Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chekiang Province, Republic of China


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was   keep. (non-admin closure) TBrandley (what's up) 00:12, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Chekiang Province, Republic of China

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Chekiang Province is simply a different spelling (Romanization) of Zhejiang Province. It was not "abolished," only taken over by the PRC. The article is essentially unsourced, using only websites and a random BBC report. At best, info should be merged into Zhejiang Province article. ch (talk) 19:57, 11 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Weak keep: Though the article definitely needs better sources, I'd like to slightly disagree with part of the nomination rationale. This article is parallel to Fujian Province, Republic of China - Chekiang, ROC was not abolished by the formation of the PRC and rule over Zhejiang Province. Chekiang, ROC existed as a province of the ROC well after the 1949 formation of the PRC, until 1955, as a separate political entity, and this article describes the historical political entity. Chekiang, ROC were a group of small islands off the mainland Chinese coast that, until 1955, were still under KMT control (and not the CPC), just like how Fukien Province, ROC is still under ROC, and not PRC, control. TL;DR: This article is about the historical former province of the Republic of China, not about the modern-day province of the People's Republic of China known as Zhejiang. (Although yes, the spelling difference is just a minor Pinyin/Postal rom variation, they both refer to the same name) --  李博杰  &#124; —Talk contribs email 22:03, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. LlamaAl (talk) 23:05, 11 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Michaelzeng7 (talk) 17:01, 18 February 2013 (UTC)




 * Keep My reading of this is that they were not geographically coextensive despite having essentially the same name, and that although Chekiang was subsumed by Zhejiang they are distinct yet historically related entities. I do agree that the article as it exists needs work.Synchronism (talk) 16:27, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.