Talk:Rape in China

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): Xijing17.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 02:59, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 one external links on Rape in China. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:
 * Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.uschina.usc.edu/w_usci/showarticle.aspx?articleID=13037&AspxAutoDetectCookieSupport=1
 * Attempted to fix sourcing for http://voices.yahoo.com/i-was-raped-china-americans-perspective-12231018.html?cat=72

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 11:01, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Discrepancy of statistics
The differences between the statistics in this article are so *staggeringly huge*, that I think it needs some more context to be useful at all. As stated in the introduction, the U.S. Department of State reported 31,833 rapes. But extrapolating from the "9.3% of men had raped a woman in the last year" claim from the Multi-country Study on Men and Domestic Violence below gives us at least one thousand times that number, at tens of millions of rapes every year. Either the differences between the methodologies should be clearly stated, or the discrepancy of the results should be commented on in the introduction. Ornilnas (talk) 13:26, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

This article is heavily politicized. I attempted to remove certain parts and improve the wording to be more correct, but it's nearly entirely garbage and should be rewritten to focus on relevant statistics rather than anecdotes, which are almost never included in better-maintained articles about foreign law.

Cleanup
This article is heavily politicized. I attempted to remove certain parts and improve the wording to be more correct, but it's nearly entirely garbage and should be rewritten to focus on relevant statistics rather than anecdotes, which are almost never included in better-maintained articles about foreign law.

AlbertOfWords (talk) 08:49, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
 * You whitewashed the shit out of it... I will be restoring, looks well sourced and relevant to me. Horse Eye&#39;s Back (talk) 19:13, 22 September 2021 (UTC)