Jump to content

Portal talk:Current events/2018 March 5

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

China GDP target for 2018

[edit]

China keeps the target of 6.5% GDP growth in 2018, says Prime Minister of China Li Keqiang, the same target that was exceeded in 2017. (Reuters)

Argumentation in favour of publishing:

So it is news that China sets a 6.5% GDP growth target for 2018. Additional info:

  • Same target as 2017, despite having reached 6.9% last year
  • The target is in the PM's yearly work report
  • The target is supported by the head of the state council’s research office Wakari07 (talk) 09:15, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Argumentation against publishing:

Please discuss. Wakari07 (talk) 09:15, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Those aren't arguments and in any case it's not noteworthy as every government on Earth does that. Wingwraith (talk) 09:21, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Agencies and papers who think it's news: Reuters, BBC, the Kansas City Star, Yahoo News, India TV, Xinhua, The Australian, New Haven Register, Nasdaq, Fox Business, CNBC, New York Daily News, Asahi Shimbun... and many more. Wakari07 (talk) 09:42, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

But I agree the target is not exactly 6.5%. Possible rewording:

China keeps the target of around 6.5% GDP growth in 2018, says Prime Minister of China Li Keqiang, the same target that was exceeded in 2017. (Reuters)

You can article mine like that for any event that any government does and get basically the same result, but my point still stands, that announcement in itself is not noteworthy. Wingwraith (talk) 10:02, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • The public number was rather 7.5% previously. 6.5% is really new data. Also, China is not just any country. I wouldn't do that for the Maasmechelen announcement that it tightens rules after some girls complained of being filmed by boys in the swimming pool. Wakari07 (talk) 10:25, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Those numbers are just projections, it would make more sense if you reported on the meeting of that deliverable (which AFAIC is usually how it's done). Wingwraith (talk) 10:30, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Not projections but guidance. Please educate yourself on how things work. Wakari07 (talk) 10:41, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
No they are projections, that's what they scientifically are, you just call them guidance because you think that the word makes what is going on sound nice. Wingwraith (talk) 10:47, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Especially if you don't like it, you should learn the basics of socialist market economy. Wakari07 (talk) 10:51, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I know more about it than you do and my point still stands, these kinds of announcements are not newsworthy. Wingwraith (talk) 10:54, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
So where are your credentials? I think you're acting ignorant. Wakari07 (talk) 10:56, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
You're just wasting time with these comments. Actually rebut my argument which as I said is that those numbers are just projections, it would make more sense if you reported on the meeting of that deliverable (which AFAIC is usually how it's done). If you don't have anything constructive to say, then don't say it at all. Wingwraith (talk) 11:02, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

We do have a tendency to report announcements by large modern nations, and do so quite regularly when those announcements may affect policy; see the numerous instances wherein Trump has announced various intended policy changes, long before any serious attempt to implement them; most recently, his opinions on the trade of steel and aluminum. Arguably, this is partly a response to that; China's goal is lower than a number hit last year, signalling an expectation that the market may be less favorable. I would personally argue that this is, in fact, notable, as it signals economic tension between two of the three most populous nations in the world. Icarosaurvus (talk) 11:10, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Even if I were to grant you that that in itself is not what is important, what is is this of which that announcement is but one part; I wouldn't have a problem if you amalgamated the economic projection with your description of that event. Wingwraith (talk) 11:20, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Those two meetings are not news. They were "carefully choreographed" as BBC correctly reports. Wakari07 (talk) 11:32, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Also, I don't think it's a reaction on "tensions" or the day's loom. Wakari07 (talk) 11:42, 5 March 2018 (UTC) Simply a notable (albeit programmed) event in the business and economy of China. Wakari07 (talk) 11:48, 5 March 2018 (UTC) Like offering the result of the previous programming to the population and manufacturing consent to use it as input for the future dirigist programming. Wakari07 (talk) 12:03, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You're comments don't make sense, the article is makes it clear (in the first paragraph) that the meetings are what is important. Wingwraith (talk) 13:01, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that I am wasting my time at trying to "discuss" with this user. Wakari07 (talk) 13:47, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Your comment here is deceptive, the administrator clearly called you out for your violation of 3RR as well so don't act like the ANI request was resolved on your terms. It's your edits which are being reverted so it's your responsibility to find the consensus to justify them. Wingwraith (talk) 23:49, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
In further clarification of this comment, I state for the record that my position, once again, on this issue is that what is important is this of which that announcement is but one part; I wouldn't have a problem if the economic projection was amalgamated with the description of that event. Wingwraith (talk) 00:00, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
What that talk of "amalgamate"? I'm here for the bare info. Wakari07 (talk) 00:08, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It's obvious that you haven't read the article, read it first and then come back to discuss this further; in the meantime do not edit war any further. Wingwraith (talk) 00:12, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Aside from a passing mention of Li Datong, I see nothing notable to amalgamate in it. Wakari07 (talk) 00:17, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Stop playing games the first paragraph of the article says what's important, which is that "China's "two sessions" - the annual meetings of the national legislature and the top political advisory body - are opening in Beijing." Wingwraith (talk) 00:20, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Do you mean this:

