Talk:Guangzhou/Archive 3

Including traditional name and Pinyin name in title
Because the origin of the name "Canton" in English as well as other European languages can be traced back to the 15th century, well preceded any formal romanization methods for Chinese, and due to its wide usage prior to 1970s, it is necessary to list both Canton and Guangzhou in the title. Melop (talk) 23:55, 15 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Why? What policy or guideline or manual of style or naming convention suggests that that is how to address such an issue? There is no necessity for the title of an article to reflect previous names of the subject. older ≠ wiser 23:58, 15 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Agree. Look at Mumbai. It's not Mumbai (Bombay). -- Neil N    talk  ♦  contribs  00:01, 16 November 2009 (UTC)


 * But also see how Rome, Athens, Naples, Macao & Hongkong not being listed under Roma, Athenae, Napoli, Aomen and Xianggang. Naming convention should not be treated rigid and should allow users to locate entries with ease. Listed both names in title will allow ease of search. Redirection is an inappropriate way to handle this situation, because it implies what's written in the title is a more proper way to express the concept instead of the keyword chosen by the user. The problem here is associated with the sociopsychological condition of the people of Canton who wishes to maintain the conventional usage as oppose to adopting a mandarin romanization for their city's name. Using "Guangzhou" only will render this party of opinion largely ignored. In order to achieve a balance between the two views and thus maintain a neutral stance, both names should be listed in the title. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Melop (talk • contribs) 00:20, 16 November 2009 (UTC)


 * The articles you cited do not have their "old" or local names as part of the article title. However, I have no objection to Canton being added to the infobox below Guangzhou. -- Neil N   talk  ♦  contribs  00:26, 16 November 2009 (UTC)


 * For synonyms under contention listed simultaneously in title, see Cantonese (Yue).Melop (talk) 01:03, 16 November 2009 (UTC)


 * @Melop First, where is the evidence that the city is more commonly known today as Canton than Guangzhou? Second, why is redirection inappropriate? That is precisely where redirection is correct? Again, what is the evidence users might be unable to find the article if Canton is not part of the title? What is this supposed sociopsychological condition of the people of Canton? Is that verifiable? older ≠ wiser 00:31, 16 November 2009 (UTC)


 * For advocacy of resurrection of the English name "Canton" by the people of Canton, see http://big5.xinhuanet.com/gate/big5/news.xinhuanet.com/fortune/2006-11/02/content_5282023.htm. Also see this paper : http://www.rddlzz.com/admin/downfile.aspx?id=3689. Melop (talk) 01:03, 16 November 2009 (UTC)


 * If Melop can show that Canton is in common use then I think it should be part of the infobox, following the style of Mumbai and Rome. -- Neil N   talk  ♦  contribs  00:35, 16 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Google returns 4,510,000 results for "Guangzhou", and 6,550,000 for "Canton". The latter, of course, might include toponyms named after Canton, China. For advocacy of resurrection of the English name "Canton" by the people of Canton, see http://big5.xinhuanet.com/gate/big5/news.xinhuanet.com/fortune/2006-11/02/content_5282023.htm. Also see this paper : http://www.rddlzz.com/admin/downfile.aspx?id=3689. Melop (talk) 01:03, 16 November 2009 (UTC)


 * You all forget about Dairen (Dalian), Pekin (Beijing), Nanking (Nanjing), Chungking (Chongqing), Dihua (Ürümqi), etc. "Canton" is no longer official in English plus Canton is already mention in the article. Rome is different because Roma is the native name in Italian not sure about Mumbai. Be I do know Pekin is very common in Europe but it is not use in the infobox. —  ASDFGH =]  talk? 00:39, 16 November 2009 (UTC)


 * The toponyms you mentioned emerged at least 1 century later than Canton (see the above paper I cited), and the two spellings are different merely in romanization schemes but same in etymology. However, as Macao, Canton came from a different etymology than "Guangzhou", making it difficult to recognize. The official name for Hongkong is Xianggang, and that for Macao is Aomen. One should alter these two entries too. Melop (talk) 01:03, 16 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Do you have a link to a well-recognized English atlas that shows these names? Also, referring to what you posted above, Wikipedia does not list what advocates want, it lists placenames according to what appears in current reliable sources. -- Neil N   talk  ♦  contribs  01:12, 16 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Could you refer me to this wikipedia policy? But how about its policy of Neutral point of view?


