Talk:Confucius Institute

This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Linguistics: Applied Linguistics Low‑importance

	Linguistics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Linguistics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of linguistics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LinguisticsWikipedia:WikiProject LinguisticsTemplate:WikiProject LinguisticsLinguistics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Applied Linguistics Task Force.
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

China Mid‑importance

	China portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject China, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of China related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChinaWikipedia:WikiProject ChinaTemplate:WikiProject ChinaChina-related articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archives

1, 2

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by when more than 1 section is present.

Intro

In rearranging the introduction around 3 paragraphs, I placed the organization first, academic freedom second, and the propaganda third. You are free to modify the wording if you have POV concerns. HertzUranus (talk) 13:11, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@HertzUranus: That's not how Wikipedia works. The WP:ONUS is on you to gain WP:CONSENSUS. Also the above is not even close to explaining what you intend, what your sources are and does not even begin to address my objections. Kleuske (talk) 13:15, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This last paragraph is a mixed bag, that is why I broke it up. I moved the first two sentences up to the top as part of the organization history. The last two sentences are covered in the body of the article, and since its country-specific, should be removed from the intro altogether.

There have been a number of reports pointing to controversial incidents in the past, including a former senior CCP official, Li Changchun's comment that Confucius Institutes are "an important part of China's overseas propaganda set-up". In July 2020, Hanban announced its renaming to the Center for Language Education and Cooperation, stating that The Confucius Institute was handed over to Chinese International Education Foundation [zh], a self-described "non-governmental private organization". On 13 August 2020, the United States Department of State designated the headquarters of the Confucius Institute in the U.S. as a foreign mission of the Chinese government. This designation has been protested by the Center in an open letter to former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and former Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos. HertzUranus (talk) 13:20, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This sums up what has happened to many CIs worldwide so I have added the following sentence. Such concerns have led to a backlash from academics and governments, resulting in many universities closing their Confucius Institutes. HertzUranus (talk) 13:23, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with @HertzUranus that these last two sentences are not significant enough for inclusion in the lead: "On 13 August 2020, the United States Department of State designated the headquarters of the Confucius Institute in the U.S. as a foreign mission of the Chinese government. This designation has been protested by the Center in an open letter to former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and former Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos." They remain appropriate for elsewhere in the article. JArthur1984 (talk) 13:23, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Last two paragraphs of Intro

The last two paragraphs in the introduction are clearly duplicates of the previous two paragraphs. Someone (who will not be incorrectly counteracted every time they try to help) should delete them. Sladimort (talk) 03:15, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I deleted the other one (someone else got to one before me). They were definitely duplicates. PiGuy3 (talk) 04:17, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]