|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
Whats going on with the wiktionary page? It doesn't seem to exist. Thadk 08:15, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
Similarities with Separation of duties
To me it seems that a chinese wall is related to seggregation of duties (ie. that the wall is something you build in order to prevent certain persons from executing certain actions. Can anyone confirm this?
Am I the only one who[[ finds that, far from being "more likely," the second and third etymologies are almost certainly Folk etymology? Has anyone got any legitimate source for this? The OED says that it's in reference to the Great Wall, which seems far more likely. Would someone in early 20th-Century America (OED gives first use 1907) know about a custom (of dubious veracity) of Mandarins? Would he create an analogy based on the Chinese-American community's isolation--caused at this point by racist laws, not by the immigrant]] underline is made by me! he he who is me? group's insularity? No--but everyone knows about the Great Wall of China!
- I'm sure the name stems from the use of thin paper walls in traditonal chinese houses to separate rooms - under the basis that you should not cross the barrier, even with there being no technical force stopping you.
- Chinese houses don't have paper walls. Japanese houses do.
Roadrunner 19:23, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
- I shall endevour to find reference for this concept, with the lack of proper references for the other proposed origins these should be considered for an 'edit' . The huge blockquote fsdfsdfsdfsdfsdfshould be referenced to an external site aswell, wikipedia is not a source of it's own 'truthfulness' (one cannot reference themselves).
--Max power 22:18, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
I was going to swoop in and suggest it's a reference to the Chinese Room, which uses similar language of information blockage between actors, but the dates don't even remotely work if the existing material in this article are to believed (that the term dates back to the 20s, while Searle wrote in the 80s). So this is to obviate any such thinking. However, is it possible that the etymology works the other way, that Searle picked Chinese for his thought experiment in reference to the Chinese Wall concept? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Asasa64 (talk • contribs) 02:25, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
This etymology is silly
Too silly to keep without a citation
- Or, the term may have originated as a reference to a traditional practice among Chinese mandarins in the Late Imperial period, where a junior mandarin who saw a senior mandarin on the road was expected to bow and present compliments; to expedite traffic in high-flow areas such as Beijing, mandarins used retainer walls attached to umbrellas to avoid seeing each other in the first place.
Roadrunner 19:22, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
Computer Science section
The clean room design article links to a section on the Chinese wall article called "computer science", but that no longer seems to exist on this page. Was it removed for a specific reason or has it never been apart of this page?
- The section was replaced with vandalism which was then removed by a well-meaning editor. I don't really know enough about Wikipedia to easily repair this, but I'm going to be bold and try anyway.
Wall or wall?
- I don't see why this term would be a proper noun or any other reason for wall to be capitalized. Chillum 23:31, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
Law firms in Britain
Yes, law firms may act for both sides in a case though it is rare - the stipulation of non-contact only refers to Solicitors... Barristers are not considered by these regulations, even if sharing 'Chambers' - due to the slightly archaic rules that govern their professional circumstances, it is not that uncommon for two barristers to act for the respective sides in a case, and being self-employed as they are it is not considered to be a conflict-of-interest.
The Law Society (governing Solicitors) and the Inns of Court (Governing Barristers) in England and Wales will no doubt have more information on this - I would look it up myself but I don't have the time at the moment.
Lastly, I would expect the regulations to refer mainly to corporate work - there is little chance of a conflict-of-interest with criminal cases due to the Crown Prosecution Service exclusively handling public prosecutions.
Sorry, but the law firms section is just wrong as it applies to English law. Solicitors cannot act for both sides of a case in a litigation scenario as the firm's duties to both sides would conflict. A law firm can act for creditors competing for the same asset in a litigation but require consent to do this. In the latter scenario they would act being "information barriers" (Chinese wall is not a term of art anymore). Barristers from the same chambers can act for opposing clients.
To be pedantic, the Solicitors Regulation Authority creates the rules for solicitors (not the law society) and the Bar Council produces rules for barristers (no the Inns of Court). CKN —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk) 00:33, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
Internal v. External Wall
This parenthetical is a little odd: "(This may be obvious or even coincidental: a feature of the Great Wall of China is that it is an internal barrier within China as opposed to being on one of its frontiers, and hence the metaphor for an internal information barrier within a company.)" The Great Wall of China may be located well within the P.R.C.'s borders today, but at the time it was built it was indeed on the frontier or very close to it. I'd suggest deleting the parenthetical. --Nomenclaturist (talk) 00:18, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
Consider the following unsourced speculation: a "spirit wall" is a traditional feature of Chinese architecture. See Chinese_architecture#Cosmological_concepts: "Screen walls to face the main entrance of the house, which stems from the belief that evil things travel on straight lines."
This type of wall provides nominal isolation-- one can't see through it, or toss objects through a door so "protected," but it may be easily stepped around. __ Just plain Bill (talk) 16:24, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
The Great Wall of China diff may not be really apropos here. Dicdefs (Random House, Webster's 3rd, American Heritage) mention an "insuperable barrier or obstacle, as to understanding" or "serious obstacle to intercourse or understanding" all of which are inapplicable in this context. The type of isolation described in this article depends on the good behavior of the participants far more than it relies on any insurmountable physical barrier.
That said, the article could use reliably sourced information on the origins of this use of the term "Chinese wall." Dictionaries seem to be tertiary sources. Some tertiary sources may be more reliable than others. __ Just plain Bill (talk) 18:11, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
There is another use of "Chinese Wall" that is not described in the article. In criminal cases where the first prosecutor has information he is not allowed to use (as with Kastigar vs. US), a second prosecution can be set up behind a Chinese Wall. See, for example: http://www.armfor.uscourts.gov/newcaaf/opinions/2003Term/03-0025.htm Scott Bowden (talk) 21:13, 14 March 2013 (UTC)