Talk:Reactions to the 2008 Sichuan earthquake

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Merge[edit]

This article may require merged content from here. Previous discussions from the depreciated article are at Talk:International reactions to 2008 Sichuan earthquake.   — C M B J   22:09, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So let me get this straight -- instead of just changing the name of "Intl Reactions..." to "Reactions...", TPTB merged the former into the latter, thereby losing all the history and talk of the former, which is where all the action was taking place? Man, I hate it when TPTB screw around with articles without giving any thought to what they are doing. Can someone with more juice than I have send a message to the right person to fix this? 68.73.94.131 (talk) 06:15, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, I am not sure who or what what you mean by 'TPTB' but it looks indeed like the content has been merged here. The name could not be simply changed to "Reactions...", since that was the older article with an edit history as well. nevertheless, the merge should not only have been highlighted more clearly within the edit history of this article (for attribution), but also been discussed before, since it isn't obvious what the consensus title would be and how best to go about this merger technically. While a merge with leaving a redirect and the edit history is possible, the articles had been created one after the other, so a history merge with subsequent move to the right place would have been possible and probably preferable. I might have better highlighted this upfront after the DRV. What seems best now might depend on the desired name. A history merge is still possible, just somewhat messier now. It would actually be necessary if you actually want to have "Intl Reactions..." as tittle. Otherwise if you want to keep this one here, one can just add a {{r from merge}} to the redirect and merge the talk pages as well. .--Tikiwont (talk) 08:05, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I've merged the content from Talk:International reactions to 2008 Sichuan earthquake here and changed that to be a redirect here. -- Bovineone (talk) 16:23, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Add Lebanon[edit]

Ref: [1] Robin Hood 1212 (talk) 23:35, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Organization[edit]

Some dang good work organizing this page.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.73.94.131 (talk • contribs)

Tibet Government in Exile[edit]

I moved out the "Tibet Government in Exile" item from the Countries/Regions list, but was reverted.

I'm not engaging in a is-Taiwan-a-country-? edit war here. I think it is pretty clear that the CTA is neither a country nor a region, it couldn't practically represent the people from a geographic region either as far financial or material aid would go. It has nothing to do with Macao or Hong Kong either. You may notice that it is the sole entity on the list to have no financial or material donation. It's not its point and nobody is expecting it from them.

For all it matters here, it is an organisation and should belong with the IOC and the UN. If the Pope was to make a declaration, I'd be enclined to put it among organisations too. You have to consider what is logical in this context. That's where people will be looking for it.

I don't consider this to be controversial, it's only an organisational point I'm making.--GrAfFiTTalk Contribs 01:50, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

as i said the tibetan exile does not represents a legitimate regional government, thus to be deleted. If you want to put to organization that's fine. I can claim I am leader of chinese goverment exile. To be honest, Dalai Lama pay a lip service, does not mean much. He maybe a good honest person, but he had so many handler around coaching him, already lost his own mind for long. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.111.192.110 (talk) 03:02, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The related column is most neutrally titled "Government" rather than "Countries" in order to alleviate these disputes, as per the original article.   — C M B J   03:17, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

to be honest, before I did not realize that people should not be bullied. Now I am fully aware it's better speak out say something, and not stupidly keep silent. Not any more. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.111.192.110 (talk) 04:42, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

again, as i said, the exile did not control a particular region, therefore should not be put into as country/region. That's pretty sumple concept. I am a leader of chinese goverment exile, does it mean I represent the china. have you say. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.111.192.110 (talk) 04:48, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good god put Tibet back in. I don't care what you call it, or where you put it -- just put it back in. I'm sick and tired of these stupid semantic wars the purpose of which is merely to censor info that offends someone's delicate sensibilities. 68.73.94.131 (talk) 14:16, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It may be emotional charged. But if you look at it, the table is country/region with relative independent administration, and that apply to Hong Kong. So exile is not in this category. If we want to give a list of organization and individual, that’s fine.

I suggest you look at it. The column heading was changed to "entity" awhile ago, which pretty much covers anything. Put Tibet back. 68.73.94.131 (talk) 14:50, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you look the common character of these entities in that table, they are administrations of different geographical region. Again, exile is exile, does not control much. This page is to honor people and government who contributed offered something to the people who suffered. Not Dalai Lama’s propaganda show? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.111.192.110 (talk) 15:41, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well see bud, that's where you're wrong. This page is *not* about honoring anyone or anything -- it is about documenting facts. This is an encyclopedia, not your personal diary. Stop deleting info just because you don't like it. 68.73.94.131 (talk) 21:51, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

One thing is sincerity. I heard of news that a murder suspect went to the funeral of a murder victim. It’s cruel, and you can imagine how the victim’s relatives feel about it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.111.192.110 (talk) 14:46, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reactions to 2008 Sichuan earthquake[edit]

For those unaware, the original Reactions to the 2008 Sichuan earthquake article was recently deleted. There is now an ongoing DRV request to reverse this decision. An additional AfD is also taking place regarding 8 identical articles.   — C M B J   03:15, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Relevance of the article and possible deletion[edit]

The article is very much relevant 1) that’s current (and evolving future) events with huge magnitude and impact 2) compare it with the Burma Cyclone_Nargis page, it has also give the list of international donation and relief offer.

