Talk:Peking University/Archive 1

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 28 March 2019 and 8 May 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): ZoeWZY.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 06:19, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

I have a better DaXueTang picture than the one in the page
But I don't know how to upload it. The following is the address. May someone help me to upload it? http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=198069819&size=s

There's no such thing as "Peking University". of 1.29 billion chinese, if you are one, you'd be the first to refer to Beijing as Peking. The pronunciation is still the same, take into account the vo wel shift which happened half a millenia prior


 * Peking University has decided that its English name will remain "Peking University", regardless of the correct name in Chinese (which is indeed Beijing Daxue). The university's website uses Peking. -- Vardion 05:58, 27 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * And their official seal still uses "Peking University." Folks refer to it also as Beijing University, but I believe Vardion is correct. Fuzheado | Talk 07:43, 27 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * According to the joint meeting held by the University Commissions and Beijing Sangxia Advertising Co. Ltd. on Aug. 25th 2006, the university will begin to use University of Beijing as the formal English name instead of Peking University.Endeneon 05:35, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

I don't think that Peking University is adequately described as "private". Babelfisch, November 3rd, 2004

Shouldn't 京師大學堂 be translated as "Capital University" rather than "Metropolitan University"?

Private vs. Public
Technically, there were no "private" schools in the People's Republic of China between 1949 and 1990s. They were fully supported by the government, and they were totally free to students, which meant students did not need to pay any tuition and lodging, as dormitory rooms were provided to all students free of charge. All the costs the students had to pay were board (meals), textbooks and other supplies for school work. And a certain percent of the students could get need-based financial support which was sometimes enough to cover the board. The university dining rooms in early 1980s provided great quality meals with minimal cost which was much lower than that of restaurants. So, all the schools during this period were "public".

As the 20th century approached its fin de siecle, China also advanced further in capitalization along its "socialist road with Chinese characteristics". And private schools emerged during this period. These private schools are completely independent of the government in finance and derive their revenue entirely from tuitions of the students, and they usually do not have adequate faculty and facilities, but they charge a fortune to get into, and it is, therefore, the last choice for prospective students to go to these private schools. And their students are usually those who failed in the annual National College Entrance Examination. In China, one must pass this examination to go to a public school. Those who have the privilege to be admitted by Peking University, the Harvard of China, and Tsinghua University, the MIT of China, are those who score the highest in the national examination.

Meanwhile, the previously free public schools, including Peking University and Tsinghua University, started to charge tuitions and various fees on their students, first moderately, and then exorbitantly. Now, the size of a tuition is positively proportional to the reputation of a school.

If the GDP per capita of China is still not comparable to that of Europe and North America, its tuitions relative to its GDP per capita has certainly far surpassed their Western counterparts. As a consequence, many intellectually qualified prospective students have to give up their chances to go to the top universities and opt for a lesser one or even give up the idea of going to a college.

This is not too much of a concern, however, of top universities such as Peking University and Tsinghua University. Because of the immense population of China, there is a vast base of prospective students to choose from, and the top universities can usually find enough students that are both intelligent and rich without too much discount on the quality of students.

- Well just one little comment on the part regarding tuition fees, which is erroneous to a large extent. The tuition fee for a regular bachelor program in Beida or Tsinghua, or any other ordinary university is less than 1000 USD per year, which is absolutely affordable to most Chinese families. Even if you can't afford it, the university always offers you a solution like scholarships, aids, or student loads. The cases where you have to drop out because of financial causes are very unlikely to happen. Comparatively, the tuition fee standard is much lower, no matter nominal or considering purchase power, than that of US or UK. Zuk7602 (talk) 06:04, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Peking University vs. Beijing University
This debate is similar to the one conerning Tsinghua University vs. Qinghua University.

Although the university authority is the ultimate arbitor over what spelling to use, it is technically an anachronism to insist on the old Peking in its name. As long as the university uses this outdated spelling, confusions will continue to arise. As of now, 28% percent of the googled entries of Peking/Beijing University used Beijing instead of Peking.

