![]() | 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 5 | ← | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 |
The article formerly read
which... ok, fine.
Problem is I actually got some sources for the exact dates that he was leading the PMTI and
that doesn't work at all.
I imagine the actual source just says Mao was active in Hunan and an overimaginative editor added the bit about that occurring "through the PMTI" that he actually taught a year afterwards... but I'm not sure. I imagine there are some experts or people with groaning bookshelves who keep an eye on major pages like this. Hopefully one of y'all can clean this up appropriately. — LlywelynII 17:30, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
The article uses the US date format of mm/did//yy, even though such is not used in a China and the article is written in what is described on Wikipedia as 'British' English. Could someone change to (very widely used) format of dad/mm/yy. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 45.116.183.63 ( talk) 12:46, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
The article states that Mao suffered his second heart attack in July, before dying in September. Any source I can find that provides an actual date, lists the date of that heart attack as June 26 [1] [2], not July.
Dkfwriting ( talk) 20:21, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
References
{{
cite web}}
: Missing or empty |title=
(
help)
{{
cite web}}
: Missing or empty |title=
(
help)
![]() | This
edit request to
Mao Zedong has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Tomunc ( talk) 22:58, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Mao Zedong has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I would like to add an image below your picture of the location of the 1st Party Meeting in Shanghai. It is an image from inside of the wax figures of Mao, Zhou Enlai, etc... I took the image myself. Tomunc ( talk) 23:14, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Mao Zedong. 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) 14:27, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Mao Zedong. 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) 10:33, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
My account isn't confirmed yet because I only started using it again recently, but can someone change "collectively known as Maoism or Marxism-Leninism-Maoism" in the intro to "collectively known as Maoism or Mao Zedong Thought." Although Mao's work eventually would influence MLM, the branch of Marxism-Leninism he theorized was Mao Zedong Thought. Alternatively, the reference to MLM can be removed altogether because MLM wouldn't be developed until 1993, nearly 20 years after his death and independent of the Chinese Communist Party. This seems to be a source of confusion for a lot of people studying Mao and thus I hope someone can rectify this.
— Sofi Delicafe ( talk) 07:20, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
Mao Zedong claimed to be China's greatest scholar - because he had killed nine thousand of them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1.129.97.197 ( talk) 01:15, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
I have removed the sentence "The Holocaust memorial museum puts the death toll between 5 and 10 million," referring to the Cultural Revolution, in this edit. This was a very recent addition to the article, and cited this page, from the Holocaust Memorial Museum. I question the veracity of this sentence for three reasons.
For a topic like this I think WP:SCHOLARSHIP must apply, which the sentence does not meet. I would be glad should someone find an appropriate source for the figure, but the sentence in question must not stand as-is. For the record, I hope no one takes this post as being sympathetic to the Cultural Revolution, which my family suffered greatly under. This is merely me checking the sources in the article. Richard Ye talk 03:38, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 6 external links on Mao Zedong. 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) 04:56, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
Didn't he go blind or half-blind in the last year or two of his life (possibly due to cataracts)? If so, why is this notable fact not included in this article? 76.189.141.37 ( talk) 03:15, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
No mention of genocide, one can only presume the curators are trying to portray this monster in the best light possible — Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.174.39.102 ( talk) 16:47, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
On almost every China-related page there will be a transliteration of the name in Chinese pinyin as well as simplified/traditional characters in the first sentence. I don't actually edit wikipedia stuff but I'm sure someone would want to fix that. 谢谢 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.189.137.159 ( talk) 00:32, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
Mao is notable for leading the Communist revolution in China and his contributions to the largest catastrophe in human history as per Washington Post: Remembering the biggest mass murder in the history of the world. The introduction is too long and focused on irrelevant topics, eg introducing him as a 'Chinese communist revolutionary, poet, political theorist' - no one is here for some Maoist poetry, any more than they visit Hitler for his art ;) The intro should be shortened to summarize his original intentions with the Communist revolution, versus the resulting famine and death toll. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.233.125.236 ( talk) 06:58, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
In the section "Portrayal in film and television", there should be added the film "The Chairman", which is a political thriller released circa 1969. A great deal of the plot features a fictional Mao engaged in idealogical discourse with a visiting Western dignitary. Mao is played by Conrad Yama. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.223.130.32 ( talk) 20:22, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
"which through arbitrary executions, purges and forced labor caused an estimated 40 to 70 million deaths"
What? Are we seriously trying to claim that under Mao, 70,000,000 people were... "executed or purged"? Really? This isn't even the standard propaganda line of the imperialists. The usual claim is that most of these people died in famine, which somehow is Mao's fault. Claíomh Solais ( talk) 22:01, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Mao Zedong has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Under the heading "Genealogy": Please amend "One of his granddaughters is businesswoman Kong Dongmei, one of the richest people in China.[286] His grandson Mao Xinyu (Kong's half-brother) is a general in the Chinese army" to "One of his granddaughters is businesswoman Kong Dongmei, one of the richest people in China.[286] His grandson Mao Xinyu (Kong's cousin) is a general in the Chinese army". Mao Xinyu's father was the half-brother of Kong Dongmei's mother; Kong Dongmei and Mao Xinyu are therefore not siblings but cousins. 88.144.62.237 ( talk) 22:19, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
"Kong Dongmei has been following in the footsteps of her grandfather, Mao Zedong, by promoting literature and culture. Yang Guang reports
Kong Dongmei has the same mole on her chin as her grandfather, former chairman Mao Zedong, but that's not all. She also has the same ambition to promote culture.
The daughter of Li Min, Mao's only surviving child with second wife He Zizhen, Kong is the president of a Beijing culture corporation." http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/life/2010-05/11/content_9833328.htm
"Mao Xinyu, the only grandson of Mao Zedong, made a public appearance last week, silencing a rumor that he was among 32 Chinese tourists killed in a traffic accident in North Korea last month.
He is the only son of Mao Anqing, the last surviving son of Mao Zedong." http://www.koreaherald.com/view.php?ud=20180506000063 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.72.176.195 ( talk) 12:13, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Mao Zedong has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Under the heading "Genealogy": Please amend "One of his granddaughters is businesswoman Kong Dongmei, one of the richest people in China.[286] His grandson Mao Xinyu (Kong's half-brother) is a general in the Chinese army" to "One of his granddaughters is businesswoman Kong Dongmei, one of the richest people in China.[286] His grandson Mao Xinyu (Kong's cousin) is a general in the Chinese army". Mao Xinyu's father was the half-brother of Kong Dongmei's mother; Kong Dongmei and Mao Xinyu are therefore not siblings but cousins. Sourced evidence: "Kong Dongmei has been following in the footsteps of her grandfather, Mao Zedong, by promoting literature and culture...The daughter of Li Min, Mao's only surviving child with second wife He Zizhen, Kong is the president of a Beijing culture corporation." http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/life/2010-05/11/content_9833328.htm
"Mao Xinyu, the only grandson of Mao Zedong, made a public appearance last week, silencing a rumor that he was among 32 Chinese tourists killed in a traffic accident in North Korea last month...He is the only son of Mao Anqing, the last surviving son of Mao Zedong." http://www.koreaherald.com/view.php?ud=20180506000063 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.72.176.195 ( talk) 12:13, 26 May 2018 (UTC) 79.72.176.195 ( talk) 12:17, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Mao Zedong has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Could someone *please* fix the reference to Kong Dongmei and Mao Xinyu? As indicated in the sources above, they are cousins, not half-siblings. I don't care if you amend it to refer to them as cousins, or delete the bracketed passage, or just delete reference to them altogether, but please get rid of the unnecessary inaccuracy. 79.72.177.168 ( talk) 18:55, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
I've seen back-and-forth edits of the 'feminist' label on other left wing figures'pages whose views on the issue were grey-area, so I assume this might be a controversial tag. But in this case it really feels particularly far from being clear-cut. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ashitanofrog ( talk • contribs) 07:00, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
Can editors please discuss the infobox picture here instead of edit warring. Nigel Ish ( talk) 10:36, 20 July 2018 (UTC)
I was looking for another Mao event, (his role in messing up pollinators in China) but fruit being fruit ... . The events described do not match the reference materials, with events and participants out of order. Rather than dispute, I've rewritten.
