Talk:Desinicization campaign

Edit wars on this article

The continued reverting from IP addresses on this article really should be brought to this talk page, for discussion, rather than continued bickering via edit summaries. Also, to the above editor, you cannot forbid someone from contributing just because they do not know the Chinese language. The purpose of English Wikipedia is to give information of an encyclopedic nature, and this topic can be understood by anyone, not just someone who speaks Chinese. I'd request you have some tolerance, and patience for non-native Chinese editors. Thank you. Additionally, this article needs to be cited with proper, third-party reliable sources and written from a neutral, fact-based viewpoint. There is currently only one reference, and it is not in English. For the English Wikipedia, this is not considered something that the majority of editors would be able to review for verifiability. I'd encourage those editors working on this article to step back, go find some good English language sources, and write this article up in a neutral voice, without any commentary or opinion, or original research. But the biggest issue right now is this continued reverting by three IP addresses. It is not constructive, and I urge all of you to bring your concerns here in a civil manner, discuss them, and then write the article together. Thanks, ^Ariel♥Gold 06:11, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Hear hear. If nothing can be resolved, page protection might come into play, and that really isn't going to help any edit wars continue. Jmlk17 06:21, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

I can tell you that these people who always put wrong information understand Chinese. The reason why I questioning them is that I know they can read Chinese easily, but they always write the examples that are listed as bias in Chinese page. -- 218.166.73.248 (talk · contribs · logs) 06:53, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

As I'm sure most people know, but I'll just remind everyone: neutrality is a core policy. There is no arguing that, but this article is frankly, in some serious need of help. It needs references, and the removal of opinion, commentary, and original research. The point I'm making, and Jmlk is making, is that this edit warring needs to stop, it is not constructive, nor helpful. I would encourage everyone who is familiar with the subject, regardless of nation of origin, to come here, discuss things nicely, find references, come to agreements, and then work together as a team to create an article that someone who is completely unfamiliar with this topic, could read, understand, and learn from. This is my hope, and I would truly like to see that happen, I'd like to see this article become something helpful, rather than a battleground for differing points of view. Remember, just because a similar article may exist on the Chinese Wikipedia, this article should not simply be a copy of that article, it should be original, an article that is aimed towards those who may be unfamiliar with the subject, and also those who may know about it, but would learn more from reading this. Cheers, ^Ariel♥Gold 07:02, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

218.166 is a chinese, but he refuses to admit that he is a chinese. with that kind of mentality, can we actually trust him? he just deleted a lot of desicization examples that he doesn't like. someone should revert what he deleted. --Soa308d 22:06, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

• It does not matter where someone is from, or what nationality they are. Wikipedia is a global project, and everyone is welcome to contribute, providing they follow the core policies and the guidelines. If editors cannot come to agreements here, about the issues, then further action may be required to protect this article from these constant edit wars. I encourage everyone to bring specific, detailed concerns here, discuss them in a civil manner, and reach an agreement, based on reliable sources that should be properly cited. Any non-bias should be shelved at the door, and items that can be verifiable should be included, with no commentary, opinion, or original research. I sincerely hope this can be accomplished with respect to each other, and to the project. Thanks, ^Ariel♥Gold 02:47, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

• Deletion of unfootnoted material is different than deletion of footnoted material. Deletion of footnoted material usually requires a discussion on the article's talk page. In regards to motivation, Assume good faith and the requirement that reliable sources be used in the article on Wikipedia English largely have wiped out a need in Wikipedia English to figure out someone's motives. It is not a matter of good motives, bad motives, trust, or lack of trust; it only matters if the article is improved based on reliable source material. Instead of spending time worrying about someone's back ground and wasting significant time in discussing such matters (and generating hurt feelings), Wikipedia English keep's its eye on the prize - the improvement of the encyclopedia. Adhering to this approach helps us be civil towards one another and lessens a chance for an edit war. Cheers. -- Jreferee ^(Talk) 16:04, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Actions taken on the article

I move the article to desinicization campaign because "desinicization" is more of a dictionary term and "desinicization campaign" is how the reliable sources labeled the desinicization actions. You may disagree that a desinicization campaign exists or that a particular action is not part of the desinicization campaign even though it was so identified by a reliable source, but such personal beliefs may be better addressed in the Taiwanese localization movement article (through reliable sources) or elsewhere. -- Jreferee ^(Talk) 22:45, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

I'd just like to say that this article is much improved now, thanks to your help, Jreferee. You have added multiple, reliable sources, cited with footnotes, and that makes it much easier to read, and I'd just like to say, well done! ^Ariel♥Gold 02:52, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

