Jump to content

Talk:Nanjing

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 2607:fea8:61f:f0ab:5c89:bba5:cff6:4f03 (talk) at 21:51, 2 February 2017 (→‎Official capital of the ROC). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:Vital article

Wade-Giles

The article"formerly called Nanking in [the] Wade-Giles system". Is this true? I would have thought the Wade-Giles spelling would be something like Nan-Ching, with Nanking representing an older spelling/pronounciation. Enchanter 23:46, 12 Oct 2003 (UTC)

that sentence is wrong. Editing in progress. kt2 23:52, 12 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Article Vandalism

I just removed some blatent vandalism on the top of this page. I removed the text 'China is Nazi!' as well as the images of a Nazi flag and of China with a swastica on it. It appears that the user has been blocked indefinitely. Just letting you guys know. SIGURD42 17:13, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The user was Redbuster SIGURD42 17:20, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

City flower

Nanjing's city flower is not apricot but plum. I lived there for several years and am quite sure of this.

It IS plum. I corrected the mistake.

According to Chinese Wikipedia, it is mei (prunus mume), not plum (prunus domestica). Mei is more closely related to apricot than to plum. --163.139.215.193 13:07, 4 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Official capital of the ROC

SchmuckyTheCat removed descriptions as ROC's official capital in this edit. Please refer to the discussion at template talk:Republic of China infobox. — Instantnood 15:28, May 1, 2005 (UTC)

  • Yes, that contribution needs extensive and verifiable attribution, especially as it said it was constitutional but no such designation exists in the ROC constitution (that I could find when I looked it up). SchmuckyTheCat 15:55, 1 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Major Edit

The original article is not too well written. I'm trying to give it a major revamp, adding a few important sections and better categorize them. Hopefully I can get it done by next week, as I'm also taking summer courses and working part-time now... Colinoncayuga 02:22, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Explanation for places of interests of Nanjing

I think the brief explanations following each listing of the place of interest is unnecessary, since:

  • it would be explained fully in the article of the specific entry, therefore this is a duplicate.
  • it kinda messes up the clean layout of the tourism section.
  • the article length is already exceeding the optimal, and in the future I hope we can create seperate articles of sub-topics of Nanjing and reduce the currently lengthy main article.

Colinoncayuga 06:18, 1 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

First paragraph

Should the sentence regarding the status of Nanjing in China's administrative structure be removed from the first paragraph and placed lower in the lead section? --Dpr 07:25, 9 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Climate - Nanjing a "Furnace" in summer

I have often read that Nanjing is known throughout China as one of the three "furnaces of the earth" (the other two being Wuhan and Chongqing) because of the high temperatures in summer. (Sometimes it says four furnaces).

That definitely deserves a mention under climate for each of these cities - sound fair? Singkong2005 05:21, 16 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Good suggestion. Relevant part edited. Colinoncayuga 04:33, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I use to live in Nanjing and it normally goes up to 35 degrees(celsius) during summer. It definitely deserves mentioning.

Numerous chinese travel sites mention the three or four furnaces. It certainly is a furnace in the summer. I could not get close to finding anything that could be called a source for the quote, but it's true. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.88.167.229 (talk) 17:01, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Several things

The number of districts seems to be 11, not 12. I'm not sure if the long lists of parks, public universities, etc. serve much purpose since there's no link for further information and they're not that important to begin with. Anyone with a better skyline/city overview picture? The present one is very, very dull.

Ming Dynasty Palace Site

This is now the Taiping Kingdom History Museum, right? Rigadoun 20:08, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, these two are totally different sites. The site of the museum has nothing to do with Ming emperors.

"Four Capitals"

I have removed "Four Capitals" for the second time because of the following reasons:

  • The section is historically wrong. "Tokyo" is the "eastern capital" relative to Kyoto, not any city in China. There have been a number of "Eastern capitals" in China, the most important of which is probably Kaifeng during the Song dynasty.
  • A large number of cities have had these names in Chinese history, and the list as added is anachronous.
  • The "four capitals" is an artificial grouping. One of them is not even Chinese, to boot.
  • The table has no explanatory text attached whatsoever.
  • The heading and table are misleading, in that it gives the impresion that China had four capitals (historically or simultaneously), when the truth is that these cities were not capitals at the same time, and one of them isn't in China at all.
  • Incorrect English and pinyin grammar; misspelling of "Pinyin".

