User talk:Colipon

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Welcome to my talk page. I will generally respond to your messages here for the purpose of linking threads, but will respond on your talk page if you prefer.


I have a question; what was the CPC Secretariat composition before the 12th Central Committee (and how long were Deng and Hu members)...Currently, the "Central institution membership" section of the Hu Yaobang infobox is incomplete (of course I'm guessing, but Hu was Secretary-General of the CPC Secretariat). --TIAYN (talk) 08:13, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Hu Yaobang was part of the Secretariat beginning in 1980, when it was duly restored after the Cultural Revolution. He was Secretary-General of the Secretariat from 1980 to 1982, presumably at this point the Secretariat still functioned much like it did in Deng Xiaoping's days as Secretary-General (perhaps Deng saw Hu playing the same role that he himself played under Mao). Beginning in September 1982 the Secretary-General position was abolished, or 'merged' into the role of the General Secretary of the Communist Party, a position which presides nominally over the Secretariat and the Politburo, but whose title seems to be derived from the Secretariat. To answer you perhaps more directly, the Secretariat did not exist during the Cultural Revolution, and its only previous incarnation was between the founding of the PRC and the Cultural Revolution under Deng Xiaoping. Before that, the Secretariat during the days of the party as a wartime organization was one in the same as what one would see as a de facto Politburo Standing Committee. Colipon+(Talk) 00:56, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

Thanks! ... I've just created the Vice Chairman of the Central Military Commission, and I have several questions. What does "主持工作" mean? I know it means presiding something, but does that mean that Lin Biao was Vice Chairman who was responsible for presiding over the work of the CMC, or was it another word to say "First Vice Chairman"? Are articles for the "People's Revolutionary Military Commission" and the "National Defense Council" needed (probably not I'm guessing)? The party–state CMC first became "unified" bodies, in the sense that they had the same leadership (vice-chairmen and chairmen), with the retirement of Zhang Zhen (general) in 1997 (membership in general I don't know), and the state national defense bodies were separate (in terms of membership) with the CPC–CMC (most notably with a large chunk of old KMT generals serving as members and less senior CPC commanders)—the current state of the article does not make this clear... My question is this; should I create separate articles or try to create a "Institutional history" section (as done with the CDIC)? The problem, as I see it, is that unlike the CDIC, which existed in different incarnation, with the CMC we are dealing with two separate systems which were later merged into one (which means, two separate institutional histories). Whats you're thoughts on the matter? --TIAYN (talk) 11:45, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

Hi, good work on the article! "主持工作" means literally "presiding over work"; in my understanding it is often used in the context of describing someone as "being in charge day-to-day" as opposed to someone who is the nominal head of the organization. One might say for instance that Liu Yunshan is the president of the Central Party School but day to day the person who actually runs the place is He Yiting, the executive vice president of the school. As for whether or have two articles or not, my preference is to keep it all under one article. Since 1997 I am fairly certain that the Vice-Chairmanship and the membership at large had merged into a single entity. It may also be worthwhile to create an article entitled "one institution, two signboards. Colipon+(Talk) 17:05, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Incomplete DYK nomination[edit]

Symbol question.svg Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/Suicide of Chen Gang at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; see step 3 of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with {{db-g7}}, or ask a DYK admin. Thank you. DYKHousekeepingBot (talk) 04:34, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

Question 2[edit]

Question, are their currently more then one CC official currently under investigation by the CDIC? If so who are these individuals? I need them for my infobox User:Trust Is All You Need/Socialism (I'm currently working on the 18th CPC Central Committee). --TIAYN (talk) 19:59, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Good work! Let me know if you need help. Yang Jinshan, Jiang Jiemin, and Li Dongsheng were expelled at the 4th plenum. The only member currently under investigation is Ling Jihua. There are many alternates under investigation but not yet formally expelled. Maybe it is a good idea to append a number to the 'symbol' so that one can see which plenum the member was expelled at - in all likelihood Ling will be expelled at the 5th plenum.
A few other notes - is it ok that we use "PSC" rather than "SC-PC", for "Politburo Standing Committee"? That is the acronym that I have most frequently seen being used. Also ethnicity should say 'Mongol' not 'Mongolian' (similar to "Bengali" and "Bangladeshi" or "Kazakh" and "Kazakhstani"), one is an ethnicity, the other a nationality. I am guessing you intend to use this page to replace the current "18th Central Committee of the Communist Party of China" page.
Another useful "key" might be "military", although this again may overlap as Yang Jinshan is both "military" and "expelled". I am not aware of anyone that is "female" and "military." Colipon+(Talk) 20:26, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

It says which plenum the individual is expelled at in the Keys section :p .. Fixed, fixed and yes, I was thinking about it (there has to be a limit to how many "—" rows one can have). Its either a Key for military or a separate header (for military rank).... Yes I am... In any case, I'm having problems in two other areas; first is (nine missing birth dates (it seems English Chinese outlets are not very keen to publish their age–those I found I got from China Vitae, but they are missing 9 individuals) and the second problem is the Rank column (I honestly don't know which position qualifies for what rank; I have a very faint idea but have no clue).. --TIAYN (talk) 20:42, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

