This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||
|
The members are listed in "stroke order of surnames", the Chinese equivalent of alphabetical order. This has no relevance to an English-speaking reader. The source lists them in order of ranking and separates standing committee members from lower ranking members. Kauffner ( talk) 09:31, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 17:25, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Politburo Standing Committee of the Communist Party of China which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. — RMCD bot 10:31, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
A user has recently undertaken the task of reformatting the individual Politburo articles from list to table style, and splitting off the Standing Committee information into child articles. (Example before → after + child article).
The new individual Politburo articles no longer mention which members are on the Standing Committee, which another editor disagrees with. (Background: 1, 2, 3. Currently affected articles: 16, 17, 18, 19, 20.)
Now that we have child articles for individual Standing Committees ( 16, 17, 18, 19, 20), should the Standing Committee members be indicated on the individual Politburo articles, or is a clickthrough good enough? If they should be indicated, how should that be done? Folly Mox ( talk) 18:09, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
It is true that earlier the politburo and the standing committee shared the same article, but I was WP:BOLD. As far as I have gathered no one is opposed to these edits. Membership + meeting list is enough to have one separate list as well. I also note that the 8th Politburo of the Workers' Party of Korea does not list in its list the 8th Presidium of the Workers' Party of Korea either. So it does not seem to be the norm. I also note that the Central Committee of the 16th Congress of the All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks) does not have members of the politburo, orgburo or secretariat in bold either (and that list is a WP:FL)
I would rather propose that 71.105.190.227 adds information in the lead on who serves concurrently in the Standing Committee if he feels it is natural... But alas, it is the CC and not the Politburo that elects the members of the Standing Committee, but it could be notable.
I am, however, interested in a compromise that makes everyone happy. It should be possible! -- TheUzbek ( talk) 21:34, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
★
??)? or an entry in the "No. of offices" column like "(member Standing Committee)"?
Folly Mox (
talk) 13:59, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
Bold 71.90.229.134 ( talk) 17:33, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||
|
The members are listed in "stroke order of surnames", the Chinese equivalent of alphabetical order. This has no relevance to an English-speaking reader. The source lists them in order of ranking and separates standing committee members from lower ranking members. Kauffner ( talk) 09:31, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 17:25, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Politburo Standing Committee of the Communist Party of China which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. — RMCD bot 10:31, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
A user has recently undertaken the task of reformatting the individual Politburo articles from list to table style, and splitting off the Standing Committee information into child articles. (Example before → after + child article).
The new individual Politburo articles no longer mention which members are on the Standing Committee, which another editor disagrees with. (Background: 1, 2, 3. Currently affected articles: 16, 17, 18, 19, 20.)
Now that we have child articles for individual Standing Committees ( 16, 17, 18, 19, 20), should the Standing Committee members be indicated on the individual Politburo articles, or is a clickthrough good enough? If they should be indicated, how should that be done? Folly Mox ( talk) 18:09, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
It is true that earlier the politburo and the standing committee shared the same article, but I was WP:BOLD. As far as I have gathered no one is opposed to these edits. Membership + meeting list is enough to have one separate list as well. I also note that the 8th Politburo of the Workers' Party of Korea does not list in its list the 8th Presidium of the Workers' Party of Korea either. So it does not seem to be the norm. I also note that the Central Committee of the 16th Congress of the All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks) does not have members of the politburo, orgburo or secretariat in bold either (and that list is a WP:FL)
I would rather propose that 71.105.190.227 adds information in the lead on who serves concurrently in the Standing Committee if he feels it is natural... But alas, it is the CC and not the Politburo that elects the members of the Standing Committee, but it could be notable.
I am, however, interested in a compromise that makes everyone happy. It should be possible! -- TheUzbek ( talk) 21:34, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
★
??)? or an entry in the "No. of offices" column like "(member Standing Committee)"?
Folly Mox (
talk) 13:59, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
Bold 71.90.229.134 ( talk) 17:33, 21 November 2023 (UTC)