If the city of Beijing has successfully shifted to the new spelling from Peking in a short period of time, so can the two universities. --Roland 00:42, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

You are presuming that they want to. It seems that you are trying to dictate to them what they should call themselves. Bathrobe 07:19, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

A friend of mine is a faculty member at the university. According to her the official name in English is Peking University and not Beijing University. This was a conscious decision so as to respect the school's old tradition and (more importantly) to avoid confusion with Beijing Normal University and other institutions. Unfortunately, many hyper-correct persons writing in English improperly change the English to Beijing University, but this is an error. —Klompje7 21:40, 4 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Maybe an error technically, but it is not more erroneous than the "conscious decision" which is destined to cause errors and confusions in the future. Unless a historical note, such as the one at the beginning of the article, is attached to each occurance of "Peking University", people will invariably get confused with the question: "Is this an outdated spelling due to the oversight of the writer?" --Roland 20:02, 7 August 2006 (UTC)


 * that is beside the point. To call it "Beijing University" in English is wrong and against the wishes of the univeristy. Need evidence, look at their logo. Klompje7 08:54, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

I attended Peking University. Everyone knows the school as Beida or PKU.


 * It's called "tradition". Other "anachronisms" exist all over the world. What about the 1st Cavalry Division of the US Army? The Grenadier Guards? --Sumple (Talk) 02:41, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

This debate will be finally solved. According to the joint meeting held by the University Commissions and Beijing Sangxia Advertising Co. Ltd. on Aug. 20th 2006, the university will begin to use The University of Beijing as the formal English name instead of Peking University.Endeneon 05:36, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Is there any information concerning when this change will take effect (or if it already has taken effect)? I assume we would want to move this page to University of Beijing whenever that happens and note the name change in the article. Does anyone have any information on this? Heimstern Läufer 06:08, 28 August 2006 (UTC)


 * User:Endeneon has made a total of four edits, three of them on the talk page and the other changing Peking Univeristy to University of Beijing on the article page. With no citations or reputable sources to back it up, (and who on earth is Beijing Sangxia Advertising Co. Ltd.)... I don't think it should go on the page yet --Sumple (Ta.lk) 06:51, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I see (and read) the 163.com article. However, that article seems very ambiguous - it says that PKU will introduce a "new University logo" carrying the words "University of Beijing", but at the same time it says that "Peking University" and "PKU" are "recognised English names and abbreviations for the university" and that there was no reason to change these.
 * It would appear that the university would still be Peking University, but also marketed under the brand name of "University of Beijing". --Sumple (Talk) 09:50, 28 August 2006 (UTC)


 * In my opinion, it is wordy to call it University of Beijing, and it will continue to cause confusions: "Is it Beijing University or Peking University?" People would ask. Why not just Beijing Univesity, logical, clear and resounding? --198.119.145.102 20:56, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Because the university itself does not call itself this in English, nor does it plan to do so. They have said that the name they will use in English soon is "University of Beijing". Therefore, if and when this becomes official, I believe we should use this name. Until then, it should remain "Peking University". Also, I don't think "University of Beijing" is wordy; it only adds one two-letter word when compared to "Beijing University". Heimstern Läufer 21:43, 28 August 2006 (UTC)


 * If not wordy, why do they also need the shortened, or colloquial, form Beijing University as their announcement says?


 * [S]tudents in peking university are more willing to accept the traditional name than the never existing "new" names of "Beijing University" or "Univeristy of Beijing".There are too many universities in beijing whose english names initialed with "Beijing University of ....".we dont want to be asked if one day:"Pardon,are you from Beijing University of WHAT?"


 * (1) Your question is largely a product of your imagination; (2) If that question can indeed occur, people could still ask "Peking University of WHAT?" because they know "Peking" is just the outdated name of "Beijing"; (3) If by one out of a million chance someone asks that question, you can answer, "Just Beijing University"; (4) The name Peking University could give people the impression that it is not quite up to date, and it is left behind by at least thirty-plus years.
 * They want to be special and unique, which is fine, but chose an unnatural, illogical and error-prone way. --Roland 02:29, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

That's too ridiculous.Peking university is good enough.People should be more patient and careful with the names staff.You cant always ask others to change their names because you cant make it correct ,right? It's very basic .And it has been artiulated by an faculty from the foreign studies school that most false names appeared on the newspapers and TV programs are caused by the heedless characteristics of the chinese people. There are no Beijing University in official occasions.The Chinses name"北京大学"doesn't have to follow the name of beijing.We also have THE MUSEUM OF DR.SUN YAT-SEN and SUN YAT-SEN UNIVERSITY, there is no need to change them to THE MUSEUM OF DR.SUN ZHONG-SHAN,and SUN ZHONG-SHAN UNIVERSITY. i got news that the attempts to change new logos has been ceased. Ahrangg 21:36, 28 October 2006 (UTC)ahrangg


