Radical pro-Beijing camp was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 30 April 2024 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Pro-Beijing camp (Hong Kong). The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here. |
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Pro-Beijing camp (Hong Kong) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article is written in Hong Kong English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, realise, travelled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
In Hong Kong and Macau media, the pro-Beijing camp is just called "建制派", and it is NOT an abbreviation of "親建制派". The Chinese name need NOT be a direct translation of English name. It is offending to include "親建制派" but not "建制派" in this article. 182.239.77.40 ( talk) 08:32, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
User:Sirlanz insists to put the name "establishment camp" in the header, but the fact is there is hardly a thing called "establishment camp" in the English media. What most of them use is "pro-establishment camp", which means "親建制派" in Chinese, and "建制派" is merely an abbreviation of the term. Lmmnhn ( talk) 15:26, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
It appears someone is very much confused with "pro-Beijing faction" and "Pro-Beijing camp". Carrie Lam as Chief Executive is non-partisan, even she's pro-Beijing but she doesn't represent Pro-Beijing camp in the government. Her name should be removed from infobox. STSC ( talk) 13:12, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
Lmmnhn WP:BLPCRIME is a very serious policy, and the para as written was not compliant with it. I'd strongly suggest you review that policy. Simonm223 ( talk) 13:02, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Not moved. The oppose !votes invoke the existence of the Macau camp; the nomination doesn't provide a rationale for it being the primary topic for the term. No prejudice against speedy renomination if the nominator wants to make the case for that (pinging Feminist). ( closed by non-admin page mover) SITH (talk) 14:14, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
Pro-Beijing camp (Hong Kong) →
Pro-Beijing camp – Per
WP:PTOPIC and
WP:TWODABS.
feminist (
talk) 08:46, 29 September 2019 (UTC)
I feel like I should point out that if the argument is that this is not the primary topic for Pro-Beijing camp, then Pro-Beijing camp should not be a redirect here but should be a disambiguation page for this and the Macau article, and any other relevant articles. If we are going to keep the redirect, then there is no point keeping this in parenthetical disambiguated form. The outcome of the above RM seems to suggest Pro-Beijing camp should be a disambiguation page, and I considered changing it myself but frankly there are way way way too many direct links to Pro-Beijing camp (see Special:WhatLinksHere/Pro-Beijing camp) most of which look like they are indeed targeting this article and I don't have a script nor know of any bot I can invoke to fix that. Frankly I'm not sure if the above RM properly considered the primary topic issue, and the large number of links compared to Pro-Beijing camp (Macau) ( Special:WhatLinksHere/Pro-Beijing camp (Macau)) makes me think that it may very well be. (Although it's only weak evidence.) Nil Einne ( talk) 08:58, 17 November 2019 (UTC)
Should the page use blue as political colour? Most of the Hong Kong media and even Chinese state media CGTN recognize it. Blue vs. Yellow: Divide is ripping families in Hong Kong Marxistfounder ( talk) 05:58, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
The Chinese version of this article and the Pro-Dem Camp article includes the EC, while the English article of the Pro-BJ camp of Macau also includes NPC delegates, thoughts on adding it here?
