都一一被他删除了,这已经足够证明他提倡违反人权和违反言论自由的人了。他根本不懂马来西亚华人和华裔的分别,他允许他人抹掉马来西亚华人的历史,这种人是不需要自称本身为马来西亚华人,因为他是日本人后裔和马来人混杂的人种。这,就是写给你这种幼稚的人读的。 阿华仔 ( 留言) 2008年9月18日 (四) 16:29 (UTC)
我看过不少南洋华侨的故事。许许多多老一辈华人的故事、精神,让我非常感动。总感觉生活在外族人以伊斯兰教为主的马来、印尼的华人,以及外族人以基督教为主的菲律宾的华人,尤其是前者,相当的不容易。不知道你们是不是有一种受压抑的感觉? - Dicting ( 留言) 2008年9月18日 (四) 17:03 (UTC)
太无聊了吧,还有什么国民党军官要等中共来救 什么什么的,太好笑了。你自己先玩个够吧,我过几天才陪你玩,bye bye。 阿华仔 ( 留言) 2008年9月18日 (四) 19:45 (UTC)
这当然可笑啊。请问你,马国人对“这些年来中共正在逐步抛弃马列共产主义意识形态。恢复中国的时间不会太久”了解有几多呢? 我们马国人了解的是马国的政治,我们现在关心的是【916】,你有兴趣吗? 阿华仔 ( 留言) 2008年9月19日 (五) 01:47 (UTC)
还有,你所发问的一些问题其实是敏感的课题,几乎大大小小的事情对于马国人都可以是敏感课题。
阿华仔 ( 留言) 2008年9月19日 (五) 05:16 (UTC)
阿华仔 ( 留言) 2008年9月19日 (五) 06:12 (UTC)
华文仍然还是没能够被马国政府承认为官方语言,所以情况还是没有差别。 阿华仔 ( 留言) 2008年9月19日 (五) 06:26 (UTC)
我是大陆人。如果国民党军官及其后代在马来西亚受欺负,我就非常希望去帮助他们。现在缅甸的 果敢人,有的是明朝官员、军队以及平民的后裔,有的是国民党军队后裔,现在和大陆关系很好。真正的国民党,是爱民族、爱同胞的人;真正的共产党,就像基督徒,某种意义上都是犹太教的产物,他们都是撕碎家庭、民族、国家的人(同时往往被独裁者愚弄、压榨、奴役,如党组织、教会)(马列共产主义是基督教的产物,见Oswald Spengler的著作)。不过,因为大陆曾经是共产主义国家的缘故,不少海外华人出于华族的根本原因而倾向支持共产主义,也是可以理解的,就像果敢人曾经通过果敢共产党求生存一样。但是,当政治意识形态时代结束以后,应该立即转变思维,不要忘记根本。我们的根本在于中华文化。而共产主义和基督教、伊斯兰教一样,本质上是专制的、摧毁自由、摧毁民族文化、摧毁多样性的。 - Dicting ( 留言) 2008年9月19日 (五) 06:34 (UTC)
其实无论国民政府也好,明朝也好,为什么不保护海外华人?因为当时国家实力弱,明朝虽然实力强,但是一度没有制海权,沿海也曾长期遭受“倭寇”侵扰,所以根本无力保护海外华人。但是,当郑和的时代,海军世界第一,不会保护吗?明朝的郑成功在台湾,有能力也会保护南洋的华人。这里面有很多历史,体现真正的中国传统,可以研究一下。至于清朝,比较复杂,一则弱得被西方任意欺凌,二则满清带有种族统治的性质,满清皇帝是否会真正关怀海外汉人族群的利益,很难说。海外华人要了解真正中国政府的传统,中共和清朝都不要去考虑,主要研究明朝、民国政府。 - Dicting ( 留言) 2008年9月19日 (五) 08:07 (UTC)
:所以就有华人干脆把孩子送到英文学校让他长大后可以进入国际大公司,而选择在家里自己教自己孩子华文。 阿华仔 ( 留言) 2008年9月19日 (五) 08:17 (UTC)
今天就谈到此啦,谢谢,拜拜,下次再谈。 阿华仔 ( 留言) 2008年9月19日 (五) 08:25 (UTC)
::English, do you speak it? -
60.49.104.219 (
talk)
09:28, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
Why isn't there a page on race relations in Malaysia? It would seem that with such great documentation of the each of the races, there should be an informative page regarding relationships among the different races. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.135.36.161 ( talk) 02:33, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
The article should explain why after so many years of living among local population of the Malays the Chinese didn't and are not integrated or assimiliated and prefer to keep their chinese traditions and language. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.129.21.2 ( talk) 06:08, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
Can anyone explain more about the 1971 National Culture Policy? I thought that the policy was rejected at some point of time. Besides, if that was not the case, how come the Malaysian Government promotes all cultures (Malay, Indian, Chinese, Malaysian Borneo Indigenous) as a Malaysian identity? The article lacks information whether the policy is enforced and how it affects (or affected) the ethnic Chinese culture and community.
And I do agree with the comment stating that more explanation is needed as to why the Chinese community do not integrate with the local Malay community (and some do not even speak Malay well or are unwilling to speak the language.) Is it the same reason as to why the local Chinese do not marry inter-racially? (cultural, religious reasons?) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.69.0.91 ( talk) 09:22, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
The sections are reorganised for more logical organisation and easier flow of reading. Some topics are merged to eliminate redundancy eg. history and ancestral origin sections. The language section is edited for conciseness and organised by dialect dominancy, some people may not be interested in the history (ancestral origin) section but do want to know what dialects are currently spoken by the Chinese in different regions.
There is a new section on Malay (BM)-educated as you cannot call yourself 'English educated' if you have only one subject taught in English and the rest in BM.