 * You do have the right to call yourself whatever you like, and you could call it, Gnikep University, for instance. But then you got to expect many confusions and errors as has been the case of Peking University, because it is not what follows naturally and logically. --Roland 02:05, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

[I] got to say it's stupid for the university council to think about another name.obviously the uni is governed by foolish ccp bureaucracies. when they dont give us lies ,they give stupid thinkings and talkings instead.


 * Please remember that it is not our purpose here to decide what the University should call itself; but rather to decide what our article should be called. I think it's pretty clear that it should be called "Peking University" as this is what the university calls itself in English and it is commonly used in English sources (even though "Beijing University" is also used. Heimstern Läufer 01:17, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

OK - everyone that never attended PKU please get the hell out of this debate. If you attended PKU you know its called Peking University or PKU. You know that every student refers to the university as PKU or Peking University. GOT IT?


 * Um, anyone may discuss the article's content here. This is not a place exclusively for PKU students. Heimstern Läufer 00:39, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Sure - but everything you say is garbage. You're saying you know a school better than people who actually ATTENDED PKU. That's kinda presumptuous. That's like me trying to write about Berlin just from crap I got from my buddy Goerthe.


 * PKU graduates may be experts on physics or mathematics, but not necessarily on names and their implications and complications, even their own university's name. The decision and the subsequent cancel of it to change its English name to The University of Beijing reflects the confusion and hesitation of even its authority. --Roland 09:21, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

What you say is baffling. Physics and Math have nothing to do with this conversation. My question is, how would people besides those that attend the university know more about the university than students and faculty of the university. To Roland - actually, I think your name is spelled incorrectly - it should be spelled Rowland. You might be an expert on whether its PKU or the University of Beijing, but I'm an expert of the name Rowland.

Look - stop arguing for the sake of arguing. It's been Peking University for years. The link I just saw is questionable at best. Show me something from xinhua or people's daily as opposed to 163.
 * I have removed the part about "University of Beijing", since it said that the new name would appear in 2006, and nothing of the sort has happened. I don't know if the University preferred to stick with the traditional name or what, but at any rate, it's still what's on their website and is evidently still what they use. So it must remain the article's title. Heimstern Läufer 05:00, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

An interesting piece from the The Economist dated 2010-11-11: Beijing or Peking? --Roland 20:28, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Freedom
Would someone prove, that there is freedom of research in humanities there? An university without freedom isn't a university. Xx236 10:55, 28 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Aye, a true scotsman. --Sumple (Talk) 11:48, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Spencer Ranking???
I looked up on google and many other search engines for more than 40 minutes looking for what Spencer Ranking system is. And I found Zero results. Freely revert my deletion if you can cite the sourse. Merumerume 06:44, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Ximen-1.jpg
Image:Ximen-1.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 12:26, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Motto?
For a university with such caliber & history, how come it doesn't even have a motto?! (or it's just not listed...) Anyone? TheAsianGURU (talk) 03:15, 4 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Peking University truly doesn't have a motto. Actually, not having a motto has become a kind of tradition for the university --119.118.232.251 (talk) 01:44, 22 July 2008 (UTC)kelsey was here--71.137.228.161 (talk) 01:36, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

merge Peking University Guqin Society into PKU?
Peking University Guqin Society should not be merged into Peking University, because there are too many student society in PKU.Topliuchao (talk) 09:50, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Chinese Classics Faculty Photo


