Talk:Shenzhen

¥200 or HK$200?

The article says "Shenzhen airport is conveniently connected by coach directly to Hong Kong airport for a fee of ¥200 or HK$200 " [my emphasis]. HK$200 as of December 2007 is $25.63 USD while ¥200 is $1.76 USD. Thus, is this statement correct? 208.2.17.2 (talk) 16:45, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

To answer your question:

HK dollar and RMB (china yuan) has been at the exchange rate @ 1 (HKD):1.06 (RMB) or 1:1 (due to deflation in recent years) during the last 8 years. The statement is correct in the origional article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.11.71.70 (talk) 23:42, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Demographics

"However, many people think there are far more residents, mostly because they are commuters from Dongguan."... "most 'old' Shenzhen locals felt that the practice of opening the city to inland residents is making it less competitive with other Chinese cities."

This is rather not convincing with the use of words like "many people", "most 'old' Shenzhen", adding up to the emphasis on "Dongguan". Yes, citation please. Otherwise this is not appearing to be objective. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.49.124.107 (talk) 13:37, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Economy

Is this right? "The city has more than four hundred of the world's five hundred biggest companies." http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/global500/2006/cities/ lists the city with the most global 500 companies as Tokyo, with 52. Is Fortune going by how many companies have their head office, and this is perhaps going by how many offices at all? Darinteb Well so does San Jose, California, an office doesn't mean anything. Tokyo is the most headquartered.

Population

Latest figures put population above 10 million, with only about 2 million posessing a LEGAL hukou. cf: http://www.china.org.cn/english/government/130137.htm

Regarding population guesses disguised as fact, they always seem to double every few years for places believed to grow fast. I know 17 million is a very dubious figure for Shenzhen, whether entire 2050 km or inner districts. News reports are full of errors, only people who specialize in counting people really know, like me.

Inner Shanghai official Census 2000 of China only had about 8 million people, meaning the inner qu (市中心 and 浦东新区) comprising 1,364 square km, add it up yourself on the Shanghai page! Contrary to popular belief, Chinese authority DO count non-legal residents, but they separate the statistics, which would be self-evident if you can read Chinese. Most of the rest of Shanghai is very low density similar to US suburbs, or atleast was during that Census. The extent of any major city can be verified with Google Earth as low density looks obviously different. 8 million is a ton of people, it shouldn't be taken lightly, it took New York 200 years to get there. But yes, its easily to inflate that number to 12 or 17 million by the stroke of a pen.

根据深圳市统计局网站公布的资料，2005年末，全市常住人口827.75万人，其中户籍人口181.93万人，暂住人口645.82万人。 This says in 2005 year end, Shenzhen Municipality had 8,277,500 residents, of which 1,819,300 were legal.

Accordung to Shenzhen Daily article published on 4th Dec 2007:

Registered temporary residents who have stayed in Shenzhen for more than six months will in the future be treated the same as hukou holders in terms of education, medicare and housing. The figure for these two types of population are quoted as 8.46 million at the end of 2006. However, this excludes the temporary population who stay less than six months and those who do not bother to register.

Up until now there has been no incentive to register for the non-hukou population, unless the employer insists. Therefore, most of the workers in the small retail trade, restaurant trade, transport consultants, etc, do not bother. In studying the transport needs for Shenzhen we find that the demand for public transport is more consistent with a figure of about 12 million than anything less than 10 million. Who knows?

Mikecc46 (talk) 10:23, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Massage

Um, not to put too fine a point on it, but when the article mentions "massage", does it mean massage, or prostitution?

Second question, where does that image come from? It's clearly not a photograph (or if it is, it's been heavily Photoshopped).

Finally, from what I recall of my brief visit to Shenzhen, the air was very heavily polluted. Is this typical, or did I just go on a really bad day...--Robert Merkel 00:13, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)

"massage"

In aswer to your question, Mr. Merkel, it does indeed mean prostitution. I lived in southern China for five years and I can tell you firsthand that it is simply a codeword for the world's oldest profession. You know this very well when hotel employees say the word and make rude gestures at the same time. You know it even better when the "masseuse" comes to your door offering her services!

