Talk:Chiang Kai-shek
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Chiang Kai-shek article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. | |||
| Article policies | ||
| Archives: 1, 2 | |||
 | Chiang Kai-shek has been listed as a level-4 vital article in People. If you can improve it, please do. This article has been rated as C-Class. |
 | This article is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Referencing and citation: not checked
 | A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on October 10, 2011. |
Authoritarianism[edit]
As others have pointed out, the statement that Chiang "rejected" Sun's philosophy in favor of authoritarianism is rather debatable. Sun argued that a period of tutelage under Kuomintang domination was necessary before democracy, after the Beyiang Goverment failed. China was never stable nor fully unified under Chiang's rule, and many of Chiang's quotes suggested he considered himself quite pro-democracy. Point is, unless there is something I'm missing, it's not really clear whether Chiang was following Sun's plan or not. And thus it seems inaccurate to say he "rejected" Sun's views.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.184.252.74 (talk) 18:35, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
Phonetic pronunciation of CKS[edit]
Could someone who knows (not me, I'm afraid) put up a phonetic guide to the pronunciation of CKS's name? I ask because in Barbara Tuchman's biography of Joe Stilwell she criticises a US official for pronouncing his name to rhyme with "bang". I'd always assumed that was right too.Thomas Peardew (talk) 07:40, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
- All Chinese -ang sounds use an ah vowel, not a long ey. The first syllable of Shanghai doesn't rhyme with "bang" either. — LlywelynII 12:05, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
It is not necessary to try to pronounce foreign names as their natives do. Chiang Kai-shek is known in English as Chiang (to rhyme with Bang), Kai (to rhyme with Sky) and Shek (to rhyme with Check). Efforts at 'correct' Chinese pronunciation (which 'Chinese'?) are fruitless. Changing foreign names from well-established English transliterations are confusing. I am reading a book where he is referred to as Jiang Jieshi. My own name is French, but we pronounce it is a thoroughly English way; which is 'correct' for us. The French say it differently, which is correct for them.Ballenstedter (talk) 16:26, 2 April 2017 (UTC)
Chiang Kai-Shek is a Cantonese version of his name, which would be pronounced [jöng gai sek], where "ö" is as in German "ö" or French "eu," "gai" is as the English word "guy," and "sek" rhymes with "heck." English speakers had a hard time figuring out how to romanize this Cantonese vowel, and it shows up a number of different ways. China now attempts to force all proper names (and everything else) into Mandarin, leaving people with things like "Jiang Jeshi" which no one but Mainland Chinese folks would recognize as the historical figure Chiang Kai-Shek. One problem is that Mainland scholars are under pressure to pretend dialects other than Mandarin never existed, lol, so it's hard to get accurate information from the very people who would be most knowledgeable. At this point, they may have inherited the problem, though, i.e. are not actively covering up the true pronunciation themselves, but rather their own professors had already "revised history" by the time modern scholars studied it, effectively destroying much detailed knowledge of life in China (and Tibet and Turkestan) as it truly was in, say, 1949.
