Talk:Cantonese culture

Should {{HK-stub}} be added to this article?

User:Huaiwei has attempted several times to take {{HK-stub}} off from this article [1] [2] [3]. All comments are welcome. (And of course the best way to solve the trouble is to expand the article. :-) ) — Instantnood June 30, 2005 15:14 (UTC)

HK-stub is no longer being used. Please use Hong-Kong-stub instead. Tedernst 17:14, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

Lingnan

In fact there's a page about Lingnan in the Chinese Wikipedia. :-) -- Jerry Crimson Mann 3 July 2005 21:35 (UTC)

Deleting "Recognized as Han Chinese" section & Replace with "Tang Chinese" section

I don't think using Mongol Yuan dynasty classification of Chinese people is relevant since they are not Chinese, they can't classify people since Mongols had a divide-&-conquer strategy of pitting Chinese against Chinese. For example, the Southern Song dynasty was undoubtly filled with many Han Chinese people who fled from northern invasion, but they are labelled as "Southern People" (Nan ren) instead of "Han Chinese" (Han ren). It's mostly a political distinction since Southern Song people were most resistant to Mongol rule and northern China had been conquered and under Mongol rule for several centuries.

MY PROPOSAL:

The Cantonese, Hakka, Teochew people all call themselves "Tang ren" or "People of the Tang" as reflected in Chinatown in US is called "Tang ren gai" (Street of the Tang people"....so clearly the Cantonese and Lingnan people identify themselves with mainstream Chinese culture as early as Tang dynasty, because Tang dynasty was when southern China was full sinicized and assimilated. We can do away what MONGOLS Think because Mongols racial classification is inherently biased against Southern Song conquered subjects (which contained Han Chinese), I think we should do away with it. Rwat128 (talk) 05:26, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

Is your proposal based on actual academic research or is it your assumptions and observations? _dk (talk) 06:13, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

I think it is a fair suggestion. As the primary author of this article, I have made some minor changes. First, now that paragraph says Cantonese were finally "Fully Integrated as Han Chinese" at the time of Ming Dynasty. It now clearly states that while Cantonese wasn't legally classified as Han Chinese until Ming Dynasty, they have culturally sinicized long before that. I have also added a brief paragraph about the "People of the Tang" topic.Prince-of-Canton (talk) 11:12, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

Great revisions Prince of Canton! This has been resolved. Rwat128 (talk) 12:07, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

Requested move 15 April 2023

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) – MaterialWorks (contribs) 18:51, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

---

Lingnan culture → Cantonese culture – 1. WP:UCRN According to Google Trends ([4]) and Google Ngram Viewer ([5]) the term 'Cantonese culture' is more widely used. 2. WP:PRECISE If in the article we have to explain that this article is the 'second definition: Cantonese culture' rather than the 'first definition:culture in the Lingnan region', than I don't think it is precise enough. 三葉草SanYeCao 討論Talk 18:46, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.