This page 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
I have nominated Battle of Red Cliffs for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" in regards to the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. a455bcd9 (Antoine) (talk) 16:01, 21 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It seems User:Cfls has recently renamed all Chinese districts from "XX District" to "XX, City that XX belongs to", giving no other reason other than WP:TITLECON. That's odd, because TITLECON links to WP:PLACE which links to WP:CHINESE#Place names, which gives the convention that our article titles had used before Cfls's changes. Was there some discussion for this change that I'm missing? I find it hard to believe that an experienced editor would make a massive change which disregards established convention without having discussed it with anyone first. Cobblet (talk) 23:44, 21 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'm not aware of any prior discussion, but if we're talking about a mass disambiguation on the merits, I weakly support it and definitely don't support undoing it. I must have been looking for the wrong thing; see below. 05:20, 23 November 2023 (UTC)WP:TITLECON makes sense as a reason, since some district names are perforce disambiguated (like Xincheng District), consistency would imply they should all be disambiguated.I note that the OP has overstated the scope of the mass action. Without looking very hard, I see Xi District, Shuncheng District, Wanghua District, Dongzhou District, Jianhua District, Longsha District, Ziyang District, Nan'an District, and many more that are still at titles matching X District. I'm not a big "article title" person, so I don't feel super strongly about it, but I imagine one reason some of our X District articles currently lack a disambiguator is due to redlinks or alternative names (for example, two out of three places in Taiwan that are named "西區" are translated as "West District" instead of transliterated as "Xi District", and the third lacks an article: see Xiqu and zh:西區 (臺南市)). I don't think a mass disambiguation is a bad idea, although it should have been discussed first. I invite Cfls to comment here, but I don't believe any action is necessary. Folly Mox (talk) 13:02, 22 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for correcting me, but that's even stranger then, that some articles have received this treatment and not others. FWIW, Ziyang District and Nan'an District are actually redirects. Cobblet (talk) 15:19, 22 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks, Cobblet, clearly I didn't do my due diligence before replying, a typical bad habit I have 🙃 Yeah I don't understand the reasoning exactly, and another thing I haven't done is a thorough search for a discussion about the mass disambiguation. There wasn't one on this page or Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (Chinese) or MOS Talk:China, but it could be somewhere. Still hoping to hear from Cfls, but since we're at this point we might want to have a proper discussion now regardless of the participation of the initiating editor. Folly Mox (talk) 17:16, 22 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
These moves are definitely wrong. 'district' (区）is part of the name in Chinese. While cities + provinces just go by the name – Henan, Beijing, etc. – a district is specified as such, always or almost always. This may seem odd to English speakers, but in English districts can and commonly are referred to by just their name: Tottenham e.g. or Toxteth. If the name is ambiguous it should be disambiguated but 'district' should still be included for correctness and to make it clear it's a district, not some other feature located in that city.--2A04:4A43:907F:F451:4584:675A:C90F:C0D1 (talk) 00:52, 23 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oops I confess I didn't even notice the elision of "District" from the article titles: too focused on finding the problem articles. Apologies to Cobblet and striking my support above.Unregistered editor 2A04, you're absolutely right. The earlier moves in the series are of the form Zhaohua District → Zhaohua, Guangyuan, with newer ones like List of schools in Haidian District → List of schools in Haidian, Beijing, which I found by searching User:Cfls's move log, which I should have done in the first place. There's also stuff like Zhangqiu, Yanggu County → Zhangqiu, Yanggu, which doesn't even make sense. So the general forms appear to be: 1. sometimes adding a superunit disambiguator (fine) 2. always removing a unit designation (wrong).Unit designations are part of the toponyms for Districts always, and I think also for Counties always. Cities aren't always specifically named "Some City", so dropping that can be ok, if we find instances of that.Anyway apologies for my earlier confusion. There are definitely a lot of them, and the things I said above about dusambiguating based on superunit still apply, but the moves are all incorrect. So I don't think straight reversion is the correct next step, but rather a separate move, to X Unit, Superunit. I suppose if Cfls doesn't show up here soon we should just get started on it. Folly Mox (talk) 05:20, 23 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi. Thank you all for your attention on this matter. The removal of the word is for clarity and for better understanding for the readers. Let me explain all your concerns.