—Preceding
unsigned comment added by
202.73.10.66 (
talk)
02:38, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
-- 202.73.10.66 ( talk) 16:49, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
A new section of the various diversity of Malaysian Chinese names is included. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.73.10.66 ( talk) 04:52, 16 November 2010 (UTC) -- 202.73.10.66 ( talk) 16:50, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
Food section is reorganised to show more relevant and important information such as origin of cuisines. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.4.125.88 ( talk) 16:49, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Until 1982 (way after Independence), there were up to 4 types of public schools in the primary level and 2 types in the secondary level divided by medium of instruction (Malay, English, Chinese and Tamil). In 1974, English language public schools were phased out on a year to year basis and this process was completed in 1982 when the last Upper Six classes were conducted in English for that academic session. This is quite well documented. The way the current section is written assumes that English medium schools ceased to exist post-Independence and does not acknowledge the existence of a sizable percentage (albeit dwindling) of Malaysian Chinese that speak English either as a first or second language. - Bob K | Talk 15:37, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
Firstly, no Chinese or insignificant go to Tamil schools so that can be ruled out as 'Tamil educated'.
Secondly, 1969 was indeed the last batch of English medium for standard one kids until form six. It will take 11 years for this last batch to complete their MCE education. 1969 + 11 = 1980. In 1982, both English and Malay medium was done in parallel, the last batch was at form six. But std one upto form five were all educated in Malay.
Speaking English as a first language doesn't qualify you as a fluent speaker. There are many broken English spoken in Malaysia for these 'first language speakers'. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.49.75.33 ( talk) 14:37, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
60.49.75.33 ( talk) 14:40, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
I'm looking at the chinese population table "By state & territory". These numbers do not look anywhere close to correct.
For example, it says 46.5% of Penang population is Chinese, but the population number is only 44,323. The entire Penang population is 1,520,143, so the correct population should be 706,866. I agree there may be difference between 2000 population census and 2010 total population number, but the difference should not be out by 1600%! Somebody should go back to the reference material and re-check the number. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hiaw c ( talk • contribs) 13:21, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
There are links to the Malaysian census and some Indian woman's conference paper labelled as being from the US Department of State. Further, the cited paper does not support the 24.6% number, although the Malaysian census data does. Someone probably needs to go through and check the other refs to make sure they haven't all been tampered with. — LlywelynII 06:53, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
The malaysian census is more accurate so 24.6% is correct. It used to be much larger at nearly 50% during independence.
118.101.201.147 ( talk) 11:13, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
Several important info were moved into separate pages but they were mysteriously deleted. Please move them back into main page if they cannot be separated. They are important info. (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.82.59.80 ( talk)
Malaysian chinese languages and list of malaysian chinese communities (demographics) were both moved to separate pages. However, these pages were deleted by somebody. So I suggest they be moved back to main page. They contain important info for people to understand malaysian chinese. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.82.59.80 ( talk) 09:38, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for adding the info back. It should be complete. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.82.59.80 ( talk) 09:33, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
As far as I know the predominant language used in seberang prai and bukit mertajam should be penang hokkien and not teochew.
Can any natives staying in these two areas verify which is the predominant ie. most people use the language to communicate with strangers (not friends).
I stayed there for a year but didn't hear anybody use teochew in pasar malam to talk to strangers. But I am not a native there.
118.101.201.147 ( talk) 11:09, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
Really, Tom? The least you could do is tag the copyvio so someone would notice the problem and rewrite everything. Since you hollowed out the section with any substance all that was put in place was some poorly-written college writing, probably by some local college student, that constantly repeats facts and is completely unsalvageable. If this is the current trend of Wikipedia, its editors have completely failed. - 175.139.153.1 ( talk) 12:07, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
If you want lot more details of each wave, you should add into another wiki page as you can write so much more.
eg. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_emigration
added by 175.140.91.60 (talk) 07:41, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
For the person who wrote the civil war in China under the British wave, could you create another wiki page as it is too long and not everyone wants to read it. What some of us need are the summary of the four waves.
If you want more details of each wave, that should be another page. Eg. a baba/nyonya page exist separately.
Or add it onto this page on Chinese emigration. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_emigration
— Preceding
unsigned comment added by
175.140.91.60 (
talk)
07:41, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
can somebody replace those photos with more famous malaysians known internationally like lim goh tong (genting highland founder), wu qi xian (singer, songwriter) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.172.30.249 ( talk) 14:58, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
"Chinese Malaysians also contribute almost 90 percent of the country's income tax?" You can't be serious, right? Do not forget those with mix-blood ancestry (Brit, Dutch, Portugal "leftovers"). There are about 8.8% of other ethnicities. The figure is skewed, simply because the Malays, Muslims, Orang Asli (with Islam religion) have a different taxation system called zakat. Why no mention of that? And most of the cites are MISLEADING and UNRELATED. These sections need major updating.
https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Malaysian_Chinese&diff=615765302&oldid=615001124 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jing345 ( talk • contribs) 23:42, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
Please note that a lot of people don't know that na tuk gong, maoshan, hu xian are all grouped under Taoism. na tuk gong is just the local Malay name for what the Chinese in China called 'tu ti gong' 土地公.
There is no clear cut lines between Taoism, Maoshan, hu xian, Buddhism. All of them incorporates elements from each other. For example, you can also see Kuan Yin which is a Buddhist deity in Taoist temples. Taoism just mean Chinese folk religions in a broader sense.
Whereas, Chinese Buddhism incorporates both Buddhism and Taoism which includes incense burning, dead ancestors respect and Taoist deities. Taoist deities don't contradict Buddhism because Buddhist believe in many deities. They are called 'devas' and reside in the heavens.
