Talk:China

Not that I'm terribly concerned about historical accuracy, but this article has a pretty huge Mao-aboo slant. --206.55.183.234 03:01, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

• The "Mao-aboo" (I this word means that it has a lot of Mao reference) slant only significantly appears on the Modern Era of China, since he is more infamous then China's previous leaders and his role was more important/significant into the birth of the Modern China psyche, so it seems pretty reasonable that he would most likely be the main focus in that section. Derpysaurus
  • I think he means that it's painting him in a more favorable light than he deserves, and some of the stuff (like the Cultural Revolution) does seem to conveniently ignore that it was in fact his fault. That's part of the problem with having history pages here, I guess- we can be passionate about the subject matter, but that passion gets in the way of cold, hard facts. --Newerfag (talk) 21:17, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

Yea, this is why I'd almost rather not have recent history articles. Nobody gets emotional about Hadrian's domestic policies (or at least nobody we care about offending). I will say I've never seen reliable sourcing for a lot of the things put forward in this article (Mao not wanting a personality cult or feeling remorse for the great leap). --Petro (talk) 23:22, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

• And since I'm the kind of nerd that does care about these things I dug out my old history book and looked it up. So I don't know if that was what the previous editor was referring to, but I'd hardly qualify his response to Peng as "remorseful". Oh and then he sacked him, and replaced him with Lin Biao, who made his personality cult mandatory in the military, until he suffered a bad case of explosion during a defection attempt. So there's that. --Petro (talk) 00:10, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

• • Well the paragraph on the Great Leap Forward was literally mocking the idiocy and the EPIC FAIL! of Mao's incompetency in his goal to industrialize China back to Great Power status. There was two paragraphs that was literally negative on Mao and the Communist Party that followed, only the last paragraph shared some light in Mao's humanity (Mainly on how this failure, which led to unnecessary deaths in large amounts, made Mao fear that it would eternally tarnished his reputation as the "Great Helmsmen who saved China from the corrupt KMT and the Imperialist Japanese"). Although it is true that it might seem a bit too "Pro-Mao", I think this might have been the fact that this is a Traditional Games wiki (Humor wiki) and we try our best to not get too realistically dark by adding some lightness into it. Derpysaurus

There is talk of the ethnic Han displacing the 'aboriginal' Chinese under the pre-history section, but I can't find any reliable information on that. I don't think there is much in concrete evidence that the Chinese haven't lived in the north for centuries before the founding of the semi-mythical Xia. --Canodae (talk) 8:18, 19 January 2018 (GMT)

Deleting Post Imperial History

I dunno, I'm very ambivalent about denuding the wiki of "modern history" (whatever that means). It's very tangentially related to traditional gaming (ever setting must have at least one Communist faction, it is known) and /tg/ are some of the biggest history nerds on 4chan. On the other hand you can just tell it's going to spawn edit wars, and the thought of having to cite sources to defend a position takes us to a weird place for this wiki. --Petro (talk) 00:32, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

• While improbable, there could be people who were actually old enough to be around when those events had just happened, so it's for the best that they're taken out. We're a traditional games wiki with a humorous bent to it, not a bunch of trained historians with degrees. And do we REALLY want to get into the nitty-gritty of historical revisionism?--Newerfag (talk) 00:40, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

Well... I actually do have a degree in Chinese history, and I would love to argue about it.... I just don't know if it's helpful for the wiki. EDIT: I guess my main concern is that if we start justifying deletions with concern for people's sensibilities, however valid they may be, that puts quite a large portion of this wiki on the chopping block. I don't even particularly want to test the link but I think we have an article for rape. --Petro (talk) 00:43, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

so i dont know shit about china but reading the deleted section, i thought it was pretty funny and concise. why are people butt hurt about it? didnt it already say that mao was a piece of shit? --Kapow

I think the deletion of the modern history stuff should be undone, mainly because the reasoning the deleter has was "stop liking things I don't like". - Biggus Berrus (talk) 08:11, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

For the person who deleted the entire post-war China...Yes there are games, movies and literature based on Communist China such as C&C:Generals, BF4, 1984 Eastasia as well as others. Although I do admit that the part in the Great Leap Forward was a bit "Pro-Mao" in the sense that he showed some regret, it was balanced with the fact that we acknowledged multiple times that he was a very, very incompetent and paranoid leader who made a large number of mistakes. But other then that, it shouldn't really be necessary to be deleted.Derpysaurus "There is no evidence he showed regret at all- in fact, all evidence points to the exact opposite. Does this sound like regret to you?

"When there is not enough to eat people starve to death. It is better to let half of the people die so that the other half can eat their fill."

I've fixed it so its historically accurate while still being funny.--Newerfag (talk) 15:34, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

Is this /pol/'s wiki, now? We all know we have different opinions, as long as the facts are presented impartially- -Oh, who am I kidding. If it's funny, we should keep it.