Therefore, I have clarified the point in the article (ATTN: ADMINISTRATORS! You may want to zap that line altogether) by putting, perhaps as you say, too fine a point on it. It now says "prostitution", rather than "massage", complete with a link to that article, if indeed there is one (I haven't checked).

Massage and Prostitution

These are two distinct activities in Shenzhen, although the latter frequently advertises itself as the former. Both Luohu and Futian have a very large number of genuine massage parlours interspersed with the restaurants and shops of all classes. The various types of back and foot massage are conducted in public rooms or glass-fronted cubicles at about 10-20% of the cost in Hong Kong, and are thus a major attraction for Hong Kong visitors as well as local people. Since the redevelopment of the part of Luohu adjacent to the Hong Kong border, the prostitution trade has been largely limited to two red-light areas, one a little to the north-east of that and the other close to the Huanggang border crossing. In addition, as in most other cities in the World, prostitutes can be called to the rooms in many, but by no means all, hotels.

The only images I can see are the buildings reflected in the lake and the Luohu Metro station construction. Why do you think that they are not normal photos? I live next to that park, and the metro area looked just like that, with the rail station to the left and the Shangrila Hotel in center.

Mikecc46 (talk) 10:35, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Port

The page says:

The rapid growth of Shenzhen port, its lower labour costs and its proximity to factories in Guangdong province has put pressure on Hong Kong's terminals. Shenzhen's total sea container throughput caught up with Hong Kong's Kwai Chung port in August 2003, when each handled 1.06 million twenty-foot-equivalent units (TEUs) of goods.

Shenzhen has moved more goods than maninland China's busiest port of Shanghai for the second month in September 2003.

According to statistics from The American Association of Port Authorities, in 2002, Shenzhen moved 7.6 million TEUs and Hong Kong moved 19.4 million. It is very difficult to believe that both Shenzhen and Hong Kong's traffic decreated to 1.06 million TEUs by August 2003, and I am more inclined to believe the AAPA on this than the unnamed source of the Wikipedia article. -- Dominus 14:54, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)

pollution

In answer to your other question, the air in that part of China is often foul. Some days, though, it is worse than others. The current photo was taken on a bad day, good days tending to be the windier ones when most of the smog is blown away.

The photo now with the article seems to have been uploaded after you posted your message.

-- it is unfair to add a single section of pollution for shenzhen especially the section . although the air condition in shenzhen may not be as good as some places in the world, it is not as bad as needing a special section. http://pdf.sznews.com/tqb/pdf/200612/1221/TA05c21C(ps).pdf "Shenzhen's severe pollution problems also make it representative of the new Chinese economy." - untrue, in fact, shenzhen is not a city depending on polluting industry. "In 2004, 21 days in October were smoggy and, in April 2006, two companies in Bao'an District were fined for dumping chemical wastes directly into the Shanghenglang River. " --- if you are accusing shenzhen being severely polluted, these examples are not convicing. 21 days of smoggy was subject to weather condition. "Shenzhen's pollution concerns are likely far worse than public statistics reveal." -- this is so subjective and i find a little bit amusing, a better place for it should be sb's blog. Chenyun 02:06, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Chenyun, I've been there. Maybe I'm just a naive Westerner, and it may have been a bad day, and I'm told that there's plenty of places in China with worse air pollution, but the air was absolutely filthy on the day I visited. Maybe not warranting a paragraph on its own, but certainly worth a mention--Robert Merkel 03:14, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Setting up of the SEZ

"The one-time fishing village of Shenzhen, singled out by late Chinese paramount leader Deng Xiaoping (鄧小平), is one of the so-called Special Economic Zones (SEZ) of China originally established in 1978 in competition with Hong Kong, then a British colony."

