Talk:Braga incident

	This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC articles
	This article was accepted from this draft on 12 July 2015 by reviewer MatthewVanitas (talk · contribs).

Academic Journals

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Academic Journals, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Academic Journals on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Academic JournalsWikipedia:WikiProject Academic JournalsTemplate:WikiProject Academic JournalsAcademic Journal articles
	This article has been marked as needing an infobox.
See WikiProject Academic Journals' writing guide for tips on how to improve this article.

Politics

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Braga Incident. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:21, 24 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Merger proposal

The article's incident is unnoticeable outside of the context of wider criticisms of Confucius Institutes, which has its dedicated article. Therefore I propose this article be merged into Criticism of Confucius Institutes.--LucasGeorge (talk) 07:44, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose merge on the grounds that having parent/child articles (WP:SUMMARY) would seem to work better. Criticism of Confucius Institutes at 128k is already too long (WP:TOOBIG), and the Braga incident page is well-referenced from multiple sources (suggesting independent notability). The incident page should certainly be better linked from the main page, and I've attempted to do so by adding links and adding a 'further information' template. I think that that suffices. Klbrain (talk) 06:49, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The thing is, the section in the Criticism of Confucius Institutes article is longer and better than this article. I would suggest, roughly, replacing this article with the material in the Criticism of Confucius Institutes article and replacing the material in the above article with a brief summary and link to t his article.Bill (talk) 06:02, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Description of incident

The description of the incident is incomprehensible. In one paragraph it says that Xu Lin demanded the removal of references to Taiwanese institutions. In the next paragraph it says that she demanded the removal of references to the Confucius China Studies Program, which is a PRC program. It is also not made clear how Xu Lin obtained control of the materials distributed at the conference. Did she simply steal the printed materials? Or did she exert pressure on the organizers? Or was she herself one of the organizers and in charge of the conference?Bill (talk) 05:49, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]