Talk:Great Wall of China

Edit request on 23 January 2012

i have a bunch of info from a school project — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kaitlyn72783 (talk • contribs) 21:39, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Can't do much with that request, you have to supply the specific info that you want added and credible citations. Cheers, Cold Season (talk) 00:00, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

rfc: reference format clean up

I think that the best help to get this article to progress out of C-class would be to re-do the references. I think re-examining and re-formatting the references would be a good thing. I find it difficult to work with a main article text with many references embedded throughout the article, rather than being in a more clear Notes section (and, no offense to Ripley' 1932 book, but these do vary considerably in quality). However, I am making a request for comment on this in the interest of group unity/consensus, since it would require a major change to the of the reference format throughout the article. Dcattell (talk) 05:01, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

I'm not sure what citation style you are proposing as there are many possible. Please refer to Example Styles for citations. In addition I don't see what you seek to gain from any changes. Altering citations to create a uniform style is welcome but changing every citation on a personal preference seems pointless. My personal preference by the way is for in-line citations using one of the relevant {cite} templates. The reason being that it makes it clear exactly what section of the article applies to what source. Problems of obscure markup within the text can be negated simply by adding carriage returns before/after the cite template while editing and removing again before saving. This simple task makes reading the text in the editor easy without requiring a complete reworking of the whole reference system. Rincewind42 (talk) 17:24, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

I'd agree that I personally find long-title references embedded in the main text hard to work with for an article of any length, and the existing ones in this article aren't consistent, so they need work one way or another. I'd agree with Rincewind42, though, that for us to reach a valid consensus you'd need to specific about which alt system (harvb, sfn, etc.) you were intending to introduce. Hchc2009 (talk) 17:41, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

The Photo Gallery

The photographs in the Gallery do not, I feel, give an adequate representation of the Wall. Furthermore, they are not captioned. Hence, I have added one that shows the wall in an unrestored state. I propose there needs to be more photos added, not less, so that a better view of the wall can be given, especially since most of it is unrestored. To date, the gallery contains only a few snapshots of the tourist areas where the wall has been restored. Bryan MacKinnon (talk) 05:14, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Photos that are radically different and provide new information - sure. More of the same sort of photos (this one shows a sunset! this one is framed better) - no. The photo you added does seem to be new, and worth keeping; I have removed a couple of repetitive ones. - DavidWBrooks (talk) 12:56, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

I actually do think we should include "better framed" and higher quality photos, especially ones that readers can see the subject in question. Some of the photos here are shot in distance and mostly only shows the background, and they can be monotone as well.--Balthazarduju (talk) 18:45, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Yes, that's true. But then we should replace the poorer-quality photo, not just add another picture, which is what tends to happen, especially on articles about tourist-visited places where lots of editors have personal photos. - DavidWBrooks (talk) 19:40, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Change wall length

Please change the wall length from 8,850km to 21,196.18km based on the latest state survey results.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-18337039

Smkilani (talk) 11:42, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

 Done Mdann52 (talk) 15:14, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

206.201.224.117 (talk) 22:37, 2 May 2013 (UTC)The Chinese government reported the extended length of the Great Wall tripled: From 4000 miles to 5500 miles in 2009 penetrating into North Korea, again to 14000 miles in 2012 which was too much exaggerated. The reason: China manipulated its history in favor of China in advance to the growing influence over the Manchuria region by Korea which would be united soon and suppress Uyghru movements in western Mongoria. Manchuria's walls are actually built by ancient Korean kingdoms206.201.224.117 (talk) 22:37, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Limit of China?

The portrayal in this article of the Great Wall as China's pre-Qing northern border is problematic. According to the Mongolist Zhou Qingshu, "In the past imperialists nonsensically argued that China from ancient times saw the Great Wall as a boundary, that north of the Great Wall was not part of China's territory, and that Han people only settled beyond the Great Wall very recently ... these arguments are not convincing". A major argument of Christopher Beckwith in Empires of the Silk Road was that the Great Wall was not primarily defensive; that it was used by expanding Chinese empires in order to consolidate territorial gains and to project power beyond the wall. We should investigate and thoroughly explain in this article to what extent that this received wisdom, that the Great Wall represented a limit to Chinese culture, is true. (Although in some cases, the unfortunate diplomatic tendency of the Chinese government to censor maps that portray China's historical boundaries as exceeding the PRC's contemporary ones, may disqualify PRC sources) Shrigley (talk) 03:28, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

1920 article in the geographical review

http://library.uoregon.edu/ec/e-asia/read/clapper.pdf

Rajmaan (talk) 05:23, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Controversy over the exaggerated length of Great Wall

Jameskim235 (talk) 18:27, 13 February 2013 (UTC) Recently, the Chinese government reported the extended length of the Great Wall triple times than before.

1) From 4000 miles to 5500 miles in the 2009 report (to penetrate into North Korea) 2) Again from 5500 miles to 14000 miles in the 2012 report

which are too much exaggerated.

The reason: China wants to make a counter attack to the growing influence over the Manchuria region by Korea which would be united soon and increasing conflict with Uyghur tribe in western Mongoria. To do that, China decided to manipulate its ancient history over the region and the extending the wall is just a part of it. There is so called 'Northeastern Project' inside Chinese government that researches and manipulates the history over the Manchuria in favor of China.

The reported span of the wall crosses the entire Manchuria and reaches near Vladivostok. China never controlled the region in ancient times. Rather they defended the attacks from powers over the region. The walls inside current China's territory does not mean it is their manipulable history. It is a world history. The walls are built by Koguryo and Barhae which are Korean ancient kingdom.

The Chinese claim has been rejected by scholars outside of China, especially in Korea. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.201.224.117 (talk) 21:46, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Then you need sources that meet our criteria at WP:RS stating this and we can show both. I've removed your bit about "the world should know", that's inappropriate here. We can show differing opinions if the opinions are significant and well sourced. Dougweller (talk) 04:54, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Jameskim235 (talk) 04:51, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

China’s Historical Distortion Stretches to Great Wall

http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2009/09/116_52682.html

The Controversy over the Great Wall of China's Expansion

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCKDRMsZ-9k&list=PL94E00DE0CB645926

US to publish report on Chinese distortion of Korean history: sources

http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2012/12/120_127479.html

The North East Project of China - History Manipulation

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northeast_Project_of_the_Chinese_Academy_of_Social_Sciences

China's Northeast Project Issues

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x7-Ov8wn7wQ

China's Northeast project site (the evidence)

http://bjzx.cass.cn/news/129976.htm

Jameskim235 (talk) 18:09, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

in which city is it

In which city it is located — Preceding unsigned comment added by 14.96.220.216 (talk) 05:42, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Edit Request

I request this because according to some of the facts I have researched, some of the vital measurements of the Wall are incorrect, and need to be restored to factual information. Overseer693 (talk) 03:54, 24 November 2013 (UTC)