I can fill in all the ranks if you want. Basically the rule of thumb is that PB = Sub-national rank. PSC = national rank. Everyone else in CC is "Provincial-Ministerial" (省部级), once in a while you will have someone at sub-provincial level (Ma Xingrui for instance), and once in a blue moon someone at the prefecture-department (厅局级) level. "State leader" is technically incorrect because all of PB, Sec't, and even Vice Chairs of the CPPCC qualify as "party and state leaders", the correct terminology is "national-level leader". I am inclined to "abbreviate" the ranks if possible, "N" for "national leader", "SN" for "sub-national leader", "PM" for "provincial-ministerial", and "SPM" for "sub-provincial (vice minister)". Colipon+(Talk) 20:59, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
That would be great, as for abbreviations you decide, but I'll note that the article does not have any space issues yet (and I doubt it will).... So the entire non PSC Politburo are "Deputy State Leader" rank? Who is ranked Deputy Minister, Bureau Director, Deputy Bureau Director, Division Head, Deputy Division Head, Section Head or Deputy Section Head (you don't need to answer all of them, just one is suffice) and are these ranks party ranks or state ranks? --TIAYN (talk) 21:17, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
I think I wrote about this at Civil Service of the People's Republic of China. And yes, the entire Politburo (non-PSC) is "deputy-state leader" rank. All CPC department heads are headed by a Politburo member, except for the "international liaison" department, which makes the latter a minister-level rank, but the former "deputy-national-leader" ranks. To find out who belongs to the "national leader" ranks one just has to look at a news bulletin for a funeral of a deceased leader; however in recent years this practice has been abandoned in favour of naming only members of the PSC (and Jiang and Hu) when it comes to funerals. Some ranks are strange - technically the party chiefs of Peking and Tsinghua Universities both hold sub-provincial (vice-minister) rank. State-owned enterprises are classified by rank. Usually those with higher than x dollars in revenue or are of "strategic national importance" have higher ranks. Colipon+(Talk) 21:40, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
Also, since China is a party-state, the ranks between the party and state belong to the same system. Those at the same rank can hold vastly different levels of political power, however; for example a provincial deputy party chief is immeasurably more powerful than a provincial "consultative conference" vice-chair, though technically they are entitled to the same salary and benefits. Colipon+(Talk) 21:43, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
This raises another point - military ranks are not the same as civil ones, and I have not found a convincing source yet that tells me the two are interchangeable. It seems to me like a Major General is equivalent to sub-provincial rank, Lt. General is equivalent to a cabinet minister, and a General is equivalent of a deputy national leader, but again I don't know for sure. Therefore under "rank" presumably you can put the military rank for PLA officers but civil rank for non-PLA. Colipon+(Talk) 21:46, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
Thanks alot.. As for military rank in the Rank column; it would seem very strange to have two different ranking system within one column, wouldn't it? --TIAYN (talk) 22:31, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
I don't think so at all. I did it at the "anti-corruption" article. The thing is, it is difficult to assign civil ranks to military leaders anyway. Colipon+(Talk) 23:53, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
OK, it looks great actually. Anyhow, I moved information about retirement to the "Keys" column and removed the former posts of retired officials, replacing it with "—" and removed all posts which an individual currently did not hold. While you might disagree (since you added it), I'd argue that most WP readers will probably go quickly through the list and might get a tad bit confused by seeing two individuals in the same office (since it would look like that). At last, if we are to include every office an individual is going to hold during a term won't certain boxes became too large? ... I've also created a military "Keys" column, so military personnel get sorted properly... About retirement.. Who is retired and who is not? Is Zhou Shengxian for instance retired? He's still young enough, but I doubt he'll get appointment which lasts barely for a year. Should individuals like Zhou be pushed into the retirement column? --TIAYN (talk) 10:55, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
Sorry, I will have to disagree, but let me tell you why and maybe you can tell me if it does not make sense. Central Committee members are usually selected from a list of candidates who are already 'slotted' for certain positions. That is, Wang Rulin made it to CC by virtue of his being the party head in Jilin; similarly, Xie Zhenhua made it because he was a minister-level deputy chair of the NDRC. Huang Xingguo made it because he was mayor of Tianjin. That these people were later transitioned to different roles was a matter of unforeseen circumstances. If we push a 'dash' through the "position" column for these individuals, it is not possible to see why they made it to the CC in the first place. Very rarely (at least since 2002) will you ever have a CC member who sits on the body without any other official position; now CC seats are essentially ex officio (though as a side point I feel sorry for the losers of the elections because there are more candidates and seats and it's usually obvious who did not "make it", as was the case with Deng Liqun).
For retirement, it's basically anyone above the age of 65, and that includes those who are moved into essentially powerless positions in the NPC or CPPCC. Again, this way it is clear to the reader why someone like Zhang Baoshun sits on the CC to begin with; if there is only a 'dash' through that column for Zhang the reader will have no idea why he sits on the CC to begin with.
Side issue - what do you do with Yang Jinshan who is a part of the PLA and also expelled? Colipon+(Talk) 14:17, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
I get that, but isn't that what the lead is for? The lead, which is going to get written, should mention this.... And if you're right won't these people be reallocated soon anyway? ... Wasn't Yang Jinshan dismissed from all his posts, lost his status and his rank withdrawn (and he is no longer in active service).. What I'm saying is this, Yang Jinshan is no longer a PLA soldier or a PLA representative. He is no longer fits the description of military personnel; he's no longer an active soldier... Again, I'm planning to write a lead, and this should surely be included.... My plan is very simple; I want to turn the 18th CPC Central Committee into a featured list. Featured lists get more visitors, and more importantly, it can be nominated for a main page listing, as the Chairman of the National Assembly of Vietnam has (it will be shown on the main page on 3 July).. I'm doing the same thing with the Soviet 16th and 17th central committees (the planned layout will be similar to the two aforementioned), and I want to have at least 3-4 CPC central committees as FLs...
In other words, I accept you're criticism. But part of the criticism you just made could just as easily have a sentence or two in the lead (the maximum amount an article can have to qualify as a list is 4 so we'll have plenty of space). --TIAYN (talk) 20:12, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Something I could agree on is, instead of actually listing the work of former retirees in the table, what about instead of "–" we'll have "Note 1", "Note 2"? ... And they would all go through the same thing, in very short and orderly manner. Why the person was retired (age)/why he was dismissed/Why he was transitioned. His/her last active post... What about short notes, two to three sentences?.. What about:
Hanzi K Ethnicity Office
Rank Portrait I–C & CDIC
Min, WangWang Min
(born 1950)
王珉 Han
Notes section
  1. ^ He was retired because of age limits for promotion. He last served as Minister of Culture.
Thanks for your suggestions, unfortunately I still do not agree, but I appreciate that we are both editing in good faith. I will offer another (hopefully more convincing) reason for you for retaining titles which are no longer current, and I hope you will reconsider. I too would love to see this page make it to a "Featured List" status. However, we want the page to have staying power. Your current proposal assumes that the reader is most interested in the current state of affairs, which may well be true now, but this won't be true twenty, thirty years from now, when this page will likely still exist and garner hits (who knows, the 18th CC is definitely the most 'institutionalized' CC to date, with every seat being given ex officio to a member holding another position, and with 99% of members strictly following retirement age regulations). As such, when we look back five, ten years from now, it is important that we demonstrate exactly what the body looked like at the beginning of the term (2013) and what it looked like at the end (2017). Think of a list like "list of members of Richard Nixon's cabinet" - would you exclude the cabinet members who resigned midway through their terms? Similarly can you imagine if we were to make the same list for the "17th CC", where "current position" would not apply? Therefore my suggestion is to still include major titles of disgraced as well as retired officials. Additionally, I would remove the "retired" key; even if this does not conflict with the "PLA" key, it may conflict with the "female" key. It is entirely plausible that someone will want to filter for "PLA" members only and then miss someone because their key says "retired."
So my proposal is this - we have only three types of "parenthetical remarks" - (retired), (dismissed), and (transferred). Retired means that they had reached age limits and left office or taken on a symbolic position at the NPC and CPPCC. Dismissed means that they were removed forcibly from their positions. Finally Transferred means that they left their positions in the middle of their term on the CC but took on a position of equivalent rank. Of course there is also "died in office" - I don't know how you want to capture that but it doesn't seem like that will happen to anyone this time around. Colipon+(Talk) 00:31, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