Was it set up to compete with Hong Kong, or to make use of the advantage of its proximity? -- 20:16, January 26, 2005, UTC

most certainly the latter. much harder to take a mere village than an already bustling city and transform it to a competitor of HK. ---HXL 何献龙 23:03, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

BTW, why was my line about the expansion of the SEZ In June zapped? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.165.213.18 (talk) 11:49, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Yantian

Do ships going to Yantian have to pass through the waters of Hong Kong's territory? Or do they go detour round Tung Ping Chau? -- 20:36, January 26, 2005, UTC

Why Yale and Jyutping but not IPA?

IPA is the preferred system of marking pronuncations on Wikipedia. -- 20:47, January 26, 2005, UTC

User:Ran changed the text by removing IPA.

BEFORE

Shenzhen (深圳; Sham Chun [Shamchun] in old or Hong Kong documents; pinyin: Shēnzhèn, Cantonese IPA: sɐm1dzɐn3, Yale: sām jan; Jyutping: sam1 zan3; lit. deep drains) is a sub-provincial city of Guangdong province in southern Mainland China, located at the border with Hong Kong.

AFTER

Shenzhen (深圳; Sham Chun [Shamchun] in old or Hong Kong documents; pinyin: Shēnzhèn, Cantonese Jyutping: sam1 zan3, Yale: sām jan; lit. deep drains) is a sub-provincial city of Guangdong province in southern Mainland China, located at the border with Hong Kong.

Comparison

Well, because:

1. IPA is causing us lots of dispute. I'm not just talking about /b d g/ and the tone numbers; theoretically we can go into arguments about how to transcribe every single vowel.
2. It is not needed when we already have Jyutping and Yale.

Why do you think the Mandarin pronunciation is given in Pinyin, not IPA? Because there's no need for IPA if we already have Pinyin. -- ran (talk) 20:56, Jan 26, 2005 (UTC)

Neither Jyutping nor Yale to Cantonese is comparable to Pinyin to Mandarin. -- 20:58, January 26, 2005, UTC

Okay, do you want to continue the conversation at Talk:Political divisions of China, for the next week or two?

This is a waste of your time, and a waste of mine. If we decide to use IPA, what next? We're going to spend a week arguing over whether to use /b d g/. Then another week over whether to use tone numbers or tone contours. Then what? If we use tone numbers, should we have separate /7 8 9/ tones or should we merge those into /1 3 6/? If we use tone contours, what's the 4th tone? /11/ or /21/? What's the 5th tone, /23/ or /13/ or /12/ or /24/?

And that's not all. How are we going to do the long /a/ and short /a/? Are we going to use the /a/ and flipped /a/? or are we going to use /a:/ and /a/? Or perhaps /a:/ and flipped /a/? What about short /i/? Are we going to use the IPA lax /i/? Are we going to mark all the long vowels? What about the vowel of seoi "water". How do we write it? Is the first half /œ/, or maybe /ø/? And the second part? /y/? or /i/?

If you want to spend six months over this thing, please find someone else to discuss it with, I'm tired of this game. Insert all the IPA you want. Insert IPA that's clearly different from what's described on Standard Cantonese. I guarantee you that over the next six months many people will come and argue with you and change the IPA or remove it. But if I were you, I'd be using the IPA as described in Standard Cantonese; or I'd use Jyutping and Yale. (And for that matter, if you're so sure about this /b d g/ thing, why don't you change the article Standard Cantonese too, to show what the phonology of Cantonese is really like?)

