Talk:Hurting the feelings of the Chinese people
(Redirected from Talk:Hurt the feelings of the Chinese people)
 | A fact from Hurting the feelings of the Chinese people appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 19 September 2020 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|  |
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Did you know nomination
[edit]- The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: promoted by Yoninah (talk) 11:57, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
( )
- ... that Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and Barack Obama have all been accused of hurting the feelings of the Chinese people?
Source 20 (Wired): "China is growling about President Clinton's plans to meet next week with the exiled Tibetan spiritual leader, the Dalai Lama. To do so, a Foreign Ministry spokesman said, would be to "support (the Dalai Lama's) activities, which seriously hurt the feelings of the Chinese people.""
Source 21 (Hindustan Times): "Liu said Bush's meeting with the Tibetan spiritual leader, one day before the Dalai Lama receives a congressional Gold Medal, "seriously violates the fundamental rules of international relations, hurts the Chinese people's feelings and grossly interferes in China's internal affairs.""
Source 22 (Xinhua): "China pointed out that the U.S. obstinate arrangement of President Obama's meeting with the Dalai Lama in the White House has seriously interfered in China's internal affairs, hurt the feelings of the Chinese people, undermined China's key interests and damaged the Sino-American relations, said the press release"
Source 23 (Quartz): "After president Barack Obama met the Dalai Lama in 2010, China issued a statement calling the meeting “a serious interference in China’s internal affairs that hurt the feelings of the Chinese people, hurts China’s core interests and hurts Sino-US relations.”"- ALT1:... that according to the People's Daily, Pope John Paul II's canonisation of Chinese martyrs hurt the feelings of the Chinese people?
Source 10 (People's Daily): "梵蒂冈不顾中国人民包括广大天主教徒的强烈反对，坚持搞“封圣”的倒行逆施，极大地伤害了中华民族的感情，这是对12亿中国人民的严重挑衅。" (English TL: "In spite of the strong opposition of the Chinese people, including Catholics, the Vatican has insisted on the perverse practice of 'canonisation', which has greatly hurt the feelings of the Chinese race. This is a serious provocation to the 1.2 billion Chinese people.") - ALT2:... that according to the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Pope John Paul II's canonisation of Chinese martyrs hurt the feelings of the Chinese people?
Source 24 (Foreign Ministry PRC): "梵蒂冈的这一行径严重伤害了中国人民的感情和中华民族的尊严。" (English TL: "This action by the Vatican has seriously hurt the feelings of the Chinese people and the dignity of the Chinese nation.")
- ALT1:... that according to the People's Daily, Pope John Paul II's canonisation of Chinese martyrs hurt the feelings of the Chinese people?
Created by Benlisquare (talk). Self-nominated at 14:36, 3 September 2020 (UTC).
| General: Article is new enough and long enough |
|---|
| Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems |
|---|
|
| Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation |
|---|
|
| QPQ: Done. |
ALT2 is best, imo. Most people won't know what "People's Daily" is. (t · c) buidhe 02:21, 5 September 2020 (UTC)Horng-luen Wang article
[edit]2016 re-print version of 汪宏倫's journal article:
Regards, --benlisquareT•C•E 05:55, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
Seems distinctly OR
[edit]While there is secondary coverage of this phraseology, it feels like the article takes liberties to fill in the rest with potential OR or failing that, undue examples. I'm trying to imagine a version of this article about an editorial tic of a particular Western media outlet—and while that theoretical article seems plausible, it would also have more grouchy editors contesting its scope. I'm that grouch here, I guess. Remsense诉 23:17, 30 March 2024 (UTC)