1.32.71.5 (
talk)
00:59, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Not moved due to lack of support. Tiggerjay ( talk) 19:26, 22 October 2015 (UTC) Tiggerjay ( talk) 19:26, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
Malaysian Chinese → Chinese people in Malaysia – If we use Chinese people in Italy, Chinese people in the Netherlands, Chinese people in Germany and many more similar articles as standard naming article, what is your opinion? Alexander Iskandar ( talk) 11:25, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
There is no proof of any Chinese wave occuring during the Fujian massacre in 1651 and 1652. The Ming loyalists fled to Taiwan instead and not Kedah. Kedah in 1652 was under the Malacca sultanate and there were hardly any economic reason to immigrate so far from China instead of Taiwan, Vietnam, Thailand which is much nearer to China.
It was during the British Malaya where there are economic reasons to migrate so far away instead of nearer countries such as Taiwan, Philipines, Vietnam, Thailand.
Bkjalng ( talk) 14:36, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
At the moment an editor Xng keeps adding a supposed inventor of the dish Bak Kut Teh in the article, an assertion that is contradicted by other sources. For example, in this source here, it was claimed by the Tourism Minister that the dish was invented in the 1930s, earlier than the one the editor preferred (late 1940s) but the editor simply removed the source, and just add others that supported his claim (along with name-calling, issuing non-existent ANI notices, etc.) I would propose deleting the names of this and other dishes, since there is minimal research on these apart from talking to the people claiming to have invented it, and are therefore highly unreliable. Hzh ( talk) 01:17, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
Dr Ng even claimed Chili crab and Hainanese Chicken rice are invented in Malaysia. What are her sources? Did she do any research?
Unless you have a specific shop name, it's not reliable. The fact that you don't want to call Dr Ng to verify her sources show that you're a troll. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Xng ( talk • contribs) 01:30, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
It's easy to verify the inventor of Bak Kut Teh, just go to the shop itself and speak to the old residents who have been living there for 60 years or more. That was what Thestar newspaper and Axian food show did.
That's unlike you who keeps unediting reliable sources and doesn't give any reliable source with reliable shop name. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Xng ( talk • contribs) 01:33, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
To Hzh,
Dr Ng even claimed Chili crab and Hainanese Chicken rice are invented in Malaysia. What are her sources? Did she do any research?
Unless you have a specific shop name, it's not reliable. The fact that you don't want to call Dr Ng to verify her sources show that you're a troll. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Xng ( talk • contribs) 01:30, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
It's easy to verify the inventor of Bak Kut Teh, just go to the shop itself and speak to the old residents who have been living around thatarea for 60 years or more. That was what Thestar newspaper and Axian food show did.
That's unlike you who keeps undoing reliable sources and doesn't give any reliable source with a shop name.
Many Singaporeans called up Dr Ng when she claimed chilli crab was invented in Malaysia. When asked for the name of the shop and other claims, she couldn't give any. This proves that her words can't be trusted and she simply say things without much research. Please note that chilli crab is Singapore's national dish.
Back to Bak Kut Teh, it is well known that in Chinese culture, your signature dish have your name in it eg. Zhu Yuk Wing 豬肉榮 (in Cantonese) is from a seller called Ah Wing 榮. Similarly, Bak Kut Teh 肉骨地 has the name of the seller called Ah Teh 地. But most people forgot the origin and think that 地 means茶 (Chinese tea) because both have the same sound Teh in Hokkien. Chinese drink Chinese tea with every food and not just Bak Kut Teh so this assumption is wrong.
For those who want to argue further like Hzh, please watch some Chinese food programmes from Singapore who traced the origin of all Chinese food in Singapore. The links given by Xng is reliable and Ah Teh was the one who popularised Bak Kut Teh in Klang first which then spread to whole of Malaysia and Singapore. His shop is still there in Klang and anyone can visit him and his competitors to verify.
Peace to all.
Bkjalng ( talk) 11:10, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
Most are the information are up to date especially the statistics, most of them are from 2016. All of the sources listed works, and they are neutral sources for educational purpose. Most sources are not bias, it was more of an overview of the topic. Thought it had too much words so maybe add more pictures so that the audiences can relate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jtey3 ( talk • contribs) 06:20, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Malaysian Chinese. 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.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 14:22, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Malaysian Chinese. 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:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=%2F2011%2F7%2F29%2Fnation%2F20110729203217&sec=nationWhen 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) 03:11, 31 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Malaysian Chinese. 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) 09:29, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 8 external links on Malaysian Chinese. 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) 10:26, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Malaysian Chinese. 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:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.portal.mohe.gov.my/portal/page/portal/ExtPortal/Agencies/Study_in_Malaysia/National_Education_System{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.epu.gov.my/documents/10124/669145a4-1b34-4f04-9043-31b24d1c3442When 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) 00:32, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
The expression 'Chinese Malaysian' is unknown in Malaysia. This should be moved to 'Malaysian Chinese'. Andrew Yong 13:48, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
There may be a discrepancy in the article relating to the subtopics of dialect groups, census 2000, and the number of people who speaks the dialects. I suggest this to be amended to clarify which dialect group speaks what dialect, how the census 2000 corresponds with the dialect group. e.g. It was mentioned that "Cantonese constitutes the most populous Chinese dialect in... Selangor" yet the Census shows Cantonese people are ranked 3rd. For an average reader who is not a Chinese or not a Malaysian, I doubt s/he would understand. Dat789 11:31, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
Hi all, I found this page very interesting. Do you know what Malaysian Chinese & Chinese Malaysian is/are?
Same goes for American Chinese & Chinese American. American Chinese is American/Yankees migrated to China, while Chinese migrated to America is called Chinese American.