Perhaps the table might be useful, with the correct information, in a page about historical capital cities of China. But it's irrelevant on this page. --Sumple (Talk) 04:49, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Right. Nanjing was once called the "Eastern Capital" (東都), paired with Wu Chang, today's 鄂州, as the capital of the State of Wu established by Sun Quan. Interestingly, it was called "Western Capital" (西都), paired with Guang Ling, today's 扬州, as the capital of Qi State established by Xu Zhihao. Whoole 11:32, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Taiping Rebellion

Considering the Taiping Rebellion was the 2nd most costly war in History (only in WW2 did more people die) surely this Nanjing article owes a little more explanation to the Rebellion, as it sat as its capital from 1853-1860? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Olir (talk • contribs) 23:54, 19 December 2006 (UTC).[reply]

this article is not b class

sorry guys, its not b class, its a start, but not b class —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Olir (talk • contribs) 00:54, 3 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Massacre Inaccuracy

I think that there is a bias in the figure showed as the death toll of the massacre. IMO it should be checked and revised to match the article which specifically deals with that matter. The figure of more than a million is not accurate and accepted by the scientific community.

The actual article on the massacre has enormous numbers of citations, and the photo from the massacre memorial has the (for some, disputed) figure 300,000 clearly shown. This doesn't need a citation, it needs a link to the other article, where the citations are to be found. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.88.167.229 (talk) 17:16, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Forgot to sign the previous one.

Inserted on: 30.05.2007 Sign your username: faso

Pictures

Thanks to Godofnanjing for the beautiful pictures. Definitely a huge step up from the older ones. The first pic (Nanjing city skyline), however, looks grossly over-processed and fake, striking as it is. Would be nice if a more natural-looking pic is used instead.

The use of graduated blue filter on the President House pic (Nj07.jpg) is also too obvious. Consider changing it.

The building in Nj04.jpg is not Jinming Temple but a geological research institute.

Nj09.jpg needs updating as Dachang and Jiangpu districts are now defunct and Jianye district was rezoned.

Re: Pictures

I have changed the skyline picture and move Godofnanjing's night view picture to the cityscape section. Does it look better?

Also thanks to Godofnanjing for the huge contribution. I hope you are not feeling bad about my modification on your work. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Desmond2046 (talk • contribs) 00:00, 31 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wonderful montage, great job! --LLTimes (talk) 02:46, 31 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]


The fake picture intended to attract tourists is back. Having been to Nanjing, I can tell you that it's very smoggy. A quick Google image search should reveal this to be true. I wonder how long before this comment is deleted. Whatever, I don't even care anymore. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Derwos (talk • contribs) 23:00, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for all comments

I just add pics that whatever I have to show everybosy how does Nanjing look like today. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Godofnanjing (talk • contribs) 01:44, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

name of city

I have read that 'Nanjing' means 'Southern Capital,' just as 'Beijing' means 'Northern Capital.' During its tenure as capital of the ROC, the city that is currently Nanking was called Nanjing, while the city that is now Beijing was called 'Beiping,' meaning 'Northern Peace.' This seems to me to be a discrepancy in need of resolution. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MD1937 (talk • contribs) 04:45, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

you are confused. the city is currently called "Nanjing" in pinyin and "Nanking" in Wade-Giles. Beijing went through a bunch of different names, but that has nothing to do with this. 125.194.12.26 (talk) 15:24, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
In some ways I beg to differ with you 125.194.12.26. Nanjing does indeed mean 'Southern Capital' in Chinese. Southern Capital is not a nickname but a direct translation. Candy (talk) 14:35, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Likewise, I beg you to defer to 125.&c. MD got the romanizations backwards. On the other hand, he's right to be a little confused. The short version is that traditionally, China only likes to have one capital at a time and changes the name of the old one (Qing move the capital from Nanjing to Beijing, Nanjing becomes Jiangning; ROC moves the capital back, Beijing becomes Beiping; &c.). The PRC let Nanjing keep its name and simply didn't make it the actual capital. — LlywelynII 23:00, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Schools

I've never heard of Nanjing International School and The British School of Nanjing. I removed these items as they are notable. --MtBell (talk) 23:55, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Three questions

Thank you very much --Roksanna (talk) 08:23, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Official capital of the ROC

Nanjing was administratively named as the official capital of the ROC, and this has not been changed as far as I know. Therefore, Nanjing remains the official capital of the ROC, even though the de facto capital is in Taipei.

It was removed and the reason was it was "not right". Would the person who removes the sentence please provide a more detailed reason?