Dia Li[edit]
What was said about Dia Li whose name was actually Tai Li is not entirely correct. He did not trust or like the British who arrested him when Tai Li went to Vietnam before WW-II and Chiang had to arrange for his release. Tai was the Director of a US Navy Unit called SACO. SACO was the only military unit that I know of who was under the direct control of a foreign government, China. ADM Miles was the Deputy Director of SACO. Tai Li ordered the British intelligence unit out of China after WW-II started. After the war started, ADM King gave then Commander Miles secret orders to go to China and work with Tai Li to set up weather stations and help the Chinese and locate coast watchers to look for Japanese ships. SACO' duties were expanded later. Tai Li was also in charge of China's BIA, Bureau of Investigation and Statistics, which is like our FBI. It is true Tai Li did not trust many people but he developed a very close relationship with the SACO personal and ADM Miles and trusted them completely. It is also true he did not like and Chiang did like GEN Stillwell, GEN Wedemyer or GEN Donovan due to things which were said and done. It is also true a US General made a mistake at a banquet given for him by Tai Li. He got drunk and said some things which criticized China and Chaing's wife. It became a major issue between the US and China and things had to be smoothed out. Unknown to Chiang, General Donovan, who was director of the OSS, sent men to north China and met with the Communist Chinese. When Chiang found out through information provided by Tai Li, he became very angry with General Wedemyer since he was the theater commander and another situation developed and trust between the US and China became strained again. GEN Stillwell, Gen Wedemyer and GEN Donovan wanted SACO out of China and did everything they could to do so. This also did not help in the relationship between Chiang, Tai Li and the US government and military. See www.saconavy.com and ADM Miles book "A Different Kind of War" and other books written about SACO by SACO veterans about the relationship between the US military and Chiang/Tai Li and the US government. Jack Coyle SACO Historian jackwcoyle@bellsouth.net — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.166.105.139 (talk) 15:40, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
Atrocities comitted by Chiang Kai Shek's Governement[edit]
There is a remarkable lack of mention of the number of people massacred at the hands of his government. There is lots of useful sourced info in this page: http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/NOTE2.HTM
Some of this info could be added to the KMT page and the History of China page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.104.218.11 (talk) 19:10, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
Chiang kai-shek's criticism of soviet, western, and japanese imperialism[edit]
Page 211
'What they call "Internationalism" and "World Revolution" are nothing but Kaiser Imperialism. They have only given it a new name and made it puzzling to distinguish one from the other. Russians, as well as the English, French, Americans and Japanese, it seems to me, all have it in their minds to promote the interest of their own respective countries at the cost of other nations. One of them ridiculing the others about this is, as Mencius said, just like a man who had run only fifty paces ridiculing those who had run a hundred paces for having run at all.
Title The life of Chiang Kai-shek Author Shih-i Hsiung Publisher Peter Davies, 1948 Length 398 pages
Page 84
"What they call 'Internationalism' and 'World Revolution' are nothing but Kaiser Imperialism. . . . Russians, as well as the English, French, Americans and Japanese, it seems to me, all have it in their minds to promote the interest of their own respective countries at the cost of other nations. One of them ridiculing the others about this is, as Mencius said, just like a man who had run only fifty paces ridiculing those who had run a hundred paces for having run at all.
Title Chiang Kai-shek: an unauthorized biography Author Emily Hahn Publisher Doubleday, 1955 Original from the University of Michigan Digitized Jan 6, 2006 Length 382 pages
page 303
Title The Awakening of China 1793 - 1949 Author Roger Pelissier Published 1967
Jonathan Marshall - Opium and the Politics of Gangsterism in Nationalist China, 1927-1945[edit]
Page 19
http://criticalasianstudies.org/assets/files/bcas/v08n03.pdf
Rajmaan (talk) 02:02, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
Anti-capitalism and cultural policy of Chiang Kai-shek[edit]
http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2005/10/the_real_chiang.html
https://www.mtholyoke.edu/courses/sgabriel/economics/china-essays/1.html
The German advisor Max Bauer advised Chiang on anti capitalism and of the importance of cultural preservation over material development, Bauer believed that western civilization had been going downhill aftter 1789.
Vietnam policy[edit]
http://www.vietquoc.com/0007vq.htm
http://www.vietquoc.com/0006ART.HTM
The blog itself is not a source, but it lists good sources.
http://leminhkhai.wordpress.com/2013/04/25/chiang-kai-shek-and-vietnam-in-1945/
https://leminhkhai.wordpress.com/2012/09/01/ho-chi-minh-said-what/
Actually the blog can be used as a valid source since it's a notable historian who runs the blog, Professor Liam Kelley of the University of Hawaii at Manoa.
