- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result of the discussion was: Delete. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 06:34, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
These discussions happen at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject China. Creating subpages of CENT (though done before) doesn't seem appropriate. Chris Troutman ( talk) 15:39, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
Comment- the matter is the naming of subpages related to PROC and/or ROC. Well, the primary pages, China and Taiwan, are no longer part of the goal, so the issue is struck out. BTW, I typed "Taiwan" to search for discussions in WikiProject China. I don't see recent discussions about the naming disputes. I see very old ones, but they occurred before the 2012 moves. How would WikiProject China or WT:WikiProject Taiwan handle this? I'm surprised by the MFD nomination. What about the project talk page, which has full of comments? -- George Ho ( talk) 16:19, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
- Also, I tried "People's Republic" but found just invitations to other venues where individual discussions occurred. Same for "PRC", "PROC", "Republic of China", and "ROC". -- George Ho ( talk) 16:24, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
- Actually, the naming issue has been discussed at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (Chinese) and Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/China-related articles. Past proposals may have failed, such as Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Chinese)/Taiwan. George Ho ( talk) 16:31, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
- Keep The first things I noticed entering Wikipedia talk:WikiProject China is the PRC flag, the portal link and the sentence "This page is within the scope of WikiProject China, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of China related articles on Wikipedia." Clearly this is a place for PRC topics. The discussion concerns Taiwan as well, so it doesn't belong there. Szqecs ( talk) 17:38, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
- support deletion. There is no meaningful content on the main page, while the talk page just consists of flawed proposals and questions and very limited discussion. Most importantly there are already venues for these discussions. In particular there are the existing policy pages, Wikipedia:Manual of Style/China-related articles and Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Chinese) that already cover this ground. Any changes to these policies should be discussed on their talk pages, any other related topics on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject China.-- JohnBlackburne words deeds 09:54, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
- Delete Seems to be a continuation of the various attempts at circumventing the results of the moves of China and Taiwan to their respective current titles. Number 5 7 11:03, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
- Delete This looks like just another way of reopening recent discussions about renaming of articles (most of which have been closed with clear consensus). -- T*U ( talk) 14:11, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
- Keep or move to a different location if the title is problematic. As misguided as this may be, we typically do not delete good-faith discussions. Instead, if there is an issue with the discussion, it should be closed with a note explaining why. Mz7 ( talk) 16:21, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
- Keep (or per Mz7, move to somewhere) - After endless RMs and attempted proposals to update guidelines, how else can we discuss the matter? Yes, "China" and "Taiwan" are frequently used names, yet the attempts to implement consistency on subtopics have been proven controversial. The RM closure of Talk:Politics of China#Requested move 11 December 2016 was discussed. Since the closures of Talk:National Emblem of the People's Republic of China and Talk:Civil Service of the People's Republic of China, I felt that central discussion is needed before another RM happens. As for the "central discussion" subpage, of course the page was disorganized. So was the Macedonia one when it began. If other venues are unsuitable for the China/Taiwan issue, give this page a few weeks more, so the page can improve. -- George Ho ( talk) 17:22, 8 April 2017 (UTC); "move" emphasized. 07:50, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
Update: User:Szqecs/Naming conventions (China and Taiwan) is created as proposed guideline. I wonder whether the project talk page can move into User talk:Szqecs/Naming conventions (China and Taiwan).George Ho ( talk) 07:50, 11 April 2017 (UTC); edited, 15:48, 11 April 2017 (UTC); fully struck, 15:57, 11 April 2017 (UTC)- The user namespace is not a suitable place for public discussions. This discussion can be moved to Wikiproject East Asia, but personally I don't see the problem with it being here. Szqecs ( talk)
- @ George Ho: Please remove that link. I do not wish people to edit that user subpage. Szqecs ( talk) 15:45, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
- @ George Ho: Strike or remove the whole thing please. Thanks. Szqecs ( talk) 15:56, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
- Keep disclaimer, for some reasion I was invited by hand to participate in the discussions, though I have yet not done so. I feel they should be kept, as they are well marked, and are not circumventing anything. They can be moved over to the main project page or deleted later. L3X1 (distant write) 21:38, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
- Strong delete, appears to be a somewhat dishonest attempt to circumvent the consensus in the recently closed RMs. If this RfC were to go ahead it would presumably overrule the consensus at Talk:National Emblem of the People's Republic of China, where it was determined to use the long title, as opposed to just "China". This was done based on reasons relating directly to the article, and it was a properly conducted RM. It seems like some POV pushers here should WP:DROPTHESTICK, instead of forum-shopping to achieve their goals. Laurdecl talk 03:26, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
- @
Laurdecl: FYI, I created this page but I did not participate in the RM you speak of, nor do I wish to. As the title says, this is a centralized discussion, which takes into account results of individual discussions. Also, this is not an RfC yet. Funny how you assume what would be the outcome before it even started.
Szqecs (
talk) 10:01, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
- Then I'm sorry for assuming so. It still seems to me like an attempt to circumvent the recent RMs and the difference established in the names, i.e.: "Flag of China" and "National Emblem of the PRC". Isn't the point of this page to determine which titles to use, and bring them into consistency? Laurdecl talk 22:25, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
- @
Laurdecl: FYI, I created this page but I did not participate in the RM you speak of, nor do I wish to. As the title says, this is a centralized discussion, which takes into account results of individual discussions. Also, this is not an RfC yet. Funny how you assume what would be the outcome before it even started.