The sentence as it stands right now says the ROC's capital is no longer in Nanjing. This, as far as I know, is incorrect. The government admits still that the official capital is in Nanjing.--pyl (talk) 03:11, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Show sources. You can't move the argument from one article to another. SchmuckyTheCat (talk)
Besides being not in line with the existing sources from the Republic of China article, the amount of information about 60 year old history and the ROC doesn't belong in the lead paragraph of the Nanjing article. SchmuckyTheCat (talk)
I didn't think I was trying to move arguments from one article to another. I didn't think it would be practical to put "Taipei (de facto) Nanjing (official)" in the table of the Republic of China article as it has space constraints. Here in this article, it has no space constraint and the fact that Nanjing remains the official capital should be stated.
I don't believe that the 60 year old information would no longer be relevant if no intervening events have occurred. In this case, no government has officially changed the location of the capital, so the status doesn't just disappear. I also don't understand why you said "ROC doesn't belong in the lead paragraph of the Nanjing article". It is mentioned. The information as it stands right now relating to the ROC is misleading. I repeated the concerns, but you haven't responded to it. If you have concerns with the length of the explanation information, perhaps I can suggest that we can work on shortening it, rather than removing the whole thing.
You left an edit summary of "per talk?" that doesn't work..". Can you explain more about what you mean? What doesn't work? I left reasons in the discussion and reverted the article to get your attention so we can discuss here.
I think the sources have been shown to you in our previous discussions. Perhaps it is in the Republic of China article or in your personal talk page. I am sorry I don't have time to go through them and copy them here at this stage.--pyl (talk) 08:56, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"I think the sources have been shown to you..." No, it has never been shown that Nanjing is still the official capital of the ROC. It is a conversation many have had for several years. All modern sources simply say Taipei, both blue and green governments. They don't qualify it. There are no modern sources that claim Nanjing is the capital of the ROC. That is the criteria for including information.
Oh I see. I will look for it when I have time then.
Second, this is the intro paragraph about Nanjing, not about the ROC, yet this information is supposed to take half of the intro paragraph? Even if it was absolutely true, it isn't that important to the subject of Nanjing to spend half the intro paragraph explaining some sixty year old bit of trivia. SchmuckyTheCat (talk)
So the fact that the opening paragraph relating to the ROC can be misleading is ok?
I am not into cold war politics myself or those empty slogans about "Taipei is only the temporary capital" and "we will take back the mainland very soon". But I do have issues with misleading information. --pyl (talk) 09:28, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
But that is all they were, slogans. The ROC went through "provisional" capitals repeatedly. In the end, "Nanjing is the capital" was just a slogan and even that isn't said anymore. The capital is where it is, not by legislation, but by presence. I've followed this conversation with different participants for at least four years. I've yet to see any authoritative source substantiate that Nanjing is official. :::::"So the fact that the opening paragraph relating to the ROC can be misleading is ok?" The opening paragraph is not misleading. SchmuckyTheCat (talk)

zh:User:Huang_Sir said he obtained an email regarding ROC's capital from the Ministry of Interior of ROC. It is confirmed that Nanjing has been the capital of ROC since 1927, and ROC's central government is now located in Taipei. See [1]. --MtBell 23:42, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is reference: 中華民國102年，教育部發佈「有關採購教師教學所需教具之原則」，重申「中華民國首都在南京、中央政府所在地是臺北」。儘管依據中華民國官方文件，南京為首都，但這些年來，因兩岸關係發展，一般不觸及首都問題，而稱「中華民國中央政府位於臺北」 Nanking is the capital of Republic of China, and the central government of Republic of China is located in Taipei. -Ginlinglang (talk) 07:56, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This Ministry of Education circular was contradicted a few days later by the interior minister, and the MoE official apologized for the circular:
  • "Taipei is Republic of China's capital: minister". Taiwan News. December 4, 2013.
  • "Interior minister reaffirms Taipei is ROC's capital". Taipei Times. December 5, 2013.
Hence I am removing this claim. Kanguole 00:16, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Objection to Kanguole, that claim has been active since 1949 even though Nanjing is still labelled as the statutory capital of the Republic of China from 1946. Taipei was never the permanent capital but it is still the temporary capital and provisional seat of government,[2]. However, the Republic of China was an signatory of the United Nations Charter signed in 1945. 2607:FEA8:61F:F0AB:5C89:BBA5:CFF6:4F03 (talk) 21:51, 2 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong location of Nanjing

The map in this article does not show the correct location of Nanjing. Nanjing is at the border of Hubei and Henan, not in Jiangsu. Please correct as necessary. ICE77 (talk) 23:25, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nanjing is the provincial capital of Jiangsu. --MtBell 23:30, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
MtBell is correct, and furthermore, it is at the border of at least Anhui. Hubei and Henan is another layer off, meaning one has to cross Anhui to even think about reaching the former two. ---华钢琴49 (TALK) 04:06, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"Nanjing is at the border of Hubei and Henan, not in Jiangsu." meant that at the time I wrote my comment, 2009, Nanjing was at the border of Hubei and Henan. I see it's been fixed. ICE77 (talk) 22:32, 12 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"Economy----Today" section require information on commerce.