Anyway, I do not want to fix anything, this topic is open for discussion. -- L joo 08:43, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
Google:
Yahoo
- Others -
MSN
Go.com
Netscape
Lycos
From lead section:
The term Chinese Malaysian is rarely (if ever) used in Malaysia.
i think this is misleading. there are chinese in msia using the term Chinese Malaysian. google search for:
in fact:
furthermore:
I think the second data above proves that the term "malaysian chinese" as being more popular is inconclusive, and deserve a move, as "Malaysian Chinese" seems more ambiguous gramatically and globally. Or at least mention "Chinese Malaysian" in the first sentence of lead section (eg British Chinese) kawaputra 16:27, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
The move debate is getting so enormous that it dominates the talk page and makes it difficult to find discussion about the actual contents of the page. Though the debate is not yet closed, it seems to have died down --- anyone object if I move it to Talk:Chinese Malaysian/Move debate, then prominently link to that page from here? (Please note that location of debate does not indicate endorsement of either name =P). cab 11:11, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
This section is getting very long; most of it should be split out to a separate List of famous Malaysian Chinese and only a few of the most prominent examples retained. The question, of course, is which ones --- comments? cab 11:11, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
how about the affirmative actions limiting the number of ethnic Chinese into top Malaysian universities?
Or, I dunno, the systemic discrimination of the chinese minority by the racist malay state? Malaysian Chinese are a textbook definition of second class citizen. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.242.175.202 ( talk) 06:22, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
I've edited out the redirect to Talk:Chinese Malaysian. The article's name is Malaysian Chinese. Hong Qi Gong ( Talk - Contribs) 21:37, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
I have inserted 2 headings to the article. This article, on first instance, tells about the history of Malaysian Chinese e.g. where Malaysian Chinese originates, where they were educated, what dialect groups they belonged to, etc. However, I do feel a strong need to inform general readers that there is somewhat a difference in terms of what they eat and practices from that of China. The article has successfully mentioned that Malaysian Chinese originates from China -- an undisputed fact. But unless we describe, non-Asians might think we are like them in all ways including the way we think, eat, sleep, educated, speak, etc. We have the -lahs while they don't. So, please elaborate on these two subtopics in anyway you see fit. -- User:Dat789 13:18, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
A brief history of terms use:
Feel free to edit/comment. L joo 00:42, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
Malaysian Chinese are ethnic Chinese, but not Chinese (it refers to citizenship)
It should be in Wiki Project Malaysia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bobk ( talk • contribs)
Who came up with the stuff there? It's unverified information at best and seems more like POV. - Bob K 08:15, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
I have a comment about the name infobox on the right side of the page. It currently reads "马来西亚唐人" (Mǎláixīyà Tángrén, literally "Malaysia Tang people") for the Chinese name. Well it is an acceptable form to refer to ethnic Chinese in Malaysia, it is not in common usage in Mandarin. The terminology usually used in Mandarin is "马来西亚华人" (Mǎláixīyà Huárén, literally "Malaysia Chinese people"). However, the former is more commonly used in other Chinese dialects such as Hokkien (Minnan), Cantonese, etc. Should we add a small note to explain this situation? -- Joshua Say "hi" to me! What have I done? 11:19, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
(Removed content as per WP:FORUM)
This article has become little more than a reinforcement of popular myths and is highly patronising to many people around the globe as a result. In particular, this article:
1.Falsely implies that most Cantonese, Hainanese, Hokkien and Teochew peoples are of Chinese ethnicity. In fact nothing else can be further from the truth. In fact, their ancestors were the victims of one of the worst genocides in world history at the hands of various Chinese armies. Once subjugated, the existences of distinct Cantonese, Hainanese, Hokkien and Teochew ethnic identities (as opposed to 'regional' identities) were 'conveniently' forgotten by most people in the world (and tragically to this day). Thus from this point of view, the label of Han ethnicity was a brutal imposition upon the Cantonese, Hainanese, Hokkien and Teochew peoples against the wills of the said local peoples.
2.Fails to make any real distinctions between the concepts of ancestry and ethnicity whatsoever. There is more to ethnicity than simply being descended from a particular ancestor. Naturally, ethnic identities evolve and may even change over time (but not counting genocides). One could even argue that the concept of ancestry is nothing more than a political and social misconstruct since a recent scientific study has proven beyond reasonable doubt that all modern humans were descended from Africans.
The above points, in particular, MUST be taken seriously. Someone who is an expert on the subject matter of this article must edit this article IMMEDIATELY to remove the blatant biases in the article (including population figures).
Note: I would have attempted to correct some of the biases in the article, but owing to the fact that most of the required references are very difficult to obtain (and generally not found on the internet), I have called for an expert to fix the article instead. 122.105.145.169 ( talk) 10:56, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
Since no one has responded to the above concerns in a meaningful way, I have flagged the article as biased and inaccurate. 122.105.149.241 ( talk) 12:09, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
If anyone is willing to see it they can find some indirect evidence at the Wikipedia article
Yue (peoples) that the Chinese were responsible for some of the world's worst
genocides directed against the Cantonese and Hokkien peoples. Of course, the Cantonese and Hokkien peoples were not annihilated; however, their native cultures were almost completely destroyed and they now have to suffer the indignity of being associated with the Chinese ethnicity on a regular basis just like how ethnic
Egyptians and ethnic
Lebanese today have to put up with being labeled '
Arab' on a regular basis. It is hard to believe that many people are simply unaware of the
genocides I have just alluded to. Obviously, some of us need to have a long and hard look at some of the disgusting acts carried out against other peoples throughout world history by the genocidal Chinese.
Please note that the ancient Cantonese and Hokkien peoples did NOT speak a language from the Sino-Tibetan family; they spoke languages from a diverse range of other language families such as
Hmong-Mien,
Tai or
Austronesian. Also note that
genocides do not necessarily result in the extermination of targeted groups; what does happen, however, is that the cultures of the affected groups are severely damaged or even destroyed.