 * I think the Bombay-Mumbai situation parallels this one. Mumbai was the local term, Bombay the English one, used it atlases. A few years ago, the city "officially" changed its English name to Mumbai to match what the locals called it. -- Neil N   talk  ♦  contribs  00:48, 16 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Oh yeah, I forgot "Gwong Zau" is the local language (Cantonese) name in Romanization.— ASDFGH =]  talk? 00:58, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Exactly, that's why people of Canton are unsatisfied with the name "Guangzhou", which is neither the pronunciation of the locals nor the conventional name of the city in English. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Melop (talk • contribs) 01:06, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
 * But, I hope you know "Canton" is not even local language at all. In the PRC all non-autonomous cities names uses pinyin are official. —  ASDFGH =]  talk? 01:14, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Please read my contribution on the etymology of Canton. It has an etymology in Cantonese.

National Geographic lists the place name as Guangzhou, with Canton appearing below in a smaller font. This is a reliable source. -- Neil N   talk  ♦  contribs  01:41, 16 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Your source is indeed a prove of Canton being used as a synonym in a modern English atlas. Does the smaller font mean Canton is "subordinate" to "Guangzhou"? It is merely a way to list the synonym according to appearance of time. The junior synonym is listed above the senior synonym. If you search "Beijing" in the same map, would it show "pekin" under "Beijing"? Try "Dalian" and "Urumqi" too. Furthermore, it also display Amoy for Xiamen, suggesting that the entry for Xiamen should be renamed Amoy (Xiamen). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Melop (talk • contribs) 02:39, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, the smaller font denotes the secondary, not primary name. Therefore, the article is correctly named Guangzhou. -- Neil N    talk  ♦  contribs  02:50, 16 November 2009 (UTC)


 * I disagree. Please give reference to your claim. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Melop (talk • contribs) 02:58, 16 November 2009 (UTC) . Please also justify the reason why Pekin is not listed under Beijing, why Napoli not listed under Naples, why Roma not under Rome in National Geographics. Melop (talk) 03:01, 16 November 2009 (UTC) What's more, listing BOTH names follows the convention of your source. Why only one name should appear in the title?


 * Common sense I suppose. You still haven't provided any current source that lists Canton at the top. Napoli and Roma were never used widely in English.  Bombay was and that's why it's listed under Mumbai now. It's pointless arguing unless you can provide some sources that the English speaking world regards Canton as the primary official name. -- Neil N    talk  ♦  contribs  03:18, 16 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Which guideline explicits that only when a city's name is "at the top", or "by common sense it's "primary"" can it be included in the title? National Geographic listing both names for the city is the best prove that both names should be included in this wikipedia title.


 * For what I know Han Chinese cities in PRChina have rules how to name cities articles readNaming conventions (Chinese) it very well established Hanyu Pinyin are only used in Han Chinese cities.— ASDFGH =]  talk? 03:09, 16 November 2009 (UTC)


 * I strongly urge you not to over-interpret guidelines as laws: "These conventions are guidelines only, and there are examples of exceptions, so please use your discretion. As always, all discussion is welcome on the talk page." Canton is obviously such exception which has been fully explained in the article. It has also been proved by the National Geographic map provided by Nei1N, in which Pekin, Roma, Napoli are not listed under Beijing, Rome and Naples, but Canton is listed as a synonym as Guangzhou. I am not opposing the usage of Guangzhou, because I intended to list BOTH synonyms in the title. Listing Canton in the article's title only adds clarity to this language version of wikipedia instead of "breaking the rule". —Preceding unsigned comment added by Melop (talk • contribs) 03:15, 16 November 2009 (UTC)


 * As of now the rules are

"Mainland China place names should be in Hanyu Pinyin. Place names in Hong Kong, Macau, Taiwan, and overseas (such as Singapore) should be romanized in whatever way is commonly used for those places. Same goes for non-Han Chinese place names. So use Hohhot, Kashgar, and Shigatse, not Huhehaote, Kashi and Rikaze. (呼和浩特、喀什、日喀则)"


 * The guideline does NOT prohibit listing synonyms in addition to Pinyin names in title. Melop (talk) 03:33, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

As NeilN mention "the smaller font denotes the secondary, not primary name." — ASDFGH =]  talk? 03:22, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
 * But is does not justified "Canton (Guangzhou)." — ASDFGH =]  talk? 03:26, 16 November 2009 (UTC)


 * There's no consensus to do that and I've explained why Roma and Napoli don't appear in the atlas. You've already broken WP:3RR - any further reverts will be looked upon dimly by admins. -- Neil N    talk  ♦  contribs  03:26, 16 November 2009 (UTC)