I dislike "spiritual time bomb", and expect that there are subtlies lost in translation. What was author Cynthis Thuma's source? [1] More substantial seems to be Malcolm Moore's 2013 news article, which he based (in part) on an interview with "Alfreda Murck, a scholar at Beijing's Palace Museum whose work forms the basis of the exhibition at Zurich's Reitberg museum". [2] [3] Her book seems to be the start of this section article, even if not well studied as a reference.
GeeBee60 ( talk) 15:58, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
References
Wives section says Mao had four wives, Siblings section talks about all three of his wives. Please correct this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.159.232.121 ( talk) 18:51, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
I added a fact that stated the number of death's caused by Mao's famine was widely debated. An exact number was never decided upon. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jcmoss8917 ( talk • contribs) 05:14, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
I don't think this is important enough to have its own section.-- Jack Upland ( talk) 08:34, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
In the section "Mango fever", "They cried out enthusiastically and sand with wild abandonment" should read "sang with wild abandonment". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jnfnt ( talk • contribs) 02:57, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
The claim that Mao was left out of a Shanghai history textbook has been disputed: [1] I can't find any other source that has this story. It is now a decade old and might no longer be true. In any case, this is only one textbook and one city. Including this seems to misrepresent the situation in China. I will remove it.-- Jack Upland ( talk) 08:44, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
The claim that "no foreign diplomats" (or leaders, for that matter) attended Mao's funeral seems to be contradicted by this video.... of Mao's funeral.
Start around 26:52 and you will very clearly see foreign representation there, and mentioned... LittleCuteSuit ( talk) 05:09, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
For most of my life this man was known as "Mao Tse Tung". His most famous book was published under that name for more than 40 years:
https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/mao/works/red-book/index.htm
And is still published under that name, today:
https://www.amazon.com/Quotations-Chairman-Mao-Tse-Tung-Original/dp/1547154357/
Suddenly, his name has been posthumously changed to "Zedong" ??
Or is this just another weird Wikipedia affectation? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.89.176.249 ( talk) 20:22, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Mao Zedong has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Mao Zedong has three siblings. We can add that to his personal details! They have played important part in the communist revolution as guerilla soldiers. Legende Legende ( talk) 00:20, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
The paragraph starting with "A controversial figure, Mao is regarded as one of the most important and influential individuals in modern world history" presents Mao as a legitimate world leader who did a lot of good, but who also did some bad, and is thus a "controversial" figure. The man was a monster, responsible for some of the greatest atrocities ever. Is this description of him as "controversial" accurate? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:F470:6:3002:88CE:E25F:DBFA:1175 ( talk) 15:48, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
It's...truly an understatement to say that, Jack. 90.252.95.112 ( talk) 17:25, 9 July 2019 (UTC)Frank
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 11:52, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
Hi, in the section "Resuming Civil War", there is a qote from Edwin Moise, and in the last line it has "... the contacts with the USA developed with the CPC led to very little". Not a native speaker, but the with/with couple makes no sense to me. Could it be that it should read "...the contacts _which_ the USA developed with the CPC led to very little" ? T 85.166.160.249 ( talk) 01:01, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
Why are dates in this article in the mm/dd/yy format when almost all articles regarding Chinese people and politicians use dd/mm/yy? 78.108.56.35 ( talk) 14:52, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
This issue has been mentioned before but no discussion came of it. In the section "Mango Fever" this sentence is problematic to me:
"When Mao first tasted mangoes in 1968 he was enthused, describing them as a "spiritual time bomb"."
The source for the quote "spiritual time bomb" is a secondary source which does not include a citation for the original quote. Usually not that much of an issue, granted the source is academic in nature. However, the source in question is a cookbook, which may not necessarily meet high standard of research that say a peer-review publication would have. If someone could find the original source of the quote that would be appreciated and preferable to what we have now.
I'll leave the sentence there for now, so discuss can take place.
Also, the Mango Fever section in general seems very out of place in a biographical article and would seem to be more appropriate in the article about the Cultural Revolution. Thoughts? Jp16103 20:37, 28 September 2019 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 09:51, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
I would add to the intro of the entry.
Mao Zedong[a] (/ˈmaʊ (d)zəˈdʊŋ/;[2] December 26, 1893 – September 9, 1976), also known as Chairman Mao, was a Chinese communist revolutionary who became the founding father of the People's Republic of China (PRC), which he ruled as the Chairman of the Communist Party of China from its establishment in 1949 until his death in 1976. Idelogically a Marxist, his theories, military strategies, and political policies are collectively known as Maoism.
to:
Mao Zedong[a] (/ˈmaʊ (d)zəˈdʊŋ/;[2] December 26, 1893 – September 9, 1976), also known as Chairman Mao, was a Chinese communist revolutionary, and mass murderer, who became the founding father of the People's Republic of China (PRC), which he ruled as the Chairman of the Communist Party of China from its establishment in 1949 until his death in 1976. Idelogically a Marxist, his theories, military strategies, and political policies are collectively known as Maoism. 66.177.231.180 ( talk) 11:33, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
There is NO consensus in scholarship for inflating the number to this extent. If you can find academic sources which claim this estimate, present them here. Scholarly sources such as Mao's Last Revolution (2006), one of the most authoritative accounts of the GPCR, puts the death toll for the GPCR at between 750,000 and 1.5 million (p.262). Similarly, Frank Dikotter's recent book The Cultural Revolution: A People’s History, 1962–1976 puts the total death toll at between 1.5 and 2 million (p. xvi). Even the vehemently anti-Mao biography Mao: The Unknown Story allows for a total of 3 million deaths (569). If the 20 million estimate were at all credible, The Chang/Halliday book would have certainly mentioned it. Including the high estimate of 20 million in the lede and the third paragraph of the GPCR sub-section undermines the credibility of the article, as it is clearly not the consensus among Sinologists and scholars of the GPCR, and it smacks of propaganda.-- C.J. Griffin ( talk) 17:37, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
I do not have much time to dig through book sources page by page, but the claim of 20 million from Ye Jianying is quoted from History.People.com.cn as follows: "粉碎“四人帮”之后,叶剑英在一次讲话中沉痛地说:“文化大革命”死了2000万人,整了1亿人,浪费了8000亿人民币。" The source makes no mention of the precise context (purpose, date, location, etc) of the meeting at which Marshal Ye was quoted from. This alone seems to be a problem of WP:UNDUE weight given to non-scholarly sources (see the lede) such as the South China Morning Post and The Atlantic. CaradhrasAiguo ( leave language) 19:17, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Mao Zedong has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Since Mao was Chairman of the PRC state [People's Republic of China], change chairman to president. 45.58.91.229 ( talk) 01:21, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
{{
edit semi-protected}}
template.
