Talk:Hong Kong Kids phenomenon

Regarding this article
"allow them to learn life self-care skills from daily life like buttoning shirts, tying shoe laces and feeding themselves" is this a joke? I'm not from Hong Kong (Not even from East Asia), but this can't be correct. Redflorist (talk) 19:48, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Redirect
I have redirected Hong Kong children here because this article is better sourced and gives more information. The article I'm replacing with a redirect is mostly a strangely-formatted laundry list of complaints about young people with most of the references being written in Chinese and often misused. That said, it does mention a book by Wong Ming Lok and an event in London Heathrow airport and these might be included in the article. Gary (talk) 20:32, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, I see your point about the previous Hong Kong children article. I did move the info about the book over, looks good. Thanks for the mention.-- CaroleHenson  ( talk ) 16:24, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Proposed merge with Hong Kong Kids phenomenon
Clearly the topic(s) are related or talking about the same thing entirely, so one needs to be merged into the other. Raykyogrou0 ( Talk ) 07:25, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Yes, you're right. It looks as if they should be merged.-- CaroleHenson  ( talk ) 14:58, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
 * One page that redirects to the Hong Kong Kids Phenomenon article is "Hong Kong children", the most recent edit prior to the redirect being this one. It's not exactly the same but there are a lot of similarities. I made the redirect. I think it would be a good idea to merge the articles. Gary (talk) 02:21, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Notability/tone?
This is the meanest article ever, haha. It's just roasting the entire youth population of Hong Kong, it's not really encyclopaedic at all. I think it either needs to be cut down drastically to reduce bias or deleted. Yannaynay (talk) 01:00, 4 May 2016 (UTC) Listed for deletion Yannaynay (talk) 01:24, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

This is a remarkably poor-quality article, lacking any science (even social science) and full of slurs. It adds nothing to Wikipedia. Magnabonzo (talk) 15:09, 9 October 2019 (UTC) This article is racist twards aisians and should be removed.

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Hong Kong Kids phenomenon. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131202223828/http://edu.sina.com.hk/news/42/4/1/77629/1.html to http://edu.sina.com.hk/news/42/4/1/77629/1.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 17:44, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

Is this really specific to hong kong
I have never been to hong kong in my life so i might be missing some important context here, but small humans born relatively recently that are dependant on caregivers, have low emotional intelligence and weak self-management skills are not unique to hong kong, children, as they're called, are found all over the world, and they've known to be self centered, and have short tempers

I don't think the fact that there are kids in hong kong in worth an entire wikipedia page, and that the reason that in 2009 only kids born after 1990 were acting like children, is that those born before 1990 were not children anymore Jele155 (talk) 15:12, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

Deletion?
Like others have said, this is such an exceptionally poor quality article that it reads more like lore for a fictional universe than serious documentation of sociological phenomenon that it either needs to be rewritten from the ground up or deleted to be compliant with Wikipedia's standards. Chemistmenace (talk) 05:11, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

Agreeing with deletion
This article seems to provide one-sided coverage of an internecine dispute. As many others have said, it is not suitable for an encyclopedia and should be deleted. What is the procedure for this? Aurodea108 (talk) 03:21, 8 August 2023 (UTC)


 * You may nominate the article for deletion at Articles for deletion. WP:AFDHOWTO explains the process for doing this. Carter00000 (talk) 08:20, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Ping Chemistmenace from above section. Carter00000 (talk) 08:23, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
 * The original page read as if it was a well-established phenomenon, which happened to have a derogatory term. I've rewritten the page so it's describing the derogatory term (with no scientific basis as far as I could find) and its use in the media.
 * I think it's better, but I'm new to this whole thing so I'd like it if someone with more experience could revisit the page and check if it's now worth something, or if it should still be deleted. For example @Aurodea108 Wranks Yoga (talk) 13:59, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
 * It does appear to be a notable improvement in the tone, coming more to a neutral description of what the term refers to. Time will tell whether this term exists long enough to warrant an encyclopedia article explaining it. Aurodea108 (talk) 00:26, 7 May 2024 (UTC)