By the way, can user Bobk - or indeed any other user - prove that the aforementioned allegations (very serious) are false? If that happens, then this section can disappear into oblivion; otherwise, we will keep talking about the allegations until we reach consensus.
122.105.150.183 (
talk)
05:28, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
Chan Yin Keen | U T C 07:59, 21 June 2008 (UTC)X is not proven simply because "not X" cannot be proven.
(outdent)So let me try and follow this. What you are saying is that people (not necessarily you or me), potentially find the notion offensive that the Cantonese, Hokkien etc are being implied as ethnically Chinese. The offense stems from the fact that many years ago, southern China wasn't part of China, and thus the people there don't identify as Chinese? Am I following right thus far?
From there I'd also like to point out that I'm still waiting for proof and references. Burden of proof lies with you on this because while we can say that we can't prove it either way, it seems quite established that the likes of the Cantonese, etc are Chinese. Now, I'm not saying that just because it seems established it is right. For all I know they're just lumped as Chinese because they, I don't know, happen to come out of a landmass that is known as present day China. The gist of what I'm trying to say is that what you ask for is to challenge the paradigm that the people in the area of south China are Chinese. This paradigm, as near as I can tell without actually doing any real research, is what you would call a theory. What you wish to do is upend the old theory with your theory that the Cantonese, Hainanese etc are not ethnic Chinese. Until substantial proof arises otherwise, I see no reason why there would be a paradigm shift. Personally, I'm waiting for you to dig this rabbit hole as I'm interested to know rather than refute. Chan Yin Keen |
U
T
C
13:01, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
Stop feeding some trolls.
60.49.75.33 ( talk) 14:26, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
Just a bit of researches of the word CHINESE. The word Chinese derived from Chin which was the name of Chin Dynasty (modern People's Republic of China's pinyin: Qin Dynasty)
Qin ( modern pinyin) or Chin ( Wade-Giles) (778 BC-207 BC), the unification of China in 221 BC under the First Emperor Qin Shi Huang (Wade-Giles: Chin Shih Huang) marked the beginning of Imperial China.....
Read carefully the Wade-Giles pronunciation of Chin, is Cheen, not Tchai. This Chin emperor united/conquered 7 states, the southern Yue state was conquered by Chin, and thus they were assimilated by the Chin and thus they became known as Chinese.
The word Chin was first introduced to the ancient Indian, Persian and Roman traders, such as: Cina, Zhina, Shina, etc.
Parameswara himself visited Cina 2-3 times and he brought back the yellow regalia stuffs, thus the name Orang Cina appeared in Malaya.
Teoh SK 60.48.230.117 ( talk) 03:53, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
As I understand, an IP believes I'm out to make a point while disrupting this article. I've been meaning to discuss the revert but it's a different IP everytime so let's just get down to the gist of it. It looks like I'm moving the goalposts a bit but the whole section isn't just reverted because it's got no citation. I didn't want to go and write a whole paragraph on the edit summary so I just tossed up ONE reason for why the section shouldn't be there. Anyway, the issues;
1. The citation. Can we at least properly put it down to the right page of the book? My apologies, you did your work.
2.
WP:WEIGHT. It feels like not all POVs are being represented.
3. Tone.
The gist of what I'm trying to say here is, I have no inherent issues against it. What I do not agree with is how the section is presented in a sensationalist fashion over a plight that some of the minority written about in that book isn't even aware of. I'm sure what you want to put into the article has a place somewhere, I'm just not sure it's deserving of a place in it's current state until it comes off a little more NPOV. Feel free to disagree. Chan Yin Keen | U T C 13:21, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