I have a concern that the economy section should contain information on agriculture, industry and service(mainly business or commerce). The current economy section focus on industry. As Nanjing is one of the commercial center in China, more information on commerce should be specified. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Desmond2046 (talk • contribs) 23:55, 30 July 2010 (UTC) --Desmond2046 (talk) 06:19, 31 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Too Few Reference

B Class article requires more reference. For example, Beijing has 122 refers. Seattle has 229. We need to convince people that every sentence in this article is not from our imagination but some trust sources. I will work on this in the coming days but I really hope we work together. Thank you all. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Desmond2046 (talk • contribs) 06:14, 31 July 2010 (UTC) --Desmond2046 (talk) 06:18, 31 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Organization structure is too long and not so important

The organization structure of the government is not a vital information of a city. Also, I don't like to see such a long list in the center of an article. I prefer to include the link http://english.nanjing.gov.cn/gk/200812/t20081215_256760.htm instead of a whole list. What do you guys think? --Desmond2046 (talk) 06:27, 31 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fully agree and removed the whole linkfarm. The tourism and education sections also need to be transformed into prose. --Elekhh (talk) 09:19, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it's good to remove the pictures of "Presidential Hall" and "Nanjing Massacre Memorial Hall". They are so important to the city of Nanjing.Desmond2046 (talk) 05:42, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Even if these buildings are among the most important in the city, the two images in question, particularly "Nanjing Massacre Memorial Hall" add very little encyclopedic value to the article, due to their low quality. The article layout looks terrible as result of too many images, and some cleanup needs to be done. --Elekhh (talk) 08:22, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

missing images

there are some missing images that, i think, should be replaced or deleted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 186.104.81.206 (talk) 05:08, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nanjing's first "Water Bus" for Public Transport

I have read in newspapers that from 18th January 2011, the first water bus route on the Yangtze River has been started into operation for Public transport. The water bus travels across the Yangtze River between the Liuhetongjiangji dock and the Yanziji dock located in Nanjing and has reduced the travel time from 2 hours to 20 minutes. Although luxury boats are adopted, the ticket is as cheap as 3 Yuan per person. Can anybody add this information with references ? Thanks. Zubair71 (talk) 11:47, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, they have always had a ferries from Xiaguan (Zhongshan Wharf) to Pukou, and also ferries to some islands in the river... but this thing is something new, I guess. Here's an article that describes plans for a service along the river, with stops on both sides, but it certainly seems to be just a plan: http://house.xinmin.cn/fczx/2011/04/16/10281537.html -- Vmenkov (talk) 23:39, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Date of Wall highly dubious

Don't want to include OR, but I have myself been to Nanjing and seen the signs on the wall explaining that they were reconstructed in the 1980s and 1990s. The idea that even the majority of it remains from the Ming wall is highly suspect. — LlywelynII 22:54, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Small destroyed part was reconstructed or bad part was repaired, while the whole wall is very long. Bricks made in Ming are different from now. The ancient bricks have names of makers (craftsmen) or signs indicate makers on the surface. -Ginlinglang (talk) 12:10, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Extremely ugly city caption

Don't want to be a jerk, but whoever designed and put the new city caption montage on this article deserves to have his computer smashed (and his/her photo editing software with it). The new montage is far too long and includes way too many images. Additionally, the white framing around the images has been hastly rushed together and is not aesthetically appealing AT ALL. This is a DISGRACE. -- Jonipoon (Jonipoon) 23:21, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have now changed the city capton montage for the second time with my modified "finer" edition. Frames have been trimmed and cut to the same size, and two images have been ereased for aesthetic purposes. It was WAY too big before and made the article look extremely unprofessional. I take note to all mods and admins that Jack No1 shouldnt be allowed to further vandalize this article with his "extremely ugly city caption". -- Jonipoon (Jonipoon) 23:15, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I admit that your version looks better. But you also did something wrong when editing. You changed the image with no reason provided at the first time. As a result, I just saw the photos was cut and rolled back. After that, you became rude and uncivilized (have huge pressure and difficulty with your life and want to vent on the net?). Also, don’t use "vandalize" to blame others. I'm freshman in English Wikipedia and you should remember to Assume good faith with other editors. You committed some faults and then went to criticize me. It's unfair to me. Finally, you have something wrong with your character and you should study to treat others friendly. --Jack No1 09:06, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Reason was specified in the section of the talk section before. Additionally, when you first changed back to the original picture with the motivation that the caption didnt match, you didnt take notice that the caption had already been changed to match the new picture. So by bringing up my so called "mistake" you forgot to mention your own. Im well aware of the rules and objectives of Wikipedia and I'm not trying to be "rude and uncivilized". By Wikipedian standards the original picture was simply not acceptable, however you deserve an applaude for originally choosing a fine and well mixed collection of photos. -- Jonipoon (Jonipoon) 22:52, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It is your responsibility to write some note when you change the picture. With your comment, I would pay attention to those problems. However, you gave no comment and it seems that you think I should find out out the reason of your change. That's not rational because I cannot always find out why people make a change without their comments. I don't think "have his computer smashed" should be said by a wise and civilized person. Finally, I don't think I should be blamed for uploading "ugly" pictures. I didn't do anything against the rule. If you think I "vandalized" Wikipedia just because I provide a picture you were not satisfied with. It's completely unacceptable.--Jack No1 22:27, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What language is spoken in Nanjing?