There are some individuals who have "retired", but have not "retired", and who are holding ceremonial posts until they reach the age limit, but these people have not retired in the practical sense of the word... What about

Hanzi K Ethnicity Office Rank Portrait I–C & CDIC
Min, WangWang Min
(born 1950)
Min, WangWang Min
(born 1950)
Min, WangWang Min
(born 1950)
Han Secretary, Chongqing Municipal Committee
Jihua, LingLing Jihua
(born 1956)
Han Vice Chairman of the Chinese Political Consultative Conference (dimsissed)
Head of the United Front Work Department (dismissed)
Guangrong, QinQin Guangrong
(born 1954)
Han Secretary, Yunnan Provincial Committee (transferred)
Vice Chair, Internal Legal Affairs Committee of the National People's Congress
Guangrong, QinQin Guangrong
(born 1954)
Han Secretary, Yunnan Provincial Committee (until 2014)
Vice Chair, Internal Legal Affairs Committee of the National People's Congress (from 2014)
Jun, CheChe Jun
(born 1958)
Han First Commissar, Xinjiang Production and Construction Corps (until 2015)
Deputy Secretary, Xinjiang Regional Committee
Chunlan, SunSun Chunlan
(born 1958)
Han Secretary, Tianjin Municipal Committee (2012–2014)
Head of the United Front Work Department (2014–)

In any case, I'll begin work on "tabeling" the alternate section.. I feel, since we've established an unusually "comradely" working relationship, it would be wrong for me to push through my version, so I'll let this discussion run its course. A compromise will be find, I hope. --TIAYN (talk) 10:28, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. I have two more suggestions above - one is to capture the years that each member served in each role, the other is consistent with what I have written above. To be perfectly honest I really don't see any point in introducing the collapsible list since usually we are dealing with two, at most three offices, and the information on the offices they once held is just as pertinent if not more so than the "current office" so it makes no sense for the user to have to click an extra button just to see it. Colipon+(Talk) 17:53, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
Sorry for late response; real life and I was creating the the Deputy Secretary-General of the State Council list... In any case, this should work:
Hanzi K Ethnicity Office Rank I–C & CDIC
Min, WangWang Min
(born 1950)
Han Emperor, Paramount
Secretary, Guizhou Provincial Committee (2013–2015)
Deputy Secretary, Central Commission for Discipline Inspection (2012–2013)
I would prefer a break somehow instead of try offices with a row, with two marked with (dismissed) or (retired)-it just doesn't look very nice... As for alternate members can be dismissed outside a plenum, I could not find anything supporting that. But I've noticed that alternate members, during the anti-corruption campaign, often decide to "willingly" leave office (a more quiet departure)... According to this article "Central Committee on Thursday endorsed prior decisions to revoke the membership of six former officials."... Anyhow, what you think of removing the "Portrait" column. Currently we have 40 pictures, but have 207 individuals listed in the table (is 40 really enough?).. And without the Portrait column the tables look better. --TIAYN (talk) 23:15, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
apparently China has a military representative who is a woman... --TIAYN (talk) 09:02, 25 June 2015 (UTC)