Eggishorn
(talk)
(contrib)
15:14, 8 March 2020 (UTC)As per my information Four Pests Campaign was one of major movements started my Mao. In this article there is not even mention about it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.220.154.225 ( talk) 18:15, 9 April 2020 (UTC)
I can't find any mention of the 1947 elections in this article, or any explanation to why Mao chose not to participate in the elections anywhere on Wikipedia. Alec Gargett ( talk) 21:53, 29 December 2019 (UTC)
Go to wikimedia sir Andrew Athini ( talk) 17:08, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
I noticed that when you click on, "2nd Chairman of the PRC" it takes me to this page, "President of the People's Republic of China." I understand that the Chairman of the PRC was the leader/head of state of the PRC de facto, before not anymore, but that does not mean that it is the President of the PRC. I do not remember but after some time they created the President of the PRC as the head of state making it de jure. Today they still have the Chairman of the PRC but it does not hold as much power anymore. Please, correct me if I'm wrong on any of these statements. I just wanted to bring this up because it did not sit right for me. LucasA04 ( talk) 17:09, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 00:07, 28 April 2020 (UTC)
I've removed this from the lead:
This is not reflected in the body of the article. Firstly, why say "in particular"? Secondly, in fact, it was Nixon who reversed the US policy of excluding China. Mao's government was not recognised as the government of China for decades. And Australian leader Gough Whitlam had visited China prior to the Nixon visit. Mao's China had links to the world from 1949 onwards. Thirdly, linking to the Open Door Policy is appalling as the Open Door Policy was an imperialist policy which Mao did not support. The Open Door Policy article does not (understandably) mention Nixon at all. Nor did Mao welcoming Nixon foreshadow Deng's market reforms. This sentence gets almost everything wrong.-- Jack Upland ( talk) 08:55, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
I've cut out the "tinker, tailor, soldier, spy" bit in the lead. He was primarily known as a politician. You can buy books anywhere on Mao the politician, but you're hard pressed to buy books of his poetry. That he wrote poetry is not really relevant to this page or his life, because anyone can do those things.
I've also suggested tweaking it to say he was a highly influential person, because "one of the most" doesn't explain where he fits in with everyone else. E.g. Kennedy, Deng, Gorbachev, Thatcher, Reagen, Roosevelt, the list just goes on and becomes somewhat meaningless. I know one book referred to him that way, but it's a bit much. But if someone wants to change that particular bit back I don't mind. John Smith's ( talk) 17:09, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
Jesus, are we really doing this? Source is Mao: A Reinterpretation, which Wikipedia describes as "a work of historical revisionism that sought to highlight what Feigon saw as the positive aspects of Mao Zedong's political leadership." Academic reviews of this book are pretty negative overall, with comments like "contrarian and unpersuasive" and "a simplistic vision of Mao that cannot convince." Bruce Cumings did like it. Obviously there is other reliable-source scholarship interpreting Mao as a cynical Machiavellian, his objections to elite ruling classes as obviously ludicrous given his own position, the GPCR as his weapon against Party rivals, etc. We should separate interpretation from fact and certainly never take a fringe revisionist work as authoritative. 74.15.32.60 ( talk) 00:53, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
How about mass murderer?? This Wikipedia page makes it sound like he is one of the greatest people in history with a few minor blemishes on his record. I mean, this article admits he persecuted (killed) 550,000 people in one period of history and then hundreds of thousands to tens of millions in other parts of his rule. Most accounts I’ve read by historians say he killed 30-50 million Chinese to include dead babies left on pitch forks and spears. How can you such flattering commentary in respect to this guy?? 2601:6C3:8200:5160:28A6:EC5D:502C:3B0C ( talk) 02:54, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
Li's book goes into much detail about Mao's preference for underage girls as sexual partners. Why no mention of that in the article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.244.137.86 ( talk) 02:40, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
See Talk:Mao Zedong/Archive 9#I propose adding "mass murderer" to the intro.
To be clear about my position:
- Tom Haws ( talk) 17:02, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
To phrase this as if it were an attributed POV is absurd. There is no dispute whatsoever in reliable sources that Mao ruled an autocratic and totalitarian regime. Snooganssnoogans ( talk) 15:04, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
Why on Earth does the lead list what Mao's supporters say about his regime? It is absurd to list what partisans are saying about what he did when there is an enormous literature that documents what he actually did. We should obviously focus on the latter rather than recite what his supporters and opponents say about him. It is also a blatant NPOV violation to have content in the lead that specifically focuses on what his fans say about him when it doesn't include the rhetoric of his opponents. That said, neither should obviously be in the lead. Snooganssnoogans ( talk) 15:10, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
We should not give equal weight to revisionist histories by Mao apologists to rebut mainstream scholarship. [2] The claims sourced to these revisionist histories are extraordinary (the Cultural Revolution led to the great economic growth commonly attributed to liberal reforms) and no pages are cited for them. Snooganssnoogans ( talk) 13:59, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
I struggle to see how this is WP:UNDUE if they're actually backed by the sources, and accusations that historians are "revisionist", "apologists" or fringe based on editors' POV hold no water whatsoever. PailSimon, can you provide the pages / direct quotations? Changed title according to WP:TALKHEADPOV and WP:SECTIONHEADINGOWN -- BunnyyHop ( talk) 22:51, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
Although it is true that direct relief was limited to those who could not be helped by the family, the process of collectivization did dramatically change access to public goods for many people in the countryside by providing rudimentary public health, education, and irrigation projects [...] Under Mao, the welfare system was seen as subservient to the demands of the economy and to the pursuit of socialism [...] At the same time, the organization of the collective in the countryside and the inconsequentiality of cost meant that for its developmental level, rural Chinese enjoyed good preventive healthcare and basic education systems
This registration guaranteed access to a number of benefits denied to the peasants, such as secure employment, affordable housing, inexpensive medical care, and retirement income.
When the trade unions were abolished during the Cultural Revolution, the system ceased and free healthcare became part and parcel of the benefit package of working in a SOE.
