Talk:Scouting and Guiding in mainland China

2005 discussion that does not have a section

If you are just going to pick semantics and not contribute otherwise to the article, your energies are better spent elsewhere. The topic is Scouting in Mainland China. Geographically, Hong Kong and Macao are connected to the Chinese mainland. Both the ROC and PRC stand by their "one-China" policies, therefore according to them, there is only China. This article pertains to the larger section of China connected to the _mainland_ of Asia, not to your perception of political status. I say again, this article covers the existence of Scouting in the _geographic_ Chinese mainland, outside of the Scouting that exists on Taiwan. This article does not debate political or cultural or 'widely accepted' definitions, just geography. Chris 18:16, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

The term "mainland China" is rarely, if not never, used for its purely geographical meaning. — Instantnood 18:31, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

You seem determined to force POV into this article. I will keep watch and continue to undo your POV, as you are not paying attention. This article does not care about your definition of what is on the Chinese mainland. Both Hong Kong and Macao are connected _physically_ to Asia, they are on the Chinese mainland. This _is_ one of those rare articles in which mainland China is "used for its purely geographical meaning". Your additions belong in a political discussion in the national article, not in this on which is on Scouting (also note with a capital S always in English). Chris 18:36, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

It seems apparent you are not familiar with what the term "mainland China" refers to in actual real-life usage. It's irrelevant to the point of view of anyone. Please research on what the term actually means before you use it in writing an encyclopædia article. — Instantnood 18:43, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

Instantnood, in fairness, if you have somethine _else_ to contribute, perhaps information on possible Scout groups starting in the PRC, anything but this argument, your changes would be most welcome. I am familiar with the common usage. I just want you to understand that for this article, for this purpose, we are trying to keep the definition _strictly_ geographical. I do not want to fight on this. I worded this very particularly from the onset of this article. Again, if you have _new_ information on anything else on this article, please share it. But stop with the POV, please. Chris 18:45, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

It's nothing to do with anybody's point of view. There's never ever any serious writing in which mainland China is defined in this way. Please kindly justify why this different definition of the term stands, why should the term be defined in this way in this article, and suggest how we can avoid confusions with the prevalent meaning of the term. Thanks in advance. — Instantnood 18:50, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

The entire point of Scouting (note again the capital S) is to promote good citizenry and understanding of others in the world. The debate as to what is and is not included in China, for instance Tibet or Mongolia, is fractious enough. The reason we are sticking to the rarer geographic use is to avoid any such political debate on this page. I _know_ it is not common usage, but it is wholly _neutral_ usage. It is supposed to be neutral, in line with Scouting ideals, rather than a divisive "this belongs or belonged to this country, so it's different". Consider Cyprus, which is claimed by both Greek and Turkish groups. Cyprus is still a whole island. For the purpose of this article, who-owned-what-when has nothing to do with the physical _geography_ of China. It needs to be this term, I know it's rare, I know you don't like it, but it is not ignorance or lack of seriousness on my part in writing this way. Please put it back the way it was. I respect that you understand the topic greatly, please understand why this article is being written in this way. Wikipedia has a 'three reversions' policy, I do not want to have this mediated.

Now, if in fact the PRC _is_ developing Scouting (which I do not know), then the article does need to be changed to reflect that at that point. If you have such information, please share it. That would be most welcome, and we would be happy to have your contributions! Chris 19:02, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

Thank you. I'd say your definition is in fact confusing especially to readers who are familiar with how the term is used in almost all ordinary real-life situations. IMO it's more useful to define the geographical scope of this article according to the usual meaning of the term "mainland China", since development of Scouting in Hong Kong and Macau is pretty irrelevant with that in mainland China. There's little reason to mess up everything in an article. Please be reminded that Wikipedia is a collaborated project, and no user owns any entry on Wikipedia. — Instantnood 19:15, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

I'm glad we are coming closer to understanding. The article should not confuse anyone, but it most definitely uses that rarer geographic term. You said yourself "almost all" and "almost never", by that definition there are some few instances in which the geography-only version is used, for this article this suits that purpose. It's like, I couldn't write "Scouting in the Soviet Union", because the Soviet Union never had Scouting. Tsarist Russia did, and all republics do now, but "Scouting in the Soviet Union" would be incorrect. Likewise Scouting has existed since 1908 in various parts of what is now the PRC, but not _while_ it was the PRC. (unless they are working on it now)

Also, the development of Scouting in Hong Kong and Macau is not at all irrelevant, as it may well be that when the PRC _does_ develop Scouting, Hong Kong and Macau may be the ones planting the seeds.

