Template talk:Chinese political parties

What is the scope?
The scope of this template is specifically political parties in Mainland China (which doesn't include Hong Kong and Macau). Naming it "Chinese political parties" makes the scope unclear. I am opening a discussion here so that I can understand the viewpoints. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 11:52, 7 March 2017 (UTC) Pinging and. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 11:54, 7 March 2017 (UTC)
 * As the template heading states, the scope is List of political parties in China, therefore the template naming follows suit. These proxy wars over the China/Taiwan naming dispute are getting quite tiresome and at some point I will end up raising them at WP:ANI.
 * Also, why are you pinging someone not involved in this issue but who has supported your viewpoint elsewhere? This seems to be a WP:CANVASSing violation. Number   5  7  12:02, 7 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I think the scope of this template is alright... I doubt changing the name would solve the problem of scope confusion. Deryck C. 12:41, 7 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Number 57, I am not sure what "proxy war" you are talking about but if you feel that I have been disruptive and I have done anything wrong, please feel free to report my behaviour WP:ANI. I notified Deryck because I had participated in a recent discussion involving categorising Hong Kong as part of China. I tend to value Deryck's opinions as he is from Hong Kong and has often impressed me with his knowledgeable comments. (And Deryck and I have disagreed more often than we have agreed). Regardless, to put your fears to rest, this is not a discussion about consensus but rather about understanding viewpoints, including yours. (Any decision about the scope/title will take place with due procedures).
 * The reason I am trying to understand your view is because China seems to be about Mainland China+Hong Kong+Macau. The long term stable version of this template mentioned Political parties in the People's Republic of China (and someone last year added "mainland only"). Recently Political parties in the People's Republic of China was moved, although with few opinions.
 * My opinion here is that an encyclopaedia should be precise and neutral. Thus naming it "Chinese political parties" actually makes it more ambiguous, considering that Chinese is used both for ethnicity and nationality. I decided to look at Britannica. They seem to have a list of parties in China which lists Kuomintang as a party in China.
 * I am not claiming that I know the correct way to solve this. But I am interested in hearing opinions so that I understand where they are coming from. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 13:12, 7 March 2017 (UTC)
 * As noted in the edit summary, I will report you to ANI if you change the heading of the template again. The article was moved to List of political parties in China. Refusing to accept that is disruptive editing. I do not believe your denial about understanding the 'proxy war' I am referring to. Please stop this. Number   5  7  13:28, 7 March 2017 (UTC)
 * There is no consensus about changing the heading of the template. And if you feel I am being genuinely disruptive please report me to WP:ANI. We will see how it goes there. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 13:31, 7 March 2017 (UTC)
 * The heading of the template is List of political parties in China and consensus was achieved to move it to that title (minus "People's Republic of" ) on the article's talk page. No separate discussion is required here. Number   5  7  17:48, 7 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Both PRC and China are both about Mainland China+Hong Kong+Macau. This does not solve the ambiguity at all. The Britannica webpages list both historical and current political parties like that in US list. Kuomintang is also shown in the Taiwan list as well (yes it is named Taiwan instead of ROC). Naming this template "Chinese political parties" fits the format of related templates. Fizikanauk (talk) 20:56, 7 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I understand the problem that PRC is also ambiguous. Which is why I am thinking if we should use Mainland China which is the precise scope. (And using "Chinese" creates a lot more problem, as the term is used both as a nationality and ethnicity. Malaysian Chinese Association for example is a "Chinese" political party in Malaysia).
 * My focus here is not on Taiwan/ROC, but on the distinction between the term "Chinese", "PRC" and "Mainland China". The Britannica entry for Kuomintang says "Chinese political party" in the headline (which I cannot say is untrue). --Lemongirl942 (talk) 06:50, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

Is the Shanghai National Party too margnial?
There are some English news articles from mainstream media, such as the Voice of America and the The Wall Street Journal, reporting this political party. Here are some examples: 1 2 3. Given these articles, I believe that the Shanghai National Party is significant enough to be added to this template. GoldWitness (talk) 09:12, 17 May 2024 (UTC)