A wrong article name

How long will a campaign last? second, other than Taiwan, there are other countries that are doing desinicization, so this article should change a better name. and how can anyone improve it if you locked it? 71.156.32.55 (talk · contribs · logs) 07:34, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

You could create an account and get a registered username, which has many beneficial aspects, take a look at the link to learn more. Also, would you please read the administrator Jreferee's reasons and explanations above? Thanks! ^Ariel♥Gold 09:08, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

That is his own reason, no one agrees with him. he should look up the defintion of "campaign" before he vandalized that page.--Adka92 09:15, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia English is based on reliable sources. "Desinicization" is more of a dictionary term and "desinicization campaign" is how the reliable sources labeled the desinicization efforts. -- Jreferee ^(Talk) 15:26, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Been recreated again as Desinicize --ÐeadΣyeДrrow (Talk|Contribs) 10:56, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Who hijacked this article and forced everyone to accept his version?

Before you force everyone to accept your article, tell us what does the following have anything to do with Taiwan government? this is simply too ridiculous. Examples elsewhere: Some commentators also take the recent Seoul city mayor's move to change Seoul city's Chinese official name from Hancheng (漢城; Hànchéng) to Shou'er (首爾; Shǒuěr) in 2005 as a model of desinicization. The previous name, pronounced Hànchéng in Chinese and Hanseong in Korean, is an old name for Seoul, literally meaning Han River City, but can be misinterpreted as Han Chinese City. The new name Shou'er carried no such connotation, and was close in both sound and meaning to Seoul, which, uniquely among Korean place names, does not have a Sino-Korean name. See also Seoul - Chinese name. The Dungans of Kyrgyzstan represent a less conscious process of desinicization, during which, over the course of a little more than a century (since the Hui Minorities' War), a Hui Chinese population became alienated from the literary tradition and local culture of Shaanxi and Gansu.-- Adka92 (talk · contribs · logs) 09:17, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

All 90+ references I reviewed mentioned "desinicization" and all limited their desinicization to Taiwan. The Korea example provided appears to be original research. -- Jreferee ^(Talk) 15:31, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Then you obviously don't know what desinicization means, do some research on why vietnam invented their own written language, and on why Chinese as a language was banned in south korea not so long ago, etc. all those things are desinicization, you are just hijacking this article. and if you want to write about taiwan, you should change the name to "taiwan's desinicization campaign," and "campaign" doesn't last long, but desicinization has been long before you were born, you need to revert the original article back --Adka92 22:30, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia English does not use original research. As I posted elsewhere in this talk page, desinicization is a perspective and many thing can be characterized as desinicization through original research. The only way we can keep this article from becoming prohibited original research is to use reliable source material. A reliable source would need to refer to Chinese as a language being banned in South Korea as being "desinicization" for such information to be included in this article. Same goes for Vietnam inventing their own written language. I have not found any reliable sources making such claims. Also, I have found several reliable sources that use the phrase "Desinicization campaign". For us to change the name of the article from desinicization campaign, we would need reliable sources that sufficiently counters other reliable sources use of the term "desinicization campaign". I have not found any. Wikipedia is nothing more than a neutral and unbiased compilation of previously written, verifiable information. It is merely the ladle that helps us drink from the fountain of knowledge. Wikipedia's policies keep it from being anything more than that. -- Jreferee ^(Talk) 06:44, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Really different from the Chinese page

This article is really different from the Chinese page(去中國化). The quality of this article is really lower than the Chinese page. Some critical informations are listed in the Chinese page. If you understand Chinese, you can read the Chinese page and understand how important these informations are. These information are about removing or renaming the symbols of Chiang Kai-shek. Many people are trying to remove symbols about Chiang because they viewed him as a tyrant, not because they think they are Taiwanese or Chinese. In any democratic country, it is really common to deny any cult of tyrants! Seeing denying Chiang as Desinicizaton really means that democratization is Desinicization or China means autocracy! I tried to listed some of them. However some people always delete these critical information! They only questioned if you are Chinese or not! Also, there is another bigger issue. Is this article important? The reason why it is usually used as another name of Taiwan independent movement or Taiwan localization movement is that the word "Desinicization" can imply that this is damaging Chinese culture. -- 61.224.42.135 (talk · contribs · logs) 15:00 14 September 2007 (UTC)