Removed as I could find nowhere to place the photo where it looked right and did not mess up the references at the bottom like it did before. In retrospect, the pciture, unlike the others on the page at present, was of no real consequences (merely decoration?) and so I have removed the photo. The link is copied here, so anyone is welcome to try again. Thanks. DAFMM (talk) 13:39, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Notes on Chinese names
Vincenz Hundhausen (DE) was a professor of German at Peking University. His Chinese name is 洪濤生/洪涛生 Hóng Tāoshēng. Page 92 says Hundhausen also owned a publishing establishment called the Poplar Island Press (Pappelinsel-Werkstatt/楊樹島), located near the southwestern corner of the former Beijing city wall. Page 92 says he was a "masterly translator of Chinese drama and poetry" and edited and was responsible for several sonderausgaben (特刊) special issues of the Deustch-Chinesische Nachrichten. The page says that they included, on anniversaries of famous people, the famous peoples' articles, translations and texts to celebrate them("in memory of famous people"). Pages 92 and 93 list the people as 1932: Goethe, Spinoza, 1933: Wieland, 1934: Schiller, 1935: Humboldt, 1936: Platen, and Horace. They each had German and Chinese sections. Page 93 says "They were well illustrated" and "boasted excellent contributors from both sides"
 * Source: Walravens, Hartmut. "German Influence on the Press in China." - In: Newspapers in International Librarianship: Papers Presented by the Newspaper Section at IFLA General Conferences. Walter de Gruyter, January 1, 2003. ISBN 3110962799, 9783110962796.
 * Also available at (Archive) the website of the Queens Library - This version does not include the footnotes visible in the Walter de Gruyter version
 * Also available in Walravens, Hartmut and Edmund King. Newspapers in international librarianship: papers presented by the newspapers section at IFLA General Conferences. K.G. Saur, 2003. ISBN 3598218370, 9783598218378.
 * p. 92.

WhisperToMe (talk) 14:57, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Peking vs Beijing
This did not have any reliable sources and added speculations by the editor. -- Neil N   talk to me  17:00, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

History of Peking University
According to the article on Sir Robert Hart, 1st Baronet, he, together with "with the Manchu noble Aisin Gioro Yixin, better known as Prince Gong (恭親王, 1833–1898), established the Tongwen Guan (同文館, School of Combined Learning) in Peking in 1862..." which later became part of Imperial University and then Peking University. For example, Hart apparently appointed the Tongwen Guan's first head. I don't know enough about his role to write anything myself. It would be interesting but not totally surprising if a Westerner working for the Chinese government provided at least part of the impetus behind the founding of the first western-style university, and also not surprising that his role would later be obscured, deliberately or not. Comments? Evangeline (talk) 17:27, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Peking University Shenzhen Graduate School
Peking University Shenzhen Graduate School deserves a section on the Peking University page.

I feel that the Peking University page in itself does not do justice to how the institution. Since it is satellite campus, most people locate it through main campus resources namely the website and Peking University's Wikipedia page. The section on Shenzhen Graduate School occupies a lot of space on the page I agree but it seems big because the rest of the page itself is less updates and needs to be expanded to accommodate the recent advances made by PKU.

The concept of a department or an allied institution having a large presence on its parent institution's Wikipedia page is not new. Tsinghua SEM, JHU SAIS, Columbia SIPA are a few examples of the same.I request my fellow Wikipedians to not delete the section and expand the Peking University page further. Sunny7338 (talk) 07:47, 10 October 2013 (UTC)Sunny7338

There seems to be sothing wrong with the Photo "Office Buildings"
Actually it is not an office building of Peking University. It seems to be "literature and history teaching building"(“文史楼”) or "old biology building"（“老生物楼”). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:FCD0:100:C21:0:0:6830:E8D4 (talk) 07:10, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Image:Winter in Peking University Winter in 2013.jpeg
I believe that the location shown in the image File:Winter in Peking University Winter in 2013.jpeg is actually at Tsinghua University, not PKU, but I'd appreciate a second opinion before removing it from the article. Bulaisen (talk) 10:54, 24 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Agree. I don't think PKU has such a place. But I'm not sure if it's in TsingHua University. Need further verification. GanbyWang (talk) 22:21, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

Gao Yan controversy and Metoo
Peking University has been under a great amount of criticism this year over their handling of sexual assault allegations. I think this deserves either a section within the article or a passage within the history section of the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.171.31.62 (talk) 01:09, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

Meets criteria for "C"
I restored the "C" for the China Project rating. Some sections do need sources, and thanks to for putting "Sources needed" templates there, but the criteria for "C" specify that an article "should have some references to reliable sources," which it does, and also "cites more than one reliable source and is better developed in style, structure, and quality than Start-Class, but it fails one or more of the criteria for B-Class." ch (talk) 18:42, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
 * My apologies, I had not realized that WikiProject China maintained such a low criteria for C. Horse Eye&#39;s Back (talk) 18:43, 19 July 2021 (UTC)