Hanzi K Ethnicity Office Rank I–C & CDIC
Min, WangWang Min
(born 1950)
Han Emperor, Paramount (2015–)
Secretary, Guizhou Provincial Committee (2013–2015)
Deputy Secretary, Central Commission for Discipline Inspection (2012–2013)
This latest version looks good. Just to clarify, this doesn't mean we have to add 'year' designations to everyone, just the people who changed positions. Colipon+(Talk) 11:39, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for your hard work; here are a few more requests - is it ok that we use "♀§" instead for "Female and military" - it would seem only logical. Also for those "promoted" from alternate to full membership could we use a colour like light green? Red seems to imply something "bad". I would actually say that the '♮' sign you use to denote member being expelled from the party should use a red background. Also is it alright that we reduce the size of the CPC logo? I'm also debating whether we should use "SC" for the abbreviation for "Secretariat", since "SC" is commonly used to abbreviate "Standing Committee". Colipon+(Talk) 13:58, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
Another thing - could we please order the years from earlier to later? Again this is for the future, it makes much more sense for this to be chronological rather than reverse chronological. Colipon+(Talk) 14:56, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
Agree, agree (I changed it to "LightBlue", less work that way.. for different colors see Web colors), agree (reduced to 180px, enough?), agree (changed it to ST, OK?) and disagree. I cannot agree with this suggestion.. If we had worked on the17th CPC Central Committee I could have accepted the argument, since, its an historical institution (which no longer exists), but the 18th CPC Central Committee still exists, at the present, and it should focus on the present. The first they should see is the present office, not the individual's work history.

...Again; do you think we can remove the "Portrait" column (only 40 pictures out of 200+ individuals)? --TIAYN (talk) 20:30, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

I don't mind keeping the 'portrait' column - it may incentivize us to find pictures of these people. Colipon+(Talk) 20:33, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
Another thing.. In the CC full section you have not linked any cities (by that, I mean city names in official titles, such as "Chonqing Municipal Committee" but you have done that in the alternate section. While I'm not against it, the list has to look, if possible, identical from beginning to end)..... In either case, should we include the heads of the institutions directly under the Central Committee?? I've done something similar with the main apparatus at the Central Committee elected by the 17th Congress of the All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks)—but there are important variations between the CPC and the CPSU; the CPSU had a tendency to abolish and resurrect departments, commissions, you name very often, so for instance the CPSU Organizations Department had 8–9 different incarnations... Therefore in the CPSU, a department played a specific role in specific times, therefore they are needed, and because of this, there is not much written about them either...). Should we include a list of directly subordinate to the CC heads? --TIAYN (talk) 20:49, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
I see where you are coming from, but do you really want us to come back and re-jig the entire thing come 2017 when this becomes a historical institution? As for linking, I think my policy was to link only those cities which are not direct-controlled (going by the philosophy of "only link things that a user might be interested in clicking on). As for institutions, I'm not sure - it doesn't hurt to have it. Could include the "vice-heads" of departments as well since those are usually very prominent positions, particularly in the Org and Prop departments. And yes, the CPC's institutions seem a lot more stable than those of the CPSU. Colipon+(Talk) 20:54, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
Please retain the city links, like Qujing and Qianxinan Buyei and Miao Autonomous Prefecture. These are places that even I have never heard of and I would love to have links to them. Colipon+(Talk) 21:07, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
It is also not necessary to mention that a Governor is also a deputy secretary. Colipon+(Talk) 21:18, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
If you link one city, you have to link every city, every province and so on. If that's what you want to do, then do it :) Again, consistency, the article has to identical from beginning to end. So if locations names are linked one place, it should be linked everywhere else.... I have nothing against it, it was just easier for me to remove them then to add links to all the names :p .. As for "only link things that a user might be interested in clicking on", that works for articles, and not FLs (or lists in general)... I would say, I can wait until 2017.. + the main work will have been done, no one barely visits the page(it will of course rise if it becomes an FL), but more importantly, very few actually edit this page... But again, I feel its the natural order. When I create infoboxes for politicians its natural for me that the office the person earned latest is at the top, and the one he earned at the bottom (even if, theorettically, the one at the bottom is more important than the one at the top...).. This, by the end of the day, is a matter of taste.....

"It is also not necessary to mention that a Governor is also a deputy secretary."... It is.. We mention that Xi is CMC Chairman even if he has the right to the office as the GS and President. People not accustomed to CPC politics don't even know that a governor sits in the party leadership, so its seems to me as logical. --TIAYN (talk) 21:54, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

It may seem logical and consistent but imho it is not really relevant; I find it is too much clutter. Maybe a hatnote will do just fine. My justification for this is that even in the articles themselves about people who are currently governors, it usually does not stipulate that they are also deputy party chiefs. As for the ordering, I am not going to fight tooth and nail for it as long as you are open to (and will be around to) changing it in November 2017 when this becomes a historical body.
On a sidenote, the Politburo met yesterday to discuss further institutionalizing meritocratic promotion (and crucially, demotion) practices. There is also the Sanyan Sanshi ("Three Stricts, Three Honests") campaign which probably deserves an article as well. Colipon+(Talk) 14:08, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
Isn't it? Isn't the governor the no. 2 in the local standing committee because he is First Deputy Secretary? Party offices, as we both know, are more important then state posts at the end of the day.It seems very relevant to me..... Fine, we have a date for November 2017 (I'll earmark the calendar)... Interesting, at least we now know what the 5th Plenary Session will focus on (of course that's just a guess, but the CC must sanction it for it to become a regulation in the first place, and I'm guessing such a regulation will be pushed through with a great deal of fanfare).... As for last argument to remove portraits, if we do we can give a separate column to YOF (year of birth), which will give the readers the ability to sort the table according to an individual's birth year. --TIAYN (talk) 15:23, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Almost ready[edit]