Once upon a time, I was arguing with User:Shorne over the history of the People's Republic of China. We argued for a very long time. Then I wrote a version that incorporated both his views and my views, and the argument was over. The way of least dispute is the easiest and fairest way on Wikipedia. I think you should learn that too, in the same way I did. -- ran (talk) 21:05, Jan 26, 2005 (UTC)

The GDP per capita

The page says:

In 2001, the working population reached 3.3 million. Though the secondary sector of industry had the largest share (1.85 million in 2001, increased by 5.5%), the tertiary sector of industry is growing fast (1.44 million in 2001, increased by 11.6%). The GDP per capita was ¥136071 (US$16,430) in 2001, ranked no. 1 among 659 Chinese cities, per the Guangdong Provincial Statistical Bureau (the city itself quoted a much cheaper number equivalent to US$5,605).[1][2]

I live in Shenzhen ,and I think the "The GDP per capita was ¥136071 (US$16,430) in 2001" is wrong number. the true number is about $5000, and in the 2004,The GDP per capita was about 7000, and was 7300 in 2005.

The problem with Shenzhen's per capita figures is always about the population: does it exclude temporary (migrant) workers, or not? DOR (HK) (talk) 00:27, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Map

Is it possible to change the map in the info box to one which shows where Shenzhen is in China? At the moment it is impossible to tell exactly where the city is, only after reading a bit can you gather that it is near Hong Kong.Suicup 07:10, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Seconded. Frankly, this is the most useless map I have ever seen in my life.

The city is located just north of HK geographically. Do u need a whole map to display where it is in china. There is a map that in the zh.wikipedia.org that shows where it is situated in relation to guangdong province.

Tourist Attractions Section

I can't help but notice that the section on Tourist Attractions seems to have been written by the Shenzhen Tourist Bureau. I am going to remove the advertising blurbs. If anyone believes each "attraction" is worthy of more than a passing mention, could they please edit it so it is more NPOV. --Roisterer 16:20, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

The sad point is that there's really not that much of interest to the tourist in Shenzhen, apart from a few nice parks, and the gallery I mentioned on the Wiki Travel page (depends on taste, I suppose). Most of the 'attractions' are just money-making theme parks, shopping centres, and the like. Still, detailed tourism information really belongs on the Wiki Travel site. I previously included the link to the site in the article. As can be seen from the article's current content, there really isn't much to do! Actually, "China-Hong Kong St" is probably worth a visit, although I haven't actually been there. According to a policeman we encountered near the site, it takes ~30min for a Chinese (China/HK/Macau) citizen to get a permit to enter, and at least a day for a non-Chinese. Probably worth investigating and including. --СђrΐsτσρhΞr ScЋδlτξη 18:42, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Shenzhen is basically a miracle city established over night as a window to the world. It has never been famous at its natural beauty. Other than a couple of beach resorts, including da/xiao mei sha, da peng, xi qong, some nice parks and gallery (as mentioned above), yinyu and wutong mountain, shenzhen's tourist attraction is more about the exciting night life, fashion & electronic product shopping, and city lifesyle. With the China-HK st, it is famous as it used to be the place to witness HK police officer on one border while the Chinese solider on the other side of the street. In the old days it is somewhere to do a lot of shopping as some of the products sold there were not available in SZ. However having a more open market in mainland China these days, China-HK st probably is still in the tourist map due to the histrical reasons and lost its charm in the old days. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.11.71.70 (talk) 00:03, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Integration with hong kong.

Seems to just contain information on shopping centres. Zazaban 04:27, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

There should be info somewhere about how shenzhen is economically important to HK and vice versa.

The Integration section should start with the Basic Law, which says HK does not have the option of changing before 2047, and real integration (as opposed to mere facilitation) would therefore require Shenzhen to change its laws, currency or whatever. What the Chief Executive dreams about is not nearly as important as what the Basic Law says.DOR (HK) (talk) 00:29, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

What the Paramount Leader dreams about is not nearly as important as what the Treaty of Nanjing says. We have to review theTreaty of Nanjing, which says HK does not have the option of reunifying with China ever, and real integration (as opposed to One country, two systems) would therefore require China to adopt economic reforms and liberalize it's economy to equal or surpass HK level of development. By using your logic, HK will still be in Britain's control, and we wouldn't having this discussion. Drones like you that don't act on self-interest, and restricted by imperialist laws that divide countries rather than unite PRD region, is as bad as being a traitor to Japanese Imperial Army. 72.81.233.159 (talk) 18:40, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

-> Debatable about how much the British or anyone could really do if they did change things. Particularly if it could be argued it was in HK's interest.

