Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Hong Kong/archive1

Hong Kong
Self-nom. I think this is an extremely comprehensive article about one of the most fascinating countries on earth. This article has improved significantly recently, and is now, in my humble opinion, very much worthy of being a featured article. Thank you! Páll 30 June 2005 06:55 (UTC)


 * Oppose, problem image copyrights:
 * Image:Hkgarrison.jpg and Image:Hong Kong relief map with geographic labels.jpg, both claimed as PD, but I can see no evidence that works created by the HK government are PD and online sources aren't listed.
 * Image:Hongkongbar.jpg dubious fair use claim especially since the image lists no source.
 * Image:Hkstreets.jpg, Image:AsiaPics 409.jpg, Image:Exhibition.JPG


 * Image:Cuhk.jpg


 * Conditional support, I would like to see the remaining images of unclear copyright removed and/or replaced, especially the art exhibition one since that installation would certainly be the work of a living artist and copyrighted. Turning the ??? into characters would be good too--nixie 7 July 2005 10:47 (UTC)


 * OK, I believe I addressed the problems with the images. Will work to fix the inslite site and district issue. Páll 30 June 2005 09:30 (UTC)


 * Although HK does indeed follow British law by default, the policy that Crown Copyright material "may be reproduced free of charge in any format or medium provided it is reproduced accurately and not used in a misleading context" is not actually UK law, but is instead mere government policy.  Does the HK govt actually have this policy?  Morwen - Talk 30 June 2005 11:11 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure if this is the OFFICIAL policy, but no objection would we face if we adopt it. --Deryck C. 2005-06-30 15:13:24 (UTC)


 * I just called my local District Council. Indeed Hong Kong does follow Crown Copyright policy as established by the United Kingdom. So Crown Copyright is an acceptable licence for use of images of Hong Kong. Páll 30 June 2005 20:26 (UTC)


 * The copyright holder of a photo is the camera-man, not the author of the object concerned. Deryck C. 7 July 2005 10:58 (UTC)
 * I suggest you read this before you go handing out copyright advice Copyright FAQ--nixie 7 July 2005 11:17 (UTC)


 * I suggest nixie to read this extract before quoting that rule to me: This ruling only applies to two-dimension works. For pictures of statues (which is, effectively, a translation of a three dimensional work into a two-dimensional copy) the picture taker has creative input into which angle to take the photographs from. Therefore, a new copyright is created when the picture is taken. If you still think that copyright authorization is needed from the maker of that bubble, I suggest you to go seeing a eye doctor. Deryck C. 7 July 2005 11:35 (UTC)
 * No it also applies to 3D works that are not in the public domain. By my understanding any image of a 3D work (which this appears to be) less than 70 years old is a derivate work under US copyright law, I'd also be wise for you to leave out the personal attacks.--nixie 7 July 2005 11:47 (UTC)


 * But the object is in Hong Kong, not US. US laws are not applicable in HK. Deryck C. 7 July 2005 11:53 (UTC)
 * I suppose architectural works, such as skyscrapers, are copyrighted. Is it necessary for the architect to grant the permission to upload a photograph of a building she/he designed? :-D &mdash; Instantnood July 7, 2005 21:02 (UTC)
 * Nope. But art is different, and since the image isn't even discussed there is no claim of fair use, US copyright rules apply for obvious reasons.--nixie 7 July 2005 22:26 (UTC)
 * You've got a point, however, as the bubble, the designer of the bubble, and the camera-man are all in Hong Kong instead of US, only HK copyright laws apply, not US copyright laws. Deryck C. 8 July 2005 02:30 (UTC)
 * Unless you get a legal opinion to that effect, I don't believe that for a moment.  We work on the assumption that US law applies because Wikipedia is "published" in the US.  Of course US copyright law will sometimes have regard to the law in other jurisdictions, but how and when is a very tangled legal area. Mark1 8 July 2005 03:02 (UTC)

：：I’ve no more comments. I don't want the FAC to become an international information war. Deryck C. 8 July 2005 03:27 (UTC)
 * Oppose for now. crown copyright= PD? This sounds new to me. But other than the image issues I think this is an excellent article. Oh, and the administrative divisions section needs to be moved to the bottom of the page Borisblue 30 June 2005 09:21 (UTC)


 * No, of course crown copyright isn't PD. That's been fixed. Please see the individual image pages now. Páll 30 June 2005 09:30 (UTC)


 * I've moved the administrative divisions section down to a more appropriate position. So kandle Morwen's concern and I'll be more than happy to vote support. Cheers! Borisblue 30 June 2005 15:45 (UTC)