China's "two sessions" - the annual meetings of the national legislature and the top political advisory body - are opening in Beijing. China aims at around 6.5% GDP growth in 2018, the same target as in 2017. (BBC) (Reuters)

I still don't see why we need to link this, but hey, why not. You mean all this talk for such a simple edit? Wakari07 (talk) 00:25, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No that is neither what I nor the article said. Also don't restore your reverted version of the article while we are discussing it here on the talkpage. If you don't care to understand even the basic rules of how to edit Wikipedia, then just get the hell off of the website. Wingwraith (talk) 00:30, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Then again, why don't you modify the blurb instead of deleting information? We're making folly of the revert rules. Wakari07 (talk) 00:32, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
You're the one who caused this issue first and wants to put this item on the portal so it's your responsibility to make the changes. Wingwraith (talk) 00:37, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Do you have a full time job at this? Wakari07 (talk) 00:39, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
If you have nothing constructive to say, then don't fucking say it at all. Wingwraith (talk) 00:40, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Propose your version of the text here on the talkpage first instead of just adding it directly to the main article as you did here. Wingwraith (talk) 00:45, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You made my userpage. Ñow I'm going to sleep. Wakari07 (talk) 00:47, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
In relation to your comment here, I repeat, propose your version of the text here on the talkpage first instead of just adding it directly to the main article. Wingwraith (talk) 01:38, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I have proposed twothree versions. The last one is too amalgamated for my taste. You produced none. When does your shift end? Wakari07 (talk) 01:44, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It ends after your shift ends. What are the three versions of the text? (I don't see them so write them out enumeratively ) Wingwraith (talk) 01:50, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Also you revert the article to your version while we are discussing it here on the talkpage again as you did here and I'll notify the administrator who closed your ANI request of what you are doing. Wingwraith (talk) 01:57, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The three versions are above, assorted with the "code" tag.Wakari07 (talk) 07:52, 6 March 2018 (UTC) Do you mean Bbb23 ? Now she/he's pinged. Wakari07 (talk) 07:43, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Further to the above, per WP:BRD the burden is on you to discuss it your reverts. Not only have you refused to discuss them and my compromise proposal, which is that what is important is the opening of the two sessions of which that announcement is but one part; I wouldn't have a problem if the economic projection was amalgamated with the description of that event, but you've also unilaterally reverted the article at every possible opportunity to your version of the article while we have been discussing it here on the talkpage. @Bbb23:, I await your intervention on this issue. Wingwraith (talk) 08:05, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User:Wingwraith Wakari07 (talk) 08:28, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The latest and the barest proposal:
Business and economy
My suggestion would be something like:
Politics and Elections
    • China's "two sessions" - the annual meetings of the national legislature and the top political advisory body - are opening in Beijing. Among other announcements, it is stated that the target GDP growth is 6.5% for 2018, the same target as in 2017. The legislature is expected to approve a number of measures which would effectively solidify the power of Xi Jinping. (BBC) (Reuters)
While the two sessions meeting may largely be planned, with expected outcomes being rather less uncertain than legislative bodies in Western nations, I do not feel that a semi-scripted event is necessarily non-notable; For example, we covered the opening of the Argentinian national assembly several days ago, when it arguably may have been more notable if said opening had somehow gone wildly off the rails. Please let me know if there are any suggestions for alterations, or if this summary is somehow unsuitable. Icarosaurvus (talk) 17:27, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This is certainly acceptable to me. A bit long and boring, but hey, let me get over it. Any ideas for a cat? Hard-core Politics of China? Wakari07 (talk) 17:36, 6 March 2018 (UTC) Oh yes, we may add internal links to Lianghui#Governmental usages instead of Lianghui, to China and to Beijing. But it's mostly a question of taste. Wakari07 (talk) 17:40, 6 March 2018 (UTC) Also, literally citing it's "around 6.5%" rather than "6.5%". Wakari07 (talk) 18:11, 6 March 2018 (UTC) Making it:[reply]
Politics and Elections
Aye, this looks good to me; more precision in our internal links is definitely preferable. Inclusion of "around" is also an improvement; I'm afraid I missed that bit. I do admittedly have a bit of Geertzian wordiness; a common hazard for people in the social sciences. Icarosaurvus (talk) 19:20, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Politics and Elections