-- BunnyyHop ( talk) 07:26, 12 February 2021 (UTC)That China could develop without capitalism was proven during the Cultural Revolution as the living standard rose for the majority of the population – the third-line industrialization policy had a positive effect on bringing progress to remote areas of the PRC and agricultural production increased. All these achievements were possible without exploiting colonies and without exploiting the toiling masses in China
I am unsure if to use baidu baike as a source, because it is officially deprecated. However, it may be useful in describing the official standpoint of the chinese government on events like the great leap forward and the cultural revolution. Since these are both touchy topics in China, they would probably have some sort of censor on baidu, and wouldn't contain vandalism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SherlockHolmes23 ( talk • contribs) 04:07, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
Mao ruled China from the end of WWII to 1976. Wouldn't literacy and life expectancy have increased under pretty much any stable ruler who governed a country in that particular period, in particular one that had previously been embroiled in a long civil war and world war? Shouldn't an increase in literacy and life expectancy be compared to similar states rather than be stated as a notable statistic without any context? In my view, this does not belong in the lead unless it can be supported by high-quality academic publications which stress that the increase in literacy and life expectancy was notable in its own right and in relation to similar states or the counterfactual of any other ruler. Of the academic studies that actually try to assess the counterfactual, they see Mao's rule as a failure [3]. Snooganssnoogans ( talk) 16:49, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
"While no one is minimising the cost of Mao's follies - notably the 30 million dead from famine caused by the Great Leap Forward - scholars point out that in the sane interludes between these campaigns China showed remarkable economic growth and dramatically improved indices of social welfare, with life expectancy doubling in the 1950s . . . None of this gets a mention in Mao: The Unknown Story."
There is a lot of this in the article that turns it from neutral to a revisionist history which is not accurate. His supporters are all over the article. They should be removed. The whole got this all over it, in lots of places that are not sourced. It is completely NPOV'd. The only people who should comment in this article, are independent historians who are taking a balanced and neutral view. scope_creep Talk 11:35, 17 May 2021 (UTC)
According to the talk page, this article is in British English, so why is "romanisation" and "romanised" spelled as "romanization" and "romanized"? ReaIdiot ( talk) 21:16, 17 May 2021 (UTC)
I really don't find the section that begins with "Despite being considered a feminist..." is necessary or relevant, especially considering the fact that as is, the claim is relatively unsubstantiated. 2 of the 3 cited sources have broken links, and the third is a short blurb that mentions no sources besides a mysterious US State Department document supposedly published 35 years after the fact. Would we consider, for instance, Chinese Intelligence documents which make disparaging claims about US presidents to be a reliable source? Obviously the US State Department is biased.. Breeby ( talk) 23:13, 20 July 2021 (UTC)
Things that Mao's supporters say he did in the "Legacy" section:
I think most, if not all, of this content should be removed from the article. Or at the very least, be verified with strong sources (e.g. well-known China experts publishing in top presses and journals). Snooganssnoogans ( talk) 02:18, 4 July 2021 (UTC)
Bosho71 ( talk) 13:37, 8 August 2021 (UTC) I agree with most of these points. Especially #3, that's kind of hilarious. A lot of the legacy section is unsourced propaganda. Some of it is sourced... But to CCCP propaganda sites, some of which are broken as of this writing. Why are we including offhand comments from blogs in this wikipage? Or polls taken from a state newspaper in which criticism of the state is not allowed? Or just including biased unsourced opinions? Imagine if someone wrote, "Supporters of Hitler point out that he was half man, half sandwich". That might be something some supporter of Hitler said at one time, who cares? That is not a popular consensus among anyone. Why are we including things like that in the wikipage? Why is this biased statement, "Mao's military writings continue to have a large amount of influence both among those who seek to create an insurgency and those who seek to crush one, especially in manners of guerrilla warfare, at which Mao is popularly regarded as a genius." in this section, unsourced? That is not a popular consensus.
Also, some of these sources have nothing to do with what is being stated in the wiki. Take footnote 264, which is supposed to support the statement, "Supporters point out... [Mao Zedong] improved life expectancy, education and health care". Nothing on the page sourced of Patricia Ebrey's The Cambridge Illustrated History of China, has anything to do with that statement. There is nothing saying that "supporters" of Mao made that particular claim. Maybe you can misconstrue this statement to mean that Patricia Ebrey herself is a supporter of Mao, I'm just going ahead and going to guess no, she isn't. Why was this statement added to the wiki? Why did was this random page of this book that has nothing to do with that statement linked as a source? Why does this section look like parts of it was written by the CCCP?
On Commons, there seems to be some inconsistency about whether the lead portrait photo was taken in 1959 or 1963. Could someone look into it to settle the matter and make the needed moves/corrections? {{u| Sdkb}} talk 07:02, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
Sorry, but that's very odd. Can we switch all dates featured to DMY for consistency? Far easier than to change all spelling to American English. -- 222.153.41.39 ( talk) 12:10, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
On Australian ABC radio recently ( [1]) a serious historian mentioned that Mao spoke a minority dialect that meant he was unintelligible (in speech) to most people in China. -- Feroshki ( talk) 08:44, 26 July 2021 (UTC) That's a very good point. Please add it if you can (if you haven't already). -- 222.153.41.39 ( talk) 12:12, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
References
It is not a minority language, but a local accent that can be understood by most Chinese people. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Lindorx (
talk •
contribs)
11:54, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect
Chairman mao and has thus listed it
for discussion. This discussion will occur at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 January 5#Chairman mao until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.
CentreLeftRight
✉
08:41, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Mao Zedong has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
In the second paragraph, change "...and through a psychological victory in the Korean War, which altogether resulted in the deaths of several million Chinese." To "...and through a psychological victory in the Korean War." Or Add a citation. You cannot claim millions of anything without a citation, and I want to read the original source for this information. 184.62.234.0 ( talk) 07:17, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 03:38, 22 March 2022 (UTC)
This article seems to be more forthcoming about Mao's controversial deeds than it was the last time I happened by. I don't find the article entirely unsatisfactory any more. Good work. Tom Haws ( talk) 23:08, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
Under this section there are multiple sections that use CCP-linked polling and sources to prove support for Mao within mainland China. That is far from an objective lens. The sections citing polling results from Global Times (links to an Al Jazeera article about it) are questionable at best. 2A00:801:739:41CA:0:0:1114:132F ( talk) 18:38, 14 April 2022 (UTC)
I propose merging Early revolutionary activity of Mao Zedong into Mao Zedong. The former is largely a carbon-copy of the "Early revolutionary activity" section in the latter, with the exception of a few altered and added sentences that it would take very little effort to incorporate into the latter article. Unlike the article Early life of Mao Zedong, which provides a vastly expanded overview of this period of Mao's life in comparison to the "Early life" section, there is very little in the "Early revolutionary activity" article that currently justifies its existence as a separate article. If this section were to get too heavy for the main article, then there would be a case for splitting, but as of now they are two articles for the same information. -- Grnrchst ( talk) 11:07, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
Hi CentreLeftRight. The only reason I added that to the lead is that article is linked to from the Red Emperor (disambiguation) page, and the mention in the body is buried and difficult to find. If the use of the term is uncommon or unjustified, I suggest removing it from the DAB page as well. Other views welcome and I'll leave it to editors of this page, not having time to dig deeper on the matter myself - it was purely a style issue for me. Laterthanyouthink ( talk) 00:56, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
This should be added to the top of the article: In this Chinese name, the family name is Mao and Ze is a generation name.
Other articles about Chinese people have this at the top to reduce confusion. This article has it out of the way at the bottom when it should be at the top.
-- 2601:80:8402:1AA0:643C:EBF7:25A4:4142 ( talk) 04:51, 11 September 2022 (UTC)
{{
edit semi-protected}}
template. this has previously been reinstated by other editors, stating it would introduce too many hatnotes, and that it is better to have all explanations about the name in the same place.