被专制的白种蛮夷亚当子孙基督迷信邪教徒(维基百科管理员)删除的内容
马来西亚华人主要信华夏传统信仰、道教、佛教吧?以及无神论、无信仰吧?。只有少数是基督教、回教乃至其它各种教之类的吧? - Dicting ( 留言) 2008年9月18日 (四) 10:18 (UTC)
以我的感觉,改信了基督教、伊斯兰教之类的华人,是不是背叛华族?或者是在极端艰难的社会生存环境下的被迫选择? - Dicting ( 留言) 2008年9月18日 (四) 16:58 (UTC)
基本上,马国人是不敢公开大声说:“我不信神,我无神论、我无信仰”。那些信神的人们认为“不信神,无神论、无信仰”比任何一切的坏人更坏。 阿华仔 ( 留言) 2008年9月19日 (五) 04:55 (UTC)
极端艰难的社会生存环境下的被迫选择? 是的,有很多当年穷,为了吃饭,就投靠教会了。 阿华仔 ( 留言) 2008年9月19日 (五) 05:39 (UTC)
刚才看了前面的讨论,看到一段:
中国解决了台湾的问题后就会来救我们(指救马来西亚华人)
我觉得历来海外华人对祖国(祖先之国)帮助很大,而我们中国政府对海外华人同胞做得却很少,对不起他们,特别是老一代的华侨。
中国过去受制于马列主义意识形态,政府的专制连本国人民的权益都不能保障,再加上比较实力弱,基本没有考虑在海外的华人同胞的权益。将来恢复中国,强大以后,应该如何帮助海外华人?像马来西亚华人等等?我觉得最起码要敦促这些国家取消歧视政策,实现公民平等、自由权利吧?还有,帮助当地土著变得文明起来,不要那么野蛮,动不动就是骂啊威胁啊打啊杀的。如果是那样,只能采取对待野蛮人的办法。 Dicting ( 留言) 2008年9月18日 (四) 10:28 (UTC)
还有,你的国民党军官要等中共来救的理论太可笑了吧? 看来你很幼稚,我们通常对付幼稚的人就是直接揭穿他的底。其实,这位 Ongss是 巫统派来当卧底的“网络监察人员”,他们是属于公务人员领取月薪的一族,他当然是马来人,他也是日本人后裔,因为他的名字“白布飘扬”就是典型日本人的名字,很大可能性他的上一代在日本侵略马来亚的那段期间生下了他。巫统的人最拿手玩弄种族政治,派了一位懂得中文的卧底来删除我们编写的一切真相,同时又挑起种族歧视言论来让各界议论纷纷,让某族群仇视某族群,而趁机鱼翁得利。 Ongss确实是一位巫统卧底,也当然是白布的傀儡,他提倡违反人权和违反言论自由,一再地把我们所写的真相删除掉,至今,被他删除的文章包括 《回到馬來亞:華馬小說七十年》所提到的“华裔馬華文學、华裔馬英文學、华裔馬來文學,这三个语言不相同的华人老死不相往來”,华文教师欧宗敏写的《那一群华人》,还有很多,很多,就连华人取洋名,英文教育,中国情意结,这些都是有可靠来源的文章,都一一被他删除了,这已经足够证明他提倡违反人权和违反言论自由的人了。他根本不懂马来西亚华人和华裔的分别,他允许他人抹掉马来西亚华人的历史,这种人是不需要自称本身为马来西亚华人,因为他是日本人后裔和马来人混杂的人种。这,就是写给你这种幼稚的人读的。 阿华仔 ( 留言) 2008年9月18日 (四) 16:29 (UTC)
我看过不少南洋华侨的故事。许许多多老一辈华人的故事、精神,让我非常感动。总感觉生活在外族人以伊斯兰教为主的马来、印尼的华人,以及外族人以基督教为主的菲律宾的华人,尤其是前者,相当的不容易。不知道你们是不是有一种受压抑的感觉? - Dicting ( 留言) 2008年9月18日 (四) 17:03 (UTC)
太无聊了吧,还有什么国民党军官要等中共来救 什么什么的,太好笑了。你自己先玩个够吧,我过几天才陪你玩,bye bye。 阿华仔 ( 留言) 2008年9月18日 (四) 19:45 (UTC)
这当然可笑啊。请问你,马国人对“这些年来中共正在逐步抛弃马列共产主义意识形态。恢复中国的时间不会太久”了解有几多呢? 我们马国人了解的是马国的政治,我们现在关心的是【916】,你有兴趣吗? 阿华仔 ( 留言) 2008年9月19日 (五) 01:47 (UTC)
还有,你所发问的一些问题其实是敏感的课题,几乎大大小小的事情对于马国人都可以是敏感课题。
阿华仔 ( 留言) 2008年9月19日 (五) 05:16 (UTC)
阿华仔 ( 留言) 2008年9月19日 (五) 06:12 (UTC)
华文仍然还是没能够被马国政府承认为官方语言,所以情况还是没有差别。 阿华仔 ( 留言) 2008年9月19日 (五) 06:26 (UTC)
我是大陆人。如果国民党军官及其后代在马来西亚受欺负,我就非常希望去帮助他们。现在缅甸的 果敢人,有的是明朝官员、军队以及平民的后裔,有的是国民党军队后裔,现在和大陆关系很好。真正的国民党,是爱民族、爱同胞的人;真正的共产党,就像基督徒,某种意义上都是犹太教的产物,他们都是撕碎家庭、民族、国家的人(同时往往被独裁者愚弄、压榨、奴役,如党组织、教会)(马列共产主义是基督教的产物,见Oswald Spengler的著作)。不过,因为大陆曾经是共产主义国家的缘故,不少海外华人出于华族的根本原因而倾向支持共产主义,也是可以理解的,就像果敢人曾经通过果敢共产党求生存一样。但是,当政治意识形态时代结束以后,应该立即转变思维,不要忘记根本。我们的根本在于中华文化。而共产主义和基督教、伊斯兰教一样,本质上是专制的、摧毁自由、摧毁民族文化、摧毁多样性的。 - Dicting ( 留言) 2008年9月19日 (五) 06:34 (UTC)
其实无论国民政府也好,明朝也好,为什么不保护海外华人?因为当时国家实力弱,明朝虽然实力强,但是一度没有制海权,沿海也曾长期遭受“倭寇”侵扰,所以根本无力保护海外华人。但是,当郑和的时代,海军世界第一,不会保护吗?明朝的郑成功在台湾,有能力也会保护南洋的华人。这里面有很多历史,体现真正的中国传统,可以研究一下。至于清朝,比较复杂,一则弱得被西方任意欺凌,二则满清带有种族统治的性质,满清皇帝是否会真正关怀海外汉人族群的利益,很难说。海外华人要了解真正中国政府的传统,中共和清朝都不要去考虑,主要研究明朝、民国政府。 - Dicting ( 留言) 2008年9月19日 (五) 08:07 (UTC)
:所以就有华人干脆把孩子送到英文学校让他长大后可以进入国际大公司,而选择在家里自己教自己孩子华文。 阿华仔 ( 留言) 2008年9月19日 (五) 08:17 (UTC)
今天就谈到此啦,谢谢,拜拜,下次再谈。 阿华仔 ( 留言) 2008年9月19日 (五) 08:25 (UTC)
::English, do you speak it? -
60.49.104.219 (
talk)
09:28, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
Why isn't there a page on race relations in Malaysia? It would seem that with such great documentation of the each of the races, there should be an informative page regarding relationships among the different races. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.135.36.161 ( talk) 02:33, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
The article should explain why after so many years of living among local population of the Malays the Chinese didn't and are not integrated or assimiliated and prefer to keep their chinese traditions and language. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.129.21.2 ( talk) 06:08, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
Can anyone explain more about the 1971 National Culture Policy? I thought that the policy was rejected at some point of time. Besides, if that was not the case, how come the Malaysian Government promotes all cultures (Malay, Indian, Chinese, Malaysian Borneo Indigenous) as a Malaysian identity? The article lacks information whether the policy is enforced and how it affects (or affected) the ethnic Chinese culture and community.
