Talk:2019–2020 Hong Kong protests

New topic division

I wonder if we should draw an end to the topic of this article (and its accompanying timeline) since street protests are becoming less common (and we all know whom to blame), and start a new one called 2020 Hong Kong constitutional crisis whose scope begins with the NPC's plan to enact Hong Kong national security law and continues with the ongoing LegCo election crisis? Deryck C. 18:44, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

I think this suggestion makes sense since the current controversy mainly focuses on the national security law rather than five demands. However, what would be the scope of this "constitutional crisis"? The national security law and the LegCo election are actually two separate constitutional crises. OceanHok (talk) 09:38, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

I think the main purpose of starting a new article is to draw a line under this one, and then have another summary-style article about the ongoing crisis in Hong Kong. In a way 2019-20 Hong Kong protests also has multiple storylines: the Extradition Bill, police violence, Five Demands, District Council elections, Wuhan coronavirus, and then National Security Law. I envisage the new article to also be broad and I do think "constitutional crisis" covers both issues because the ongoing disqualification controversy - as the Returning Officers' statements show - is very much influenced by the National Security Law.

I guess the outline of the article will be something like this:

• (Lead)
• Background
  • Extradition Bill protests and the Five Demands
  • Covid-19 pandemic
• National security law
  • NPC decision (May)
  • Promulgation and enforcement - includes commentary on conflict of laws
  • NSL arrests and warrants
• LegCo election
  • Pan-dem primaries (allegations of NSL violation)
  • Candidate disqualifications
  • Election postponement
• (Possibly in its own section: international responses)

--Deryck C. 22:02, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

I am not too sure about this, since the scope seems a bit narrow. The direction where the whole protest/pro-democratic movement will go at this moment is very unclear. I think we can reconsider this proposal after a month or two. OceanHok (talk) 11:59, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

I agree with OceanHok that a certain waiting period would be beneficial in our decision making on this question. If a new article is to be created, it should, in my view, state that the national security law was, first and foremost, "the" answer by the authorities in Hong Kong and Beijing to the street protests (and therefore the Five Demands); otherwise it could even be said by certain quarters – it should be clear who I mean here – that the "constitutional crisis" had already become plain during the protests, with the remedy having come through the NSL.

Apart from this point, a general problem that I have with the term "constitutional crisis" as part of the new article's name, at least from the present point of view, is that it puts the emphasis rather strongly on governance. This would seem to give insufficient weight to numerous ways how the protesters and their supporters will likely continue to express their resistance outside the LegCo. In due course, it may be that a term for the post-NSL enactment era will emerge. I would think that a neutral term relating to a date (obviously 1 July 2020 would be a candidate for this) would be desirable for this. There are surely many broad precedents for such naming, though I can only think of Vormärz. But such a term must of course gain traction in public discussion over an appreciable timespan. Also, in view of these issues, we may have to allow for the possibility of a future renaming of the envisaged new article. --CRau080 (talk) 16:47, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

I was going to propose that this article be split up into different protests for the different goals thought but decided against it. I think this would be a good start at cutting this big topic up. — RealFakeKimT 09:32, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

Is HK protests a disaster

I found that Bishonen remove Wikiproject disaster management from HK protest, Yellow vest movement, Lebanese protests, and so on. IMO, all of these protest,while categorised as social movement, it is actually include in disaster, which belongs in Wikiproject Disaster Management. I Have questions, why these protest remove WP disaster management tag, while it also includes civil disobedience, which is a Man-made disaster? 114.125.235.207 (talk) 09:24, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Political unrest doesn't come under "disaster management", come on. Wikipedia:WikiProject Disaster management would be added to twenty times as many articles if it did. Also, you have added (and I have removed) the Wikipedia:WikiProject Death tag to a number of articles, like here, pretty randomly IMO. If you want to insist on adding these WikiProjects to such articles, please discuss at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Disaster management and Wikipedia:WikiProject Death and see if you can get consensus for it. Bishonen | tålk 10:51, 11 August 2020 (UTC).

PS, please note that you have a warning for adding irrelevant wikiprojects at User talk:180.245.109.42! Bishonen | tålk 10:56, 11 August 2020 (UTC).

Wikipedia is not a soapbox Flaughtin (talk) 06:42, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

I suggest that the IP editor(s) voicing their objection to the removal of their WikiProject additions actually read the introductory paragraphs of those WikiProjects. WikiProject Disaster management for example deals specifically with natural disasters. It doesn't matter how you interpret the name of the WikiProject or the event you're adding their template to—it's not in their scope. CentreLeftRight ✉ 07:04, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

Supporting Countries

May I ask a question? Macau and Hong Kong are include in the 2020 Hong Kong protests? Please answer this question. Aldrin0000 (talk) 04:58, 10 September 2020 (UTC)