Talk:Wild China

Television Low‑importance

	Television portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

BBC Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject BBC, an attempt to better organise information in articles related to the BBC. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join us as a member. You can also visit the BBC Portal.BBCWikipedia:WikiProject BBCTemplate:WikiProject BBCBBC articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Tasks for WikiProject BBC:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Improve BBC, BBC News (TV channel) and BBC News to Good Article status following previous reviews, create BBC Computer Literacy Project (in light of forthcoming 30th anniversary)
Cleanup : Chucklevision - references and general clean-up, Pebble Mill Studios - over-detailed and long, BBC World Service Television - unreferenced and confusing
Copyedit : BBC News, Broadcasting House
Expand : Top 20 start-class BBC articles with most importance: BBC Japan, BBC World Service Television, BBC Lifestyle, BBC Two Northern Ireland
NPOV : Criticism of the BBC (See comments)
Stubs : Stub-Class BBC articles
Other : *Restructure the category
- Add infoboxes to the BBC articles without infoboxes
- Add free-use images to biographical articles where possible
- Add references to Goa Mix (see assessment) and Coat of arms of the BBC
- Return Dad's Army to a Good article. (See comments)
- Reassess BBC following improvements to article.

China Low‑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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Central Asia Low‑importance

	Asia portal Wild China is part of WikiProject Central Asia, a project to improve all Central Asia-related articles. This includes but is not limited to Afghanistan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Mongolia, Tajikistan, Tibet, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Xinjiang and Central Asian portions of Iran, Pakistan and Russia, region-specific topics, and anything else related to Central Asia. If you would like to help improve this and other Central Asia-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome.Central AsiaWikipedia:WikiProject Central AsiaTemplate:WikiProject Central AsiaCentral Asia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Biology Low‑importance

	Biology portal Wild China is part of the WikiProject Biology, an effort to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to biology on Wikipedia. Leave messages on the WikiProject talk page.BiologyWikipedia:WikiProject BiologyTemplate:WikiProject BiologyBiology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Environment Low‑importance

	Environment portal This environment-related article is part of the WikiProject Environment to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the environment. The aim is to write neutral and well-referenced articles on environment-related topics, as well as to ensure that environment articles are properly categorized. Read Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ and leave any messages at the project talk page.EnvironmentWikipedia:WikiProject EnvironmentTemplate:WikiProject EnvironmentEnvironment articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Reception section

The article could do with a reception section giving an overview critical reception, some ratings and in the future any awards or nominations. matt br 18:04, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Criticism, bias, manipulations, etc?

To be honest, while the first two episodes I saw where... grand, beautifull, the fact it was done with PRC's ok and all thsi make me wonder...

Wss there critics by international groups like greenpeace, bias and manipulations from PRC or it's pressure, etc...? Because I am sure they tried by example discretely to 'veer' attention away from 'sore spots' and so on...

Frankly, was there any greenwashing and whitewashing?

Answer to Above

Somehow I knew this question is going to come up, but I mean, just chill out. It is simply impossible to be filming such a big project in a country without that country's government saying OK, regardless of which country. So PRC's OK isn't something that should make you wonder, it's a given or BBC will be breaking all kinds of international laws... And I mean, if you don't have faith in the PRC government's media presentation, you've gotta have faith in BBC NHU, it is THE team for top level nature documentaries. It is not fair for the filming team and for China's wild life scene otherwise.

There are still many environmental problems in China oh for sure, but not every documentary needs to focus on the stain on the table 100% of the time, especially when outsiders don't even know what the whole picture looks like yet. As a general presentation of Chinese wild life and conservation efforts, I think Wild China is very dignified. It is also true that the Chinese government is flooding a lot of money and effort into conservation nowadays, no one would argue with that. So I'd say it is an optimistic view into the relationship between Chinese people and their environment in recent years, showcasing the increasing effort for conservation but downplays a lot of the detailed difficulties in the process. It is optimistic as in it choose to focus on the general trend, it also focus on the solution more than the problem (we've been told the problem enough times already). For the final verdict, I'd say there's as much or maybe very slightly more "greenwashing" to Wild China compared to other BBC productions of the same scale.

Now lastly, remember that this is a nature documentary, not a political one: it captures images of certain animals in their natural habitat with various behaviors. All the cultural and ideological or even human factors are ultimately tasty frosting, but the stars are the animals themselves. And to that extend, I don't know how could it ever be "whitewashed" --- The facts about those animals are definitely true, and BBC has done a great job with them, what more can I say. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.24.111.220 (talk) 01:14, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps not the first collaboration with a foreign broadcaster

I think of the "Silk Road" series made with NHK as the first collaboration of CCTV with a foreign broadcaster. Is it correct to say that "Wild China" was the first? --Bistropha (talk) 17:29, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]