@Trust Is All You Need: I think this list is almost ready for prime time. A few things. 1. You might want to clarify what the acronym "ARDCC institutions" stands for. 2. I honestly do not think we need two different symbols for "expelled at the 4th plenum" and simply "expelled", it's too much information. I would say we combine the two into a single symbol, and I would prefer to use "♮" over the down arrow (that seems to indicate demotion, not expulsion); a simple "X" might also do. 3. I also do not see "retired" as a necessary 'key' anymore, since we are labeling the years of each office, and you made a good point that some of these people have simply been 'relegated' to the NPC and CPPCC, doesn't mean they are fully retired. 4. I do not think we need the plenums in table format - I actually prefer the old format. 5. We need to fix up the 'symbol legend' table so it doesn't occupy the whole page. It also may be advantageous to put it in columns rather than in a table format.
As a side note, it is interesting how seemingly random the Alternate Member list is - it seems like most deputy party chiefs at the provincial level have a seat, but the remaining positions are dispersed throughout without any apparent pattern, ranging from party apparatchiks to army generals to university administrators to bank CEOs to some scientists who do not seem to have any real position of importance at all. As a rule of thumb I did not assign 'rank' to anyone at a state-owned enterprise, although in practice most of these are sub-provincial level positions (but they get paid much more $$$ than a mere civil servant) if you consider the seniority of their holders. Also the youngest member turns out to be Liu Jian, party chief of Hami Prefecture, born in 1970 - an extraordinary feat given that he was a mere 42 years of age when he entered the body. Many 42 year olds are lucky to be a county governor! Colipon+(Talk) 19:13, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Sorry late response.. Work... In any case... 1. It is explained, see Keys section (this might not be the right place to abbreviate it, but it must surely be mentioned in the lead)... 2 done... 3 but its still interesting for the reader (it surprised me) that so many individuals retire without being relegated to ceremonial posts (in any case, it does no harm being there, right?)... 4 Since its part of a list, it has to be in proper format (a list with over 4 paragraphs is no list, according to WP definition, therefore having them in boxes makes sense; but you can ask the reviewers during the FL nom, if they support you're motion we'll revert to the older version)... 5 Is that a problem (this box should be seen; the bigger the better right)? (however, I've made it smaller)...
Its a tradition that begun under Stalin, in the USSR at least. Since the CC was not supposed to be a debating body, it became a professionalised body (e.g. that if the leader, or the Politburo needed help, they could simply turn to a CC member, who was a leading specialist in the field). The CC is the supreme body of the party and is supposed to be able to make decisions on all things, and for it to do that, it needs people from all areas (in the Soviet CC under Brezhnev you had genetics, spaceship researchers, journalists, ideologues, engineers, authors, heads of mass organizations, enterprise heads—pretty much everything you could think of)... At last, everything the CPC does is organized; they leave nothing to chance (the Mao days are definitely gone).. Jupp, that man is going to have a bright future (I see PSC membership if everything goes to plan).
As for a separate column for age, I feel like the list would be missing something (because at the present you can't sort the tables according to age)... As we both know, having the right birth year means everything for an CPC official (just look at Bo)—you're age of birth determines, with some few exceptions (like Liu Jian), the offices you require and the clout you have. To be honest, the "Age" post (at my talk page) has given me a new perspective on Chinese politics (I always knew about it, but now I've read, because of you, tons about it).

...The columns might be ready, but there are several problems. We currently lack references on retirement, most individuals who are under investigation, references on those who have been expelled, retirements, birth years and the entire office column... And of course, we can't forget the lead. There is still much to do here! --TIAYN (talk) 22:13, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

