Talk:Concessions in China
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. |
|
China To-do:
|
|
 |
It is requested that a map or maps be included in this article to improve its quality. |
[edit] European Enclaves
I don't think we should list them here, because we should include them in a category for their separate articles or maybe we could make a list. John Riemann Soong 19:55, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
The former article European Enclaves in China started as a list and not an article.--Leonardo Alves 23:21, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
Do not merge this please. This is part of WP:CHINA, and has been a requested article for a long while now. Please kindly check the context of the article before suggesting merger. The concessions in China have a unique situation in history different from most other concessions; note also that they play an interesting role in literature such as Man's Fate. Besides, there's no point in merging - see Wikipedia:Summary style. Yes, the concession article covers a greater scope, but at the same time it's meant to be an overview of concessions in general. The onus is on you to suggest why there needs to be a merger, not the other way round. Elle vécut heureuse à jamais (Be eudaimonic!) 12:47, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
- Let's rename this instead to Treaty ports, concessions and foreign settlements in China, to include more than just concessions. This way we can have a comprehensive list of all the territorial encroachments. -- Миборовский 06:41, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
- Perhaps just "foreign settlements" in China, because the desired focus is the culture and enclaves that sprang up when Europeans resided in China in their own communities. Treaty ports should be separate, IMO. (Encroachment in general should really be treated in the Unequal Treaties article.) Elle vécut heureuse à jamais (Be eudaimonic!) 15:16, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
- Treaty ports definitely belong apart, since they remain under Chinese (viz. Japanese, Korean) sovereignty. The notio European concessions, though, is artificial, no reason to sigle out European ones, at the very least it should be Foreign - not just European Fastifex 12:15, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
- The scope of "European settlements" no longer exists, because of Japanese intervention. Elle vécut heureuse à jamais (Be eudaimonic!) 16:02, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