 * I just addressed it, called asking about the Crown Copyright policy of Hong Kong and it does indeed follow it. Páll 30 June 2005 20:26 (UTC)
 * OK then, support Borisblue 1 July 2005 01:08 (UTC)


 * Support. Hong Kong is the biggest entrepot in the world and the most well-developed former colonial city. It's existence is extremely important to the economic health of the world. Therefore people from all around the world should know more about it.--Deryck C. 2005-06-30 15:13:24 (UTC) Some response to the people objecting this article: The standard of an article could not be disputed ONLY by problems of TWO PICTURES. Please give some REAL ADVICE if you really want to object this article.--Deryck C. 2005-06-30 15:13:24 (UTC)
 * "Hong Kong is the biggest entrepot in the world and the most well-developed former colonial city. It's existence is extremely important to the economic health of the world" First of all, the quality of this article rather than than HK's importance as a port should be the main considerations of this discussion! Wikipedia aims to be a respectable encyclopedia, so copyright issues are important. FAs especially cannot afford to be sloppy. Borisblue 30 June 2005 15:45 (UTC)


 * Abstain/Neutral Oppose : 1) The article is still too long and can easily be summarised into a shorter, more readable text. 2) The divisions should be accompanied by a map. 3) Inline references, as nixie mentioned, are absent. =Nichalp   «Talk»=  June 30, 2005 18:14 (UTC)
 * Wakie wakie, the map is ready~ :-D So your second request is catered. -- Jerry Crimson Mann 1 July 2005 16:04 (UTC)
 * Great! =Nichalp   «Talk»=  July 1, 2005 19:02 (UTC)
 * Inline references completed! Third request cleared! -- Jerry Crimson Mann 1 July 2005 17:49 (UTC)
 * No its not cleared. That's not the way to render inline references. Each figure on the page has to be referenced by an inline reference which are internal links pointing to the ==Notes= section or reference section. See the =economy= and =demographics= sections of the India or Australia articles. =Nichalp   «Talk»=  July 1, 2005 19:02 (UTC)
 * By clicking on the picture you get a detailed copyright and reference section on the image caption page. In addition, by clicking on the words you get an explanation of the picture from another article. There's no absolute need to have references on the same page. Deryck C. 2005-07-06 01:00:54 (UTC)
 * I didn't mention anything about the pictures. =Nichalp   «Talk»=  July 6, 2005 17:39 (UTC)
 * This article is not too long by any means. It is 47k, which places it in the middle of featured article lengths, and it has to describe a lot more than most other country articles since it is also a city. For example, no other current featured country pages have sections on their legal system (which is important as it is a clear separation between HK and China) or their transport sections. I have just added inline siting to all the stats in demographics and the economy section. I also added information on temperatures in the Geography section. Anything else? Páll 4 July 2005 06:19 (UTC) Páll 30 June 2005 20:26 (UTC)
 * There still a lot of scope for a summary. 46kb is a put off with the amount of information to read. =Nichalp   «Talk»=  July 6, 2005 17:39 (UTC)
 * I also can't find a mention of HK's transport or the exact temperatures. What are the exact temperatures? =Nichalp   «Talk»=  July 1, 2005 19:05 (UTC)
 * Now there's a mention of HK's transport. What do you mean byu "the exact temperatures"? I can't see "the exact temperatures" in other articles like the PRC. Could you give me some typical examples so that I could make an improvement if any? :-) -- Jerry Crimson Mann 1 July 2005 19:46 (UTC)
 * See Mumbai, San Jose, California. PRC is a country, HK is a city, big difference. July 2, 2005 09:29 (UTC)
 * This might interest you  =Nichalp   «Talk»=  July 3, 2005 14:32 (UTC)
 * I really want the average temperatures mentioned. I've only given you the extremes. And no the inline references are still not properly done. See footnote3, footnote4. If you wan't to add more sections, you would have to summarise the rest. =Nichalp   «Talk»=  July 6, 2005 17:39 (UTC)
 * OK, I've added information about the average temperature. The article has been shortened considerably (from 49k to 42), so I believe all the grounds for your objection have been covered. Thank you. Páll 01:23, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