The alphabetical ordering is not correct - by using the template {first name|last name} it seems as though the table will sort the individuals by their given name (Chinese naming order is family name followed by given name.) Regarding retirement, it seems like the only people who 'retire for good' are those in the PLA. Could you point to a case where a civilian official retired completely without being assigned to a position in the CPPCC or NPC? Wang Min and Zhang Baoshun both recently received placements on committees on the NPC, on which they can presumably serve until the next transition in 2018. In any case, even if assuming some individuals retire without being given another post, perhaps it is best to change the 'legend' to "retired during term" rather than simply "retired", again for the sake of preparing for the day that this becomes a historical body. Colipon+(Talk) 01:10, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
I'm embarrassed that I didn't think of that when I created the table. And I'm even more embarrassed that I never noticed it... Does Zhou Shengxian currently hold any offices? If its true that all the retired hold ceremonial positions, those offices should be mentioned in the table.. It could easily be changed to, when the 19th CPC CC has been formed, To indicate individuals who retired before the dissolution of the 18 CC. --TIAYN (talk) 11:00, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
Zhou Shengxian now sits on an environment committee on the CPPCC. Colipon+(Talk) 11:34, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
Those positions should of course be mentioned in the tables, and since you know of them, please add them to the article. Again, how are we going to solve the problems of referencing the offices individuals have held? To the Chinese make individuals CVs for every CC member? ... As for you're changes to the Deputy Secretary-General of the State Council, I've never seen a field in which states which offices the individual acquired after leaving office (I know you'll say its important, but again, I've never seen that before).. Considering the CPPCC ceremonial importance, I've decided to create Vice Chairman of the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference, Secretary General of the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference and Committee heads and vice heads of the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference (since nine is not enough to be designated as a list by WP standards)..--TIAYN (talk) 22:39, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
The only reservation I have about adding committee memberships to the articles is that they are not really offices per se. It's like listing out all the committee memberships of a U.S. Congressman... I am ok with keeping NPC and CPPCC committee positions out of this table. As for the Deputy Sec-Gen "became xx" issue, you can take a look at List of Governors of Massachusetts - I know they actually divide it out as a separate table altogether, but I still think it's more convenient to just add it into a notes section on the main table. After all we are really trying to serve the reader here, and I think a reader will be interested to know this information -- the State Council Deputy Sec-Gen position is known as a 'springboard' to higher office, and there has been much speculation that the sudden arrival of Jiang Zelin in the position this year is going to propel him to greater heights at the 19th Party Congress, possibly as a director of a Leading Group General Office succeeding Liu He, who currently, in my opinion, holds one of the most important offices of the land as the chief mastermind of the party's economic implementation plans. Liu himself may well enter the Politburo or head the NDRC, but this is all just my own speculation. It would be great if you can create those articles, though I am not sure I will have as much energy to dedicate there as I have been to the CC article and the deputy Sec-Gen article, because these are positions of actual significance rather than purely ceremonial positions! But you're right that esteemed retirees are often assigned spots there and that they were, historically speaking, at least, important people. Also it's worthwhile noting that the trend of local PPCC chairs being assigned only to retirees is not consistent - for example He Lifeng who was Tianjin PPCC chair and thought to have been 'relegated' but nonetheless later placed in the very significant post of deputy director of the NDRC, minister-rank. Similarly ethnic Miao Hunan PPCC chair Chen Qiufa was promoted to Governor of Liaoning which imo was a big surprise appointment given that Chen's initial appointment to the PPCC position at age 59 would have almost certainly 'banished' him to the political periphery. Then you also have Wang Rong who was taken out of his very powerful Shenzhen party chief position to serve as the Guangdong PPCC Chairman, which, despite being technically a promotion, led people to believe that this was a sign that he is due for a corruption investigation! All very interesting, indeed. Colipon+(Talk) 01:25, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
Re: Referencing. There is an official CV of every member of the CC. You can find it at the official website of the CPC, and various other state sources, however I am not looking forward to doing this as it will be incredibly tedious. Is this a 'mandatory requirement' for featured list?? By the way the 18th CC article actually gets a couple of thousands of hits a month, it's not bad. Perhaps an easy way to search for the references is to simply go to the articles themselves and see if you can find references there. For the full members this may be ok, but only a few dozen alternates currently have articles. Colipon+(Talk) 01:33, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
First, Central Commission for Discipline Inspection article is finally being reviewed... Secondly, while people in the West have a tendency to refer to the CPPCC and the NPC as "ceremonial" only, I doubt the CPC itself views it as such (I mean, the heads of the CPCC and the NPC are PSC members).. Thirdly, interesting! Fourth, so you're saying CVs just exists for full members.. Where can I find these? People's Daily, Xinhua? I'll fix it... Fine, being a "member of a committee" might not be notable enough, but heading such a committee at least warrants a mention. Do any of the retirees head CPPCC committees (or serve as vice chairman)? --TIAYN (talk) 09:49, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
I came across this website while doing the biography for Yang Yue - could be helpful for referencing, since it is an official source, and also easily searchable. Not sure if it contains PLA biographies though - seems to be only civilians. Also it is in Chinese, but you just need to type in the Chinese characters! Colipon+(Talk) 22:44, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
It didn't work for me! :( ... In any case, References subsection General I added this:

... if you ever come by other databases on CC members, add it to the "General" section.. In any cases, we have two things left; finishing the lead and writing the "alt" text for images (alt text is text that describe the images, its to help colour blind people...).. Could you write, since you're more updated on Chinese politics then I am, a paragraph (only one) on events during the 18th CC, what its done and so on (pretty much, I'd assume, a short summary of the plenary sessions and the anti-corruption campaign).. Of course, there may be room for two, but I don't know how much space is needed to describe the difference between full and alternate members of the CC. --TIAYN (talk) 17:52, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

I've moved the article too main space (the 18th CPC CC page)... Another question; what does State Councillor means? Arn't all ministers (and minister-level officials) members of the State Council? ... If you want you can nominate the article for DYK. --TIAYN (talk) 21:58, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

is Baidu Baike a reliable source? Its shares similarities with WP, but its controlled by the government (the sites administrators, who I presume are government officials, have to approve every edit).. At the end of the day, is it anyless reliable then People's Daily? --TIAYN (talk) 09:16, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
Hello - where do you want me to write the paragraph on events during the CC? In the lede? Great to see it's been migrated. State Councillor is basically a Vice-Premier - it's a senior officer in the State Council; however sometime in the 1980s they decided that there were too many Vice-Premiers so they made the people with highly specific portfolios "State Councilors" - including those overseeing public security (Guo Shengkun), foreign affairs (Yang Jiechi), defense (Liang Guanglie), and so on. These individuals have the same ranking administratively as a Vice-Premier. Another way to look at it is seeing them as the "Standing Committee members of the State Council" if I could call it that. They routinely take part in high level state council meetings that the cabinet ministers do not take part in. As for Baidu Baike - it is a reliable source for many China-related issues, but imho they don't do nearly as good of a job as Wikipedia at enforcing policies or quality of articles; though yes, you should take the politics articles with a grain of salt since it is written with heavy censorship. However, I would argue that it could be a good source for CVs of individuals, as well as the memberships of various committees and so on to be reliable. Colipon+(Talk) 13:29, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

OK, thanks. Yes in the lead.. I'm thinking one paragraph in the lead. --TIAYN (talk) 20:43, 6 July 2015 (UTC)


Close to perfection here.. One last problem; you have to reference this; "Prior to the 1980s, the composition of the Central Committee was essentially pre-determined by the party's top leaders. However, beginning at the 13th Party Congress in 1987, the number of candidates standing for office had been increased to be greater than the number of seats available. With this method, the candidates that receive the lowest confirmation votes in favour at a party congress not be elected at all".... I note that you removed that the 1st plenary session elected the Politburo, PSC etc.... While I agree that the sentence could have been better written, I'd argue its necessary (most people don't know this) and it should be mentioned someway or another in the lead. It doesn't need to be long, one sentence or all, but it should be there.. I'll leave this too you. Other than that, we need to write a sentence or two on the apparatus (right now its unclear to readers unfamiliar to the topic why it is there)... I can write a sentence or two on it. --TIAYN (talk) 19:25, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

