Talk:Xinjiang papers
 | The use of the contentious topics procedure has been authorised by the community for pages related to Uyghurs, Uyghur genocide, or topics that are related to Uyghurs or Uyghur genocide, including this page. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be sanctioned. |
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment edit
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 05:12, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
China Cables :merge ? edit
Xinjiang papers China Cables should be merged ? P5EE5Eec5 (talk) 10:15, 27 November 2019 (UTC)
- Comment @P5EE5Eec5: I believed it should be merged. However, we should ensure the two concepts are refering the same thing. Mariogoods (talk) 02:52, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
I would oppose a merger of one into the other, since the two are different. One refers to the documents found by the New York Times, whereas the other refers to documents obtained by International Consortium of Investigative JournalistsMikehawk10 (talk) 23:15, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose, they appear to be very different. Horse Eye Jack (talk) 11:14, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
- Support: This article is so short and the two leaks were at almost the same time. It seems reasonable to merge the two without losing anything. — MarkH21talk 22:08, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
- Support: Not identical, but both leaks on the same topic in the same month; would be best discussed together, as the social and political implications are shared. Klbrain (talk) 01:44, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
- Support: The articles are both start class. Merging them would improve them both. Swordman97 talk to me 21:51, 17 July 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose merger. These are two separate collections of documents. A merger would be like merging two books written about a similar subject. Each collection deserves their separate pages. --Tibet Nation (talk) 00:29, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose: Though the two sets of documents were published in the same month, they were published from different sources and the contents of the leaks are quite different. I have added more content to this article, hopefully it helps the article stand on its own. Couchcupcross (talk) 11:43, 17 May 2021 (UTC)
New to Wikipedia, feedback appreciated edit
Hi there! I'm new to Wikipedia and have added a thousand words to this article as part of my university assignment. I'm planning to add more content in the next few days, but would love to receive some feedback or guidance before I do so. Please feel free to provide your input on how I can elevate this article! Thanks. Couchcupcross (talk) 12:51, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
- @Couchcupcross: I was looking at the page. It has changed a lot since I created it. Looking at the sections, can you make some subsections for the "Description and contents". The answer of course depends on the sources. --Mhhossein talk 11:18, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
- @Mhhossein: Hi Mhhossein, thanks for the feedback! I read your suggestion and looked back at the article, and can see that "Description and contents" would definitely benefit from subsections. I added them and the text now seems a lot less cluttered/easier to read. Thanks again! I will look at some sources and continue expanding the article in the next few days, feel free to let me know if you have any further suggestions. Couchcupcross (talk) 12:53, 28 May 2021 (UTC)