 * "Canton" is already mention on the article it does not need to be the name of the article it also clarity the name "Canton" in the introduction which is a secondary name. — ASDFGH =]  talk? 03:33, 16 November 2009 (UTC)


 * I do not see any sentence in the article implying Canton to be a "secondary name" of the city. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Melop (talk • contribs) 03:39, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
 * By the way I don't see "Roma (Rome)," "Napoli(Naples)," nor "Bombay (Mumbai)."— ASDFGH =]  talk? 03:42, 16 November 2009 (UTC)


 * In the National geographics map provided by Nei1N, Roma and Napoli are not listed with Rome and Naples at all. Therefore the titles for these cities are appropriate in wikipedia. Nevertheless, this map listed Bombay as synonym of Mumbai, suggesting that listing Bombay in the title might be appropriate. Nevertheless, it depends on data on the sociopsycology of the people of mumbai on nomenclature of their city. If reference can be found on disagreement, Bombay (Mumbai) can be adopted to reach balance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Melop (talk • contribs) 03:55, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
 * First of all there is only one source not multiply sources/evidences claiming "Guangzhou (Canton)" find more source first another thing Guangzhou is currently the official name not Canton. "Guangzhou" is official since the PRC adopted Hanyu Pinyin in 1982. —  ASDFGH =]  talk? 04:16, 16 November 2009 (UTC)


 * The Romans invented the Latin alphabet 2000 years ago. Since then Roma has been spelled as Roma, not Rome. Why not make Rome more "official"? Please explicit the wikipedia guideline for forbidding listing a well-established English name written together with the name adopted by the country's current government in the title. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Melop (talk • contribs) 04:25, 16 November 2009 (UTC)


 * "Rome" is official in English name even the the Italian official Rome Tourism website writes "Rome" on its title in the English version but not in Roma compare to the Italian version (Roma) . —  ASDFGH =]  talk? 04:46, 16 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes, because the Italian government respects the established English use. But what if they change it to "Roma"? So the ENGLISH wikipedia version should also use "Roma"? Listing both alternative names could not be worse than listing only one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Melop (talk • contribs) 05:11, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
 * According to the current article it lists both alternative names "Guangzhou" and "Canton" also a bonus "Kwangchow" in the introduction. Case closed.— ASDFGH =]  talk? 05:39, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
 * "Kwangchow" was a much less used romanization for the city. It is why this name was not used by National Geographics. Kwangchow is merely a rominization as Guangzhou, which did not enter the English lexicon as did Canton. Obviously, consensus cannot be reached.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Melop (talk • contribs) 05:47, 16 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Please read it again has both "Guangzhou" and "Canton" also "Kwangchow" was official during ROC era in Mainland based on Wade–Giles rominization. That clearly shows all the alternate names including "Canton."— ASDFGH =]  talk? 05:57, 16 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Neither Guangzhou nor Canton were based on Wade-Giles. "Kwangchou" was. Canton was a romanization brought to Europe by the Portuguese in circ. early 1500. It had entered the English, as well as other European languages' lexica well before 1800. Therefore, Canton can be treated as a native English word as "Rome" and "Naples". Please also refer to the wikipedia versions of other European languages. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Melop (talk • contribs) 06:03, 16 November 2009 (UTC)


 * More source on Guangzhou for its Official English name— ASDFGH =]  talk? 04:46, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Yahoo Local Maps: Guangzhou only
 * Google Maps: Guangzhou only
 * Multimap from bing: Guangzhou only |11|4&bd=useful_information
 * Mapquest: Guangzhou only
 * CIA- The World Factbook: Guangzhou only


 * But search of "Canton, China" in google returned 10,400,000 results while "Guangzhou, China" returned only half - 5,270,000. Compare Bombay, India - 5,020,000; Mumbai, India - 20,600,000. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Melop (talk • contribs) 05:58, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Try "Guangzhou" - 16,300,000 but you can't get the same result with "Canton" because of multiple cities with the same name.— ASDFGH =]  talk? 06:07, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Even if you use "Guangzhou" vs. "Canton, China", you'll see that they do not diverge much: 1.56:1. But if you compare Mumbai, India vs. Bombay, India, you'll have 4.1:1.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Melop (talk • contribs) 06:23, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Okay but it does not really matter read No original research find real sources first. — ASDFGH =]  talk? 06:29, 16 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Canton, California
 * Canton, Connecticut
 * Canton, Georgia
 * Canton, Illinois
 * Canton, Iowa
 * Canton, Kansas
 * Canton, Maine
 * Canton, Baltimore, Maryland, a neighborhood and park
 * Canton, Massachusetts
 * Canton, Michigan
 * Canton, Minnesota
 * Canton, Mississippi


