This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on March 7, 2004.
Article milestones Date Process Result March 15, 2004 Featured article candidate Promoted April 23, 2006 Featured article review Kept March 15, 2007 Featured article review Demoted March 31, 2007 Good article nominee Listed October 14, 2008 Good article reassessment Kept August 15, 2009 Good article reassessment Delisted October 21, 2012 Good article nominee Not listed
Error: 'FGAN' is not a valid current status for former featured articles (help).

Template:VA

This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

China B‑class Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject China, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of China related articles 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.ChinaWikipedia:WikiProject ChinaTemplate:WikiProject ChinaChina-related articles B This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Countries B‑class This article is within the scope of WikiProject Countries, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of countries 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.CountriesWikipedia:WikiProject CountriesTemplate:WikiProject Countriescountry articles B This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. WikiProject Countries to-do list: Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Article requests : Check out the article alerts; see if anything catches your fancy. Cleanup : clean-up listing for Countries Stubs : de-stub articles in Category:Stubs by region. Other : add {{WPCountries}} to talk pages of related articles, and assess. Asia B‑class Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Asia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Asia 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.AsiaWikipedia:WikiProject AsiaTemplate:WikiProject AsiaAsia articles B This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. East Asia B‑class (defunct) This article is within the scope of WikiProject East Asia, a project which is currently considered to be defunct.East AsiaWikipedia:WikiProject East AsiaTemplate:WikiProject East AsiaEast Asia articles B This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Socialism B‑class Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Socialism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of socialism 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.SocialismWikipedia:WikiProject SocialismTemplate:WikiProject Socialismsocialism articles B This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Template:WP1.0

Template:Notice-nc-geo

In the fifth paragraph of the introduction, where it refers to the recognition of the PRC as an official state, there is a wrong link. The link you get when you click on 23 countries (have recognized the PRC...) leads to the article about the foreign relations of Taiwan (The Republic of China) and not the PRC.

The link is correct, because the Taiwan foreign relations article lists the 23 countries that recognise it instead of the PRC. Michaelmas1957 18:02, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Every list I've ever seen has Russia and then Canada listed as the largest countries in the world, how is China 2nd by "total area"???Historian932 (talk) 23:17, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Canada's is second by total area but China is second by land area: see List of countries and dependencies by area which has all the numbers. Antarctica isn't a sovereign state.--JohnBlackburne^words_deeds 23:25, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

¿no es información "vieja" que debería estar en el artículo en lugar de estar en la introducción?

Real China is Taiwan. This article needs to be moved to Mainland China. 24.146.221.180 (talk) 17:52, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No. See Talk:China/Archive_14 for the long discussion on this, but "Real China" isn't a term anyone uses that I know, and "Mainland China" is a rarely used term used primarily by those in or referring to Hong Kong and Taiwan to contrast themselves with the PRC. In English the country is commonly called "China", although "People's Republic of China" is used in many formal contexts.--JohnBlackburne^words_deeds 18:12, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please add Cantonese to regional languages because Cantonese is the second most spoken language in China. Jayjayish (talk) 03:10, 4 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: Officially, the government definition states that Cantonese is a dialect of Chinese, not a language, and that the standardised dialect of the Chinese language is Standard Chinese. Whether Cantonese is defined as a dialect or a language is a complex issue (see A language is a dialect with an army and navy). "Cantonese is the second most spoken language in China" - uhh no, that's completely incorrect. There are more native Wuu speakers then there are Yue speakers, and Cantonese is a subset of Yue. Finally, the major Chinese subgroups (Mandarin, Wuu, Yue, Hokkien, Hakka, etc) are already mentioned within the article within the #Languages section. -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs email 03:57, 4 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please change "second largest" to "fourth largest" (country in the world) Michsend (talk) 17:55, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. —KuyaBriBri^Talk 18:49, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

why doesn't China redirect to the Chinese supermarkets in Argentina?

Why should it? The country China is far more important. Michaelmas1957 (talk) 14:23, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

