• RyanGosling [none/use name]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    73
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    There was a proposal to change the entry for “Chinese Communist Party” to “Communist Party of China” and they rejected it because it was “Chinese propaganda since this is what China wants people to refer it as,” and that it should be satisfying enough that the proper party name is included in parenthesis in the article. Well, they rejected it for a myriad of reasons, actually.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Chinese_Communist_Party#c-JapanStar49-20230918143300-Tokisaki_Kurumi-20230315133100

      • Tankiedesantski [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        28
        ·
        1 year ago

        In the totalitarian USSR, aparachniks and intelligencia were chosen and promoted on the basis of ideological loyalty and political reliability instead of competence.

    • CommieKurtz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      1 year ago

      The reason given was “Oppose due to MOS:VAR, although I agree that CPC is the better abbreviation” Just Wikipedia rules that there needs to be a substantial reason to change and that “…the party prefers the use of “CPC”, it accepts the use of both and says that whether the use of either abbreviation is positive or negative depends on the specific content.” If they don’t mind I don’t see what it’s about. Republicans will use black and white logic on anything communist with any given name. I’ll use CPC from now on thanks for the info. I have no doubt the article would be changed if it was a straight change like Türkiye