 * Canton, Missouri
 * Canton (town), New York
 * Canton (village), New York
 * Canton, North Carolina
 * Canton City, North Dakota
 * Canton, Ohio
 * Canton, Oklahoma
 * Canton, Pennsylvania
 * Canton, South Dakota
 * Canton, Texas
 * Canton Township (disambiguation)


 * See WP:NOR. You still have provided no sources. -- Neil N    talk  ♦  contribs  06:06, 16 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Neither Guangzhou nor Canton were based on Wade-Giles. "Kwangchou" was. Canton was a romanization brought to Europe by the Portuguese in circ. early 1500. It had entered the English, as well as other European languages' lexica well before 1800. Therefore, Canton can be treated as a native English word as "Rome" and "Naples". Please also refer to the wikipedia versions of other European languages. There was no "official names" during the ROC period. English conventions were followed. The only official name of the city now, is 廣州/广州, written in Chinese characters and independent of pronunciation. Hanyu Pinyin is used by the Chinese government to spell place names. But it has no power to turn over the established English name. If official names are strictly followed, China should be more appropriately called Zhongguo, of course, with the characters beside. Have you realized that many of these Cantons in the U.S. are named after Canton, China? Without listing Canton for the original city, the etymology for these U.S. cities will largely be blurred.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Melop (talk • contribs) 06:13, 16 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Still no sources. Without providing anything besides your own opinion that Canton is equally as official as Guangzhou in the English-speaking word today, no one is going to agree to your proposed change. -- Neil N   talk  ♦  contribs  06:24, 16 November 2009 (UTC)


 * I have never claimed that Canton is "as official as Guangzhou". You have not provided any information on wikipedia's guideline on city names should only contain an "official name". And you have never provided information on the definition of "official". I claim, however, Canton is in wide usage in English, which I had demonstrated by the search data from google. A wide and established usage constitute its placement in the title. Another information to consider: The Baiyun international airport of the city is abbreviated as CAN, short for Canton.


 * Point to another article which has two place names in the title not required for disambiguation purposes. And I don't know how many times I have to say this so I'm going to yell: You have provided NO sources which are not original research. -- Neil N   talk  ♦  contribs  06:46, 16 November 2009 (UTC)


 * First, also look at some the airports exist that was assign with IATA airport code before Hanyu Pinyin was created


 * Beijing Capital International Airport - PEK = Pekin
 * Qingdao Liuting International Airport - TAO = Tsingtao
 * Chongqing Jiangbei International Airport - CKG = Chungking

All the pre-existing Hanyu pinyin name airport's IATA airport code has not been updated into Hanyu pinyin and the all the other "Canton" came from Canton (administrative division). — ASDFGH =]  talk? 07:02, 16 November 2009 (UTC)


 * ASDFGH had not cited correct etymology for the Canton cities in the US. For example Canton (town), New_York : "Canton is a town in St. Lawrence County, New York, USA. The population was 10,334 at the 2000 census.[1] The town contains two villages: one also named Canton, the other named *Rensselaer Falls. Canton is located near the center of the county. The town is named after Canton in China. " ; Canton, Ohio : "Bezaleel Wells, the surveyor who divided the land of the town, named it after Canton, China. The name was a memorial to a trader named John O'Donnell, whom Wells admired. O'Donnell had named his Maryland plantation after the Chinese city, as he had been the first person to transport goods from there to Baltimore." . As a matter of fact, canton (from Latin canthus) is rarely used as a geographical division in English speaking countries. Please check these US. names on their official website for etymology.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Melop (talk • contribs) 05:10, 17 November 2009 (UTC)


 * "Kwangchou" and Kwangchow" are Wade–Giles but the different is the time when it was romanize. "Canton" is Portuguese transliteration of "广东 / 廣東" not romanization, while "Guangzhou" is official romanization (Hanyu Pinyin) use today in the PRC. I noted that all the name are already listed in the introduction. So what you point it has all the name.— ASDFGH =]  talk? 06:19, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
 * ADSFGH had confused the concept of romanization and transliteration. Given that Chinese are not recorded in an alphabetical language, transliteration can never be performed. Cantão(masculine in gender) is romanized from 廣東 according to the Cantonese pronunciation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Melop (talk • contribs) 05:17, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Requesting for protection
Serious it getting annoying can any administrators lock the page for now?— ASDFGH =]  talk? 01:22, 16 November 2009 (UTC)