And I do agree with the comment stating that more explanation is needed as to why the Chinese community do not integrate with the local Malay community (and some do not even speak Malay well or are unwilling to speak the language.) Is it the same reason as to why the local Chinese do not marry inter-racially? (cultural, religious reasons?) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.69.0.91 ( talk) 09:22, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
The sections are reorganised for more logical organisation and easier flow of reading. Some topics are merged to eliminate redundancy eg. history and ancestral origin sections. The language section is edited for conciseness and organised by dialect dominancy, some people may not be interested in the history (ancestral origin) section but do want to know what dialects are currently spoken by the Chinese in different regions.
There is a new section on Malay (BM)-educated as you cannot call yourself 'English educated' if you have only one subject taught in English and the rest in BM.
—Preceding
unsigned comment added by
202.73.10.66 (
talk)
02:38, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
-- 202.73.10.66 ( talk) 16:49, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
A new section of the various diversity of Malaysian Chinese names is included. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.73.10.66 ( talk) 04:52, 16 November 2010 (UTC) -- 202.73.10.66 ( talk) 16:50, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
Food section is reorganised to show more relevant and important information such as origin of cuisines. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.4.125.88 ( talk) 16:49, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Until 1982 (way after Independence), there were up to 4 types of public schools in the primary level and 2 types in the secondary level divided by medium of instruction (Malay, English, Chinese and Tamil). In 1974, English language public schools were phased out on a year to year basis and this process was completed in 1982 when the last Upper Six classes were conducted in English for that academic session. This is quite well documented. The way the current section is written assumes that English medium schools ceased to exist post-Independence and does not acknowledge the existence of a sizable percentage (albeit dwindling) of Malaysian Chinese that speak English either as a first or second language. - Bob K | Talk 15:37, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
Firstly, no Chinese or insignificant go to Tamil schools so that can be ruled out as 'Tamil educated'.
Secondly, 1969 was indeed the last batch of English medium for standard one kids until form six. It will take 11 years for this last batch to complete their MCE education. 1969 + 11 = 1980. In 1982, both English and Malay medium was done in parallel, the last batch was at form six. But std one upto form five were all educated in Malay.
Speaking English as a first language doesn't qualify you as a fluent speaker. There are many broken English spoken in Malaysia for these 'first language speakers'. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.49.75.33 ( talk) 14:37, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
60.49.75.33 ( talk) 14:40, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
I'm looking at the chinese population table "By state & territory". These numbers do not look anywhere close to correct.
For example, it says 46.5% of Penang population is Chinese, but the population number is only 44,323. The entire Penang population is 1,520,143, so the correct population should be 706,866. I agree there may be difference between 2000 population census and 2010 total population number, but the difference should not be out by 1600%! Somebody should go back to the reference material and re-check the number. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hiaw c ( talk • contribs) 13:21, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
There are links to the Malaysian census and some Indian woman's conference paper labelled as being from the US Department of State. Further, the cited paper does not support the 24.6% number, although the Malaysian census data does. Someone probably needs to go through and check the other refs to make sure they haven't all been tampered with. — LlywelynII 06:53, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
The malaysian census is more accurate so 24.6% is correct. It used to be much larger at nearly 50% during independence.
118.101.201.147 ( talk) 11:13, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
Several important info were moved into separate pages but they were mysteriously deleted. Please move them back into main page if they cannot be separated. They are important info. (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.82.59.80 ( talk)
Malaysian chinese languages and list of malaysian chinese communities (demographics) were both moved to separate pages. However, these pages were deleted by somebody. So I suggest they be moved back to main page. They contain important info for people to understand malaysian chinese. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.82.59.80 ( talk) 09:38, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for adding the info back. It should be complete. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.82.59.80 ( talk) 09:33, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
As far as I know the predominant language used in seberang prai and bukit mertajam should be penang hokkien and not teochew.
Can any natives staying in these two areas verify which is the predominant ie. most people use the language to communicate with strangers (not friends).
I stayed there for a year but didn't hear anybody use teochew in pasar malam to talk to strangers. But I am not a native there.
118.101.201.147 ( talk) 11:09, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
Really, Tom? The least you could do is tag the copyvio so someone would notice the problem and rewrite everything. Since you hollowed out the section with any substance all that was put in place was some poorly-written college writing, probably by some local college student, that constantly repeats facts and is completely unsalvageable. If this is the current trend of Wikipedia, its editors have completely failed. - 175.139.153.1 ( talk) 12:07, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
If you want lot more details of each wave, you should add into another wiki page as you can write so much more.
eg. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_emigration
added by 175.140.91.60 (talk) 07:41, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
For the person who wrote the civil war in China under the British wave, could you create another wiki page as it is too long and not everyone wants to read it. What some of us need are the summary of the four waves.
If you want more details of each wave, that should be another page. Eg. a baba/nyonya page exist separately.
Or add it onto this page on Chinese emigration. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_emigration
— Preceding
unsigned comment added by
175.140.91.60 (
talk)
07:41, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
can somebody replace those photos with more famous malaysians known internationally like lim goh tong (genting highland founder), wu qi xian (singer, songwriter) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.172.30.249 ( talk) 14:58, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
"Chinese Malaysians also contribute almost 90 percent of the country's income tax?" You can't be serious, right? Do not forget those with mix-blood ancestry (Brit, Dutch, Portugal "leftovers"). There are about 8.8% of other ethnicities. The figure is skewed, simply because the Malays, Muslims, Orang Asli (with Islam religion) have a different taxation system called zakat. Why no mention of that? And most of the cites are MISLEADING and UNRELATED. These sections need major updating.
https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Malaysian_Chinese&diff=615765302&oldid=615001124 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jing345 ( talk • contribs) 23:42, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
Please note that a lot of people don't know that na tuk gong, maoshan, hu xian are all grouped under Taoism. na tuk gong is just the local Malay name for what the Chinese in China called 'tu ti gong' 土地公.