http://manoa.hawaii.edu/history/node/44
http://manoa-hawaii.academia.edu/LeMinhKhai
https://twitter.com/LeMinhKhai
https://vi-vn.facebook.com/leminh.khai.3
http://leminhkhai.wordpress.com/
https://leminhkhai.wordpress.com/category/burma/
http://leminhkhaiviet.wordpress.com/
Other works by the author
http://www.academia.edu/3554290/Vietnam_as_a_Domain_of_Manifest_Civility_Van_Hiến_Chi_Bang_
Miscellaneous
http://nguvan.hnue.edu.vn/Nghiencuu/VanhocVietNamtrungdai/tabid/102/newstab/209/Default.aspx
Ryukyu (Okinawa) policy[edit]
In 1943, during World War II, the US President asked its ally, the The Republic of China, if it would lay claim to the Ryukyus after the war."The President then referred to the question of the Ryukyu Islands and enquired more than once whether China would want the Ryukyus. The Generalissimo replied that China would be agreeable to joint occupation of the Ryukyus by China and the United State and, eventually, joint administration by the two countries under the trusteeship of an international organization."
Page 324
Page 324
http://www.asianewsnet.net/news-36903.html
http://cpri.tripod.com/cpr1999/ryukyu.html
Names[edit]
The Chinese characters are available in the Name section and the infobox: they don't go in the lede; the Wade transliterations—other than Chiang Kai-shek—are available in the Name section and the infobox: they don't go in the lead. For the most part, we use pinyin for all the romanizations here, while noting the others. See WP:LEDE and WP:MOS-ZH. It's not a POV issue either: Taiwan finally adopted pinyin as their romanization system a few years back. — LlywelynII 12:25, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
- @LlywelynII: Should the Shek be written with a capital letter? I have an example of "Chiang Kai-Shek" on the Wuhan page, and it is consistent with the usage of some people from Taiwan ROC, for instance Shi-Kuo Chang. Geographyinitiative (talk) 05:09, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
- I have seen native Chinese speakers capitalize the first letter of each character in a Chinese name, like "ShangHai" or "Zhou EnLai", but this is only because they do not understand the formal writing conventions for writing Chinese names in the Latin alphabet. I'm not aware of any reliable source that capitalizes every syllable. Don't do it.Ferox Seneca (talk) 05:26, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
- Well, there are formal writing conventions for Hanyu Pinyin and specific editions handed down from On High to point to. "Chiang Kai-shek" is a dialectical romanization and (to the extent they even have rules) the rules tend to be awful. The standard Cantonese system at the moment writes every character completely separately (even when they constitute a single word) and formally avoids capitalization, so that Wiktionary currently transcribes the Cantonese name for 北京 as bak ging.
- I have seen native Chinese speakers capitalize the first letter of each character in a Chinese name, like "ShangHai" or "Zhou EnLai", but this is only because they do not understand the formal writing conventions for writing Chinese names in the Latin alphabet. I'm not aware of any reliable source that capitalizes every syllable. Don't do it.Ferox Seneca (talk) 05:26, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
- In any case, there are plenty of English sources that can be found that would write the name Chiang Kai-Shek or even Chiang Kai Shek but the default treatment (brought over from Wade's formal rules for transcribing Mandarin names) would be to use Chiang Kai-shek and Ngram suggests that has always been the default English treatment. — LlywelynII 17:50, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
- Fwiw, this entry on Quora looks pretty well thought out until you realize the writer is so careless that he can't even write Suzhou as a single word. Sure enough, The Tonic Dictionary has nothing to do with the source of Chiang's romanization and doesn't even include the spelling "Chiang" in its transcriptions. — LlywelynII 03:42, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
ok to quote Chiang about his own childhood[edit]