Madeline (
part of me)
18:10, 12 September 2022 (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 5 | ← | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 |
The article formerly read
which... ok, fine.
Problem is I actually got some sources for the exact dates that he was leading the PMTI and
that doesn't work at all.
I imagine the actual source just says Mao was active in Hunan and an overimaginative editor added the bit about that occurring "through the PMTI" that he actually taught a year afterwards... but I'm not sure. I imagine there are some experts or people with groaning bookshelves who keep an eye on major pages like this. Hopefully one of y'all can clean this up appropriately. — LlywelynII 17:30, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
The article uses the US date format of mm/did//yy, even though such is not used in a China and the article is written in what is described on Wikipedia as 'British' English. Could someone change to (very widely used) format of dad/mm/yy. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 45.116.183.63 ( talk) 12:46, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
The article states that Mao suffered his second heart attack in July, before dying in September. Any source I can find that provides an actual date, lists the date of that heart attack as June 26 [1] [2], not July.
Dkfwriting ( talk) 20:21, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
References
{{
cite web}}
: Missing or empty |title=
(
help)
{{
cite web}}
: Missing or empty |title=
(
help)
![]() | This
edit request to
Mao Zedong has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Tomunc ( talk) 22:58, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Mao Zedong has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I would like to add an image below your picture of the location of the 1st Party Meeting in Shanghai. It is an image from inside of the wax figures of Mao, Zhou Enlai, etc... I took the image myself. Tomunc ( talk) 23:14, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Mao Zedong. 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) 14:27, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Mao Zedong. 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) 10:33, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
My account isn't confirmed yet because I only started using it again recently, but can someone change "collectively known as Maoism or Marxism-Leninism-Maoism" in the intro to "collectively known as Maoism or Mao Zedong Thought." Although Mao's work eventually would influence MLM, the branch of Marxism-Leninism he theorized was Mao Zedong Thought. Alternatively, the reference to MLM can be removed altogether because MLM wouldn't be developed until 1993, nearly 20 years after his death and independent of the Chinese Communist Party. This seems to be a source of confusion for a lot of people studying Mao and thus I hope someone can rectify this.
— Sofi Delicafe ( talk) 07:20, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
Mao Zedong claimed to be China's greatest scholar - because he had killed nine thousand of them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1.129.97.197 ( talk) 01:15, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
I have removed the sentence "The Holocaust memorial museum puts the death toll between 5 and 10 million," referring to the Cultural Revolution, in this edit. This was a very recent addition to the article, and cited this page, from the Holocaust Memorial Museum. I question the veracity of this sentence for three reasons.
For a topic like this I think WP:SCHOLARSHIP must apply, which the sentence does not meet. I would be glad should someone find an appropriate source for the figure, but the sentence in question must not stand as-is. For the record, I hope no one takes this post as being sympathetic to the Cultural Revolution, which my family suffered greatly under. This is merely me checking the sources in the article. Richard Ye talk 03:38, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 6 external links on Mao Zedong. 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) 04:56, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
Didn't he go blind or half-blind in the last year or two of his life (possibly due to cataracts)? If so, why is this notable fact not included in this article? 76.189.141.37 ( talk) 03:15, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
No mention of genocide, one can only presume the curators are trying to portray this monster in the best light possible — Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.174.39.102 ( talk) 16:47, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
On almost every China-related page there will be a transliteration of the name in Chinese pinyin as well as simplified/traditional characters in the first sentence. I don't actually edit wikipedia stuff but I'm sure someone would want to fix that. 谢谢 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.189.137.159 ( talk) 00:32, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
Mao is notable for leading the Communist revolution in China and his contributions to the largest catastrophe in human history as per Washington Post: Remembering the biggest mass murder in the history of the world. The introduction is too long and focused on irrelevant topics, eg introducing him as a 'Chinese communist revolutionary, poet, political theorist' - no one is here for some Maoist poetry, any more than they visit Hitler for his art ;) The intro should be shortened to summarize his original intentions with the Communist revolution, versus the resulting famine and death toll. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.233.125.236 ( talk) 06:58, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
In the section "Portrayal in film and television", there should be added the film "The Chairman", which is a political thriller released circa 1969. A great deal of the plot features a fictional Mao engaged in idealogical discourse with a visiting Western dignitary. Mao is played by Conrad Yama. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.223.130.32 ( talk) 20:22, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
"which through arbitrary executions, purges and forced labor caused an estimated 40 to 70 million deaths"
What? Are we seriously trying to claim that under Mao, 70,000,000 people were... "executed or purged"? Really? This isn't even the standard propaganda line of the imperialists. The usual claim is that most of these people died in famine, which somehow is Mao's fault. Claíomh Solais ( talk) 22:01, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Mao Zedong has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Under the heading "Genealogy": Please amend "One of his granddaughters is businesswoman Kong Dongmei, one of the richest people in China.[286] His grandson Mao Xinyu (Kong's half-brother) is a general in the Chinese army" to "One of his granddaughters is businesswoman Kong Dongmei, one of the richest people in China.[286] His grandson Mao Xinyu (Kong's cousin) is a general in the Chinese army". Mao Xinyu's father was the half-brother of Kong Dongmei's mother; Kong Dongmei and Mao Xinyu are therefore not siblings but cousins. 88.144.62.237 ( talk) 22:19, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
"Kong Dongmei has been following in the footsteps of her grandfather, Mao Zedong, by promoting literature and culture. Yang Guang reports
Kong Dongmei has the same mole on her chin as her grandfather, former chairman Mao Zedong, but that's not all. She also has the same ambition to promote culture.
The daughter of Li Min, Mao's only surviving child with second wife He Zizhen, Kong is the president of a Beijing culture corporation." http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/life/2010-05/11/content_9833328.htm
"Mao Xinyu, the only grandson of Mao Zedong, made a public appearance last week, silencing a rumor that he was among 32 Chinese tourists killed in a traffic accident in North Korea last month.
He is the only son of Mao Anqing, the last surviving son of Mao Zedong." http://www.koreaherald.com/view.php?ud=20180506000063 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.72.176.195 ( talk) 12:13, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Mao Zedong has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Under the heading "Genealogy": Please amend "One of his granddaughters is businesswoman Kong Dongmei, one of the richest people in China.[286] His grandson Mao Xinyu (Kong's half-brother) is a general in the Chinese army" to "One of his granddaughters is businesswoman Kong Dongmei, one of the richest people in China.[286] His grandson Mao Xinyu (Kong's cousin) is a general in the Chinese army". Mao Xinyu's father was the half-brother of Kong Dongmei's mother; Kong Dongmei and Mao Xinyu are therefore not siblings but cousins. Sourced evidence: "Kong Dongmei has been following in the footsteps of her grandfather, Mao Zedong, by promoting literature and culture...The daughter of Li Min, Mao's only surviving child with second wife He Zizhen, Kong is the president of a Beijing culture corporation." http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/life/2010-05/11/content_9833328.htm
"Mao Xinyu, the only grandson of Mao Zedong, made a public appearance last week, silencing a rumor that he was among 32 Chinese tourists killed in a traffic accident in North Korea last month...He is the only son of Mao Anqing, the last surviving son of Mao Zedong." http://www.koreaherald.com/view.php?ud=20180506000063 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.72.176.195 ( talk) 12:13, 26 May 2018 (UTC) 79.72.176.195 ( talk) 12:17, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Mao Zedong has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Could someone *please* fix the reference to Kong Dongmei and Mao Xinyu? As indicated in the sources above, they are cousins, not half-siblings. I don't care if you amend it to refer to them as cousins, or delete the bracketed passage, or just delete reference to them altogether, but please get rid of the unnecessary inaccuracy. 79.72.177.168 ( talk) 18:55, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
I've seen back-and-forth edits of the 'feminist' label on other left wing figures'pages whose views on the issue were grey-area, so I assume this might be a controversial tag. But in this case it really feels particularly far from being clear-cut. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ashitanofrog ( talk • contribs) 07:00, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
Can editors please discuss the infobox picture here instead of edit warring. Nigel Ish ( talk) 10:36, 20 July 2018 (UTC)
I was looking for another Mao event, (his role in messing up pollinators in China) but fruit being fruit ... . The events described do not match the reference materials, with events and participants out of order. Rather than dispute, I've rewritten.