The last paragraph is a little out of date. Many of the glitzy malls in Shenzhen sell identical products at *much higher* prices then in HK. This is in part because the value of the HK$ vs RMB has collapsed in recent months, but mostly because of inflation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.101.129.56 (talk) 09:51, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

External links

Are there too many external links in this article? According to WP:EL, they should be kept to a minimum if possible. Insanephantom 06:56, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Please keep the link to ShenzhenParty.com on the external links section it is the most well known web site to foreigners living in Shenzhen 210.17.235.228 11:51, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Clarity in history paragraph

Shenzen was not established in 1979, but the SEZ status of Shenzen originates from the 1979-1980 reform and opening period. Peter Hessler's oracle bones states the year as 1980 on page 83, but that book, though excellent, is not authoritative on Shenzen history. I suggest some edits in the history paragraph.

"Densely populated intellectuals"

What does "densely populated intellectuals" mean? It is in the source, but I don't understand it. --84.20.17.84 11:27, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

I think it means the educated middle class who live in urban areas. The Chinese use "intellectual" to mean anyone who's been to university. LDHan 16:31, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Shenzhen Stock Exchange section not NPOV

The sentence " Here buying and selling orders are matched in a fair, open and orderly market, through an automated system to create the best possible prices based on price-time priority." specifically reads like a major massaged line. It would be better to refer to the market in technical terms rather than propaganda terms such as "orderly" and "fair" etc. Presumably this sentence is suggesting that the SSE is a Electronic Communications Network where no human market maker is used to facilitate trades. If the SSE is truely a ECN-only market and doesn't use market makers.

The rest of the section has tons of NPOV problems, filled with subjective and opinions. Does anyone know the real capitalization, impact and methods that the SSE uses?

Kunming is not a sub-provincial cities but Harbin is!

The table at the bottom of Shenzhen page is incorrect:

People's Republic of China

• Direct-controlled municipalities
  • Beijing · Chongqing · Shanghai · Tianjin

Sub-provincial cities

• Changchun · Chengdu · Dalian · Guangzhou · Hangzhou · Jinan · Kunming · Nanjing · Ningbo · Qingdao · Shenyang · Shenzhen · Wuhan · Xi'an · Xiamen

Provincial capitals (not included above)

• Changsha · Fuzhou · Guiyang · Haikou · Hefei · Hohhot · Lanzhou · Lhasa · Nanchang · Nanning · Shijiazhuang · Taiyuan · Ürümqi · Xining · Yinchuan · Zhengzhou · Harbin

Special administrative regions

• Hong Kong · Macau

Pictures

Could we get some pictures of Shenzhen before the SEZ was established for comparison? Brutannica (talk) 18:30, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Don't know if there are any good pictures on the web about this. However there is an exhibition in one of Shenzhen's public parks which show exactly what you want, i.e. pictures of Shenzhen before, during and after development of the city in the last 20 years. HamTin (talk) 12:41, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Lead section - investment claims

I have found a source confirming the $30 billion investment in Shenzhen over the past two decades: http://www.businessworld.in/content/view/962/1017/ however the lead section also seems to attribute all this investment to outsiders. Is this correct? Are there any more sources to confirm the accuracy of that last sentence in the opening paragraph? HamTin (talk) 12:46, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Sea

The second best beach in China comment is really subjective and should be scrapped. Just say a "particularly nice beach, Xichong." Furthermore, 1 hour from downtown is just false, unless you are travelling by helicopter. 2 hours would be more accurate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.17.223.57 (talk) 01:45, 14 April 2008 (UTC) --218.17.223.57 (talk) 01:49, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

"Tourist attractions"

