Talk:Soviet deportations of Chinese people

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 09:21, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
 * 海嵾崴1933年的中国餐馆瓦尼亚.jpg

Requested move 27 July 2022

 * 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 to Soviet deportations of Chinese people per rough consensus. There's the agreement that the current title is inaccurate because of "in", but no agreement whether to use "(the) Chinese" or "Chinese people"; however, the alternative proposal "Soviet deportations of Chinese people" has gained several support !votes, and also has a virtue of conciseness and consistency with similar entries in category:Forced_migration_in_the_Soviet_Union  No such user (talk) 08:12, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Deportation of Chinese in the Soviet Union → Deportation of Chinese people in the Soviet Union – Proper grammar. Super  Ψ   Dro  21:29, 27 July 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. CollectiveSolidarity (talk) 00:46, 4 August 2022 (UTC)  — Relisting. FOARP (talk) 11:00, 11 August 2022 (UTC)


 * Oppose. Chinese is both the countable/uncountable plural as well as the descriptor for those from China, meaning that the grammar is correct. A similar example, Deportation of Koreans in the Soviet Union may better indicate the flow, as these are both grammatically the same. I'm not entirely opposed to the idea of changing the article to "Deportation of the Chinese from the Soviet Union" or at least "Deportation of Chinese from the Soviet Union" similar to Deportation of the Meskhetian Turks, but adding "Chinese people" would increase ambiguity, especially given the regions of China involved (Northeast China and Xinjiang) and the question of people in this case referring to ethnically Han Chinese or those under Chinese nationality.  Sam Walczak  Talk / Edits 16:45, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Not grammatically the same. "Koreans", "Turks", are definitely plural, whereas "Chinese" is ambiguous, as it also serves as adjective/possessive (and language, etc.). There is no confusion in the former case, as adjective form is "Korean", which is clearly distinct from plural "Koreans". To describe plural people here, it must be either "the Chinese"  (add "the") or "Chinese people" (add "people").  Similar to "French" vs. "German".  You "deport Germans" (plural), but you need to "deport the French" or "deport French people", not merely "deport French".  Walrasiad (talk) 14:27, 4 August 2022 (UTC)


 * Oppose: The grammar is fine as is. 2601:405:4400:9420:50B5:BD47:2846:F0B (talk) 22:54, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Oppose per User:Sam Walczak but strongly support a move to to avoid confusion with the more numerous intrastate deportations of the Soviets (e.g. Deportation of Koreans in the Soviet Union and nb Population transfer in the Soviet Union).  "Expulsion" or "removal" would also work if sources support it.  —  AjaxSmack  00:41, 31 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Use Deportation of Chinese from the Soviet Union.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  09:13, 1 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment. It appears that many of them were deported to elsewhere in the Soviet Union, so I'm not sure deportation from the Soviet Union is appropriate. How about Deportation of Chinese from the Russian Far East? -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:48, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Good point. But a title can't cover everything.  Nearly as many Chinese were summarily shot as were internally exiled and 1000 were enslaved.  It seems that a majority were expelled from the Soviet Union.  Still, your suggestion works as well or better than the current title.  However, I strongly prefer "Soviet" to "Russian" to limit the article's scope.  —  AjaxSmack  03:13, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
 * "Soviet Far East" would be fine too. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:37, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
 * It could be Soviet deportations of Chinese people. Super   Ψ   Dro  08:53, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
 * That works well too and covers most of the subjects except the few thousand who were murdered. —  AjaxSmack 14:57, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
 * I personally think this is another good suggestion as well.  Sam Walczak  Talk / Edits   15:11, 5 August 2022 (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.
 * Support. I pretty much never see native English speakers refer to "Chinese". It's always "the Chinese" or "Chinese people".--Eldomtom2 (talk) 08:43, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Really? I find it quite common, especially in titles like this.  Like the book Think Like Chinese or articles here like Overseas Chinese and British Chinese.  We don't use the Chinese here simply because we're not generalizing about all Chinese and because the grammar of the phrase doesn't allow it (cf. a title like The New Chinese: How They Are Shaping Australia). —  AjaxSmack  14:57, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
 * "We don't use the Chinese here" Well it's a good thing the proposal is to move it to "Chinese people" then--Eldomtom2 (talk) 11:08, 6 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Support. Better grammar. Walrasiad (talk) 14:16, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Support in principle per Eldomtom2, but use "from", not "in". The word "in" does not make sense here. —&#8288;&#8202;&#8288;BarrelProof (talk) 15:45, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Support while I do agree with Walczak that the current title is correct, the proposed title is more formal. I also prefer the more concise "Soviet deportations of Chinese people" as proposed above. --Spekkios (talk) 03:24, 14 August 2022 (UTC)