Relevance

As much as I appreciate an article on ancient China from a learning standpoint (and it is relevant to my interests), I can't help but wonder what the relevance is on 1d4chan. I mean, I know this is someone's baby and I'm loving the article so far, but I really can't see it. Yeah, every setting should have at least one Communism faction, but that's what the Communist page is for. At the very least there should be something in the article explaining why this belongs in the wiki.

• Then shall we link it to the communist page then? Because quite frankly, I find the post-Imperial China history contents as quite important (Since whenever anybody talks about the history of China nowadays, the first thing that comes in their head is usually Mao-era China), I will try to cut down the communist content since its incredibly bloated in context to the Imperial Paragraph. But to delete a two entire paragraph should be the responsibility on my part, since I heavily worked on that section.Derpysaurus

• If legitimate pages on this wiki that describe actual tabletop-gaming-related stuff are going to get wiped in some misguided quest for ideological purity, might as well throw an actual problematic-from-a-relevance-standpoint page under the bus. This is a bad page, written to satisfy a China-fag's raging patriotism boner and private axe to grind with Japan. It fails to recognize actual China-related tabletop-gaming shit like Legends of the Wulin, Dragonfist, or Feng Shui. It needs either a complete rework from the ground up, cutting out the vast majority of the page, or complete deletion. --SpectralTime (talk) 02:48, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
  • Editing. I will continue adding more in the future, though I've been cut off by RL for the moment. --SpectralTime (talk) 14:14, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
    • I am going to stand by keeping the historical info as it is brief enough with the majority of it only 3 paragraphs of basic info. This actually has been a good resource for setting info for me, which helps from having to read a shit ton of wikipedia articles about the subject in order to get basic facts. The qing dynasty stuff should be limited to 3 paragraphs as well at most. I am going to stand by keeping each of the sections brief and to the point, but no need to delete all of it. It does need additions such as the wuxia stuffDragoon508 (talk) 14:33, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
      • I stand opposed without quivocation. If you want to add a historical component, be my guest. But, in the form it was in, this article is not, in any way, shape, or form a good tabletop gaming article. It is, to be blunt, a way for Derpysaurus to masturbate about how awesome his country is for an embarrassingly long time before half-assedly throwing in a few half-hearted tabletop gaming references on the bottom. If I did something even remotely similar writing a United States of America article, I'd be dogpiled down in a skinny minute. You wanna add some historical stuff to my other article, be my guest. But as it stands, you're taking something on-topic and making it off-topic. If good pages have to be torched to sate Newerfag's search for ideological purity and Forgefather's political agenda, I will not stand idly by and let this one escape the flames. --SpectralTime (talk) 18:48, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
• The fuck SpectralTime? I mostly did the intro and a brief summary to some parts of China, the rest was done by A Walrus and some other anon. Don't try to put the jerking off on me as I mainly wrote it in the same vain as the Roman page with hints of over-the-topness in terms of presentation. If it did sound a bit like fanboying than I apologize for maybe going too far. Derpysaurus
• If anything I think we should agree to shorten the history bits to a few paragraphs while keeping some of the pictures (Found it humorous) while expanding its influence on other tabletop of /tg/ approved stuff. The same can be said about the Rome and British pages. Is this the agreement for everyone? Derpysaurus
  • • • • Alright well I think I have missed out on this newerfags and forgefather thing because I took a break due to family reasons. So not sure what you mean by that. Also not too confident in going that in depth on the historical portion of it as my history of China is basically confined to the three kingdoms era. But I will give a shot about doing a mini thing for a historical perspective about that time. I will probably get around to it later today or tomorrow. As for your wuxia portion of it you should probably do something about Kar Tu from DnD in there.Dragoon508 (talk) 19:20, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
          • Careful, if you say "Forgefather" 1d4 times he'll appear in the talk pa... Aw, nuts, I went and did it, didn't I?--The Forgefather
        • While "ideological purity" is an exaggeration, I did in fact propose and attempt to carry out a similar culling for the same reason SpectralTime stated- specifically, because its connection to /tg/ was made an afterthought at best in favor of fanboying a country and rambling about history that would be better suited for Wikipedia. Once it would have gotten a pass because /tg/ was the unofficial history board, but now that /his/ is a thing we only need the bare minimum of historical info and links to where people can find more info should they want it. I'm not opposed to having a history section, only to having said history being the major focus of the article. If ensuring that means people will see some big red numbers in the history, then so be it. --Newerfag (talk) 21:52, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
• Read it, a much better improvement than what I and A Walrus could do. I think we can all agree that it cut down a lot on the bloatedness that both me and A Walrus got too carried away with. Derpysaurus
  • Thank you, Derpy. I apologize profusely for personally attacking you. I've had a giant bug up my rectum about this for months, but the grace with which you're handling this profoundly shames me. --SpectralTime (talk) 13:19, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
• No worries man, at the end of the day this page was a massive improvement and I applaud you for that. Derpysaurus

