Talk:Anti-Hong Kong Express Rail Link movement

Protesters

Has anyone else noticed a distinct lack of actual taxpayers among the protesters? Given that only 20% of Hong Kong residents pay taxes, it seems like an important point that the make-up of the crowd (according to personal observation and our article) is decidedly non-taxpaying. DOR (HK) (talk) 01:04, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Are you saying the people who protested are actually mainlanders? Trying to understand what you mean. Benjwong (talk) 23:48, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Title of Article

I would like to propose the title be changed for the following reasons:

(1) "Anti ... oppositions" is a double-negative. I doubt that is what the author intends. (The title implies that this article is about people who disagree with others who oppose the rail) A suggestion would be "Anti-Guangzhou-Shenzhen-Hong Kong rail movement" or "Opposition to the Guangzhou-Shenzhen-Hong Kong rail"

(2) The article focuses on the opposition movement against the current construction plan of the Hong Kong section of the GSHK high speed rail, not the entire rail.

Caixiaohui (talk) 07:28, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Someone's done the first point. As for the second, yes, I agree with you. But then again, there is some controversy about mainland's locating two of its stations near to each other. Don't know if it's in the article; haven't really read it through. Any ideas for changing the title? Kayau Odyssey HUCK FINN to the lighthouse 12:31, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Why not just title it "Hong Kong Opposition against High Speed Rail"? That seems to be the Chinese name. Colipon+(Talk) 19:43, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

I don't quite know why either this article, or Guangzhou-Shenzhen-Hong Kong Express Rail Link Hong Kong Section were ever created. As they now exist and has been made notable by the news created by the sizeable demonstrations and political machinations, I think it would make more sense to merge it into the latter. It would create the context necessary and allow WP:NPOV development. Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 03:41, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Two sections are usually created when 2 lines of the same transport is located in technically two different territories. Similar to Hong Kong – Macau Ferry Terminal, Hong Kong and Hong Kong-Macau Ferry Pier, Macau. Benjwong (talk) 04:03, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Divination?!?

Does the hocus pocus divination thing really have to be in this article??!? --MarsmanRom (talk) 20:43, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

I have removed that section. I also had a problem with it but was waiting to confirm. You gave me the green light. Colipon+(Talk) 20:48, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

"Hocus pocus", are you guys online red guards? Something that generate such heated discussions in the territory should not get completely neglected. At least do a vote before a mass deletion. Benjwong (talk) 03:19, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Hey, I've just been asking. I'm not living in Hong Kong and are not much into that stuff. Just seemed strange to me. If a majority of people here wants to keep it, we can keep it .. maybe formulating it in a different way to make it sound less odd. So let's see if someone else joins in here. --MarsmanRom (talk) 09:47, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Hong Kong Express Rail Link controversy. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110604143231/http://www.thestandard.com.hk/news_detail.asp?we_cat=4&art_id=91254&sid=26254076&con_type=1&d_str=20091130&fc=1 to http://www.thestandard.com.hk/news_detail.asp?we_cat=4&art_id=91254&sid=26254076&con_type=1&d_str=20091130&fc=1

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).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:40, 6 November 2017 (UTC)