*Oppose, per Nichalp. Phoenix2 30 June 2005 19:52 (UTC)
 * Please don't oppose by saying "I support your opposition"... Deryck C. 2005-07-01 01:10:09 (UTC)
 * The vote is perfectly valid. Not every supporter or objector has to give different reasons- it's not an originality contest. Mark1 1 July 2005 03:59 (UTC)
 * But if that's true I can have 1000 accounts open and all say "per Deryck". Deryck C. 2005-07-04 04:13:38 (UTC)
 * Deryck, you obviously don't understand Wikipedia policy, or the idea of sockpuppets. Please read and understand this policy before questioning other people's blank opposition votes, and remember you have been guilty of doing this recently too. Harro5 July 5, 2005 01:49 (UTC)
 * I don't understand what you mean by "you have been guilty of doing this recently too." I've always been using this account, Deryckchan. If you find any sockpuppeter of mine, please point the name of that account out. Deryck C. 2005-07-06 01:06:33 (UTC)
 * I understand what you mean now. I've recently found out the username and password for the account that I've been using 10 months ago with the username Deryck Chan (space bar in the middle). Do you mean that one? Anyway, I'll consider merging accounts. Deryck C. 2005-07-06 01:27:24 (UTC)
 * OK, I've added information about the average temperature. The article has been shortened considerably (from 49k to 42), so I believe all the grounds for your objection have been covered. Thank you. Páll 01:21, 11 July 2005 (UTC)


 * Support. The article is readable, and although it may still have some small problems, it's amazing how people have summerized everything into an article this size. Well done! Carlsmith 1 July 2005 10:46 (UTC)


 * Support. One word: fab. -- Jerry Crimson Mann 1 July 2005 15:06 (UTC)
 * Support, I waited a little while to see that all issues with this article were cleared up. Now that they are, it looks great. --- [[Image:Flag of the United States.svg|20px]] Phoenix2 4th of July! 01:13 (UTC)


 * Strongly Support. It can be seen that the article is the fruit of the combined effort of a lot of Wikipedians. After a massive rewrite, the article is now very well-structured and very informative. Moreover, from a rural area to an entrepot, from an entrepot to an industralized city, from an industrialized city to a world-class city with a wide variety of cultures, the story of Hong Kong is very different from that of a lot of other countries/regions. It is worthwhile to make this article a featured one. - Alanmak 4 July 2005 23:55 (UTC)
 * Oppose. The points above not struck out are still relevant, and are certainly actionable. Space out the pics a bit more, remove external links attached to single words, more context on birthrate stats (why so low? This needs to be said) and most importantly a referencing section like that on the previously mentioned Mumbai article. This article needs to be summarised more to bring its size down a bit more. The pics in the history section are bunching up leaving huge white chunks. Please spread them out. Harro5 July 5, 2005 11:31 (UTC)
 * Well, I think I was the one to arrange those pictures last (in shortening the History section), and they look fine in my browser. I don't see any white spaces. Please feel free to rearrange them so they look good on your screen. Bishonen | talk 00:21, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
 * One note to the fertility rate problem: even we Hong Kongers are not sure why is the birth rate so low. Each woman has her distinct problem that contributs to the low birthrate. (For example, my mother and aunt are both married, and gave birth to only one child each, but have got different reasons.) It's not quite possible to give a proper way to summarize a reason for the low birthrate. Deryck C. 2005-07-06 00:55:29 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the reply. If there aren't any definite answers for the birthrate, I think a note should be made that a one-child policy doesn't exist, and isn't to blame. It would help clear up any misconceptions (like the ones I had). Thanks. Harro5 July 6, 2005 04:51 (UTC)
 * Done! One sentence added to clarify this. See Hong Kong Deryck C. 7 July 2005 09:27 (UTC)
 * Pictures are now spread across paragraphs, not one on top of another. Deryck C. 7 July 2005 10:01 (UTC)
 * Well done Deryck, good to see you getting involved in important Wikipedia functions. I've set up your references properly (in the "Footnotes" section you use to shoot up to  ). I'm going to keep my opposition though, as I agree with Nichalp above that this article is too long. Nearly every section refers to a main article, but still have so much writing that it is still 48kb. Should be condensed, and then I'll support. Harro5 July 7, 2005 10:18 (UTC)
 * I must say sorry. The original author of the Hong Kong article does not let me put the images to the left again. To avoid an edit war I must let the image stack up on the right again. Deryck C. 7 July 2005 10:46 (UTC)
 * Uh, let me try my best to respond to this. The main infobox is positioned in the standard place for country articles. Please see the current featured article South Africa as well as Johannesburg. The Armani shop is because that photograph is in one of the retail centres of Hong Kong. The photographs are all of a uniform size, and they do not bunch up on any monitor I've used to view this article. The rankings are standard, and used throughout Wikipedia. Again, please see South Africa or Australia. A person from Hong Kong is without a doubt called a Hong Konger. You are referring to the child birth rate which is located in the demographics section. It is just a statistic, and has nothing to do with the population density. The external links attached to single words is called inline siting, and is used to reference statistics given. It is also standard. There are so many white judges because there are a lot of white people who still live in Hong Kong, and as someone from Hong Kong who has considered a legal carer and is white, I don't find your tone helpful. Your objection is completely inactionable. Páll 5 July 2005 06:22 (UTC)