Taiwan

Before you come after me, the reason I added the Taiwan section is because Taiwan is an awesome setting that isn't covered by enough /tg/ related material, and I'm Chinese with some of my family living in Taiwan after many died in Mao's purges. I tried to be as neutral as humanly possible while avoiding PRC propaganda. - Mr. Crab

Modern History Stuff

So, on the one hand, I feel like a lot of it feels like "Derpysaurus vs. the World," especially when it comes to stuff China does that the rest of the world is not a huge fan of. But on the other hand... he's not automatically the only Chinese person who uses this wiki? And if there's no way to represent the issue neutrally, then perhaps the solution Pedro once floated is best, and nothing at all is better than a battlefield with no end and no victor? --SpectralTime (talk) 11:57, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

No. Taiwan is independent of China. Stop being defeatist.

Need at least two line-breaks or a colon to put your comment on a new line. And I don't mean it like that, just, well... I made this article to begin with. I wrote most of it once. And I hate that I now regret that, because so much of the modern stuff is being used to advance the positions of the Chinese government; that democracy is a Western way of life that would never work in the rest of the world and especially not China (pay no attention to the multiple examples that surround us, one of whom are filthy war criminals anyway, or to the fact that it was working just fine in Hong Kong until militarized police action deposed the democratic government and replaced it with a compliant pupped), that all the horror and disaster of the mid-20th century was a regrettable aberration and definitely not Mao's fault or directly orchestrated by him, and so on.

...Also, that my age-old tactic of just waiting for my opponents to die before coming in after the fact to fix the problem didn't work, and may never work. A bitter pill to swallow in its own right. And to be fair, at least the section about modern Taiwan mostly stands. --SpectralTime (talk) 12:18, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

• Or you know, it's good to do some research on the points that were deleted because of how...inaccurate it is from just a 5 minute google search? The rest of the edits was okay, but when it comes to complicated and multifaceted shit like this, it is best to proofread it. I don't really care about the political situation of Taiwan because... let's be honest, it is merely political posturing that those two have been going at it for decades now. So I don't get where you got the whole idea of me vs the whole world bullshit when the last time I did anything on this page was 8 bloody years ago. However when it came to the things like the whole 'anime ban'. That was so blatantly false I had to raise an eyebrow. When it came to Hong Kong, well, welcome to the world of geopolitics. Unfortunately, whilst what happened there was shitty, using the term invasion is really, really disingenuous on what actually happened there. The annexation of Crimea is a case for invasion as it was an example of a nation-state outright doing a hostile military takeover of another nation-state. There was no major PLA involvement in Hong Kong for that island is technically already de facto and de jure a part of the mainland. What happened there was the breakdown of trust between the Hong Kong police and the populace due to a fuck up of communication over an extradition treaty. Now you can stretch it to say that there were covert undercover Chinese agents at play here and you may be correct. But it still does not meet the definition of an 'invasion'. And finally, whilst China distrust democracy's effectiveness, their foreign policy is still one of pragmatism. The whole democracy Schlick is largely for the Chinese audience, nevertheless, don't conflate domestic policy with foreign policy. The Chinese do not care who they deal with, so long as their national interests aren't meddled with. It is why they signed the RCEP despite the fact that it contained the likes of Japan and Australia. Because China knows that in the realm of geo-economics. Money talks, bullshit walks. China knows that its ridiculously huge consumer base plus its advance and sophisticated supply chains mean that its neighbours will naturally gravitate towards Beijing by sheer inertia. It does not matter how much military equipment they buy from America, because at the end of the day, losing out on the world's fastest and most dynamic major economy is a net negative to the economic interests of said nation-state when your other competitors will exploit the shit out of it. One just has to look at the sheer amount of Chinese FDI that has been put in ASEAN for example, to know that whatever political chest-thumping in SCS is merely for domestic show. Welcome to the world of International Relations, shit's a complicated clusterfuck y'all, but it is something that is in my field of expertise. Derpysaurus (talk) 13:15, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
• eat a cock slathered in gutter-oil, you Chi-Com plant. We know that bastard Xinnie the Flu has gone after anime and vidya, and we're not gonna let traditional gaming be next!
• How about you have a proper debate you worthless idiot? Or is the complex interactions of Indo-Pacific realpolitik too much for you?Derpysaurus (talk) 15:04, 12 January 2022 (UTC)c

while I chew the inside of Xi's anal prolapse succ and fucc at chucc's, you know it all xiaboo. Even when held back by idiot leaders like Biden, America is still number 1, while China is still reeling from that retard Mao killing all the sparrows and ushering in a plague of locusts that crawled up your granny's dishonorable asshole!