There is no clear cut lines between Taoism, Maoshan, hu xian, Buddhism. All of them incorporates elements from each other. For example, you can also see Kuan Yin which is a Buddhist deity in Taoist temples. Taoism just mean Chinese folk religions in a broader sense.
Whereas, Chinese Buddhism incorporates both Buddhism and Taoism which includes incense burning, dead ancestors respect and Taoist deities. Taoist deities don't contradict Buddhism because Buddhist believe in many deities. They are called 'devas' and reside in the heavens.
1.32.71.5 (
talk)
00:59, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Not moved due to lack of support. Tiggerjay ( talk) 19:26, 22 October 2015 (UTC) Tiggerjay ( talk) 19:26, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
Malaysian Chinese → Chinese people in Malaysia – If we use Chinese people in Italy, Chinese people in the Netherlands, Chinese people in Germany and many more similar articles as standard naming article, what is your opinion? Alexander Iskandar ( talk) 11:25, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
There is no proof of any Chinese wave occuring during the Fujian massacre in 1651 and 1652. The Ming loyalists fled to Taiwan instead and not Kedah. Kedah in 1652 was under the Malacca sultanate and there were hardly any economic reason to immigrate so far from China instead of Taiwan, Vietnam, Thailand which is much nearer to China.
It was during the British Malaya where there are economic reasons to migrate so far away instead of nearer countries such as Taiwan, Philipines, Vietnam, Thailand.
Bkjalng ( talk) 14:36, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
At the moment an editor Xng keeps adding a supposed inventor of the dish Bak Kut Teh in the article, an assertion that is contradicted by other sources. For example, in this source here, it was claimed by the Tourism Minister that the dish was invented in the 1930s, earlier than the one the editor preferred (late 1940s) but the editor simply removed the source, and just add others that supported his claim (along with name-calling, issuing non-existent ANI notices, etc.) I would propose deleting the names of this and other dishes, since there is minimal research on these apart from talking to the people claiming to have invented it, and are therefore highly unreliable. Hzh ( talk) 01:17, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
Dr Ng even claimed Chili crab and Hainanese Chicken rice are invented in Malaysia. What are her sources? Did she do any research?
Unless you have a specific shop name, it's not reliable. The fact that you don't want to call Dr Ng to verify her sources show that you're a troll. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Xng ( talk • contribs) 01:30, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
It's easy to verify the inventor of Bak Kut Teh, just go to the shop itself and speak to the old residents who have been living there for 60 years or more. That was what Thestar newspaper and Axian food show did.
That's unlike you who keeps unediting reliable sources and doesn't give any reliable source with reliable shop name. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Xng ( talk • contribs) 01:33, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
To Hzh,
Dr Ng even claimed Chili crab and Hainanese Chicken rice are invented in Malaysia. What are her sources? Did she do any research?
Unless you have a specific shop name, it's not reliable. The fact that you don't want to call Dr Ng to verify her sources show that you're a troll. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Xng ( talk • contribs) 01:30, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
It's easy to verify the inventor of Bak Kut Teh, just go to the shop itself and speak to the old residents who have been living around thatarea for 60 years or more. That was what Thestar newspaper and Axian food show did.
That's unlike you who keeps undoing reliable sources and doesn't give any reliable source with a shop name.
Many Singaporeans called up Dr Ng when she claimed chilli crab was invented in Malaysia. When asked for the name of the shop and other claims, she couldn't give any. This proves that her words can't be trusted and she simply say things without much research. Please note that chilli crab is Singapore's national dish.
Back to Bak Kut Teh, it is well known that in Chinese culture, your signature dish have your name in it eg. Zhu Yuk Wing 豬肉榮 (in Cantonese) is from a seller called Ah Wing 榮. Similarly, Bak Kut Teh 肉骨地 has the name of the seller called Ah Teh 地. But most people forgot the origin and think that 地 means茶 (Chinese tea) because both have the same sound Teh in Hokkien. Chinese drink Chinese tea with every food and not just Bak Kut Teh so this assumption is wrong.
For those who want to argue further like Hzh, please watch some Chinese food programmes from Singapore who traced the origin of all Chinese food in Singapore. The links given by Xng is reliable and Ah Teh was the one who popularised Bak Kut Teh in Klang first which then spread to whole of Malaysia and Singapore. His shop is still there in Klang and anyone can visit him and his competitors to verify.
Peace to all.
Bkjalng ( talk) 11:10, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
Most are the information are up to date especially the statistics, most of them are from 2016. All of the sources listed works, and they are neutral sources for educational purpose. Most sources are not bias, it was more of an overview of the topic. Thought it had too much words so maybe add more pictures so that the audiences can relate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jtey3 ( talk • contribs) 06:20, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Malaysian Chinese. 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.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 14:22, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Malaysian Chinese. 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:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=%2F2011%2F7%2F29%2Fnation%2F20110729203217&sec=nationWhen 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) 03:11, 31 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Malaysian Chinese. 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) 09:29, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 8 external links on Malaysian Chinese. 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) 10:26, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Malaysian Chinese. 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:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.portal.mohe.gov.my/portal/page/portal/ExtPortal/Agencies/Study_in_Malaysia/National_Education_System{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.epu.gov.my/documents/10124/669145a4-1b34-4f04-9043-31b24d1c3442When 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) 00:32, 14 January 2018 (UTC)