I dislike "spiritual time bomb", and expect that there are subtlies lost in translation. What was author Cynthis Thuma's source? [1] More substantial seems to be Malcolm Moore's 2013 news article, which he based (in part) on an interview with "Alfreda Murck, a scholar at Beijing's Palace Museum whose work forms the basis of the exhibition at Zurich's Reitberg museum". [2] [3] Her book seems to be the start of this section article, even if not well studied as a reference.
GeeBee60 ( talk) 15:58, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
References
Wives section says Mao had four wives, Siblings section talks about all three of his wives. Please correct this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.159.232.121 ( talk) 18:51, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
I added a fact that stated the number of death's caused by Mao's famine was widely debated. An exact number was never decided upon. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jcmoss8917 ( talk • contribs) 05:14, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
I don't think this is important enough to have its own section.-- Jack Upland ( talk) 08:34, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
In the section "Mango fever", "They cried out enthusiastically and sand with wild abandonment" should read "sang with wild abandonment". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jnfnt ( talk • contribs) 02:57, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
The claim that Mao was left out of a Shanghai history textbook has been disputed: [1] I can't find any other source that has this story. It is now a decade old and might no longer be true. In any case, this is only one textbook and one city. Including this seems to misrepresent the situation in China. I will remove it.-- Jack Upland ( talk) 08:44, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
The claim that "no foreign diplomats" (or leaders, for that matter) attended Mao's funeral seems to be contradicted by this video.... of Mao's funeral.
Start around 26:52 and you will very clearly see foreign representation there, and mentioned... LittleCuteSuit ( talk) 05:09, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
For most of my life this man was known as "Mao Tse Tung". His most famous book was published under that name for more than 40 years:
https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/mao/works/red-book/index.htm
And is still published under that name, today:
https://www.amazon.com/Quotations-Chairman-Mao-Tse-Tung-Original/dp/1547154357/
Suddenly, his name has been posthumously changed to "Zedong" ??
Or is this just another weird Wikipedia affectation? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.89.176.249 ( talk) 20:22, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Mao Zedong has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Mao Zedong has three siblings. We can add that to his personal details! They have played important part in the communist revolution as guerilla soldiers. Legende Legende ( talk) 00:20, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
The paragraph starting with "A controversial figure, Mao is regarded as one of the most important and influential individuals in modern world history" presents Mao as a legitimate world leader who did a lot of good, but who also did some bad, and is thus a "controversial" figure. The man was a monster, responsible for some of the greatest atrocities ever. Is this description of him as "controversial" accurate? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:F470:6:3002:88CE:E25F:DBFA:1175 ( talk) 15:48, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
It's...truly an understatement to say that, Jack. 90.252.95.112 ( talk) 17:25, 9 July 2019 (UTC)Frank
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 11:52, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
Hi, in the section "Resuming Civil War", there is a qote from Edwin Moise, and in the last line it has "... the contacts with the USA developed with the CPC led to very little". Not a native speaker, but the with/with couple makes no sense to me. Could it be that it should read "...the contacts _which_ the USA developed with the CPC led to very little" ? T 85.166.160.249 ( talk) 01:01, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
Why are dates in this article in the mm/dd/yy format when almost all articles regarding Chinese people and politicians use dd/mm/yy? 78.108.56.35 ( talk) 14:52, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
This issue has been mentioned before but no discussion came of it. In the section "Mango Fever" this sentence is problematic to me:
"When Mao first tasted mangoes in 1968 he was enthused, describing them as a "spiritual time bomb"."
The source for the quote "spiritual time bomb" is a secondary source which does not include a citation for the original quote. Usually not that much of an issue, granted the source is academic in nature. However, the source in question is a cookbook, which may not necessarily meet high standard of research that say a peer-review publication would have. If someone could find the original source of the quote that would be appreciated and preferable to what we have now.
I'll leave the sentence there for now, so discuss can take place.
Also, the Mango Fever section in general seems very out of place in a biographical article and would seem to be more appropriate in the article about the Cultural Revolution. Thoughts? Jp16103 20:37, 28 September 2019 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 09:51, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
I would add to the intro of the entry.
Mao Zedong[a] (/ˈmaʊ (d)zəˈdʊŋ/;[2] December 26, 1893 – September 9, 1976), also known as Chairman Mao, was a Chinese communist revolutionary who became the founding father of the People's Republic of China (PRC), which he ruled as the Chairman of the Communist Party of China from its establishment in 1949 until his death in 1976. Idelogically a Marxist, his theories, military strategies, and political policies are collectively known as Maoism.
to:
Mao Zedong[a] (/ˈmaʊ (d)zəˈdʊŋ/;[2] December 26, 1893 – September 9, 1976), also known as Chairman Mao, was a Chinese communist revolutionary, and mass murderer, who became the founding father of the People's Republic of China (PRC), which he ruled as the Chairman of the Communist Party of China from its establishment in 1949 until his death in 1976. Idelogically a Marxist, his theories, military strategies, and political policies are collectively known as Maoism. 66.177.231.180 ( talk) 11:33, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
There is NO consensus in scholarship for inflating the number to this extent. If you can find academic sources which claim this estimate, present them here. Scholarly sources such as Mao's Last Revolution (2006), one of the most authoritative accounts of the GPCR, puts the death toll for the GPCR at between 750,000 and 1.5 million (p.262). Similarly, Frank Dikotter's recent book The Cultural Revolution: A People’s History, 1962–1976 puts the total death toll at between 1.5 and 2 million (p. xvi). Even the vehemently anti-Mao biography Mao: The Unknown Story allows for a total of 3 million deaths (569). If the 20 million estimate were at all credible, The Chang/Halliday book would have certainly mentioned it. Including the high estimate of 20 million in the lede and the third paragraph of the GPCR sub-section undermines the credibility of the article, as it is clearly not the consensus among Sinologists and scholars of the GPCR, and it smacks of propaganda.-- C.J. Griffin ( talk) 17:37, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
I do not have much time to dig through book sources page by page, but the claim of 20 million from Ye Jianying is quoted from History.People.com.cn as follows: "粉碎“四人帮”之后,叶剑英在一次讲话中沉痛地说:“文化大革命”死了2000万人,整了1亿人,浪费了8000亿人民币。" The source makes no mention of the precise context (purpose, date, location, etc) of the meeting at which Marshal Ye was quoted from. This alone seems to be a problem of WP:UNDUE weight given to non-scholarly sources (see the lede) such as the South China Morning Post and The Atlantic. CaradhrasAiguo ( leave language) 19:17, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Mao Zedong has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Since Mao was Chairman of the PRC state [People's Republic of China], change chairman to president. 45.58.91.229 ( talk) 01:21, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
{{
edit semi-protected}}
template.