When can sources material be omitted by the WP:UNDUE rule? Here's the rule: Generally, the views of tiny minorities should not be included at all, except perhaps in a "see also" to an article about those specific views. For example, the article on the Earth does not directly mention modern support for the Flat Earth concept, the view of a distinct minority; to do so would give undue weight to it. the "tiny minority" means fringe writers who have written about Chiang. Chiang is a RS on himself and Wiki often tells us how people saw themselves. There is no "tiny minority" here and no violation of the rule. Rjensen (talk) 04:59, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
Colorized image[edit]
The colorized image of Chiang in the infobox, File:蔣中正肖像(上色).jpg, seems poorly colorized and out of place. Should the greyscale version be used in lieu of the current version, for aesthetic and possibly historical purposes? Yeenosaurus (talk) 🍁 03:41, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
- Looks like this was done, archive or delete this section. --198.98.255.237 (talk) 01:17, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
Native name (Hanzi)[edit]
Somebody changed the native name from "蒋介石" to "蔣中正", from the usual name for Chiang Kai-shek to the "adopted name", and with an edit summary of "use name that he used in the ROC". I checked the article history and can see that for a long name the infobox had both names. But in May 2017 it was changed to displaying only "蔣中正", with an edit summary of "The official name" (which that isn't). I'm going to change it back to what was present for a long time, both names. For reference that will be:
- |native_name = {{nobold|蔣中正}}<br />{{nobold|蔣介石}}
Is there a problem having both names? Shenme (talk) 04:32, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
- No, 介石 by itself, however, is less acceptable. CaradhrasAiguo (leave language) 05:37, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion[edit]
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) 01:53, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
When and where did he die?[edit]
- New York Times: "Taipei Central Hospital" "last night" (relative to Sunday, April 6) "11:50 P.M. (10:50 A.M., New York time). "
- Office of the President, ROC (Taiwan): "at his Shilin residence." "1975-04-05" (Chinese: "於臺北士林官邸" "64年04月05日 ")
- Two Chinese language sources, one purporting to be derived from Chiang Ching-kuo's diary: "1975年4月4日晚間11點50分，" & "4月4日：父亲于夜11时50分，" "病逝于士林官邸。" also, [1] follows this interpretation
Geographyinitiative (talk) 08:24, 29 September 2019 (UTC)
- @Chongkian and Zanhe: I don't know who needs to be pinged, but I think I need to ping someone here. Am I interpreting the sources correctly? Is there really some kind of confusion or dispute about the date and place for Chiang Kai-shek's death? If I have misinterpreted anything or am giving too much credence to conspiracy theories, please revert me. Geographyinitiative (talk) 08:33, 29 September 2019 (UTC)
- Mandarin Chinese Wikipedia says of Yen Chia-kan "4月6日上午11時，嚴家淦宣誓就任總統。"Geographyinitiative (talk) 08:39, 29 September 2019 (UTC)
- Taiwan Office of the President Chinese version says Yen Chia-kan became President on the 5th. The English version says he was sworn in on the 6th and doesn't mention whether he was President before that (see his page where I have everything linked now). Except for that one number (5 or 6) all the other dates in the list of events in his Presidency are the same between the English and Chinese versions. Geographyinitiative (talk) 08:58, 29 September 2019 (UTC)
- Also, New York would have been in daylight savings at that time ([2]) which would be UTC−04:00. Taiwan was on Chungyuan Standard Time 中原標準時間 UTC+08:00 ([3]). Wouldn't that be 12 hours apart (as in, if he died at 11:50 PM, then it would be 11:50 AM the next day in New York)? Geographyinitiative (talk) 10:35, 29 September 2019 (UTC)
Simplified character names[edit]
@Geographyinitiative: Re: the simplified character "蒋" not appearing in a Taiwanese (Republic of China) MOE dictionary
As per Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style/China_and_Chinese-related_articles#Should_the_Chinese_infobox_display_both_Simplified_and_Traditional_Chinese_for_all_Greater_China_and/or_Sinosphere-related_subjects,_or_should_it_only_display_the_relevant_ones_per_territory/area? all Chinese-related subjects should display both Traditional and Simplified characters. The majority of editors of this MOS discussion expressly contradicted the rationale that one should check ZHWiki: The desire is to have both forms.
