Talk:Tiananmen Square

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is part of WikiProject China, a project to improve all China-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other China-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome.

This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. (add comments)

[edit] Pictures

Monument to the People's Heroes and The Great Hall of the People

I'm queuing this pic on the talk page because there is not enough space in the article for now. — Chameleon Main/Talk/Images 13:59, 9 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Note the new gallery layout - please do not remove pictures only for layout purposes. Leonard G. 17:37, 9 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Why not? There is a precedent for it. — Chameleon Main/Talk/Images 18:44, 9 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Could you please cite precident as to the removal of images solely for page layout purposes? There are a lot better reasons than that for removing pictures, but those should be established in the context of the article theme and the appropriateness the picture referenced to support or enhance that theme.

My argument against removing pictures (as opposed to resizing thumbs) is first, that WP has insufficient illustrations (especially on technical and travel related articles) and that layout under the current system is highly dependant upon both the user's text size selection (I use 150pct), and page width, which according to wiki suggestions is what fits on an 800 pixel wide or larger screen (I use 1280 x 1024). In the article Shanghai, User:Muke was having problems \hahehuh long list of right thumbs not being at the margin but stacking horizontally and getting into the text. (I do not see these effects on my browsers, but this is now appearing to be a side effect of font size and screen width.). He did some pix rearrangement on Shanghai which initially did not work (images were lost off the right of the page) but he subsequently corrected this to form a nice gallery (it still needs some tweeking of thumb heights, which I will do). I applied these techniques to the T.S. page and they look fine on both Safari (Mac OS X) and I.E. 5.2 Mac OS 9.2. If you use a different browser or OS, a test and feedback will be welcomed. For tech stuff on the gallery layout see User talk:Muke#Image arrangement.

Firstly, I agree with you that WP has insufficient illustrations: see the top of User:Chameleon/Images_uploaded. I just don't agree that it's always good to add images and always bad to take them away. I could take dozens of pictures of each piece of cutlery in my house and add it to Cutlery, but I don't believe that would be helpful! More is not necessarily best. There has been some discussion, and it seems at least some people agree that a certain ratio of photos to text must be observed in articles. That's common sense, right?

There really seemed to me to be too many photos for this article. Now that a gallery has been created, they fit. But not before. Note that I didn't delete anything. I just queued it up on the talk page. Another way this can be done is by commenting out the images in the article. I've done this myself with articles I have created — I've taken lots of pix, uploaded them, been really keen to put them in the article, but then realised I couldn't really justify it given the lack of text, so I queued them. Chameleon 23:17, 9 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I'm glad to hear that you think the page is improved, as that is what our mutual efforts are for. I do like the gallery setup - for one thing, it is easy to expand without impacting the text. Now that I know how to do it I will likely employ it more. The T.S. article does need a picture of the Museum of Chinese History - I have one but its not very good. A straight on shot of Tianan Gate would be nice too. I've got one of the Gate that I call "Two Reds"; in front of the gate stands my wife (a redhead) and over her shoulder the portrait of Mao. Cute and informative for my personal slide show, but not suitable for a WP article. Do you have any to upload? That would be appreciated. I'll read the discussion article. Best wishes, Leonard G. 01:16, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Two Reds

Ch. Hist. Mus.

[edit] Commons

Please transfer the images to Wikimidea Commons. --Saperaud 3 July 2005 11:53 (UTC)

[edit] The largest square in the world?

Can anybody confirm that this square is the largest in the world? Naghsh-i Jahan Square and Kharkov contain conflicting information on this issue. Thanks. --Ghirlandajo 12:53, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

None articles is absolutely correct. See and contribute to List of city squares by size. Red Square in Moscow, is not closest competitor of Tiananmen. --TAG 06:48, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Hopefully the list linked in the previous comment will clear up the issue. However I'm not convinced by the number "500 meters wide" given in this article. There is no way for this to be true according to Google Earth. Can anyone state the source for this information? I don't think there's any doubt about this square being the largest, but I don't think it's quite as large as stated in this article. --Romanski 08:02, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Some travel guides have this This north-south rectangle is the largest public square in the world, measuring 865 meters in length from north to south and 500 and 370 meters in width from east to west at the northern and southern ends. The total area is some 93 acres Travel guide. I feel that 500 meters include Great Hall and Parlament. --TAG 11:24, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Your link mentions 14 hectares, which can be verified using Google Earth to be the pure square without the buildings. I'll update the article. --Romanski 15:01, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Hmm... most web sites state 440,000 square meters. This is clearly impossible. 14 hectares seems like an understatement too. I can't find any sources stating what seems like a reasonable number. TAG, perhaps you can use the number from your travel guide and state the source? 93 acres = 380,000 square meters seems very reasonable. --Romanski 15:13, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] redirect from tienanmen