1. The removal of the word "District" is not wrong. This is because all administrative divisions in China have being suffixed with a administrative division level name. For example, Beijing is officiall known as Beijing City (北京市). As we see in the corresponding article of Beijing, the article title is Beijing. This is also the case for other cities in China. More than that, it is also the same situation for Chinese provinces. For exmaple, the official name for Zhejiang is Zhejiang Province (浙江省). Therefore, the Wikipedia Chinese administrative division articles have already demonstrated the WP:TITLECON here. There is no need to take bias against the districts of cities to keep the redundant administrative suffixes.
2. Those districts are not the districts of a province or of the country, but are belongs to the city they are part of. They are officially called city-administered districts (市辖区). The addition of the city's name in the suffix helps readers to understand which city this district belongs to. For most of the out-of-town peoplem, they do not know the district names but they know the city's name instead. The standalone district names could mostly confuse people, especially the out-of-town people who do not know much about the city.
3. The city name suffix is a consistency standard on English Wikipedia. For urban districts in other countries, we have all districts and neighborhoods in Los Angeles with the ", Los Angeles" suffix, regardless of whether their names are unique or namesake.
4. There are too many name conflicts of urban distircts across China. For example, there are Chaoyang districts in Beijing, Changchun, and Shantou. There are also Dongcheng districts in Beijing and Dongguan. Using "Chaoyang District, Beijing" and "Dongguan District, Beijing" while having "Huairou District" and "Shijinshan District" makes the article titles inconsistent and diverse. This violates the WP:TITLECON policy of keeping article titles consistent.
I hope mny answers above can respond to your concerns. What I do in the urban district articles is in the pursuit of WP:TITLECON and for making the Wikipedia article titles clearer and more understandable for readers. For articles other than the urban districts, I held no opinions on. I am open for discussion with WP:GOODFAITH, and hope you all can understand my efforts to make the urban districts' article titles clear and sound. And together, we make Wikipedia articles better. Cfls (talk) 21:43, 23 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for your comments. Unfortunately they do not address my main point, that removal of 'district' makes the titles worse both from a clarity point of view and to match common usage. I don't get your point about consistency; in this case the consistency should be within a geographic region, typically a country. If the practice in that country is to use 'district', as it is in China, then that should be followed here. Where I am such geographic terms have fallen out of use, or have been folded into names, e.g. Yorkshire. But in the US 'county' is used for sub-state units, even when not ambiguous; if you follow recent news you might have read a lot about the DA of Fulton County, Georgia, even though just "Fulton, Georgia" or even just "Fulton" would be clear and unambiguous.--2A04:4A43:907F:F451:91CB:B79D:6A28:A501 (talk) 14:32, 24 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Comment For the naming we need to determine what newspaper articles, published books, magazines, and academic journal articles in English (either from China or outside China) use. Is it "Chaoyang District" or just "Chaoyang" without the district? Whichever it is, we should follow the lead. WhisperToMe (talk) 15:20, 25 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks Cfls for engaging here. I hope you're not feeling accused of bad faith editing. I don't think anyone here means that. I do agree with points 2, 3, and 4 above indicating that the districts etc should be disambiguated by their containing administrative unit. I don't agree with point 1. The examples of cities and provinces are not to the point. Cities and provinces can be and often are referred to by just their toponym, without their administrative unit designation; it has been my experience that districts and counties are not. Folly Mox (talk) 17:26, 25 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Could you help to disambiguate links to Qingyang? There are several articles (shown at Disambig fix list for Qingyang) with links to this dab page and it is often unclear which one the link should point at. Any help appreciated.— Rodtalk 16:46, 28 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for help with this.— Rodtalk 16:42, 29 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Definitions of Chinese cities in the narrowest sense (城鎮)[edit]
Hello, does http://www.stats.gov.cn/sj/pcsj/rkpc/5rp/html/append7.htm define the following 城鎮 as:
township area of an approved established town. Including: towns and districts of organized towns where the people's governments and administrative offices of counties and above (excluding cities) are located, and towns and districts of other organized towns. Township refers to:
(1) The seat of the town people’s government and other neighborhood committee areas under the jurisdiction of the town;
(2) The urban construction of the town people's government seat has been extended to the surrounding village committee seats, and its town area should also include the entire area of the village committee. Kind regards Sarcelles (talk) 13:04, 27 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