I wanted to check the MOE dictionary to see if they did list simplified forms anyway, but I'm having trouble accessing it... WhisperToMe (talk) 10:25, 25 December 2019 (UTC)
- @WhisperToMe: Hello there. The point of including foreign language material on English Wikipedia is to provide readers with information about the native language name (names) of the person/article/etc involved. What you need to demonstrate is that 蒋 is part of a 'native name' for this person. The problem is, I don't have any evidence that this character is part of a legitimate 'native name' for this person. If you want to start adding all the potential forms of this person's name to the page, it will get hectic fast. Once you have evidence that this was part of his name, then and only then should you add that information to this page. Dictionaries comparing simplified, traditional etc characters can be seen at en.wiktionary.org. Geographyinitiative (talk) 10:50, 25 December 2019 (UTC)
- Note- there are DEFINITELY some simplified-type characters that are used in the native language of the people in the ROC, for instance 湾 can be seen in advertisements everywhere. What you've got to show is that that 蒋 is part of a form of this persons 'native name'. Geographyinitiative (talk) 11:05, 25 December 2019 (UTC)
- On the Mandarin Chinese Wikipedia, it's important to show all the different forms of Chinese characters currently used by Mandarin speakers so that Mandarin Chinese readers can understand things. English Wikipedia is only concerned with bona fide native names of the topic of the article. Geographyinitiative (talk) 11:14, 25 December 2019 (UTC)
- Simplified characters of various derivations are sometimes used in the ROC area and can be clearly demonstrated to be in use between the native people in the area. What we need is specific proof that this specific character is part of a citable, actual native name for this person. Non-native names could be included too, but there's no need since they have their own Wikipedias, and if the reader really wants to know more, they can go to Wiktionary etc. Mainland China uses Simplified characters as its primary form of Chinese characters, but their understanding of traditional characters is still used throughout the country and in their official standards (like 2010s decade's Table of General Standard Chinese Characters). To whatever extent traditional characters were historically or are culturally in use in those areas, they are legitimate for addition as 'native names' on English Wikipedia. Geographyinitiative (talk) 11:33, 25 December 2019 (UTC)
- I am curious about the statement that "Simplified characters of various derivations are sometimes used in the ROC area and can be clearly demonstrated to be in use between the native people in the area." - Are there citable references I may read about this? I wasn't aware of this particular aspect.
- Otherwise several arguments had been made in the discussion page I linked: it was argued, for example, that Simplified is not a "native form" of Hong Kong, and the dictionary argument was brought up too. The majority of editors in the MOS discussion stated anyway that they wanted both forms due to their utility/usefulness, to the point where the editor in favor of curtailing the forms was told that it was WP:SNOW and WP:1AM (as in all respondants except two wanted the utility).
- If you want a reconsideration of the decision at the MOS page, you'll have to open a discussion at the MOS page (that can also be a WP:RFC, but if so, should be linked from the MOS page) and notify all relevant WikiProjects (China, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Singapore, and Malaysia) as I did.
- WhisperToMe (talk) 11:43, 25 December 2019 (UTC)
- 蒋 needs to be shown as part of a native name for this person. It may be possible that 蒋 could be legitimately considered part of a native name for this person, but I would like to see why we would consider it native, otherwise we are giving undue prominence to a "non-native native name". The dictionaries in the ROC don't have the character 蒋 as far as I remember, and 蒋 is not used in native-to-native communication (or at least not demonstrated to be used in native-native discussion). All the traditional/simplified/etc forms that can be cited as bona fide native names for this person are being displayed on the page, which is consistent with the policy you are citing.
- (Answering your other questions as best I can: Yang Kui's 1936 臺湾新聞學, [4], the logo of [5] & the logo of [6] all the use the form 湾, hence it has got to be considered part of ROC culture on some level. Also, 区 is used widely in the ROC in handwriting. The simplified forms they are using are part of their native language communication; the alien simplified forms are just that- alien. The Hong Kong SAR is a part of the People's Republic of China on some level, hence simplified characters are definitely going to be part of the native language mix there on some level, since the PRC government has their official set of simplifications.)
