Talk:Beijing Consensus

Does not explain
Nice starting page. However, the article needs to actually explain what it is. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sinophile21992 (talk • contribs) 15:03, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Terminology
"Third-world" was a term used in the cold-war. It is not correctly used in context in the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.24.40.3 (talk) 10:36, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Change the Title "Chinese Model"
The title should change to "Chinese Model" since it doesn't only represent Beijing.Marxistfounder (talk) 16:41, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

Research Updates
I am going to add in here a few citations and areas of research that are part of the academic literature on this subject, but which have not been included here yet. This includes (1) an understanding of Beijing Consensus that focuses not only on economic growth, but also equitable social growth, (2) two paragraphs detailing policy innovation and experimentation within the Beijing Consensus, which are fundamental characteristics of its makeup, and (3) a short paragraph detailing some research that has been done regarding Chinese public opinion of the Beijing Consensus. PoliSci1618 (talk) 01:51, 18 November 2022 (UTC)


 * You added only citations to Reza Hasmath, which has been a long term issue across Wikipedia, where a series of short term accounts have shown up to do only this. Can you explain what your connection to Hasmath and/or those other editors is? MrOllie (talk) 14:01, 18 November 2022 (UTC)