"Although Shenzhen enjoys a good reputation for shopping and travel, some Hong Kong citizens are concerned about the relatively high crime rate in Shenzhen[citation needed]. Reports of businessmen and tourists being robbed and kidnapped in Shenzhen are not uncommon in Hong Kong newspapers.[citation needed]"

If these things are common, then they should be properly cited. Otherwise please delete! --218.17.223.57 (talk) 01:50, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes, please delete. This is NOT a common occurrence. I have lived in Shenzhen for four years and never heard of such a thing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.20.195.172 (talk) 07:33, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

I am not so sure it should be deleted as I think the original author is trying to show Hong Kong citizens' impression of Shenzhen and China and not the crime rate of Shenzhen itself, which is in line with my own experience in this matter. I have been trying to find a link but the only one I can find is from a source that is on the [spam blacklist]. Chineserose (talk) 09:35, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

GDP per capita.

I would like to request the source of "ranked seventh" out of all the cities.

Thank you.

~~Uli3819~~

-- i apologize for my signature, havent edited anything for too long, completely forgot how to write anything at all, Administrator: please feel free to disclose any information by convention.

Significance of the 2008 Fire?

I don't see how "A blaze, apparently ignited by fireworks, killed at least 43 people and injured 88 others at the "Kind of the Dancers" club September 20, 2008." is significant enough to be placed in an encyclopedic article about the province as a whole. I think it would be a difficult argument to even put such a story on the page of the city it occurred in. FantajiFan (talk) 14:02, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

yeah, that seemed extraneous to me, as well. Nateji77 (talk) 09:38, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

link issues

in the table of chinese and pinyin names in the "Administrative divisions" section, you can't click the links... i don't know why but maybe someone else does :) Jessi1989 (talk) 14:50, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Cityscape?

"Possibly one of Shenzhen's main attraction is its abundance of 24 year old, single, recently graduated, nice, beautiful Chinese women."

Uhm, right... not even sure where to begin, perhaps at least with a reference and the removal of the 'Possibly', or maybe the list of superlative descriptions, or maybe the not quite NPOV stance...

anyways 118.208.252.216 (talk) 07:40, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

if it's POV and not sourced, just delete it. Almost no one living in Shenzhen today is a native of the place, and Cantonese women are not pretty, but cute, anyways. --HXL 何献龙 23:01, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Addition of sister cities, among others

Since B694kp8d is rather mute and will not respond on his talk page, I will bring these issues up here:

1. He insists on inserting Matsuyama (Japan), Osaka, Hanoi, Ho Chi Minh City, Fuzhou, Shanghai, Guangzhou, and Seoul as sister cities of Shenzhen. First off, listing those three domestic cities alongside foreign cities is not a good idea. Articles on cities in mainland China that do have partnerships with other cities domestically do separate domestic from international cities. Secondly, none of those articles list Shenzhen as a sister city and those are un-sourced and un-dated additions; the rest of the list is dated.
2. So int'l flights from Shenzhen are cheaper than those from HKIA? This is not as well-established as the fact that flights to mainland China destinations are cheaper from Shenzhen than from HKIA. --HXL's Roundtable, and Record 22:56, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Also, B694kp8d continues to remove the "See Also" section without rationale. I don't see any reason not to include it, as those links are certainly relevant to the city --HXL's Roundtable, and Record 22:31, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Deng and SEZs

6k7de3x4v continues to remove any mentions of Deng from the article, with the only reason given "don't mention Deng" or some reason. And like B694kp8d, he, perhaps a successor user, continues to remove the "See Also" section. This time, there has been a reason provided: he opposes mentioning other SEZs. That is not a reason to remove the entire section. If you wish to remove mention of other SEZs, remove only that link. And I see no problem with including links such as "Economy of the People's Republic of China" and "Sham Chun River"; they are relevant to the city. --HXL's Roundtable, and Record 23:55, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

I have warned 6k7de3x4v on xyr talk page for edit warring, and explained the purpose of See Also sections. This is not really a negotiable issue, as they are key part of Wikipedia's organization system. Qwyrxian (talk) 01:40, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

==See Also= section is not to be added to Shenzhen. This is like plagarism and taking away the prosperity of Shenzhen and shifting to other parts of China and the world. And particularly Hong Kong. Any reasonable person should know by now that HXL49 is actually from Hong Kong.