- I await some evidence that 蒋 is part of a bona fide native name for this person. Geographyinitiative (talk) 12:24, 25 December 2019 (UTC)
- @Geographyinitiative: "I await some evidence that 蒋 is part of a bona fide native name for this person." - "蒋" would be part of the "native name" under the orthography rules of Mainland China, Malaysia, and Singapore (I feel like it is not necessary for me to look it up/link at this point). I am aware CKS was never resident in the PRC, so it isn't his "state". However CKS originated from, and lived on the Chinese Mainland before the loss of the civil war, and he was involved in political disputes with Mainland authorities. Even if one argues that modern ROC/Taiwan topics have no affinity with Mainland China, CKS still does have such a relationship, and so PRC orthography would be relevant to him.
- Also consider that ancient Chinese poets/figures/etc (example: Wei Zhongxian) have their names in Simplified Chinese too (if different from Traditional), even though it obviously never existed in their lifetimes. I do not believe the ENwiki userbase would allow for the removal of Simplified Chinese from those figures, so why would they want it removed from CKS's article?
- Trying to consider only Republic of China (Taiwan) orthography and not all forms of modern Chinese orthography goes against the RFC I linked above. The RFC establishes that all written forms of "modern Chinese" are together considered the "native name" - the argument that simplified is not native names of Traditional Chinese territories was rejected by the RFC I linked above.
- Anyway, if you strongly disagree with the result, please create a new RFC as per my instructions above and ensure all participants are notified. This would not only affect this article, but other ROC and Taiwan-related articles and potentiall all articles of people who were not alive on or after 1949.
- WhisperToMe (talk) 04:35, 28 December 2019 (UTC)
- @WhisperToMe: In a spirit of good will, I want to ask you to look at what you wrote and compare what you wrote to the point of having foreign language material on English Wikipedia. You wrote, "The RFC establishes that all written forms of "modern Chinese" are together considered the "native name"". Isn't it interesting that you have to write this sentence instead of providing sources for this foreign language material you are trying to add to the page? Wikipedia is about sources. The only way you can think to add the names with 蒋 is on the basis of what is "considered" a "native name" and not what actually are his sourced native names- no need to be "considered" a native name- it just is. Why do we need to add unsourced, "non-native native names" to an English Wikipedia page? Why? It's interesting that in your list of nations using PRC-standard Chinese characters, the nation that this person was elected president of for five terms is not included. Don't you think you're violating the point of having foreign language material on English Wikipedia, which is to show the readers not the "considered" native names, but the actual bona fide native language names of the subject of the article? Geographyinitiative (talk) 05:06, 28 December 2019 (UTC)
- The Xiandai Hanyu Cidian (Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (PRC) dictionary) is available through an APP (the page mentions it at http://ling.cass.cn/tzgg/201908/t20190815_4957899.html ) but I learned a basic version the APP is available for free. I downloaded the APP, and the dictionary does not list peoples' names as being distinct, not even the likes of Mao Zedong or Sun Yat-sen: it only goes by characters. Otherwise the results are predictable, as the simplified is shown as default, with traditional in parenthenses.
- "Wikipedia is about sources." - Which is true, if it is not "common sense". I don't need to source that Paris is the capital of France. In most articles there is no demand of a particular dictionary source on whether something is written in Simplified or Traditional (in regards to Traditional that issue comes up with ways of writing "Taiwan").
- Remember usually Chinese dictionaries I usually often show both forms as being complementary versions: MDBG (see the result) and Pleco (see screenshots) treat both Simplified and Traditional as just two equally valid forms of Putonghua, and so there would be no "native name" violation in that consideration. It may indeed be true that the ROC government in particular only considers limited forms valid for its purposes, but that is best addressed as a footnote instead of excluding Simplified Chinese altogether from the template; people in the MOS discussion stated very clearly they wanted to see the simplified forms.
- The reason I wrote the above sentence is that A. it would be obvious that a PRC source would consider Simplified characters to be Chiang's "native name" and B. I believe that PRC-based and/or overseas dictionaries also have to be considered, not only ROC ones.
- "the nation that this person was elected president of for five terms is not included" - Because in regards to the Chinese template I'm also considering what other areas consider his "native name", not only the ROC.