I wasn't at all claiming ownership, sorry if you felt that way. Just was trying to keep the article within its intended framework. Thanks and good Wikiing! Chris 19:34, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks. I've slightly rearranged the article and added a leading paragraph as an introduction. I believe it's now much more easier to understand for most readers. — Instantnood 19:43, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

Actual situation

ran wrote on Talk:Scouting#"There is no Scouting in totalitarian countries":

1. I've been looking around on the Internet and found out two things about Scouting in China.
   • There is a "Boy Scouts Club" in Hainan province. Official Site. Information is scarce... they might be government-run, or corporate-run (for profit!), or neither... Needless to say they aren't part of WOSM, but they do seem to take a lot of ideas from Scouting in terms of uniforms, badges, outdoor activities, etc.
   • Voice of America reports that the government has shut down an attempt to start a Scouting organization in Wuhan, central China. The report is a bit dated: [1]. I'm translating loosely here: the organization was shut down because it had failed to register with the government (which it was required to do); the government thought that the organization was political in nature; the organization was also reportedly seeking help from lawyers. No idea what happened since (presumably the government has not changed its stance). The official site is still up: [2], and appears to be regularly maintained (latest news item is dated January 10, 2006), there's a BBS on site as well that's passably active (47 posts yesterday), but there's no organization to go with it, and in fact much of the content of that website is copied from the Scouts of Hong Kong.

I think, we should include this informations in the article, but first we need to verify and translate them. --jergen 10:40, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Done. -- ran (talk) 20:52, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

There may also be some Scout groups in Tianjin, as this article suggests. --jergen 12:30, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Citation needed

For me, there is a difference between "banned" and "not permitted". Is there any source that Scouting was officially banned by the authorities in 1949? --jergen 09:09, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Scouting is not banned

Scounting is not officially banned in China, they were only abolished after 1949 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.17.162.102 (talk) 15:31, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

It still needs properly cited, I have reverted your changes in the meantime. Chris (クリス • フィッチ) (talk) 20:43, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

File:Scout Association of China.jpg —Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.83.253.149 (talk) 17:51, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

April 2012 Requested move

Scouting and Guiding in Mainland China → Scouting and Guiding in China – Article contains dedicated sections and significant text about Hong Kong and Macau, which are not part of mainland China. Even without the HK/MO text the country article is located at "China". "Mainland China" should not be used in article titles, it's a regional exonym. SchmuckyTheCat (talk) 19:25, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

• Support with some reservations. Articles of general name "Scouting and Guiding in country X", such as Scouting and Guiding in China, are general introductory articles that introduce the reader to all the various Scouting and Guiding organizations that exist in a country. They exist for every country that has Scouting or Guiding. In this case, Scouting and Guiding in China is a disambiguation pages, but it is incomplete as it does not mention Scouting in Hong Kong and Macau. After the move, however, it should be clear that mention needs to continue to be made to Scouting in Hong Kong and Macau and to Scouting in Taiwan. --Bduke (Discussion) 20:56, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
• Oppose-there are two nations with "China" in their name, the ROC and the PRC. Propose alternate move to Scouting in the People's Republic of China, presently a redirect and in line with the naming of the ROC Scout disambig.--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 01:52, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

The article, People's Republic of China, redirects to China. Republic of China redirects to Taiwan. There's no reason to oppose based on two China's unless you've got lingering resentment over the placement of those articles. SchmuckyTheCat (talk)

Have a good read at WP:AGF. I didn't put words in your mouth, you've no right to do that to me.--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 07:51, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

I get it now. Having a look at User:SchmuckyTheCat/Mainland China, you're projecting your personal crusade onto me. No thank you. That, and as the ROC national organization is named Scouts of China, you're just creating more confusion to suit your obsession. Changing my vote to strong oppose.--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 08:03, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

• Support: After long and fierce discussions, consensus has been established to call the PRC just China and the ROC Taiwan on this Wikipedia, as it reflects WP:Common usage. Please don't query this consenus in every single China-related article. --RJFF (talk) 01:11, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

• A query needs to be made at every page move because some of them are misguided, like the one at Talk:Vice President of the Republic of China. There's no harm in a case-by-case approach. People just need to use more tact in forwarding arguments specific to the case at hand instead of rehashing the same stuff.--Jiang (talk) 01:24, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

• Support, but on the condition that the lead section be rewritten to be more comprehensive. This article contains plenty of the pre-1949 history, so "Scouting in the People's Republic of China" isn't an entirely appropriate title. Multiple scouting organizations both past and present, including the Scouts of China exist under the topic "Scouting in China" and must be included in the scope of this article. This article was never just about Scouting in Mainland China in the present tense. It just suffers from poor organization.--Jiang (talk) 01:24, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

• Oppose. The proposed title is confusing, especially with Scouts of China, with represents the ROC pre- and post-1949. Pre-1949 materials in this article can be relocated to Scouting and Guiding in the Republic of China. This article should not be renamed. (By the way, I have briefly looked at the edit history. Materials about Hong Kong and Macau were added with controversies. They should be deleted in my opinion.) Jeffrey (talk) 14:32, 2 April 2012 (UTC)