Talk:Torture in China
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- Come on now, you have your own page for Chinese tickle torture. Everyone but you is pretty much agreed it is spurious. Do you really need to stuff it into every single webpage? I am not even happy about the water torture. Lao Wai 14:29, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Urban Legends
Admittedly I changed the article to refer to these as urban legends, but there is still no reason for them to be here. They have their own pages but more importantly they have nothing to do with Chinese torture at all. They belong in a different category - Western myths about China perhaps. It is like discussing (and putting a link to) unicorns on the Mammals page. It should go. Lao Wai 09:20, 23 August 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Grammar Cleanup
I added a few commas, removed a few "that's" and added clarifying language to 2 points. I did not change any of the information or content so far as I can tell. I think this article should be expanded a little bit, but I leave that to another person or a later time.--Legomancer 08:20, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Sources, POV, etc.
The criticism of the Fulan Gong movement does not have sources accompanying it and it may have pov issues. It also makes it seem like there are only two possibilities covered in the article: the exaggerations Westerners made and the exaggerations the Fulan Gong movement has made. There should be more about periods like the Cultural Revolution and what Amnesty International says. Also, the statement "it cannot be independently confirmed" sounds a bit specious: for instance, I read an article on the BBC News webpage a couple years ago that gave a confirmed incident of a forced abortion. I suggest that the article get a clean-up tag.
[edit] Using [sic]
As a general rule, use [sic] if it is obvious that the person or entity being quoted makes a grammatical mistake, spelling error, or an extremeley objective factual error such as saying that "1+1=3". According to certain legal jurisdictions, you may use [sic] for the above mentioned errors to indicate that you are not responsible for that error in the quote. (But that does bring the question on whether if you really made a typo yourself in the quote.) Avoid using [sic] for quotations you deem that are politically incorrect, controversial because no one has consensus, or that from your own POV, you don't agree. The main point here is that [sic] is generally a poor writing practice for objective writing because of the ability to abuse it. I should search the manual of style on using sic on the Wikipedia, but I make these comments based on my high school journalism experience. Allentchang 23:43, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
