Talk:2022 COVID-19 protests in China

Latest comment: 1 year ago by 2603:80A0:17F0:250:69CC:AF98:5413:3AA6 in topic Merge Hong Kong sections

Effects from the 2022 World Cup

edit

It might be reason enough to believe the protests were influenced by the 2022 FIFA World Cup. Viewers in China saw large crowds of people not in lockdown, and the Chinese public reacted to that. It's the old reaction to: "If they can do that, why couldn't we?" [1]. KyuuA4 (Talk:キュウ) 04:52, 28 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

Source does support -- kind of -- a connection by mentioning a WeChat article. Hmm. Artoria2e5 🌉 05:54, 28 November 2022 (UTC)Reply
Hmmm. While I think that could be possible, is there any document or evidence to demonstrate this causal relationship? NeoChrono Ryu (talk) 03:03, 2 February 2023 (UTC)Reply

RfC on status of the protests

edit

How should the status of the protests be described?

  • Option 1 Status quo- protests are to be described as ongoing.
  • Option 2 Protests should be described as having ended on December 5 (the last day protests were recorded in the Timeline section).
  • Option 3 Protests should be described as having ended on another date.

Firestar464 (talk) 10:04, 23 December 2022 (UTC)Reply

  • November-December. December 5 is too specific of a date; we don't need to try and pinpoint the exact date the last (or for that matter the first) protest was on. The government changed course in early December and the protests have fizzled out now, so we can just say they were a series of protests that took place in November and December of 2022. Endwise (talk) 11:49, 23 December 2022 (UTC)Reply
Option 3 — Option 1 is definitely out of the question based on reliable sources, as far as I can tell, which all seem to paint them as a thing that has ended. See e.g. NYT on December 9. A Radio Free Asia piece from December 3 implies they were already "quelled". WhinyTheYounger (WtY)(talk, contribs) 16:50, 23 December 2022 (UTC)Reply

Note: I've removed the RfC tag without a formal closure per WP:RFCEND, as the consensus appears obvious and so a formal closing statement not needed. Endwise (talk) 23:19, 6 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

Few Chinese-language sources?

edit

Most of the sources cited seem to be English-language news organizations. Is there a reason why there are so few Chinese-language sources cited here? Is there a Wikipedia policy I don't know about that preferences English-language sources? NeoChrono Ryu (talk) 03:13, 2 February 2023 (UTC)Reply

@NeoChrono Ryu: English source goes first on English Wikipedia. ときさき くるみ not because they are easy, but because they are hard 17:05, 21 February 2023 (UTC)Reply

Include supportive protests?

edit

In late November and early December there were several vigils/protests by Chinese people in various cities around the world. I attended one in New York City near the Chinese consulate on the evening of November 29, 2023. There was also a related protest at Columbia University. Is it worthwhile to include these related/inspired actions, or are these considered not important enough to justify including? NeoChrono Ryu (talk) 03:20, 2 February 2023 (UTC)Reply

@NeoChrono Ryu: It had been included in the "Abroad" section. ときさき くるみ not because they are easy, but because they are hard 17:06, 21 February 2023 (UTC)Reply
And if you think there's more can be done, feel free to add them. ときさき くるみ not because they are easy, but because they are hard 17:19, 21 February 2023 (UTC)Reply

Merge Hong Kong sections

edit

Please merge those HK sections 2603:80A0:17F0:250:69CC:AF98:5413:3AA6 (talk) 18:14, 27 July 2023 (UTC)Reply