Is it really rational to think that most people searching for "tienanmen" are looking for information about the square rather than the details surrounding the tienanmen massacre of 1989? wouldn't it make more sense for the redirect from "tienanmen" to point there instead? Mysticfeline 01:33, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

no - for very many people "tiananmen" means the gate or square, and "tiananmen incident" means the April Fifth Incident first and foremost. in Chinese at least, the 1989 protests are known as the "June Fourth Incident", "June Fourth Movement", or "June Fourth Massacre", and much less commonly the "Tiananmen incident/massacre". if people are searching for the Tiananmen Massacre they're more likely to type "tienanmen massacre". --Sumple (Talk) 01:50, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The unknown rebel

Though the square as an actual location should be the focus of the article, a picture or greater referance to the picture of the uknown rebel, the person himself, and the events surrounding it should be added because, despite what some may say, many (myself included as I was looking for the picture of the unknown rebel when I came to this page) people come to this page looking for that information first. Though there is a separate page of it, which is reasonable, a greater mention of it here would probably be warrented since this is often, outside of China, what the location is known for.

-- seconded: I came here looking for that image, I couldn't care less about the architectural features of the square!

[edit] commentary on June Fourth / massacre

I'm going to remove the following text added in Revision as of 2006-05-16 08:02:21

However, it is speculated that the number of casualities were exaggerated by the Western media at that time in order to destablize China and tarnish its global prestige. As opposed to the situation in Eastern Europe, the movement started in Tiananmen and ended there. It again became a symbol for national pride with China's booming economy

I see no support for this. Furthermore, at least part of it isn't true: the movement was active in several other Chinese cities at the same time.

With supporting attribution, this text or a variant might be reasonable. It does seem to have a POV. DHR 03:53, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Commentary on 1989 protests/massacre (Mk II)

I have removed the following statements (several times):

This is more commonly known as the Tiananmen Square massacre, which the Chinese government denies ever took place despite the video footage of a protester being mowed down by a tank. This tragic event was recorded by an tourist photographer. Changing this wikipedia entry to not reflect this sadly doesn't change history.

There is basically nothing truthful about this statement. Firstly, the Chinese govt does not deny that the protests and killings took place. Secondly, there is no video footage (that I am aware of, or cited by the anon editor) of a protestor being mown down by a tank - the editor is possibly referring to the footage of a man stopping a column of tanks. Thirdly, that event was recorded by a journalist, not a tourist photographer. Finally, the last statement is an attack on Wikipedia, not a genuine contribution.

On a side note, I feel what is presently presented here about the protests does have a slightly pro-PRC government slant. Perhaps the emphasis on the "no-one killed" story should be toned down? --Sumple (Talk) 10:39, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Move

The move to Tiananmen Square (Beijing) has been undone because "Tiananmen Square" is well... the square. If you want the massacre, they would've typed in "Tiananmen Square Massacre" or something along those lines. The other article is prominently linked to anyway. enochlau (talk) 03:44, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Spelling

Is the correct spelling in modern Pinyin not Tian'anmen? See the guidelines on the subject. Wsbhopkin 15:59, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

That's either bad formatting or vandalism. Someone be bold please. Xiner (talk, email) 19:14, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

For pinyin, we already have it as "Tiān'ānmén Guǎngchǎng". "Tiananmen" is the English spelling.—Nat Krause^{(Talk!·What have I done?)} 22:09, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Future Changes?

The square looks very naked. Are they planning to put in more stuff? Like, for example, greenery? 205.174.22.20 01:41, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Lol, maybe Beijing does need it, but don't hold your breath. Xiner | Talk 19:10, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Actually do hold your breath - Beijing is very polluted! The square looks better in 'real life', and the greenery would turn to dust very quickly, even if watered, due to the huge amount of people walking on it I think. Balfron 22:11, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] History section

Someone needs to sort out the History section. A lot of nonsense words have been put in and it doesn't make any sense (1st paragraph). Thanks. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.153.249.215 (talk) 21:33, 18 January 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Typo

I don't think 1999 was the Qing dynasty. (history section)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../t/i/a/Talk%7ETiananmen_Square_b0af.html"