Talk:String of Pearls (Indian Ocean)

Article title violates NPOV
SOP is an Indian concept. In order to be balanced we must use the PRC term Maritime Silk Road. So please move the article. Hcobb (talk) 05:02, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
 * I personally support keeping the Maritime Silk Road separate from the String of Pearls. The String of Pearls is a theory promoted by American and Indian think tanks and media, while the Maritime Silk Road is an actual project by the Chinese government. I have added a merge template so hopefully we'll get some other opinions as well. Yi Ding (talk) 22:48, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Moved to String of Pearls (Indian Ocean)
Since there have been multiple people who have supported a move away from the String of Pearls (China) title, I've moved the article to the more NPOV String of Pearls (Indian Ocean) to reflect the fact that it's not a Chinese strategy but rather a strategy speculated by both the US thinktank community and the Indian media. Yi Ding (talk) 22:21, 8 November 2014 (UTC)


 * When did Walvis Bay move to the Indian Ocean? http://www.namibian.com.na/indexx.php?id=20409&page_type=story_detail&category_id=1 Hcobb (talk) 14:23, 26 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Interesting link. Strictly speaking I don't think the Namibian base is part of the "String of Pearls" as espoused by Indian and American sources. Also, the report may be unfounded: http://en.people.cn/n/2014/1127/c90883-8815148.html In general, I think the Indian media that talks about the string of pearls is primarily worried about Chinese presence in the Indian Ocean... That said, I wouldn't be opposed to changing the name again or merging the page with some kind of "Chinese overseas military bases and relationships" or something like that. Yi Ding (talk) 08:58, 3 December 2014 (UTC)