I found the article for the voting methodology described here on the New York Times Chinese edition. It's fascinating, the way Chinese politics evolved in the 1980s. The entire series is worth a read, includes such wonderful anecdotes as to why Hu Yaobang was thrown out and the intense battles between liberals and conservatives in the wake of the Eastern European revolutions and in the lead up to Tiananmen. It's unfortunate that I haven't been able to find an English version! Colipon+(Talk) 21:06, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
I also re-inserted the paragraph about the 1st plenary session... and added a sentence on the 2nd plenum. This plenary structure (1st = party bodies, 2nd = state bodies, 3rd = significant announcement on policy, usually reforms) has been essentially institutionalized procedure since 1977. I'm not aware of any deviations from this structure apart from the 4th plenum of the 13th CC which occurred shortly after Tiananmen. Colipon+(Talk) 21:09, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

I found gold! this is the official database on CPC cadres at all levels (the problem is that they seem to delete profiles of people who have retired, so it will become outdated by the 19th CPC, but by than we've hopefully found an alternative source...).. Thanks for the help at the Central Committee elected by... article... Interesting article; I seemed to get the gist of it... Communist idealism is probably the biggest threat to any communist state throughout history; post-Tito Yug, Gorby, Dubcek, Hu & Zhao etc—and not so long ago we had Bo rather cynically basing his campaign for office on the neo-Maoist movement. Of course, I'm not saying that was Hu's & Zhao's intention, but its difficult to close the door once open... In any case, they have that system in Vietnam (if I understood it correctly).. Every National Assembly candidate has to compete with at least one other official. The NA is more powerful then the NPC; its initiated a vote of confidence against Nguyen Tan Dung's government once, and failed to initiate one twice. Another reason is that outer forces influence NA behaviour. For instance, in 2010 Võ Nguyên Giáp (the hero of the Vietnam War) opposed the government's bauxite mining plans claiming they would do great ecological damage)—several small demonstrations occurred, NA members began changing their minds, the government appared shocked, then the party leadership cracked down on the demonstrations and backed down on the bauxite mining plans. This could not happen in China. --TIAYN (talk) 10:31, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

What you say about Vietnam is interesting, seems like their power is very diffuse, one can only wonder what happens if there is a true crisis - whether the CPV will survive the fallout without strong personal leadership. After all a big reason Tiananmen failed to unseat the CPC was due to Deng's personal clout, and there is much confidence now that the CPC can weather a crisis that Xi is in charge. The same cannot be said for Jiang or Hu. The Zhou Yongkang case is telling - last ranked on the standing committee but apparently daring enough to upstage consensus and engage in "non-organizational activities", which one can only speculate is a coup or some other form of power usurpation. Also what you said about "once the door is open it can't be closed" - the system has remained remarkably rigid since 1982, although the proportion of candidates to seats have increased (it was 5% in 1982, but close to 10% by the time of the 18th Congress in 2012). I'm not sure that this method achieved anything substantial apart from eliminating the most extreme of candidates, or, curiously, Princelings. Deng Liqun failed to get elected in 1987 causing him major embarrassment, since he was supposed to get a seat on the Politburo. Bo Xilai also failed to get elected in 1997 despite being slotted for minister-level posts post-congress.
As an aside, the electoral system was much more open in the 1980s 'experimentation' stage, where local People's Congresses had many non-Communist sponsored candidates run for election, and often party-sponsored candidates actually lost in elections, all the way up to the vice governor level. When grassroots forces tried to conduct non-party-sponsored civic nominations again during the "Jasmine Revolution" the party actually decided to crack down, even though this practice was first legitimized by the party itself in the 1980s. Colipon+(Talk) 15:48, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

I'm guessing non-organizational activities means behaviour not deemed acceptable by CPC standards; factionalism, cliques etc... Have you noticed how stable the alternate membership of the 17th and 18th CC are? 9 out of the 10 youngest members of the 17th CC alternate are alternate members of the 18th CC.. (and the trend continues; the only exceptions are retirements and some promotion, but overall very few of those...).. They are expanding it very slowly—they probably see no reason to expand it at all... On that note, have you noticed that women representation decreased in the 18th CC both in member and alternate membership categories? ... Interesting. In Cuba, in this years local elections, two dissidents were actually allowed to contest the elections.... As for the Jasmine Revolution, the state constitution makes it explicitly clear that its illegal to oppose socialist political system (and socialism in general)—it doesn't matter what other laws say if they trample on that one. --TIAYN (talk) 15:59, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

The point I was trying to make was that the civic election contests were not at all meant to subvert the socialist system, rather, it was to use the rules stipulated in the electoral laws to get independent candidates elected, which was a practice that was adopted (and even encouraged) in the 1980s, where political system reform was widely discussed and the atmosphere was notably more liberal. However nowadays there is very little flexibility, that even those who are willing to operate within the confines of the system and have no intent of subverting the system will still be suppressed.
Also interesting is that Li Keqiang and Yu Zhengsheng were both not elected to alternate membership at some point in their career. Colipon+(Talk) 17:18, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

I get that. But I feel that that current is forever "lost". That current was led by idealistic, reform-minded communists — they and the old-time conservatives have been replaced by pragmatic market-friendly communists and neocommunists (and its the neocommunists that hold power).. The neocommunists plan is to build up society, using every means necessary, to reach mature socialism (but what mature socialism means no one knows; they continue to say that mature socialism means democracy, equality and social justice but thats a very vague description). Reformist communist idealism seems to me to have died alongside the tiananmen square crackdown and the collapse of the USSR—the current rulers probably believe that civic election contests without control would entail collapse, since this is what happened to Gorby's USSR. Therefore, why would they try something that they think will hurt the CPC? The party as a collective institution of people who are striving for the ultimate goal (human salvation by reaching communism, which is still referred to as a classless moneyless society) is the main connection to the CPC of old and the new party. Since this is the main connection, the idea of unleashing forces that may, just may, harm the CPC in the long run becomes unattainable... Another, maybe more severe problem, is that Xi seems to believe that the interests of the party are identical (or will become identical) to the interests of the people—this is the main problem with Leninist idea of a vanguard party, that the party knows best no matter what at the end of the day.