-- Hkfreedomfighter ( talk) 16:43, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
I want to add it to the Pro-Beijing camp (Hong Kong) article, but why do I keep removing it? 激進建制派 is a political term that is strictly used. If the title Radical pro-Beijing camp is a problem, you just have to move the title. ProKMT ( talk) 12:01, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Radical pro-Beijing camp until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.Simonm223 ( talk) 13:16, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
I've reverted the significant new additions made by @ ProKMT because I am concerned that much of that content is material I previously reviewed and found failed verification at the previous Radical pro-Beijing camp page. Please see this history for specifics. I would ask that, before this merge of material be completed, there be a review of the material in order to ensure that the sources being used actually support the claims being made and are WP:DUE inclusion. Simonm223 ( talk) 21:31, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
Radical pro-Beijing camp was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 30 April 2024 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Pro-Beijing camp (Hong Kong). The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here. |
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Pro-Beijing camp (Hong Kong) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article is written in Hong Kong English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, realise, travelled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
In Hong Kong and Macau media, the pro-Beijing camp is just called "建制派", and it is NOT an abbreviation of "親建制派". The Chinese name need NOT be a direct translation of English name. It is offending to include "親建制派" but not "建制派" in this article. 182.239.77.40 ( talk) 08:32, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
User:Sirlanz insists to put the name "establishment camp" in the header, but the fact is there is hardly a thing called "establishment camp" in the English media. What most of them use is "pro-establishment camp", which means "親建制派" in Chinese, and "建制派" is merely an abbreviation of the term. Lmmnhn ( talk) 15:26, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
It appears someone is very much confused with "pro-Beijing faction" and "Pro-Beijing camp". Carrie Lam as Chief Executive is non-partisan, even she's pro-Beijing but she doesn't represent Pro-Beijing camp in the government. Her name should be removed from infobox. STSC ( talk) 13:12, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
Lmmnhn WP:BLPCRIME is a very serious policy, and the para as written was not compliant with it. I'd strongly suggest you review that policy. Simonm223 ( talk) 13:02, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Not moved. The oppose !votes invoke the existence of the Macau camp; the nomination doesn't provide a rationale for it being the primary topic for the term. No prejudice against speedy renomination if the nominator wants to make the case for that (pinging Feminist). ( closed by non-admin page mover) SITH (talk) 14:14, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
Pro-Beijing camp (Hong Kong) →
Pro-Beijing camp – Per
WP:PTOPIC and
WP:TWODABS.
feminist (
talk) 08:46, 29 September 2019 (UTC)
I feel like I should point out that if the argument is that this is not the primary topic for Pro-Beijing camp, then Pro-Beijing camp should not be a redirect here but should be a disambiguation page for this and the Macau article, and any other relevant articles. If we are going to keep the redirect, then there is no point keeping this in parenthetical disambiguated form. The outcome of the above RM seems to suggest Pro-Beijing camp should be a disambiguation page, and I considered changing it myself but frankly there are way way way too many direct links to Pro-Beijing camp (see Special:WhatLinksHere/Pro-Beijing camp) most of which look like they are indeed targeting this article and I don't have a script nor know of any bot I can invoke to fix that. Frankly I'm not sure if the above RM properly considered the primary topic issue, and the large number of links compared to Pro-Beijing camp (Macau) ( Special:WhatLinksHere/Pro-Beijing camp (Macau)) makes me think that it may very well be. (Although it's only weak evidence.) Nil Einne ( talk) 08:58, 17 November 2019 (UTC)
Should the page use blue as political colour? Most of the Hong Kong media and even Chinese state media CGTN recognize it. Blue vs. Yellow: Divide is ripping families in Hong Kong Marxistfounder ( talk) 05:58, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
The Chinese version of this article and the Pro-Dem Camp article includes the EC, while the English article of the Pro-BJ camp of Macau also includes NPC delegates, thoughts on adding it here?
-- Hkfreedomfighter ( talk) 16:43, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
I want to add it to the Pro-Beijing camp (Hong Kong) article, but why do I keep removing it? 激進建制派 is a political term that is strictly used. If the title Radical pro-Beijing camp is a problem, you just have to move the title. ProKMT ( talk) 12:01, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Radical pro-Beijing camp until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.Simonm223 ( talk) 13:16, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
I've reverted the significant new additions made by @ ProKMT because I am concerned that much of that content is material I previously reviewed and found failed verification at the previous Radical pro-Beijing camp page. Please see this history for specifics. I would ask that, before this merge of material be completed, there be a review of the material in order to ensure that the sources being used actually support the claims being made and are WP:DUE inclusion. Simonm223 ( talk) 21:31, 30 April 2024 (UTC)