Eggishorn
(talk)
(contrib)
15:14, 8 March 2020 (UTC)As per my information Four Pests Campaign was one of major movements started my Mao. In this article there is not even mention about it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.220.154.225 ( talk) 18:15, 9 April 2020 (UTC)
I can't find any mention of the 1947 elections in this article, or any explanation to why Mao chose not to participate in the elections anywhere on Wikipedia. Alec Gargett ( talk) 21:53, 29 December 2019 (UTC)
Go to wikimedia sir Andrew Athini ( talk) 17:08, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
I noticed that when you click on, "2nd Chairman of the PRC" it takes me to this page, "President of the People's Republic of China." I understand that the Chairman of the PRC was the leader/head of state of the PRC de facto, before not anymore, but that does not mean that it is the President of the PRC. I do not remember but after some time they created the President of the PRC as the head of state making it de jure. Today they still have the Chairman of the PRC but it does not hold as much power anymore. Please, correct me if I'm wrong on any of these statements. I just wanted to bring this up because it did not sit right for me. LucasA04 ( talk) 17:09, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 00:07, 28 April 2020 (UTC)
I've removed this from the lead:
This is not reflected in the body of the article. Firstly, why say "in particular"? Secondly, in fact, it was Nixon who reversed the US policy of excluding China. Mao's government was not recognised as the government of China for decades. And Australian leader Gough Whitlam had visited China prior to the Nixon visit. Mao's China had links to the world from 1949 onwards. Thirdly, linking to the Open Door Policy is appalling as the Open Door Policy was an imperialist policy which Mao did not support. The Open Door Policy article does not (understandably) mention Nixon at all. Nor did Mao welcoming Nixon foreshadow Deng's market reforms. This sentence gets almost everything wrong.-- Jack Upland ( talk) 08:55, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
I've cut out the "tinker, tailor, soldier, spy" bit in the lead. He was primarily known as a politician. You can buy books anywhere on Mao the politician, but you're hard pressed to buy books of his poetry. That he wrote poetry is not really relevant to this page or his life, because anyone can do those things.
I've also suggested tweaking it to say he was a highly influential person, because "one of the most" doesn't explain where he fits in with everyone else. E.g. Kennedy, Deng, Gorbachev, Thatcher, Reagen, Roosevelt, the list just goes on and becomes somewhat meaningless. I know one book referred to him that way, but it's a bit much. But if someone wants to change that particular bit back I don't mind. John Smith's ( talk) 17:09, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
Jesus, are we really doing this? Source is Mao: A Reinterpretation, which Wikipedia describes as "a work of historical revisionism that sought to highlight what Feigon saw as the positive aspects of Mao Zedong's political leadership." Academic reviews of this book are pretty negative overall, with comments like "contrarian and unpersuasive" and "a simplistic vision of Mao that cannot convince." Bruce Cumings did like it. Obviously there is other reliable-source scholarship interpreting Mao as a cynical Machiavellian, his objections to elite ruling classes as obviously ludicrous given his own position, the GPCR as his weapon against Party rivals, etc. We should separate interpretation from fact and certainly never take a fringe revisionist work as authoritative. 74.15.32.60 ( talk) 00:53, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
How about mass murderer?? This Wikipedia page makes it sound like he is one of the greatest people in history with a few minor blemishes on his record. I mean, this article admits he persecuted (killed) 550,000 people in one period of history and then hundreds of thousands to tens of millions in other parts of his rule. Most accounts I’ve read by historians say he killed 30-50 million Chinese to include dead babies left on pitch forks and spears. How can you such flattering commentary in respect to this guy?? 2601:6C3:8200:5160:28A6:EC5D:502C:3B0C ( talk) 02:54, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
Li's book goes into much detail about Mao's preference for underage girls as sexual partners. Why no mention of that in the article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.244.137.86 ( talk) 02:40, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
See Talk:Mao Zedong/Archive 9#I propose adding "mass murderer" to the intro.
To be clear about my position:
- Tom Haws ( talk) 17:02, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
To phrase this as if it were an attributed POV is absurd. There is no dispute whatsoever in reliable sources that Mao ruled an autocratic and totalitarian regime. Snooganssnoogans ( talk) 15:04, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
Why on Earth does the lead list what Mao's supporters say about his regime? It is absurd to list what partisans are saying about what he did when there is an enormous literature that documents what he actually did. We should obviously focus on the latter rather than recite what his supporters and opponents say about him. It is also a blatant NPOV violation to have content in the lead that specifically focuses on what his fans say about him when it doesn't include the rhetoric of his opponents. That said, neither should obviously be in the lead. Snooganssnoogans ( talk) 15:10, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
We should not give equal weight to revisionist histories by Mao apologists to rebut mainstream scholarship. [2] The claims sourced to these revisionist histories are extraordinary (the Cultural Revolution led to the great economic growth commonly attributed to liberal reforms) and no pages are cited for them. Snooganssnoogans ( talk) 13:59, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
I struggle to see how this is WP:UNDUE if they're actually backed by the sources, and accusations that historians are "revisionist", "apologists" or fringe based on editors' POV hold no water whatsoever. PailSimon, can you provide the pages / direct quotations? Changed title according to WP:TALKHEADPOV and WP:SECTIONHEADINGOWN -- BunnyyHop ( talk) 22:51, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
Although it is true that direct relief was limited to those who could not be helped by the family, the process of collectivization did dramatically change access to public goods for many people in the countryside by providing rudimentary public health, education, and irrigation projects [...] Under Mao, the welfare system was seen as subservient to the demands of the economy and to the pursuit of socialism [...] At the same time, the organization of the collective in the countryside and the inconsequentiality of cost meant that for its developmental level, rural Chinese enjoyed good preventive healthcare and basic education systems
This registration guaranteed access to a number of benefits denied to the peasants, such as secure employment, affordable housing, inexpensive medical care, and retirement income.
When the trade unions were abolished during the Cultural Revolution, the system ceased and free healthcare became part and parcel of the benefit package of working in a SOE.
