| Revision as of 21:55, 5 April 2007 editJohnpseudo (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users5,807 editsm Instantnood is banned from adding or removing any category related to China from any article related to China. He may be blocked without further warning for up to a week for each violation.← Previous edit | Revision as of 22:13, 5 April 2007 edit undoInstantnood (talk | contribs)32,683 edits Reverted. The edit was not related to any categories.Next edit → | ||
| Line 28: | Line 28: | ||
| ==PRC vs Mainland== | ==PRC vs Mainland== | ||
| I don't think this article needs to substitute "Mainland China" for "PRC". The intro to the article explains that the censorship does not apply in Hong Kong and Macao, so I see no reason to clumsily refer back to Mainland China over and over again.--] |
I don't think this article needs to substitute "Mainland China" for "PRC". The intro to the article explains that the censorship does not apply in Hong Kong and Macao, so I see no reason to clumsily refer back to Mainland China over and over again.--] 02:37, 20 February 2007 (UTC) | ||
| :That's the official NPOV policy on Misplaced Pages. Avoid using ''People's Republic of China'' or ''China'' in place of ''mainland China'' is in fact much clearer, more accurate and more consistent, and avoid making readers confused. Since the policy is already a result of consensus, no discussion and consensus building process would be necessary when it's applied to entries in the main namespace, unless there're disputes around the applicability <span class=plainlinks> of the policy to a particular entry. See] also </span>. — ]] 15:36, 24 February 2007 (UTC) | :That's the official NPOV policy on Misplaced Pages. Avoid using ''People's Republic of China'' or ''China'' in place of ''mainland China'' is in fact much clearer, more accurate and more consistent, and avoid making readers confused. Since the policy is already a result of consensus, no discussion and consensus building process would be necessary when it's applied to entries in the main namespace, unless there're disputes around the applicability <span class=plainlinks> of the policy to a particular entry. See] also </span>. — ]] 15:36, 24 February 2007 (UTC) | ||
| ::No, it isn't an official NPOV policy. ] 16:21, 24 February 2007 (UTC) | ::No, it isn't an official NPOV policy. ] 16:21, 24 February 2007 (UTC) | ||
| Line 37: | Line 37: | ||
| :::::The specific section in that official guideline is named "Political NPOV". In what way did I ever restrict the scope of this article? What I had done was merely to avoid using ''China'' and ''Chinese'' in place of ''People's Republic of China'' or ''mainland China''. The scope of this article was kept intact. — ]] 19:49, 24 February 2007 (UTC) | :::::The specific section in that official guideline is named "Political NPOV". In what way did I ever restrict the scope of this article? What I had done was merely to avoid using ''China'' and ''Chinese'' in place of ''People's Republic of China'' or ''mainland China''. The scope of this article was kept intact. — ]] 19:49, 24 February 2007 (UTC) | ||
| ::::::Every other article about national censorship uses the title format "Censorship in (country name)". It would be a break with continuity to rename this article. Furthermore, I know some Chinese who believe that the Mainland encompasses Hong Kong and Macao as well, which makes such a title even more inappropriate.--] 23:25, 25 February 2007 (UTC) | ::::::Every other article about national censorship uses the title format "Censorship in (country name)". It would be a break with continuity to rename this article. Furthermore, I know some Chinese who believe that the Mainland encompasses Hong Kong and Macao as well, which makes such a title even more inappropriate.--] 23:25, 25 February 2007 (UTC) | ||
| :::::::The problem is that the central government of the PRC itself does not directly exercise any administrative power over the two special administrative regions. Such power is rested in the governments of the two special administrative regions. Therefore the subject matter of this article remains censorship in the mainland. Afterall the PRC is the among the few, if not only, sovereign states to maintain such a way of separation with respect to its special territories. It's true that some Hong Kong businessmen who have business interests across the border own newspapers, and these newspapers may have some form of self-censorship, but that's not censorship by the PRC over the Hong Kong press. — ]] 11:53, 4 March 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ==Internet ''flooding''== | ==Internet ''flooding''== | ||
| What is it called when a government ''floods'' the internet with information of a different kind rather than actually censoring anything? A few people are trying to get an article created about just such a phenomenon, and what China has to do with it, ] (it is a rough draft in user space). Any help would be appreciated. The article has had a spotty history; it has ] once and is now up for a deletion review ]. ] 01:27, 1 April 2007 (UTC) | What is it called when a government ''floods'' the internet with information of a different kind rather than actually censoring anything? A few people are trying to get an article created about just such a phenomenon, and what China has to do with it, ] (it is a rough draft in user space). Any help would be appreciated. The article has had a spotty history; it has ] once and is now up for a deletion review ]. ] 01:27, 1 April 2007 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 22:13, 5 April 2007
Page created
I've changed this page from a redirect to Internet censorship in the People's Republic of China to an article on general censorship in China. Here's a possible general outline for the article I came up with:
Intro paragraph
==History==
==Censored mediums==
==See also==
==References==
==External links==
Psiphon
Psiphon is a software project designed by University of Toronto's Citizen Lab under the direction of Professor Ronald Deibert, Director of the Citizen Lab. Psiphon is a circumvention technology that works through social networks of trust and is designed to help Internet users bypass content-filtering systems setup by governments, such as China, North Korea, Iran, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates and others.
