Jump to content

Talk:Pollution in China

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

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

[edit]

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Dy1001.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 02:31, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

[edit]

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Ssprak.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 06:53, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

NYT resource

[edit]

99.181.159.67 (talk) 01:05, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dubious image

[edit]
Beijing air on a day after rain (left) and a sunny but Smoggy day (right)

The image is dubious since it is by private individual and it is likely possible to construct similar images for any city having occasional non-polluting water mists and fogs. As such it is a form of dubious OR by claiming the fog is due to pollution. Also it is rather old since by some measures China's air pollution began to improve in 2006. So I propose removing it. Academica Orientalis (talk) 01:21, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You could give the individual the benefit of the doubt. Also, we don't remove images because they are old. Historical images are always used to illustrate an article. To remove it on the tenuous grounds you have put forward smacks of sanitisation. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 02:13, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Is there any evidence that the fog in this image is due to pollution? It is likely possible to produce a similar image in many cities. For example, here is an image from New York: [1]. Academica Orientalis (talk) 02:18, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
China and has an air pollution problem, therefore it is likely that the image on the right is due to smog. Your edits, here and on other article relating to China, are rapidly indicating to me that you are attempting to impose a biased point of view. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 02:32, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
OR is not allowed in Wikipedia. Spare me the ad hominem and concentrate on the issue. Also, I have added many well-sourced critical views to this and other environmental articles about China. Including about air pollution. I object to unsourced and OR arguments.Academica Orientalis (talk) 02:37, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps images such as these could be used instead, as they are from a reliable source and are not OR. I'm not sure about the copyright though ediss 02:16, 24 March 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by SmileyLlama (talk • contribs)

Introduction

[edit]

At some point, would be helpful to elaborate the introduction to this article. Thanks, DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 11:34, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Air pollution data

[edit]

I have air pollution data that I want turned into a graph: 

All measurements must be multiplied by 10,000 tonnes							

		SO2			Particulates		Industry dust
	Total	Industrial	Domestic	Total	Industrial	Domestic	
 1998	2091	1594	497	1455	1179	276	
 1999	1857.5	1460.1	397.4	1159	953.4	205.6	
 2000	1995.1	1612.5	382.6	1165.4	953.3	212.1	1092
 2001	1947.8	1566.6	381.2	1069.8	851.9	217.9	990.6
 2002	1926.6	1562	364.6	1012.7	804.2	208.5	941
 2003	2158.7	1791.4	367.3	1048.7	846.2	202.5	1021
 2004	2254.9	1891.4	363.5	1095	886.5	208.5	904.8
 2005	2549.3	2168.4	380.9	1182.5	948.9	233.6	911.2
 2006	2588.8	2234.8	354	1088.5	864.5	224.3	808.4
 2007	2468.1	2140	328.1	986.6	771.1	215.5	698.7
 2008	2321.2	1991.3	329.9	901.6	670.7	230.9	584.9
 2009	2214.4	1866.1	348.3	847.2	603.9	243.3	523.6

Excuse the poor column formatting. I can send an xls file if needed. I will dig out the refs to append to the graph. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 22:25, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Alan, Where is this data for? Source? Regards, DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 12:04, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

River exploitation and deforestation section needs citation

[edit]

Here it is: River exploitation and deforestation In 2008, China began an era of infrastructure and real estate construction campaign. Rivers are often exploited for soil and rock. To do this, trees and grassland along a given river is cleared, then the riverbed is deepened by a few dozen meters. The river is usually littered with numerous small deep lakes and sand/rock heaps. The ground water level can easily be reduced by 5 meters in nearby villages. Excavators and crushers work all day and night kicking up dust and making noise pollution a problem. Factories may dump their chemical emissions into river, or inject it into the groundwater. This practice is so widespread that many rivers in northern China are dry, with many rivers in southern China being polluted to the point of toxicity. The complete ruin of rivers and forests in many parts of China underscores the current severe pollution. Youth in China are beginning to show their resentment towards mistreatment of the environment, accompanied by an exodus of wealthy Chinese. It is unknown whether the latter is caused by environmental problems on a large scale.

