Talk:Chinese Century/Archives/2017
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Recent changes
Would the IP please explain why he is removing well cited content? Darkness Shines (talk) 22:01, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
BTW, the journal is published by MIT. Darkness Shines (talk) 22:04, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
Beckley is not an established researcher in his field, just some grad student. It fails WP:RS. And how is it published by MIT? It says Harvard Kennedy. Furthermore, it also appears to be a WP:SPS as a file uploaded to a personal website.71.191.189.195 (talk) 22:08, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
- Many researchers make papers available on their uni websites, it is not self published, the MIT press publish that journal, and the source is solid. Stop removing it because you do not like it. Darkness Shines (talk) 22:10, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
- That's very uncivil. What MIT press journal? It says HARVARD KENNEDY. Stop putting it back just because you like it. 71.191.189.195 (talk) 22:12, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
- This one. Darkness Shines (talk) 22:13, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
- Seems well notable and well recognized, would create an article. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 07:22, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
- This one. Darkness Shines (talk) 22:13, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
- That's very uncivil. What MIT press journal? It says HARVARD KENNEDY. Stop putting it back just because you like it. 71.191.189.195 (talk) 22:12, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
Maybe instead of "Debate" that section should be entitled "Mostly about Beckley"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 148.177.1.212 (talk) 13:26, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
Content being removed
@Guardian101: Please explain why you are removing references and content. Darkness Shines (talk) 09:02, 3 June 2017 (UTC)
- There are no reliable references but only one opinion piece.[1]("Publication Type: Opinion Papers") This information was added by an SPA.[2] It is contrary to every other source that puts China to be top GDP for 16th century, sometimes 17th century, and most refers to historical GDP, China was not largest for "large part" at all. Capitals00 (talk) 17:08, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
- Since when does the world bank publish opinion pieces? Darkness Shines (talk) 11:17, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
- Also the authors are experts in the field [3] Darkness Shines (talk) 11:28, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
- Here's a source from World Bank,[4] which says that China became largest GDP from 1500. Capitals00 (talk) 12:35, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
- Well then we add both. Darkness Shines (talk) 14:34, 6 June 2017 (UTC)
- Here's a source from World Bank,[4] which says that China became largest GDP from 1500. Capitals00 (talk) 12:35, 5 June 2017 (UTC)