I will recommend a simpler list just to give name of organization and monetary value of the contribution. And combine it with main page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.111.192.110 (talk) 14:31, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Remove the "Statements and Condolences" column?[edit]

As I stated at the DRV, I don't believe that the content of this column is at all significant. In a few months no one will care who said what, but what they did will still count. I suggest that we remove the content from the "Statements and Condoleneces" column and the column itself, as it adds no real value to the article. Cheers. --lifebaka (Talk - Contribs) 14:25, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's not the condolences themselves which are significant -- it is who is making them. Therein lies the value. Keep it. 68.73.94.131 (talk) 14:55, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with the IP above, and the things that the Presidents and Foreign Ministers say is quite important - it reflects the feelings of the politicians within the nation. This is encyclopedic. Plus, it is part of a merger effort that you'll need to scan the archives to find. --haha169 (talk) 22:52, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Israel - country to add[edit]

... The Ministry of Foreign Affairs, which coordinated the aid effort, collected more than one and a half million dollars...

The plane carried about 90 tons of medicines and medical equipment, water purification kits, generators, tents, sleeping bags, and clothing intended for the earthquake survivors.

The aid comes in addition to money transferred by the Israeli embassy in Beijing to the Chinese Red Cross at the beginning of last week, to be used for immediate evacuations, and a shipment of sleeping bags and blankets that arrived in China on Thursday, 22 May. ... Mekel estimated the shipment was worth $1.5 million ...


links:

[2] (Foreign Affairs Minister of Israel)

[3] (Jerusalem Post) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Komap (talk • contribs) 13:04, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good idea. Firstly, sign with 4 ~~~~. Secondly, because I am extremely busy, could you leave the above using the table's format (amount donated, stuff donated, and statements...) below? It would be helpful. If not, I will add Israel myself at a later time.--haha169 (talk) 22:54, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Please don't change the coloring synax between Romania and Poland. I will change it when I add Israel - makes the job much easier. --haha169 (talk) 23:36, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
one more link: http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2008-05/24/content_8239941.htm Komap (talk) 08:27, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Separating the counts[edit]

Apparently, there are several areas from which the civilians can help. One is via charity organisation, the other via government. Should we include just the government donations on one list, the amount receive by various charity of the earthquake worldwide on the other, and other civil donation on the third. I understand that there are several charity shows around, notably those in Hong Kong, Taiwan and Singapore, and each also has it's own specific purpose. Should we also state the specific purpose of these fund drive as well? Frankie goh (talk) 13:58, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hong Kong?[edit]

Why is Hong Kong on there as International aid? Speaker1978 (talk) 20:47, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly, read the hidden note. Don't remove unless consensus is reached here. Also, you'll need to manually change the coloring syntax. You did not do either, so I've reverted your removal. Secondly, its listed there because the table says "Countries/Regions", and Hong Kong is literally a SAR (as is listed). It is quite notable, so it is listed there. Same with Macau. We don't remove serious and cited text on Wikipedia prior to discussion. --haha169 (talk) 22:51, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
fine, noted. Speaker1978 (talk) 02:51, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cuba[edit]

There are no mention about Cuban Medical Team. Someone could add it to the list. Cuba has sent 35 strong medical team to China and provided 3.5 tons of medicines and medical equipment.

http://english.sina.com/china/1/2008/0524/162711.html http://en.chinagate.com.cn/news/2008-05/24/content_15444874.htm http://www.rrebelde.cu/noticias/mundo/mundo-1-270508-eng.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.128.196.85 (talk) 16:21, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sigh...I'd love to help, but I am tremendously busy in real life. Could somebody take this job? I think we need an easier table...--haha169 (talk) 04:59, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Copyright problem[edit]

‎ This article has been revised as part of a large-scale clean-up project of multiple article copyright infringement. (See the investigation subpage) Earlier text must not be restored, unless it can be verified to be free of infringement. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions must be deleted. Contributors may use sources as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously. --Mkativerata (talk) 22:42, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Copyright problem removed[edit]

One or more portions of this article duplicated other source(s). The material was copied from: http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2008/5/27/nation/20080527123429&sec=nation and [4] and [5] and others. Infringing material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Mkativerata (talk) 20:18, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Holy See[edit]

The Pope's attitude should be better explained in the article. Hypocritical emtpy words containing God doesn't save people at all. Besides, it should be noted that de jure the Holy See doesn't recognize the People's Republic of China as a country. --2.245.111.186 (talk) 15:00, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Reactions to the 2008 Sichuan earthquake. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 22:57, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Reactions to the 2008 Sichuan earthquake. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 20:25, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Reactions to the 2008 Sichuan earthquake. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:08, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 10 external links on Reactions to the 2008 Sichuan earthquake. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:12, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Reactions_to_the_2008_Sichuan_earthquake&oldid=1205083839"