Interesting. Alternate members, it seems to me, are future leaders who are being tested — the majority of the 17th CC alternates can become members of the 19th CC, and even 20th CC... Another interesting note is that several young 17th CC alternate members were moved to the 18th CDIC.

In any case, the problem with you're point is that defining what subverts the socialist system or not is subjective. --TIAYN (talk) 09:33, 15 July 2015 (UTC)


Sorry. Of course I know that's what talk pages are for. I guess between copying and pasting I landed on the wrong page. Yours, Quis separabit? 20:41, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Talk:Early 2012 Hong Kong protests[edit]

I started the RM discussion a couple weeks ago. I invite you to the discussion since you edited the article. --George Ho (talk) 18:18, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Bold title for Anti-corruption campaign in China[edit]

There are very few actual live exceptions to MOS:BOLDTITLE and this article is not one of them. The title should be repeated in bold unless you can give a good reason to do otherwise. Note that this article is not a general topic discussing all anti-corruption campaigns in China, but rather as specific article discussing one specific anti-corruption campaign initiated by Xi Jinping when he came to power. Rincewind42 (talk) 14:04, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Ok, I can see your point of view, but personally I am of the view that "Anti-corruption campaign in China" is really a topical article name, not a proper article name. That is, there is no uniform way by which the media and academics describe this campaign, some call it "Xi's anti-corruption campaign", at the Chinese WP they call it "Anti-corruption campaign after the 18th Party Congress". Regardless, the current name was selected only to describe the nature of the event, not because it is uniformly named as such. As an example, let's take the title "2014 Greek anti-austerity protests". If we take this as a proper title, the first sentence of the lede would read, "The 2014 Greek anti-austerity protests were a series of protests in Greece against austerity". This is a repetitive, meaningless truism. You can see the article Wenzhou train collision to see why BOLDTITLE does not apply there.
On a separate issue, "anti-corruption campaign in China" itself is a rather inappropriate name - given that there has been many anti-corruption campaigns in Chinese history, including one by Xi's predecessor, Hu Jintao. I'm not sure that the contemporary incarnation of the campaign 'deserves' to be named in a manner as if it is the only anti-corruption campaign in history. Colipon+(Talk) 00:59, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Falun Gong 2 arbitration clarification request archived[edit]

The Falun Gong 2 arbitration clarification request, which you were listed as a party to, has been archived to Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Falun Gong 2. Thank you. For the Arbitration Committee, Jim Carter 08:07, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Suicide of Chen Gang[edit]

Symbol question.svg Hello! Your submission of Suicide of Chen Gang at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 21:20, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Please see new note on DYK nomination template. Yoninah (talk) 23:06, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Peng Yong[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Peng Yong requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. KDS4444Talk 07:00, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

@KDS4444: This has to be one of the stupidest speedy deletion requests I have ever seen. Its referenced, and it clearly shows the individual is notable (military commander, member of the party's supreme decision-making organ between national congresses el cetra)... --TIAYN (talk) 09:35, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
And I like you a lot, too. Thank you for your civility. KDS4444Talk 17:01, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
@KDS4444: Sorry, but that was clearly a doing before thinking move. Of course, I should have worded myself more careful. --TIAYN (talk) 19:47, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

CCDI is a GA[edit]

The CCDI article is a GA! :) ... This is as much yours as mine.. According to the GA reviewer it meets FA criteria, should we nominate it? --TIAYN (talk) 19:47, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Yes, might as well nominate it. Great work!! Colipon+(Talk) 20:40, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 4[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Zhang Dejiang, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Yichun (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:17, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 14[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Liu Yuejun, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Rongcheng (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:48, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Suicide of Chen Gang[edit]

The DYK project (nominate) 12:02, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 24[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

18th Central Committee of the Communist Party of China (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Hami
Zheng Weiping (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to National Defence University

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:55, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

Help me here[edit]

Are the any Chinese writings discussing the offices of the CCDI? If not I'll have to remove them.

    • I've tried doing this myself, but I've found it impossible to solve the problem myself. --TIAYN (talk) 07:15, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Here you go. Can't get more official than that. Colipon+(Talk) 15:48, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
The problem now is that the link you gave me mentions nine subordinate institutions, and my list 12... Whats going on? ... I just created Institutions Directly Under the Central Commission for Discipline Inspection, but its a mess... From what I've understood, the reorganization has been more sweeping than I expected... --TIAYN (talk) 21:51, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
It has indeed been re-organized since Guo wrote his essay, and it is, as far as I know, still undergoing re-organization. I'm not sure if Guo mentions the propaganda and organization departments or the Discipline Supervision Office, "a CCDI within the CCDI". Something else worth mentioning is that not all the central departments and government ministries and commissions have yet come under the direct jurisdiction of the CCDI, but these reforms are happening at a breakneck pace. Colipon+(Talk) 23:36, 28 July 2015 (UTC)