How common are local languages in Nanjing? The Nanjing dialect page does not comment on current usage. Is it common today? How many people in Nanjing speak Putonghua at home? 129.22.76.236 (talk) 13:43, 14 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Generally local people speak local dialect at home. Standard Chinese is spoken in school, in work and on the occasions that there are people with different dialects. With rapid urbanization in the past decades in many Chinese cities including Nanjing, there are a large part of population that is not local. Nanjing dialect may have many changes from ancient times to now. As for current Nanjing dialect, common local city dialect is a little different from that of Lao Chengnan (people living southern parts of the city speaks old Nanjing accent). -Ginlinglang (talk) 05:43, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Besides, the city dialects are also different from dialects in other areas especially southern parts of Nanjing, outside the city, e.g. Lishui and Gaochun, which are classified as today's Wu dialect areas. Putonghua speakers can understand most of common dialect inside the city, but almost can not understand dialect in Gaochun. Actually Putonghua coming from Beijng dialect is a successor of Nanjing Standard Chinese in Ming dynasty. When Beijing was made as capital in Ming dynasty, half of near 100 million people were immigrated from Nanjing, so the accent in Beijing at that time is the same with Nanjing. Although after several hundred years both have changed, the difference is not very big. -Ginlinglang (talk) 06:00, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The first time Nanjing dialect became standard Chinese was in Southern dynasties, and that Nanjing dialect means the official Nanjing dialect (Nanjing Standard Chinese, Jinling Yayin, 金陵雅音), which is the successor of Luoyang Standard Chinese (Luoyang Yayin, 洛阳雅音), and is different from Nanjing local Wu dialect of the time. The Wu yin in Japanese is actually Nanjing Standard Chinese in Southern dynasties, although some changes may happened, and it does not mean Nanjing Wu dialect of the time, and it is named Wu because the area is called Wu, just like Nanjing is called Wujing (吳京, Capital of Wu) in the poem of Li Bai in Tang dynasty. In Sui and Tang dynasties , with the unification of southern and northern dynasties, the new standard Chinese was created in Chang'an based on Jinling Yayin and Luoyang Yayin of the time. The Nanjing standard Chinese in Ming dynasty is the continuation of that standard Chinese. -Ginlinglang (talk) 06:04, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nanjing standard Chinese is not the same with Nanjing local dialect, just like current standard Chinese (Beijng standard Chinese, Putonghua) is not the same with current Beijing local dialect. Although they are highly related, they are not the same thing. Standard accent is for nationwide scholars, schooling, governments, businesses, not just for a local place. -Ginlinglang (talk) 06:14, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting edit to Nanking Massacre section

Last I've checked the International Military Tribunal for the Far East puts the Nanking Massacre death toll at 200,000 deaths while China puts the death toll at 300,000 people. Any body wishing to discuss this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Graylandertagger (talk • contribs) 22:46, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Footnote 2, "南京历史沿革". 中国南京政府官网. , is apparently a dead link.

This is a pity, since the question of when Nanjing was a jing is sorta basic to the whole proposition.

David Lloyd-Jones (talk) 20:32, 28 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Timeline of Nanjing

What is missing from the recently created city timeline article? Please add relevant content. Contributions welcome. Thank you. -- M2545 (talk) 16:22, 19 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

First part introduction

It's better to introduce overall in the first sentence of introduction, instead of only current status. The order is adjusted based on this. -Ginlinglang (talk) 07:18, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Merger proposal

I propose that Nanjing City be merged into Nanjing. Timmyshin (talk) 02:34, 4 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Nanjing&oldid=763375554"