Talk:CCP (disambiguation)

Canadian Conservative Party?
I'm pretty sure it's the Conservative Party of Canada (CPC). At least, the current one (governing party) is.
 * Same for the Communist Party of China. (http://cpc.people.com.cn/) --Explosivo (talk) 09:16, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Code of Civil Procedure
I think that someone shoud add this, I original visited this page to fint it, but it want there Bergen005 (talk) 10:02, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Requested move 3 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 there's consensus that CCP is a WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT to Chinese Communist Party. (non-admin closure)  –  City Urbanism   🗩   🖉  11:07, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

CCP → CCP (disambiguation) – Proposing that the current page CCP be moved to a disambiguating page and that Chinese Communist Party becomes the WP:PRIMARY topic. In the English speaking world, the Chinese Communist Party is extremely commonly referred to as the CCP. Let's start with Google results. A Google Search of "CCP" without mentioning "China" or "Communist" returns 30 million results, while only results with "China" returns 11 million results. Removing the quotation marks around CCP returns 160 million results.This search for CCP "china" returns nearly 50 million results. Let's move on to the media. English-language sources from nearly all media outside of CCP-controlled China itself refer to the Communist Party as the CCP. Sources from the Americas are generally common in their usage of CCP, ranging from Fox News, the WSJ, the AP, Reuters, CNN, Mother Jones, Democracy Now, CNBC, and CBC. In Europe, Deutsche Welle, France24, the BBC, and RT all also use CCP. In Asia, not only does the obviously anti-mainland Taipei Times use CCP as well, but so does the Hindustan Times, NHK, Al Jazeera, and even Hong Kong's SCMP. A primary move is the right move for the Wikipedia community considering the ubiquity of CCP's referral to the Chinese Communist Party in our language today. Support or oppose them, there is no denying that this acronym is the most popular of them all to refer to the leading party in mainland China.  Invading Invader  (userpage, talk) 20:24, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Strong support - this is the most powerful political party on the planet, and it's not even close. There's nothing else on the dab page that even remotely compares. It's an easy TLA winner. Red   Slash  03:35, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Support By pageviews and importance, I don't see an alternate believable primary topic. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 10:35, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
 * The usage is unclear . Only about a third of visits to the dab page result in a clickthrough for the proposed primary topic. However, if only those views are taken into account that result in any click at all, then the ratio is somewhere in the range 67-87%. – Uanfala (talk) 14:42, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
 * That's a pretty good ratio, tbf Red   Slash  23:37, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
 * In the absence of any other considerations, a figure of 87% would support a primary topic in the opinion of most, though not all, editors. 67% would probably be enough for more than half of editors. Very few would support based on 35%. – Uanfala (talk) 10:02, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Support. I think it is believable most people on this page would want this topic. I don't think it is too shocking that many people arrive on CCP without click, since we can only judge based on the clicks we have available, it says this is probably WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. --Quiz shows 12:02, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Oppose. It's not actually that commonly seen as an abbreviation and is certainly not universally known. Too many entries under CCP for this to be made primary unless it's massively well-known, and it isn't. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:14, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
 * wait, WHAT?
 * the CCP isn't massively well-known??
 * bruh
 * I would have to say that the fact that nobody has even offered the tiniest suggestion as to what other uses might be even a hundredth as influential as the Chinese Communist Party. This is a runaway on long-term educational significance even without the dominant victory in pageviews. The party is nearly as crushingly dominant over any other contenders to CCP as it is over real-life protestors. Red   Slash  23:12, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
 * the CCP isn't massively well-known?? I'm sure you're really very much aware that I was referring to the abbreviation CCP and not the Chinese Communist Party itself! -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:40, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
 * With all due respect, I think that the sources I've provided above provide sufficient evidence that the Chinese Communist Party is known as the CCP from a variety of viewpoints across the world. I can see where you're coming from when there are so many organizations known as the CCP, but your argument would start to lose its soundness with the sources I've provided in the initial comment. I don't think you're trying to say that the Chinese Communist Party isn't well known, but if that is what you're trying to say, you might want to trout yourself.  Invading Invader  (userpage, talk) 23:46, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Clearly it was not what I was trying to say. And I said it in perfectly plain English. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:42, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Oppose The threshold for TLAs is high, and this one falls short. I'll also note that "Communist Party of China"/"CPC" are widely used.  The article itself was at Communist Party of China until 2020; and I'm not so sure that the community got it right when it chose to rename it. 162 etc. (talk) 17:17, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
 *  Strong support. Alongside the CCP being a very well known political party, the clickstream shows ~ 85% of the outgoing clicks going to the party. (I'm not quite sure why i said strong 9 hrs ago... { {ping&#124;ClydeFranklin }} (t/c) 06:27, 11 April 2023 (UTC) { {ping&#124;ClydeFranklin }} (t/c) 21:00, 10 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.