Image talk:Han Civilisation.png

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] POV

The image shows Aksai Chin and Arunachal Pradesh as a part of PRC. Askai Chin is claimed by India, administered by China, while Arunachal Pradesh is claimed by China, administered by India. =Nichalp «Talk»= 05:20, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

What are you talking about? This is a historical map. It has nothing to do with today's international politics. -- Toytoy 07:14, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Look carefully. The current boundaries of PRC is highlighted. =Nichalp «Talk»= 08:02, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Probably for no other reason than to give people an idea of China's contemporary borders as a reference point. I wouldn't read anything into it, but obviously people will. Peter1968 09:25, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

I've changed "Border of P. R. China" to "Border claimed by P. R. China", but I can't upload the new map because the existing image is protected. What Peter says is right, China's contemporary borders are meant partly as a reference point. More importantly, the border claimed by the PRC is relevant because China as it is today can be seen to be a successor state of the historical Han civlisation. In terms of cultural and political orientation, later Chinese states can be seen as a continuation of the Han legacy (in a way which was not replicated for the Roman empire in Europe). Partially for this reason, Chinese people call themselves Han people. You can see on the map that Chinese influence extended through the Tarim basin and the broader region of what is now Xinjiang. Later Chinese states, most notably the Tang dynasty, also the current People's Republic of China continued this policy. The international border shown on the map is not to show where the frontier should lie, but to show the continuity between the first long-term Chinese empire and China as it is today. I will try and made that clear in the commentary text as well. Yeu Ninje 09:40, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

The text would be of little help since the few who actually read the text would know the difference between "claim" and actual. See this NPOV image for example: Image:India-locator-map-blank.svg. =Nichalp «Talk»= 06:27, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

If someone doesn't bother to read the text or understand the difference then I'd doubt whether showing the disputed territories or not would make any difference to them. This map is different to the maps you refer to because it is primarily a historical map, and its purpose is not to give an accurate statement of international boundaries. As I said, the modern boundary is shown to demonstrate the continuity between the Han dynasty and the modern Chinese state. I think if the disputed territories would shown it would only distract from the main purpose of the map - that is, to illustrate the extent of Han civilisation. Yeu Ninje 09:02, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

That still doesn't make it a NPOV map, the primary goal of wikipedia. Use transparencies to show the difference. =Nichalp «Talk»= 16:11, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

You still assert it's POV without explaining why, or addressing my points. Let me repeat myself: the map states it's the border claimed by China. I don't agree that people won't read the text. Even if people won't read that text (as you claim), then not showing the disputed territories wouldn't make any difference to them anyway. This map is not about the international border between India and China, it's about the Han dynasty and how China sees itself in relation to that dynasty. Yeu Ninje 21:15, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

As far as the POV is concerned, I have stated it in the very first thread of this discussion. I've even included an NPOV map for your reference. Since you've asked me to expand on the policy: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, I'll quote directly from there: NPOV is a fundamental Wikipedia principle which states that all articles must be written from a neutral point of view, representing views fairly and without bias. This includes maps, reader-facing templates, categories and portals. According to Wikipedia founder Jimbo Wales, NPOV is "absolute and non-negotiable." The very fact that you mention "claimed by China" shows a bias towards China. It would assume that modern PRC has control over Arunachal Pradesh which it does not. You say that it will distract the focus of attention away from the Han Dynasty... I have suggested that you use transparencies to make it less obvious. So I'm perplexed as to why you state that I'm not doing anything or explaining my stance. If you feel it's too distracting, you can remove the current borders of PRC. Regards, =Nichalp «Talk»= 03:42, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

I don't deny that NPOV should apply to maps or that this also applies to this map. Showing the border claimed by China on a map is not, however, POV. It doesn't suppose or assume that the contested territories are controlled by China, or that they should belong to China. All it does is show that China claims sovereignty over them. This is a valid purpose for this map since modern China is a successor state to the historical Han dynasty. Yeu Ninje 06:15, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Replying to your points:

1. I don't deny that NPOV should apply to maps or that this also applies to this map – So why aren't the changes incorporated? There are three regions a) Undisputed b) Claimed by India and c) Claimed by China.
2. It doesn't suppose or assume that the contested territories are controlled by China – The very fact that no distinction is made between the three regions, it is directly implied that the entire region is a part of modern day China. Why then, are the boundaries of undisputed China not shown instead? (I'm not asking you to do this, as that too would be a POV)
3. This is a valid purpose for this map since modern China is a successor state to the historical Han dynasty. – Modern China is a successor to the Han dynasty. I'm not disputing this, but the boundaries and area of modern China are incorrect.

Since this is a featured picture, it should strongly adhere to the NPOV. I'm afraid if changes are not incorporated, I'll have to list it as a removal candidate. =Nichalp «Talk»= 08:53, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

The map doesn't show the boundaries and area of modern China, it shows the boundaries and area claimed by modern China. Nothing is implied by the fact that the three regions are not listed, because the map doesn't claim to show the actual international boundaries of China. I don't see why that is so difficult to accept. Yeu Ninje 09:27, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

NPOV is non negotiable. I'm not asking you to show incorrect boundaries, I'm asking you to depict the actual status. I really don't see why you refuse to comply to the oldest established policy of wikipedia. =Nichalp «Talk»= 11:44, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

You're asking me to show the actual status of international boundaries when the status of those boundaries aren't relevant to the map. I've explained already why the Chinese territorial claims are relevant. I fully accept NPOV policy, but it must be within the bounds of relevance. Yeu Ninje 15:12, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

As I've stated, it's non-negotiable. I'm afraid that you're contradicting yourself by saying that you adhere to the NPOV view but allowing a pro-Chinese bias. It's a nice map, but I'm sorry I'll have to list it as a removal candidate. =Nichalp «Talk»= 15:36, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

I agree it's non-negotiable. The map is not pro-Chinese. The reason the Chinese claim is shown is that the modern Chinese state is a successor to the Han dynasty. It's widely recognised that ancient Chinese civilisation is unique in the world for its unbroken continuation to the present day, so that's why I draw attention to it on the map. If India were the successor state to the Han dynasty, then the Indian claim of boundaries would be shown. Moreover, the map makes no attempt to hide the fact that only the Chinese claims are shown, as it's marked as such in the key. A paragraph explaining this is also now in the explanatory notes. Yeu Ninje 03:58, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Historical Atlas of China

Please link Zhongguo lishi ditu to Historical Atlas of China. -- Toytoy 07:14, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Great Wall

Isn't the Great Wall misplaced in this map? See i.e. Image:Qin empire 210 BCE.jpg, Image:Ming foreign relations 1580.jpg and Image:Han foreign relations CE 2.jpg. – Elisson • Talk 12:20, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

The Great Wall was built and rebuilt over the course of many thousands of years. The route it took varied from period to period. The Han dynasty retained some of the Qin wall (the one that passes close to Fushi and Didao) and built new ones on the northern frontier, including an extension to the west. The Ming wall is another construction altogether. Yeu Ninje 12:28, 13 June 2006 (UTC)