Talk:Weihai
Latest comment: 10 years ago by Another n00b in topic Proposal to split article
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Weihai article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This  level-5 vital article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||
 |
Proposal to split article edit
The article indicates a proposal to split this article. This was proposed in Dec 2012. The proposal is that there would be a separate article for the British colony material. I seem to be the first person to comment. I favor the proposal because the current city material and the colonial period material have sufficiently dissimilar content to merit their own articles. Further, a disambiguation page seems appropriate. I added a tag to this page. I am thinking of completing the split in 2 to 3 weeks approximately. FeatherPluma (talk) 20:19, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
- Oppose. I would be opposed to this split at this time. The proposed split section would not really make a viable article and in any case, it is just that for a time, Weihai was a British colony. There is no need to split. Op47 (talk) 22:23, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
- Oppose split. Material related to same physical territory should be kept in the same article unless the article becomes too large. It's nowhere near large enough to consider this. ~KvnG 03:32, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
- In favor. Weihaiwei is the only one of the 4 leased territories of China (Kwangchowan (Guangzhouwan), Kwantung Leased Territory, Kiautschou Bay Concession (really it should have been titled Kiautschou Leased Territory), and Weihaiwei) not to have its own page. I have edited and added material to Kwangchowan now and then and I'm preparing to add more. I would love to do the same soon for a Weihaiwei Leased Territory page (it should not be "Weihaiwei (British Colony)" since it was not a colony. I have good sourced material as well as maps and pictures. --Lubiesque (talk) 01:27, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
- In favor. I agree, there are loads of pictures of Weihaiwei and two good books about the subject are available, it appears to be quite different material to the new modern Weihai, I would be keen to help anyone develop this historical material about Weihaiwei. Let's do it. Chuangzu (talk) 12:38, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
- In favor It would be a great idea to have a separate article titled 'Weihaiwei (British leased territory)', then it can be listed separately under the British Empire project - (203.211.72.83 (talk) 23:22, 13 October 2013 (UTC))
- In favor. I have quite a lot of material on Weihaiwei Leased Territory Legal System and rendition. I have not added it because it would swamp the rest of the article. I agree Weihaiwei Leased Territory will probably be a better title. Shanghai88 (talk) 09:45 2 November 2013 (UTC)
- In favor. I believe that there is more than enough information for there to be a separate article for the British colony. Only so much can be summarized within the article itself. -- Another n00b (talk) 19:30, 14 November 2013 (UTC)
Usage of "special administrative region" edit
The word "special administrative region" is confusing and it should only referred to HKSAR and MSAR only.
- Reserving that terminology to HK and M would have been my instinct too, but we seem to be incorrect, at least according to WP article on Special administrative region (Republic of China). FeatherPluma (talk) 23:47, 20 February 2013 (UTC)