@Icarosaurvus: Your comments would be welcomed, I would say that my version of the text is better than Wakari07's, better prose and contains more relevant information (includes the rise in its military budget and removes the term-limit part as the delegates haven't actually announced its removal yet). Wingwraith (talk) 21:41, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's superb prose. Wakari07 (talk) 22:19, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
How about:
Politics and Elections
Icarosaurvus (talk) 22:31, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I personally disliked the excessively long linked section, and brief summaries following the name of a thing are semi-frequently allowed in current events. We can hold off on the announcements about Xi until they occur; while almost a certitude at this point, it won't hurt to wait, and we've covered them before. Icarosaurvus (talk) 22:37, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This said, the inclusion of the military budget is probably a good idea; it certainly helps to show the pattern of increased militarization under Xi. (I am afraid that I realized I forgot to include this in my above comment.) Icarosaurvus (talk) 22:41, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I'd remove the space in front of the semicolon. And military budget could link internally to Military budget of China. Otherwise it's fine, again. Wakari07 (talk) 22:53, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Okay! Are we able to agree on the following:
If so, hopefully everything can be unlocked, and I will post it. Icarosaurvus (talk) 23:02, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Wakari07 (talk) 23:11, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I would take out the two sessions part as it hampers the sentence flow with unnecessary detail; with regards to your concern about the excessively long hyperlink, I've shortened the referent.

Politics and Elections

@Icarosaurvus: Which version of the text do you prefer, this one or the one immediately above? Wingwraith (talk) 02:43, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

While I prefer the one I used, as I feel it better provides context for the reader, I am not entirely sure those interested in Chinese politics will care too greatly about our exact wording, anyway. Yours is also serviceable, however. Icarosaurvus (talk) 02:53, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ok Wingwraith (talk) 05:54, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Does this mean we are agreed that my version, while possibly not optimal for either party, is at least acceptable to both? Icarosaurvus (talk) 06:24, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, post it when you're ready. Wingwraith (talk) 07:57, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Visum. Wakari07 (talk) 13:38, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request 7 March 2018

[edit]

Please add the context * [[Politics of the United States]] to Republicans raise concern about U.S. President Donald Trump's plan to impose tariffs on metal imports. – Nixinova ⟨T|C⟩ 18:37, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Done ansh666 21:59, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Protected edit request on 6 March 2018

[edit]

Please add link to the marine archeology blurb: Vulcan Inc., maybe instead of Paul Allen, and Remotely operated underwater vehicle Wakari07 (talk) 20:34, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Half done I added Vulcan, but how/where do you want the ROV link to be added? ansh666 22:00, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, I confounded ROV and RV Petrel:
 Done — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:18, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Protected edit request on 6 March 2018

[edit]

Change "members of Antifa" to "antifa", "anti-fascists", "protesters" or "left-wing protesters". Antifa is not an organization despite claims from right-wing media.Oscar666kta420swag (talk) 23:41, 6 March 2018 (UTC) Oscar666kta420swag (talk) 23:41, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support from Antifa (United States) to antifa. Wakari07 (talk) 23:51, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support anti-fascist protesters. – Nixinova ⟨T|C⟩ 03:54, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done for now: our article Antifa (United States) uses the term with a capital A. Probably best to get it changed there first, as this should follow the style of the article — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:22, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Honestly, it's more important what the source says. Wakari07 (talk) 10:58, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done: According to the page's protection level you should be able to edit the page yourself. If you seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:29, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. Wakari07 (talk) 12:54, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Protected edit request 7 March 2018

[edit]

Add story – France lowers the age of consent to 15. (CNN) – Nixinova ⟨T|C⟩ 03:51, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Under which section? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:20, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
None, because it's not true in that phrasing. Wakari07 (talk) 11:07, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This seems more decent:

Marlène Schiappa, the French minister of equality, proposes to set an age of consent, at 15.~ Wakari07 (talk) 11:20, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Propose Science and technology; War on error Wakari07 (talk) 11:25, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Added link to a 35-year-old. Wakari07 (talk) 11:45, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Schiappa says a law proposal will be presented to the Government of France on March 21. Wakari07 (talk) 11:59, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Article source says in the first paragraph France's government has proposed setting a formal age of sexual consent. Wakari07 (talk) 14:40, 8 March 2018 (UTC) So may be useful to correlate to / distinguish from / amalgamate with the age of end of "automatic" rape? Wakari07 (talk) 15:03, 8 March 2018 (UTC) "Backwards" France obviously as of now still thinks that fundamental human and civil rights are inherent to the individual and delivered at/before birth. That is set to change, and news. When voted. Wakari07 (talk) 15:23, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Arts and culture - Timeline of young people's rights in France Wakari07 (talk) 23
09, 8 March 2018 (UTC)
So: WP:Category:Youth in France. Wakari07 (talk) 04:02, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Portal_talk:Current_events/2018_March_5&oldid=1209210664"