|
This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects: |
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Taiwan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Taiwan on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. |
|
C |
This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale. |
| High |
This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. |
|
|
|
|
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cold War, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Cold War on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. |
|
C |
This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale. |
| ??? |
This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. |
|
|
|
|
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Conservatism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Conservatism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. |
|
C |
This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale. |
| High |
This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. |
|
|
|
|
|
[edit] What a Mess!
This article is quite incoherent, even chaotic at times. It is also repetitive. Most of it reads like an advanced English learner's third or fourth try at a longish essay.
It's good that some folks are trying to write a good article about this important subject, but before editing it (i.e. "publishing" it), they really should think more care carefully and arrive at a decent draft first. Just my 2 cents... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.115.160.206 (talk) 19:46, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
[edit] Archive or Not?
Archive or Not? Explains itself... Liu Tao (talk) 03:00, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
[edit] Excessive Material?
There has been a bit of material added to the article over the past few weeks, however many of the material seems to be more historical rather than current. For example, the new 'Ethnic Policy' is entirely about the KMT policies and actions back in the pre-1940's, none of it reflects the current ethnic policies of the KMT. The list goes on and on, but I think we get the main idea. Liu Tao (talk) 01:06, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
- I agree - ideally, everything outside the History section should be current. See for instance how the Republican Party article is written. I think we could move all the historical material either back to the History section or to the History of the Kuomintang article. There's probably also a lot of duplicate material between these two articles. Laurent (talk) 01:57, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
- I changed the title of the ideology section from "Ideology" to "Ideology in Mainland China (1920s-1950s)" to indicate that it does not reflect the current ideology of the KMT. Could someone add in a section about the current ideology soon? Klaw117 (talk) 17:31, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
[edit] "Gold Standard Script"
Boy, this is a picayune point if there ever was one, but here goes:
In the section Chiang Kai-shek assumes leadership, I believe the word wanted is not "script", but rather scrip, meaning paper money of arbitrary value, for temporary emergency use. Scrip can easily be subject to hyperinflation if not backed by something of real value. Also, note the link for Gold Standard Script is a dead link. Milkunderwood (talk) 09:19, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
- Good pick up. The Chinese name of the notes in question is "gold yuan ticket", and scrip is a much more apt translation than "Script", which makes no sense in this context at all. Given that the paragraph seems unsourced for that translation, I've changed it to "scrip" until someone can bring in a better referenced name. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 11:36, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
[edit] Meaning
What does "Kuomintang" mean? Caeruleancentaur (talk) 13:06, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
- It's in the first paragraph of the article. -- 李博杰 | —Talk contribs email 13:21, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
[edit] Irrelevant information
There's a lot of irrelevant information or information being inbappropriately added here. VNQDD shouldn't even be in this article, it is by no means a 'Vietnamese KMT'. It has no official ties to to KMT, there is no need to even introduce it into this article. Maybe make some sort of mention somewhere in the article or in the History article. The same is with a lot of other stuff that should be moved to the History article, not here. This article is becoming more and more like talking about a historical party, not one that currently exists. Liu Tao (talk) 15:07, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, I suggest creation a new article somewhere along the line of "Ideology of the Kuomintang", and move the info there. The material on the VNQDD should go, with only a passing reference - there is no similar mention of the VCP on the CCP article.--PCPP (talk) 11:27, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
- Your analogy with the VCP and the CCP does not stand up. The VNQQD had direct links to the KMT in Nanjing, the VNQQD spent over an entire decade in exile in the ROC where it effectively functioned as part of the local KMT parties in the provinces. the VNQQD joined the Viet Nam Cach Menh Dong Minh Hoi- "Viet Nam Revolutionary League", which was under direct control of the KMT, whose stated goal was to unite with China under SanMinZhuYi. the VCP never had a similar relationship with the CCP. its the current VNQQD that has no official ties.Дунгане (talk) 01:33, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
- Even if that is so, the VNQQD is only a section amongst the hundreds of KMT factions. At most it should only be mentioned in the KMT article. This article talks of the KMT as a whole, not its individual factions. Liu Tao (talk) 01:09, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
[edit] Alternative name - undue weight
In the lead the article mentions the alternative translation "Chinese National People's Party". I think this gives this view undue weight since this is not a commonly encountered translation on a par with "Chinese Nationalist Party" which it follows. I suggest moving it down into the body of the article or into a footnote rather than leaving it in the lead as it may be misleading to readers. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 07:38, 20 June 2011 (UTC)