Talk:Ancestral home (Chinese)

Not exclusive to the Chinese
Ancestral Home concept is not something that is exclusive to China or Chinese culture.For eg;its there in India too.Please expand the article incorporating the "general" concept,in addition to the specific issue of Chinese Ancestral homes.--Sahodaran 06:49, 14 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Agree. Noloop (talk) 17:08, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Got sources? WhisperToMe (talk) 16:38, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Agree - broaden article to world, I added some see alsos and tagged. Widefox ; talk 14:40, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
 * alternatively, better to make Ancestral home a broad concept. Widefox ; talk 16:58, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Categories
Recently, a few categories related to ancestral homes were deleted because they were assumed to be a matter of residency instead. Those categories are now named as "XXX from Foo" such that it is strictly based on residency. I'd like to propose that we create categories that are based on ancestral homes, specifically. Any suggestions on how to name them? --- Hong Qi Gong 16:14, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Chinese, not China
The article describes the phenomenon as being in "Chinese" societies rather than "China". Such societies exist outside of China. Also "China" has POV issues because the article talks about Taiwan. The article should be renamed to "Ancestral home (Chinese)". Readin (talk) 06:14, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Looking at the history of the page I see that "China" was included in the name only recently and without discussion so I went ahead and made the move. Readin (talk) 06:20, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
 * This move doesn't make sense. People who don't believe that Taiwan is part of China - Taiwan separatists - explicitly reject the idea of ancestral home, since the ancestral home is invariably in China (for everybody who isn't an aboriginie). It was a result of lobbying from these separatists (as well as discrimination against the mainlanders who used the system) that ancestral home was removed from identification documents. As for overseas Chinese, nobody would say that Vancouver or San Francisco is their "Chinese ancestral home", because these places are not in China. Shrigley (talk) 23:19, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
 * So an ancestoral home cannot be in Taiwan? Many people's families have lived in Taiwan for so long they don't know when (or if) their ancestors came from China.  Also, the article itself says that at least in some usages "it refers to the home of one's great-great-grandfather" and for a lot (perhaps most) of Taiwanese that's puts their ancestoral home in Taiwan. Readin (talk) 04:19, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
 * In the Taiwan context, "ancestral home" invariably refers to some place in Fujian or Guangdong for those Hokkiens who migrated during the Ming Dynasty. That's why there was such a big deal about the opening of the Three Links of cross-strait travel: if ancestral home expired after two or three generations, you would not have non-mainlander Taiwanese flocking to Fujian to establish ancestral shrines, which they did en masse. Keeping a geneology book for your male-line ancestors is a practice of the culture of China, and had a cultural-political use of keeping on the margins cohesive and loyal to Zhongyuan.


 * This article is wrong in the sense that "ancestral home" is not just shorthand for "oh my grandpappy came from Taichung". Han migration to Taiwan was fairly recent, as it was in Heilongjiang or Penang, so the island doesn't have that "ancestral" legitimacy from a China culturalist viewpoint. Of course this is somewhat relative, since during the Han Dynasty, Han settlers in Guangdong would consider their ancestral home somewhere further north. But I must stress that those Taiwanese who only identify with Taiwan don't use this ancestral home concept. It's hard to find a single source that explicitly says that an ancestral home cannot be in Taiwan, but that is the unspoken treatment of "ancestral home" in the sources that I have read. Shrigley (talk) 17:29, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

It seems obvious we need to get some reliable sources for this article or else we need to nominate it for deletion. Assuming we do keep it (I think the concept is certainly notable), why would using "(China)" be better than using "(Chinese)"? It sounds like you're saying the two terms are equivalent. If that's the case why change back to a name that quite a few people would find misleading? Readin (talk) 20:24, 10 December 2012 (UTC)