i think this article should be named "peoples republic of china", since taiwan is china, too. im not taiwanesse but i think it is politically preocupied, which wikipedia shouldnt be. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.81.133.34 (talk) 16:23, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The article was moved to the current title after a long and comprehensive discussion during which that very point was raised and addressed. See the discussion in full at Talk:China/Archive_14. It is not going to be moved again without at least as substantive and detailed a discussion, which probably means it won't get moved again any time soon.--JohnBlackburne^words_deeds 16:56, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A better way to correct this bias (that's more reflected in mainstream sources) is to ensure that this article does not unduly imply that Taiwan is not a part of the People's Republic of China. Shrigley (talk) 17:04, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The point of common names is that they aren't politically pre-occupied. We're just doing what the English languages does. CMD (talk) 01:00, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the English language "does" Polish death camps. We can choose different words for different connotations, and it's our editorial choice whether to explain the erroneous implications of a common name (as in Polish death camps) or, like Climategate, to avoid the name altogether. Equating "China" with PRC doesn't necessarily imply that Taiwan is not a part of China, unless you take as dogma that that Taiwan is not a part of PRC; it does necessarily imply that the PRC rather than the ROC or both of them represent "China". Even though it excludes a view held by a shrinking number of KMT hardliners (see WP:UNDUE, "Generally, the views of tiny minorities should not be included at all"), the title is neutral for all the reasons enumerated in the move request. Shrigley (talk) 01:31, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Whether the article title is "China" or "People's Republic of China" doesn't make much difference to me. But the above reasoning misrepresents the views of the Taiwanese government, which no longer claims to be the legitimate government of China. Ma Ying-jeou is not laying claim to any territory on the mainland, at least not according to the map on his home page. Kauffner (talk) 12:01, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This review is transcluded from Talk:China/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: TheSpecialUser (talk · contribs) 14:53, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I really hate to quickly fail an article but this has to. Here are the primary reasons for it:

• Lack of refs- despite of large amount of refs, tons of facts are unsourced. Many times, I even see few paragraphs entirely unsourced and the amount of unsourced content is just too much. I fear that this can be addressed in a month or some
• External links and Further reading in the article are too many and with selective books respectively (FR should be removed).
• Portals? Not anything else then China and People's Republic of China portal please
• There also exists few dead links
• C/es are needed at some spots in the article as words such as "intense" should be strictly avoided

Above all this, the lack of ref will be the primary reason to fail and I won't go any further. The article is indeed in need of around 50 more refs, keeping in mind the amount of unsourced material which is extremely tough to address in a month or some. Unfortunately, I've failed it and one is free to re-nominate it once every sentence in the article is sourced. Thank you. TheSpecialUser ^TSU 14:53, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Three umbrella noms:

czar · · 16:21, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The map also slows the rendering of the entire page down. Can we do something about this? Is it even necessary to have a huge map here? Why can't we just have a thumbnail like we used to?

--Naus (talk) 21:28, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Why can't we just have a thumbnail like we used to?" - it's not 1997 anymore, and slow adapters shouldn't hinder progress for those with more powerful computers. It isn't a problem for most people, and the viewing experience of the majority shouldn't be hindered by those that are behind. It's the same reason why Google now uses HTML5 and most web mail clients now load at least 5MB of page data before even opening your emails. Try telling these websites to abandon their new features because a minority of people still use 56k connections and 400MHz CPUs. If you really have to browse the page on a Pentium II with 640x480 resolution, there's always the lite version. The map currently provides an effective and clear method of providing optimal information to the reader on the topic, and the map being on the page has been the status quo for quite a long time. Hence, if you really want to remove it, you'd have to gain community consensus first. -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs email 21:38, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed the size at Template:PRC provinces big imagemap alt. Adding back.Moxy (talk) 21:45, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Now it's almost illegible without a magifying glass though. I can just manage reading "Nanning" and "Guangzhou", and I'm on 1366x768. Heaven help someone with a 1920x1080 display, or someone with visual impairments. -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs email 21:52, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Should fit the screen ...should not have to side scroll the whole page just for one image. Is there a template like {{Wide image}} for templates like this.Moxy (talk) 22:01, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure myself... I guess you could ask around at the Village Pump? If one doesn't exist, surely someone can make one. -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs email 22:06, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Change it back people...it's too small. --LLTimes (talk) 00:02, 4 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• If you need a magnifying glass to read the text on the map, then you should increase the font of the map, and not have a 857px picture that covers the entire page both horizontally and vertically on a 1280x800 screen, cutting the article in half unnecessarily. And we don't need to have the provincial capitals like "Nanning" in this map, it just adds to the clutter. The US map does not have state capitals and they manage to fit 50 states in a 600px map. This a national article, not a provincial article. Also, this idea of "powerful computers" justifying ginormous images is absurd. Many of us also use 7 and 10" tablets with midget processors. I was one of the main contributors to the original PRC and China articles, and I view this map as an eyesore. It's big, obnoxious and doesn't inform readers much given how much real estate it takes up. Solid brown is also really ugly for national maps. Have none of you guys actually seen national Chinese maps in China? They are very colorful with provinces assigned to different colors! Have a little taste, big is not always best. --Naus (talk) 18:38, 4 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]