 * It's one user. I've reported him for edit warring. -- Neil N   talk  ♦  contribs  01:33, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Yguo50. Peer reviewers: Yguo50.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 22:49, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Administration section changes
I kinda like the former version of Administration divisions section before the changes, but the new one is nonetheless, informative too. Can someone merge the two? --LLTimes (talk) 00:12, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I'll try and see what I can do, but do not expect great speed in accomplishing the task. --HXL 何献龙 00:32, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh thanks! not so much about speed but if someone is willing to try then it's all good :) --LLTimes (talk) 00:57, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
 * ok great. what I am aiming at (and I will most likely require the assistance of others) is the re-integration of the "total by section"（如：市区，郊区，等）as well as moving the map from the hideous position it is in atm. although there isn't really any way to combine colours and numbers; it "defeats the purpose" and is pointless. --HXL 何献龙 02:11, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Not necessary merging the two image to one but I was thinking of putting both images together on this article.--LLTimes (talk) 22:08, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
 * then that raises redundancy concerns... --HXL 何献龙 23:44, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Merging into mega-city
From the telegraph China to create largest mega city in the world with 42 million people. 24 Jan 2011:
 * China is planning to create the world's biggest mega city by merging nine cities to create a metropolis twice the size of Wales with a population of 42 million.


 * City planners in south China have laid out an ambitious plan to merge together the nine cities that lie around the Pearl River Delta. The "Turn The Pearl River Delta Into One" scheme will create a 16,000 sq mile urban area that is 26 times larger geographically than Greater London, or twice the size of Wales. The new mega-city will cover a large part of China's manufacturing heartland, stretching from Guangzhou to Shenzhen and including Foshan, Dongguan, Zhongshan, Zhuhai, Jiangmen, Huizhou and Zhaoqing. Together, they account for nearly a tenth of the Chinese economy. Over the next six years, around 150 major infrastructure projects will mesh the transport, energy, water and telecommunications networks of the nine cities together, at a cost of some 2 trillion yuan (£190 billion). An express rail line will also connect the hub with nearby Hong Kong.

Is this true? Yosh3000 (talk) 22:54, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, no. See here. What was actually proposed was functional integration of the said cities rather than a merge of administrative divisions. Kxx (talk | contribs) 08:28, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

First sentence of lede
"What was polemical about referring to it as a sub-provincial city? seems like relevant information" Yes, it is clearly relevant; more important facts are relevant, too. So that's not the issue here. For example, in the current version of the lede of Beijing, or any of the other three municipalities (Tianjin, Shanghai, Chongqing) we don't begin immediately with "is a direct-controlled municipality" or something similar. We refer to what those cities are best known for. Regardless of that, the fact that Guangzhou is the provincial capital of Guangdong is far more well-known than the fact that it is a sub-provincial city. -- HXL's Roundtable  and  Record  05:09, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Then wouldn't it make more sense to re-order the first sentence rather than removing the info completely? Or did I miss something and you did do that? Heimstern Läufer (talk) 05:25, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Taking a side interpretation of your wording, I did not remove the info completely. It is still in the lede... Besides, many more city articles begin immediately for what the city is best known for, e.g. the Washington, DC article and those four municipality articles I gave you, though I had already altered the lede of the Chongqing article.


 * And BTW, I had originally mis-used "polemical". I am a high school student, and still have many things to learn, you know... -- HXL's Roundtable  and  Record  05:33, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Ah, it does not. I misread your edit. The diff was kind of hard to read when it came up. Anyway, I've mostly reverted back to yours now that I see. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 09:27, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Remove lists of secondary schools and international schools?
I do not see that secondary schools and international schools quite meet the bar of importance for inclusion in this page. The international schools are certainly less notable. As for the secondary schools, there are just too many of them in the city to make any particular one stand out in a page about the city. These two lists also kinda attract indiscriminate addition of entries. They are of little interest to the general audience as well. Kxx (talk | contribs) 22:32, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
 * This list problem is common to many city articles, and Shanghai is perhaps the clear exception. We should purge these lists on the main articles and create "List of schools in X". I posted a similar thread on the talk for WikiProject China but no one responded. &mdash; HXL's Roundtable  and  Record  00:27, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I have removed the lists per WP:BOLD. Kxx (talk | contribs) 06:26, 28 May 2011 (UTC)