The topic appears to fall into an article whose subject is a POV. China, etc. looks at Taiwan's actions and says "Hey, you're getting rid of Chinese culture and that is desinicization." Taiwan, etc. looks at the same action and says, "No, we're just emphasizing the importance of Taiwan's culture so it is not desinicization." Neither is really wrong (or right for that matter), it is just different perspectives. The Chinese, etc. perspective now is in the Desinicization campaign article and the Taiwan, etc. perspective is in the Taiwanese localization movement article. There are endless amount of actions, anyone of which could be characterized one way or another through original research. Such a path usually leads to edit wars, particularly in contentious topics such as this one. One of Wikipedia English's solutions is to limit information in the article to reliable source material. The present article was composed from reliable source material. Rather than use personal understanding of the situation to determine what gets into the article, I let the reliable source material dictate what gets into the article. The article now reflects what reliable sources say about the topic. -- Jreferee ^(Talk) 15:43, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

61.224, you are a chinese, and you deny that you are a chinese. it is the same thing for those desinicization acts, they are indeed desinicization things, but you refuse it. and that is why they are called desinicization.--Adka92 22:33, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

• Adka92 says nothing about this article. What he/she said is always full of racism. I think it is helpless to answer these racism questions. I should response what Jreferee talked: In the Chinese Wikipedia, there are 3 articles:Taiwan independent movement, Taiwan localization movement and desinicization. In the Chinese Wikipedia, it is list "the movements that called as desinicizaton in Taiwan actually do not harm the Chinese culture; also it almost never try to remove Chinese culture in Taiwan" in the desinicization article. De-Chianglization(removing/renaming symbols about Chiang) is listed in the Controversial part of desinicization in the Chinese page. It is also list with "Many people think that removing Chiang's symbols can not be called as desinicization." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.166.73.25 (talk) 02:13, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

• Harm to culture is merely a perspective. I have found no reliable sources saying something like "desinicizaton in Taiwan actually do not harm the Chinese culture; also it almost never try to remove Chinese culture in Taiwan." Thus, such an opinion does not belong in the Wikipedia English article. I tried to write the article using examples of what reliable sources say is desinicizaton to give the reader an understanding of the topic. Some examples seem legit and others seem to be going overboard. There's no basis to hit the reader over the head to tell them what to think. The examples themselves are enought to allow them to draw the conclusions that original reserach policy prevents us from adding to the article. -- Jreferee ^(Talk) 07:00, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Almost all Chinese articles in the Chinese Version of Wikipedia with regarding of issues Taiwan, Taiwan - Mainland relations and its independence movement are heavily bias. They are full of Pan – Green POVs. For example, you can tell by reading the Chinese section on the KMT candidate --- Ma Ying-jeou, there has been an “edit war” going on for months, as it was vandalized many times. The issues surround Taiwan & its independence movement are not as "clean cut" as others might think. There is a huge split even within the island itself. I personally don't read those articles and believe most of them are just "Pan - Green Propaganda". Maybe I will start reading them again when the Mainland Chinese are allowed back to Wiki after they are done with the whole "Internet censorship" thing (which I don't think it will happen anytime soon...). TheAsianGURU 22:32, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

desinicization campaign is an invented phrase

there is no need to "merge," that guy simply created a new article, and delete the entire content from "desinicization", and wants to force others to accept his own creation. if you search on google, you can only find ONE PAGE with his creation "desinicization campaign." you can find more than 10 pages if you search for the word "desinicization." so clearly, that was invented by him only. Everyone else around the world don't agree with that phrase. he should change his own article to "Taiwan's d campaign," And revert the original "desinicization" back to its original content. it is just that simple. --Qpiuqwe 05:04, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Please review Wikipedia:Naming conventions. English speakers recognize "desinicization" as a dictionary entry heading, which makes that an inappropriate name for this article. When you read through the reliable sources I posted in the article reference section, you will see a good number of them use "Desinicization campaign". Also, if you have reliable sources to support your statements, please post them here as they would help move the discussion forward. -- Jreferee ^(Talk) 07:14, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

This entire article is pro-China political hokum. "De-sinicization" does not refer to the removal of "chinese" from Taiwan -- how could that be? We eat Chinese food, we drink Chinese drinks, we go to Chinese temples and celebrate Chinese New Year while reading with Chinese characters. It is merely political code for the removal of markers of the Chiang regime's attempt to impose an idealized and false view of China on Taiwan. This whole entry is POV and nothing can possibly save it, since the term "de-sinicization" is used only by those who want to annex Taiwan to China. The entry should be deleted. 163.17.7.193 (talk) 06:11, 10 January 2008 (UTC) Michael Turton