• Oh please anon. Show me the doll where Xi touched you. Because whilst I find Xi a boring fuck, its pretty unhealthy to be obsessed with a guy who is gonna die within a decade or so. Derpysaurus (talk) 15:16, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

He touched all those newborn Wigger muslim babies before crushing their heads with pliers as they exited the womb. I may think Islam is an evil cult that should be outlawed, but outright murdering, sterilizing, and murdering the children of them is wrong, and the fault lies directly in that sodden bunghole's decisions. Ironic, as China under him is also supporting the Iranian regime, the world's leading sponsor of Islamic terrorism.

• Well than anon. Welcome to the world of realpolitik. To quote a certain someone. There is no eternal friends nor enemies. There are only eternal interests. Iran doesn't care because...well, they are predominantly Shia, and despite the fact the Shiites hate Sunnis, it still does not stop from Iran supporting the Sunni majority Palestinians now right? Same with how fundamentalist Pakistan are allied with China and becoming closer with Orthodox Russia. Or how the US is effectively fucking over Australia-China trade relations only to swoop in and get most of the trade deals with China, thereby making US corporations competitive. Funny how that works eh? Derpysaurus (talk) 15:26, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

The age of your realpolitik horseshit is coming to an end. The people of America are awakening, and ready to tear the whole global system down in nuclear war if it has to come to it, you slimy diarrhea shitstain. We will annihilate your collective collectivist anus with our nuclear fat American cocks, #fuckchina

• That's cute. With the way things are going in your area. Both the blue states and red states will most likely shoot each other over the next presidential election. The rest of us, however, will mostly be watching on who comes out on top. Derpysaurus (talk) 15:36, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

Says the guy whose own government released covid in their own country to try and kill off their own older generation, to wipe out knowledge of the past and make it so only younger, healthier populations survived they could mould into the perfect soulless lackeys. We will not be assuage by your belligerent bellowing, Chinaman. We will skin the hide off your scrotum and utilize it as chewing gum, and tear the breasts off your women and use fleshhooks usually reserved for hog slaughtering plants to hang them from our Christmas trees. REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE YOU DUN GOT TROLLED BROOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO but seriously, fuck you and fuck Xi and fuck Mao and fuck China, USA #1! Suck this, China! https://bobsvagene.club/pics/erect-cock-close-ups/

• I already know you were trolling, it was blatantly obvious. A good troll does not reveal himself as a troll. A shit troll gets baited into revealing himself to be a troll. Congrats, you played yourself. Derpysaurus (talk) 15:44, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

You wish lawl get balled knot-sucka zoophile chinaman pounding down soy at an unimaginable rate while sucking off a dead dog as he eats it raw lolollol

• Come on, try harder next time. I have seen much more sophisticated trolling on the internet. Derpysaurus (talk) 15:51, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

Well, to be completely serious, your country is an authoritarian shithole where any speaking out against the powerful gets your organs harvested, and you're currently perpetrating a genocide the likes of which was last seen done by Stalin and Hitler. Your country acts like two-bit thugs even worse than Americans, but uses whataboutism and shifty bribing tactics to try and shift the blame. Then when you get called out on it, you try to act all edgy and say "that's realpolitikz yo!" like a sperg.

• And to be just as serious. What makes you think China is my country? Hint. It ain't. We can talk about China's dumb 'wolf warrior diplomacy' and stupid to borderline cringeworthy ultranationalism. Yet, the above points ain't 'whataboutism'. It is pretty much the reality of the situation here. Don't like it? Well too bad. It is pretty much the issue of Great Power Politics, us small folks have no say because we are mere chess boards in the great game. I am from a region in ASEAN, so believe me, I know what its like to deal with Chinese incursions. Realpolitik is not 'whataboutism'. Calling it 'whataboutism' when I just showed a few examples on how different nation-states with different cultural origins converge is pretty ignoramus. Derpysaurus (talk) 16:07, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

• I see a pol user has graced us with his prescence. I'll get out the swastikas and copies of Mein Kamfp to satisfy him. --Lord Of The Lemmings (talk) 23:13, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

Actually I was mostly trolling. Pol is too extreme for me. Although I do think China is a threat to the democratic nations of the world, including its neighbors, the parts about cannibalizing their women's tits was a joke, not a dick, don't take it so hard. It's called "comedic take"

I'm late to this shitfest but, speaking as one more Right than not, this whole "conversation" was a damned waste of everyone's time. Can we just delete most of it? It wasn't funny; it made you (in particular) look like a complete cockhead, and it is a strong argument for just blocking people with IP addresses from even editing content in here. --Zimriel (talk) 00:46, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

I tend to say no, if only because Triacom says deleting previous talk page stuff is unwise and seems suspect. We're not wikipedia, so its not like we care really about clutter--Lord Of The Lemmings (talk) 02:18, 15 January 2022 (UTC)