One editor cannot decide what belongs in an article and what does not. The "See also" section serves a purpose to guide readers to related subjects. Related...not superior. User:HXL49's origin is irrelevant to this discussion. Tiderolls 02:46, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

I understand that you want to provide a "See Also" section as a related subject. But this is not a related subject. The section directs Shenzhen's prosperity to others as a form of advertisement. HXL49 is someone who is trying to reduce Shenzhen to rubbles. The HXL49 does not want to see Shenzhen prosperous and is not allowed on Shenzhen. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 6k7de3x4v (talk • contribs) 02:58, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Your assessment of the "see also's" result is incorrect. Continuing to speculate on the motives of other editors instead of offering cogent arguments will not serve you well. Tiderolls 03:06, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

My assessment of NOT including "See Also" is accurate and should NOT be included. I have already offered my reasons for why "See Also" is not to be included. (6k7de3x4v (talk) 03:27, 18 January 2011 (UTC))

The other SEZ of China, Shantou, Xiamen and Zhuhai make absolutely NO mention of =See Also=. Why should Shenzhen add the =See Also=? Perhaps the =See Also= should be added to those cities to see what kind of reaction is received. (6k7de3x4v (talk) 03:52, 18 January 2011 (UTC))

because "See Also" serves as an aid and is not necessarily required, but once it is added, it should not be removed. And you're wrong, only Xiamen doesn't have one. And yes, I'm going to go ahead and troll the hell out of you by adding a See Also to Xiamen soon. --HXL's Roundtable, and Record 03:55, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

=See Also= is not an aid. Even you mentioned that it is not required. So, please remove it. I have offered very concrete proof that the other SEZ that is Shantou, Xiamen and Zhuhai previously did NOT have a =See Also=. HXL49 just recently added the =See Also= only after the points were mentioned. Very high proof that the =See Also= should not be added to Shenzhen or the other SEZ for that matter. HXL49, you are now causing a real personal attack for no reason. (6k7de3x4v (talk) 04:08, 18 January 2011 (UTC))

I haven't added anything. Feel free to look at my contributions. I haven't touched either Xiamen, Shantou, or Zhuhai for many months, much less recently. And, no, you don't have a clear concept of what a personal attack is. --HXL's Roundtable, and Record 04:37, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Here is a version of the article from November of 2009 displaying the "See also" section. Seriously, 6k7de3x4v, you continue to harp on points that multiple editors have explained lack merit. Perhaps the articles you mention need "See also" sections. Bring your concerns to those talk pages. Tiderolls 04:59, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

As an outside observer, from reading the discussion, seems like 6k7de3x4v does not understand the WP:MOS and especially Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(disambiguation)#.22See_also.22_section. Maintaining a partisan POV without any hard references and on top of that deleting already established text from the article is a big No No. 6k7de3x4v should read some basic policies and guides to ensure he is not misrepresenting the article's WP:NPOV for his own take of Deng. --Visik (talk) 05:30, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Tide rolls hits upon a point I had meant to bring up earlier--if the other articles lack See Also, that's more likely a problem on those articles not this one. Now, I do agree with the general sentiment of keeping See Also sections relatively short; for example, I just removed the linked to the SEC of China article, because that article is already linked in the lead, and we're not supposed to double link. And checking more carefully, the Sham Chun River is also wikilinked, in the Geography section, so that one's out. The rest make sense to me. I think it would be better if the football club were somehow incorporated into the article as well, but, until it is, it should stay there. The rest help the reader get to different, related topics, so they serve an important purpose in the article. Qwyrxian (talk) 08:46, 18 January 2011 (UTC)