-- BunnyyHop ( talk) 07:26, 12 February 2021 (UTC)That China could develop without capitalism was proven during the Cultural Revolution as the living standard rose for the majority of the population – the third-line industrialization policy had a positive effect on bringing progress to remote areas of the PRC and agricultural production increased. All these achievements were possible without exploiting colonies and without exploiting the toiling masses in China
I am unsure if to use baidu baike as a source, because it is officially deprecated. However, it may be useful in describing the official standpoint of the chinese government on events like the great leap forward and the cultural revolution. Since these are both touchy topics in China, they would probably have some sort of censor on baidu, and wouldn't contain vandalism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SherlockHolmes23 ( talk • contribs) 04:07, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
Mao ruled China from the end of WWII to 1976. Wouldn't literacy and life expectancy have increased under pretty much any stable ruler who governed a country in that particular period, in particular one that had previously been embroiled in a long civil war and world war? Shouldn't an increase in literacy and life expectancy be compared to similar states rather than be stated as a notable statistic without any context? In my view, this does not belong in the lead unless it can be supported by high-quality academic publications which stress that the increase in literacy and life expectancy was notable in its own right and in relation to similar states or the counterfactual of any other ruler. Of the academic studies that actually try to assess the counterfactual, they see Mao's rule as a failure [3]. Snooganssnoogans ( talk) 16:49, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
"While no one is minimising the cost of Mao's follies - notably the 30 million dead from famine caused by the Great Leap Forward - scholars point out that in the sane interludes between these campaigns China showed remarkable economic growth and dramatically improved indices of social welfare, with life expectancy doubling in the 1950s . . . None of this gets a mention in Mao: The Unknown Story."
There is a lot of this in the article that turns it from neutral to a revisionist history which is not accurate. His supporters are all over the article. They should be removed. The whole got this all over it, in lots of places that are not sourced. It is completely NPOV'd. The only people who should comment in this article, are independent historians who are taking a balanced and neutral view. scope_creep Talk 11:35, 17 May 2021 (UTC)
According to the talk page, this article is in British English, so why is "romanisation" and "romanised" spelled as "romanization" and "romanized"? ReaIdiot ( talk) 21:16, 17 May 2021 (UTC)
I really don't find the section that begins with "Despite being considered a feminist..." is necessary or relevant, especially considering the fact that as is, the claim is relatively unsubstantiated. 2 of the 3 cited sources have broken links, and the third is a short blurb that mentions no sources besides a mysterious US State Department document supposedly published 35 years after the fact. Would we consider, for instance, Chinese Intelligence documents which make disparaging claims about US presidents to be a reliable source? Obviously the US State Department is biased.. Breeby ( talk) 23:13, 20 July 2021 (UTC)
Things that Mao's supporters say he did in the "Legacy" section:
I think most, if not all, of this content should be removed from the article. Or at the very least, be verified with strong sources (e.g. well-known China experts publishing in top presses and journals). Snooganssnoogans ( talk) 02:18, 4 July 2021 (UTC)
Bosho71 ( talk) 13:37, 8 August 2021 (UTC) I agree with most of these points. Especially #3, that's kind of hilarious. A lot of the legacy section is unsourced propaganda. Some of it is sourced... But to CCCP propaganda sites, some of which are broken as of this writing. Why are we including offhand comments from blogs in this wikipage? Or polls taken from a state newspaper in which criticism of the state is not allowed? Or just including biased unsourced opinions? Imagine if someone wrote, "Supporters of Hitler point out that he was half man, half sandwich". That might be something some supporter of Hitler said at one time, who cares? That is not a popular consensus among anyone. Why are we including things like that in the wikipage? Why is this biased statement, "Mao's military writings continue to have a large amount of influence both among those who seek to create an insurgency and those who seek to crush one, especially in manners of guerrilla warfare, at which Mao is popularly regarded as a genius." in this section, unsourced? That is not a popular consensus.
Also, some of these sources have nothing to do with what is being stated in the wiki. Take footnote 264, which is supposed to support the statement, "Supporters point out... [Mao Zedong] improved life expectancy, education and health care". Nothing on the page sourced of Patricia Ebrey's The Cambridge Illustrated History of China, has anything to do with that statement. There is nothing saying that "supporters" of Mao made that particular claim. Maybe you can misconstrue this statement to mean that Patricia Ebrey herself is a supporter of Mao, I'm just going ahead and going to guess no, she isn't. Why was this statement added to the wiki? Why did was this random page of this book that has nothing to do with that statement linked as a source? Why does this section look like parts of it was written by the CCCP?
On Commons, there seems to be some inconsistency about whether the lead portrait photo was taken in 1959 or 1963. Could someone look into it to settle the matter and make the needed moves/corrections? {{u| Sdkb}} talk 07:02, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
Sorry, but that's very odd. Can we switch all dates featured to DMY for consistency? Far easier than to change all spelling to American English. -- 222.153.41.39 ( talk) 12:10, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
On Australian ABC radio recently ( [1]) a serious historian mentioned that Mao spoke a minority dialect that meant he was unintelligible (in speech) to most people in China. -- Feroshki ( talk) 08:44, 26 July 2021 (UTC) That's a very good point. Please add it if you can (if you haven't already). -- 222.153.41.39 ( talk) 12:12, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
References
It is not a minority language, but a local accent that can be understood by most Chinese people. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Lindorx (
talk •
contribs)
11:54, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect
Chairman mao and has thus listed it
for discussion. This discussion will occur at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 January 5#Chairman mao until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.
CentreLeftRight
✉
08:41, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Mao Zedong has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
In the second paragraph, change "...and through a psychological victory in the Korean War, which altogether resulted in the deaths of several million Chinese." To "...and through a psychological victory in the Korean War." Or Add a citation. You cannot claim millions of anything without a citation, and I want to read the original source for this information. 184.62.234.0 ( talk) 07:17, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 03:38, 22 March 2022 (UTC)
This article seems to be more forthcoming about Mao's controversial deeds than it was the last time I happened by. I don't find the article entirely unsatisfactory any more. Good work. Tom Haws ( talk) 23:08, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
Under this section there are multiple sections that use CCP-linked polling and sources to prove support for Mao within mainland China. That is far from an objective lens. The sections citing polling results from Global Times (links to an Al Jazeera article about it) are questionable at best. 2A00:801:739:41CA:0:0:1114:132F ( talk) 18:38, 14 April 2022 (UTC)
I propose merging Early revolutionary activity of Mao Zedong into Mao Zedong. The former is largely a carbon-copy of the "Early revolutionary activity" section in the latter, with the exception of a few altered and added sentences that it would take very little effort to incorporate into the latter article. Unlike the article Early life of Mao Zedong, which provides a vastly expanded overview of this period of Mao's life in comparison to the "Early life" section, there is very little in the "Early revolutionary activity" article that currently justifies its existence as a separate article. If this section were to get too heavy for the main article, then there would be a case for splitting, but as of now they are two articles for the same information. -- Grnrchst ( talk) 11:07, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
Hi CentreLeftRight. The only reason I added that to the lead is that article is linked to from the Red Emperor (disambiguation) page, and the mention in the body is buried and difficult to find. If the use of the term is uncommon or unjustified, I suggest removing it from the DAB page as well. Other views welcome and I'll leave it to editors of this page, not having time to dig deeper on the matter myself - it was purely a style issue for me. Laterthanyouthink ( talk) 00:56, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
This should be added to the top of the article: In this Chinese name, the family name is Mao and Ze is a generation name.
Other articles about Chinese people have this at the top to reduce confusion. This article has it out of the way at the bottom when it should be at the top.
-- 2601:80:8402:1AA0:643C:EBF7:25A4:4142 ( talk) 04:51, 11 September 2022 (UTC)
{{
edit semi-protected}}
template. this has previously been reinstated by other editors, stating it would introduce too many hatnotes, and that it is better to have all explanations about the name in the same place.
Madeline (
part of me)
18:10, 12 September 2022 (UTC)