"We're aiming at giving people access to sites like Misplaced Pages," a free, user-maintained online encyclopedia, and other information and news sources, Michael Hull, psiphon's lead engineer, told CBC News Online.
pornography
Although there are some political reasons, but those are not the main reasons. The pornography is also a very common reason that China bans movies. Please do not always blame China politically, there are also some common reasons such as US and Canada's. Movies are movies, please don't always see it politically. Anthony Feb 11,2007
- Where in the article does it say that pornography is banned for political reasons?--Daveswagon 00:01, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
PRC vs Mainland
I don't think this article needs to substitute "Mainland China" for "PRC". The intro to the article explains that the censorship does not apply in Hong Kong and Macao, so I see no reason to clumsily refer back to Mainland China over and over again.--Daveswagon 02:37, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
- That's the official NPOV policy on Misplaced Pages. Avoid using People's Republic of China or China in place of mainland China is in fact much clearer, more accurate and more consistent, and avoid making readers confused. Since the policy is already a result of consensus, no discussion and consensus building process would be necessary when it's applied to entries in the main namespace, unless there're disputes around the applicability of the policy to a particular entry. See also user talk:Daveswagon. — Instantnood 15:36, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
- No, it isn't an official NPOV policy. SchmuckyTheCat 16:21, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
- Attempting to use a naming guideline as a guise to restrict the scope of an article can hardly be considered "NPOV" policy.--Huaiwei 17:03, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
- The official NPOV policy clearly provides that China or Chinese should not be used in place of People's Republic of China. Neither should China be used in place of mainland China. In what way did my edit restrict the scope of this article? Detail the reasons why and the rationale by referring to "difference between revisions" (i.e. ), if you are serious with your allegations. — Instantnood 17:25, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
- The NPOV policy does not make such a declaration. It is the naming conventions for Chinese names which does so, so quit attempting to insist the existance of an "NPOV policy" above to lend weight to your argument. Do you have further evidence to show if either document contains any direct instruction, even if explicit, on a requirement to restrict the scope of articles for the sake of "NPOV"?--Huaiwei 18:16, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
- The specific section in that official guideline is named "Political NPOV". In what way did I ever restrict the scope of this article? What I had done was merely to avoid using China and Chinese in place of People's Republic of China or mainland China. The scope of this article was kept intact. — Instantnood 19:49, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
- Every other article about national censorship uses the title format "Censorship in (country name)". It would be a break with continuity to rename this article. Furthermore, I know some Chinese who believe that the Mainland encompasses Hong Kong and Macao as well, which makes such a title even more inappropriate.--Daveswagon 23:25, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
- The problem is that the central government of the PRC itself does not directly exercise any administrative power over the two special administrative regions. Such power is rested in the governments of the two special administrative regions. Therefore the subject matter of this article remains censorship in the mainland. Afterall the PRC is the among the few, if not only, sovereign states to maintain such a way of separation with respect to its special territories. It's true that some Hong Kong businessmen who have business interests across the border own newspapers, and these newspapers may have some form of self-censorship, but that's not censorship by the PRC over the Hong Kong press. — Instantnood 11:53, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
- Every other article about national censorship uses the title format "Censorship in (country name)". It would be a break with continuity to rename this article. Furthermore, I know some Chinese who believe that the Mainland encompasses Hong Kong and Macao as well, which makes such a title even more inappropriate.--Daveswagon 23:25, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
- The specific section in that official guideline is named "Political NPOV". In what way did I ever restrict the scope of this article? What I had done was merely to avoid using China and Chinese in place of People's Republic of China or mainland China. The scope of this article was kept intact. — Instantnood 19:49, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
- The NPOV policy does not make such a declaration. It is the naming conventions for Chinese names which does so, so quit attempting to insist the existance of an "NPOV policy" above to lend weight to your argument. Do you have further evidence to show if either document contains any direct instruction, even if explicit, on a requirement to restrict the scope of articles for the sake of "NPOV"?--Huaiwei 18:16, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
- The official NPOV policy clearly provides that China or Chinese should not be used in place of People's Republic of China. Neither should China be used in place of mainland China. In what way did my edit restrict the scope of this article? Detail the reasons why and the rationale by referring to "difference between revisions" (i.e. ), if you are serious with your allegations. — Instantnood 17:25, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
Internet flooding
What is it called when a government floods the internet with information of a different kind rather than actually censoring anything? A few people are trying to get an article created about just such a phenomenon, and what China has to do with it, over here (it is a rough draft in user space). Any help would be appreciated. The article has had a spotty history; it has been deleted once and is now up for a deletion review over here. Esn 01:27, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
- That sounds like disinformation. If you're accusing China of this, I hope you have some citation-worthy sources back up your claim.--Daveswagon 01:34, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
- There's a Guardian article over here. Esn 01:36, 1 April 2007 (UTC)