Without a citation, it is very accusatory/harmful. That's why I removed it instead of adding citation needed tag. I apologize if I missed something or if this is not the correct way to handle this issue; if there is a better way, please let me know. Misaugstad (talk) 04:59, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Industrial pollution NYT article duplicate point

[edit]

In the industrial pollution section, the tenth point form the NYT article seems to refer to the same report that is the subject of the following paragraph ("A 2007 World Bank report..."). What should be done to make this less awkward? ediss 02:10, 24 March 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by SmileyLlama (talk • contribs)

Inconsistent units in Soil Contamination

[edit]

The article uses miles as a unit of area, however, a mile is a unit of length. The conversion factor of about 1500 to square kilometers also doesn't match any other widely used unit of area. I assume that the numbers im km² are correct, as they add up to about 1.3% of the total area of China, which is indeed about 1/10 of the arable area (and incidentally, about the same as the area taken up by permanent crops[1]). Ligneus (talk) 20:00, 11 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ http://en.worldstat.info/Asia/China/Land
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Pollution in China. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 20:16, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


A little Critique

[edit]

Many statistics in this article are not properly cited, where are all the data coming from? Seems like this article is all talking about the how badly the pollution in China is, so I would like to include more about the about how China is fighting back its pollution. Joeyespm163ac (talk) 09:44, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 5 May 2017

[edit]

Many of the Chinese citizens started to wonder if the air pollution if that is a the cause in the increase of lung cancer. This question began to rise when the citizens in China are constantly having to wear face masks to avoid breathing in the hazardous particles from their polluted skies. Some experts agree that it is the reason, but others say there isn't enough evidence. Wang Ning, deputy director of the Beijing Office for Prevention and Control, says he has seen a rise in a certain cancer called adenicarcinoma, which is a mucus that is seen as a side effect from pollution. China's lung cancer rate is 32% of the entire world's lung cancer patients. Meanwhile, as lung cancer increases, gastric, esophageal, and cervical cancer has all decreased in China.

Burkitt, Laurie. "Pollution: Causing Lung Cancer in China?" The Wall Street Journal. Dow Jones & Company, 11 Mar. 2014. Web. 05 May 2017. <https://blogs.wsj.com/chinarealtime/2014/03/10/does-air-pollution-cause-cancer/>. Kaylawatson0603 (talk) 14:48, 5 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. JTP (talk • contribs) 15:52, 5 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

[edit]

This article appears to be heavily vandalized. It is not immediately obvious which parts are factual and which parts are fabricated. For example, how has the paragraph on Soil Pollution survived as is for so long? Its the very first paragraph for crying out loud! Read it carefully, then follow the link for "further information". One paragraph describes productive land lost to contamination due to contaminated water, while the other is about "pure water" and productive land preserved. Its the same paragraph, sentence for sentence, with the meanings flipped. Is this some kind of sick joke?! Is this what passes for propaganda these days, "playful" vandalism, or what.. this article needs to be locked in some way. 24.117.147.14 (talk) 04:36, 7 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It seems this one was not a propagandist, as his/her original edit (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pollution_in_China&diff=772759182&oldid=771905971) included "Totally not a edit by Chinese propagandist!".
Later his/her edits were unfortunately partially reverted.
(I.e.: a nice person quickly reverted some of the edits but was not careful enough and skipped the first edit, and later other nice persons removed the most outrageous parts of the first edit but were also not careful enough to look up the original edit to fully revert it, leaving what you saw.)
Though, the claim of China's growth since 1970s decreasing pollution also should make one wonder how. And ideally one should trust anything on Wikipedia only once one has checked the references.
Feel free to participate in keeping up Wikipedia's quality. I.e., find the original edit of any vandalism you suspect (by Binary search on [the revision history) and edit the article to revert it. (But please don't delete vandalisms partially, without looking up the edit(s) of the author.) See also WP:REVERT. 2A02:AA12:A300:2B00:E40C:714D:19FA:CCC6 (talk) 16:39, 16 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Progress on air pollution in cities

[edit]

Possible Merger with the many overlapping articles on China and the environment?

[edit]

Is this article a candidate for merger? There seem to be far too many articles dealing with China environmental topics, many aspects of which are significantly out of date. I'm not an experienced enough editor to know how to approach this. There is an article on Pollution in China. Another for Greenhouse gas emissions by China. There's Debate over China's economic responsibilities for climate change mitigation. And the two best articles of the bunch, Environmental policy in China and Environmental governance in China. For the sake of completeness, I will add this comment to the talk page of each. Hopefully someone more experienced than me can suggest how to streamline. JArthur1984 (talk) 00:11, 17 June 2022 (UTC)JayArthur1984[reply]

Wiki Education assignment: Research Process and Methodology - FA22 - Sect 200 - Thu

[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 22 September 2022 and 8 December 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): VenusL (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by VenusL (talk) 16:26, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Pollution_in_China&oldid=1209806134"