 * Some answers to your inquries:
 * [I]s a person from HK really called a "Hong Konger"?
 * Ans: Definitely yes. Lacal press like South China Morning Post and HK Magazine would use the term to refer Hong Kong people more often than not.
 * Is it so low because of a one-child policy?
 * Ans: Unlike mainland China, there's no obligatory one-child policy in Hong Kong.
 * Is the government worried?
 * Ans: Perhaps, but no conspicuous action was taken by the Government to boost the birth rate. On the other hand, the immigrants from the north has been a main soure to popuilation growth.
 * Also, in the law section, explain why there are so many white judges if the city is back under Chinese control.
 * The Basic Law states that all British and people of other nationalities can still be employed by the SAR Government as long as these people are pemanant citizens of Hong Kong. -- Jerry Crimson Mann 5 July 2005 06:09 (UTC)
 * Jerry, thank you for your answers to my concerns. See above for my remaining concerns. Harro5 July 5, 2005 11:25 (UTC)
 * OK, well, I have taken care of all of your objections. I see no evidence of the problem with the images on my browser, and I've used several different computers and operating systems to look at the article. I fixed the reference section, and have also trimmed the article down to 42k. Thank you! Páll 01:21, 11 July 2005 (UTC)


 * Neutral. It's a bit image heavy and the copyright status of the images seems unclear. A lot of disputes could be resolved simply by cutting down on the image content of this article. --Malathion 5 July 2005 02:24 (UTC)
 * Problem is fixed. :) -- Jerry Crimson Mann 8 July 2005 11:06 (UTC)


 * Support. I read the article in details for the first time and enjoy it! I thought I knew Hong Kong well, after watching all the HK TV dramas, etc; but there are many other interesting fact that I learn today. I commend the contributors for the great job in updating the rapid changes Hong Kong underwent in the past decade, especially in "Politics and Government" and "Economy". Had some problems reading smoothly at the "Politics ..." section (which may need further editing on style), otherwise good content. -- Vsion 6 July 2005 10:47 (UTC)
 * Minor object Support. The lead is too short - history begins only in 1997. Few sentences about what happened earlier would be helpful. Otherwise, the article is excellent. Let me know when lead is expanded and I will support. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 6 July 2005 16:24 (UTC)
 * The lead section long enough. It occupied nearly the entire screen with 3 moderate-length paragraphs. Deryck C. 7 July 2005 10:04 (UTC)
 * Please don't just brush aside the actionable opposition of a user who knows a lot about writing great articles. This is a fair point - Hong Kong's earlier history is very important, and should be mentioned in the lead. Harro5 July 7, 2005 11:43 (UTC)
 * The history doesn't start in 1997 in the article. I wonder why you said the article was too short. I'd love to have further elaboration of your points. :-D -- Jerry Crimson Mann 8 July 2005 11:06 (UTC)
 * Jerry, Piotrus is saying the lead section is too short and only starts in 1997, not that the article is and does. I agree with him. The lead section is an important feature, and it's supposed to give a good overview of the article as a whole, so that a hurried or casual reader can read only the lead and still get a good picture. The article as a whole has a good balance between past and present, but the lead doesn't even mention the past. Those lead paragraphs, incidentally, aren't moderate length, they're short. Three paragraphs is plenty, I'd advise against having more than that, but they should be longer and include some history. I'll be ready to support when this is addressed—it's a fine article! Bishonen | talk 8 July 2005 23:06 (UTC)
 * I see. Thanks for your detailed explanation. :-D -- Jerry Crimson Mann 9 July 2005 15:40 (UTC)
 * Exactly. Jerry, see also Lead. Remember that the lead should give the best possible summary, as it will eventually be *the article* of the Wikipedia 1.0, so it is very, very important to consider what to leave out of the lead. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 12:33, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
 * I just expanded the lead to include more history. Thank you! Páll 01:21, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Tnx. What can I say... another great work by Páll&Friends :) Keep it up - just make sure new FACs have comprehensive lead! --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 19:50, 11 July 2005 (UTC)


 * Support - a nice description of one of the international centres in Asia CrossTimer 03:24, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Support—my concern about the lead section has been thoroughly addressed, it's now a fine introduction. Great article! Bishonen | talk 01:49, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Support. A delight to read... a tad long, but that's due to the amount of info to pack in. Enochlau 12:16, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Support: covers all the bases I would want to read about: plus, a photo for each section. Culture is a little less strong than the other sections, but this can be remedied. Jogloran 14:59, July 12, 2005 (UTC)
 * Generally Support, although I do wonder if the last header of "Military" may be changed to "External defence" or something close?--Huaiwei 18:40, 12 July 2005 (UTC)