Szqecs (
talk) 10:01, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result of the discussion was: Delete. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 06:34, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
These discussions happen at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject China. Creating subpages of CENT (though done before) doesn't seem appropriate. Chris Troutman ( talk) 15:39, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
Comment- the matter is the naming of subpages related to PROC and/or ROC. Well, the primary pages, China and Taiwan, are no longer part of the goal, so the issue is struck out. BTW, I typed "Taiwan" to search for discussions in WikiProject China. I don't see recent discussions about the naming disputes. I see very old ones, but they occurred before the 2012 moves. How would WikiProject China or WT:WikiProject Taiwan handle this? I'm surprised by the MFD nomination. What about the project talk page, which has full of comments? -- George Ho ( talk) 16:19, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
- Also, I tried "People's Republic" but found just invitations to other venues where individual discussions occurred. Same for "PRC", "PROC", "Republic of China", and "ROC". -- George Ho ( talk) 16:24, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
- Actually, the naming issue has been discussed at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (Chinese) and Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/China-related articles. Past proposals may have failed, such as Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Chinese)/Taiwan. George Ho ( talk) 16:31, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
- Keep The first things I noticed entering Wikipedia talk:WikiProject China is the PRC flag, the portal link and the sentence "This page is within the scope of WikiProject China, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of China related articles on Wikipedia." Clearly this is a place for PRC topics. The discussion concerns Taiwan as well, so it doesn't belong there. Szqecs ( talk) 17:38, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
- support deletion. There is no meaningful content on the main page, while the talk page just consists of flawed proposals and questions and very limited discussion. Most importantly there are already venues for these discussions. In particular there are the existing policy pages, Wikipedia:Manual of Style/China-related articles and Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Chinese) that already cover this ground. Any changes to these policies should be discussed on their talk pages, any other related topics on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject China.-- JohnBlackburne words deeds 09:54, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
- Delete Seems to be a continuation of the various attempts at circumventing the results of the moves of China and Taiwan to their respective current titles. Number 5 7 11:03, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
- Delete This looks like just another way of reopening recent discussions about renaming of articles (most of which have been closed with clear consensus). -- T*U ( talk) 14:11, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
- Keep or move to a different location if the title is problematic. As misguided as this may be, we typically do not delete good-faith discussions. Instead, if there is an issue with the discussion, it should be closed with a note explaining why. Mz7 ( talk) 16:21, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
- Keep (or per Mz7, move to somewhere) - After endless RMs and attempted proposals to update guidelines, how else can we discuss the matter? Yes, "China" and "Taiwan" are frequently used names, yet the attempts to implement consistency on subtopics have been proven controversial. The RM closure of Talk:Politics of China#Requested move 11 December 2016 was discussed. Since the closures of Talk:National Emblem of the People's Republic of China and Talk:Civil Service of the People's Republic of China, I felt that central discussion is needed before another RM happens. As for the "central discussion" subpage, of course the page was disorganized. So was the Macedonia one when it began. If other venues are unsuitable for the China/Taiwan issue, give this page a few weeks more, so the page can improve. -- George Ho ( talk) 17:22, 8 April 2017 (UTC); "move" emphasized. 07:50, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
Update: User:Szqecs/Naming conventions (China and Taiwan) is created as proposed guideline. I wonder whether the project talk page can move into User talk:Szqecs/Naming conventions (China and Taiwan).George Ho ( talk) 07:50, 11 April 2017 (UTC); edited, 15:48, 11 April 2017 (UTC); fully struck, 15:57, 11 April 2017 (UTC)- The user namespace is not a suitable place for public discussions. This discussion can be moved to Wikiproject East Asia, but personally I don't see the problem with it being here. Szqecs ( talk)
- @ George Ho: Please remove that link. I do not wish people to edit that user subpage. Szqecs ( talk) 15:45, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
- @ George Ho: Strike or remove the whole thing please. Thanks. Szqecs ( talk) 15:56, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
- Keep disclaimer, for some reasion I was invited by hand to participate in the discussions, though I have yet not done so. I feel they should be kept, as they are well marked, and are not circumventing anything. They can be moved over to the main project page or deleted later. L3X1 (distant write) 21:38, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
- Strong delete, appears to be a somewhat dishonest attempt to circumvent the consensus in the recently closed RMs. If this RfC were to go ahead it would presumably overrule the consensus at Talk:National Emblem of the People's Republic of China, where it was determined to use the long title, as opposed to just "China". This was done based on reasons relating directly to the article, and it was a properly conducted RM. It seems like some POV pushers here should WP:DROPTHESTICK, instead of forum-shopping to achieve their goals. Laurdecl talk 03:26, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
- @
Laurdecl: FYI, I created this page but I did not participate in the RM you speak of, nor do I wish to. As the title says, this is a centralized discussion, which takes into account results of individual discussions. Also, this is not an RfC yet. Funny how you assume what would be the outcome before it even started.
Szqecs (
talk) 10:01, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
- Then I'm sorry for assuming so. It still seems to me like an attempt to circumvent the recent RMs and the difference established in the names, i.e.: "Flag of China" and "National Emblem of the PRC". Isn't the point of this page to determine which titles to use, and bring them into consistency? Laurdecl talk 22:25, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
- @
Laurdecl: FYI, I created this page but I did not participate in the RM you speak of, nor do I wish to. As the title says, this is a centralized discussion, which takes into account results of individual discussions. Also, this is not an RfC yet. Funny how you assume what would be the outcome before it even started.
Szqecs (
talk) 10:01, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.