- Anyway since this contradicts the Manual of Style discussion I linked above, the idea that forms of Chinese not validated by the ROC gov't for CKS should be excluded from the article as being "foreign names" needs to be confirmed by consensus through an RFC. If you want me to file an RFC, I will happily do that. If the Wikipedia community agrees with your assertion, then that's that. If an RFC concludes that Simplified characters are "non-native native names", that's that.
- WhisperToMe (talk) 07:43, 28 December 2019 (UTC)
- @WhisperToMe: In a spirit of good will, I want to ask you to look at what you wrote and compare what you wrote to the point of having foreign language material on English Wikipedia. You wrote, "The RFC establishes that all written forms of "modern Chinese" are together considered the "native name"". Isn't it interesting that you have to write this sentence instead of providing sources for this foreign language material you are trying to add to the page? Wikipedia is about sources. The only way you can think to add the names with 蒋 is on the basis of what is "considered" a "native name" and not what actually are his sourced native names- no need to be "considered" a native name- it just is. Why do we need to add unsourced, "non-native native names" to an English Wikipedia page? Why? It's interesting that in your list of nations using PRC-standard Chinese characters, the nation that this person was elected president of for five terms is not included. Don't you think you're violating the point of having foreign language material on English Wikipedia, which is to show the readers not the "considered" native names, but the actual bona fide native language names of the subject of the article? Geographyinitiative (talk) 05:06, 28 December 2019 (UTC)
- I decided to file the RFC at Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style/China_and_Chinese-related_articles#Request_for_comment:_Do_the_traditional_and_simplified_forms_of_Chinese_count_as_the_same_name_or_different_names_in_regards_to_eligibility_of_displaying_characters?. It may affect multiple articles, and it is best to get the community's consensus in this regard. WhisperToMe (talk) 19:08, 29 December 2019 (UTC)
- Wikipedia level-4 vital articles in People
- Wikipedia C-Class vital articles in People
- Wikipedia C-Class level-4 vital articles
- C-Class biography articles
- C-Class biography (military) articles
- Low-importance biography (military) articles
- Military biography work group articles
- C-Class biography (politics and government) articles
- Low-importance biography (politics and government) articles
- Politics and government work group articles
- WikiProject Biography articles
- C-Class Religion articles
- Mid-importance Religion articles
- C-Class Interfaith articles
- Mid-importance Interfaith articles
- Interfaith work group articles
- WikiProject Religion articles
- C-Class Cold War articles
- Mid-importance Cold War articles
- Cold War task force articles
- C-Class China-related articles
- Top-importance China-related articles
- C-Class Chinese politics articles
- Top-importance Chinese politics articles
- WikiProject Chinese politics articles
- C-Class China-related articles of Top-importance
- WikiProject China articles
- C-Class Taiwan-related articles
- Top-importance Taiwan-related articles
- WikiProject Taiwan articles
- C-Class politics articles
- Mid-importance politics articles
- WikiProject Politics articles
- C-Class Conservatism articles
- Low-importance Conservatism articles
- WikiProject Conservatism articles
- C-Class Asian military history articles
- Asian military history task force articles
- C-Class Chinese military history articles
- Chinese military history task force articles
- C-Class World War II articles
- World War II task force articles
- C-Class military history articles
- C-Class Christianity articles
- Mid-importance Christianity articles
- C-Class Methodism work group articles
- Low-importance Methodism work group articles
- Methodism work group articles
- C-Class Christianity in China work group articles
- Mid-importance Christianity in China work group articles
- Christianity in China work group articles
- C-Class Version 1.0 articles
- Unknown-importance Version 1.0 articles
- History Version 1.0 articles
- C-Class Version 0.7 articles
- Unknown-importance Version 0.7 articles
- Wikipedia Version 0.7 selected articles
- History Version 0.7 articles
- Wikipedia Version 1.0 articles
- Selected anniversaries (October 2011)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
![[4]](https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Taiwan_Mobile.svg){kind=link}
No comments:
Post a Comment