Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Sino-German cooperation

Sino-German cooperation (1911-1941)

I am nominating this article because it is very informative, has many relevant pictures, and sourced. I've spent a lot of time writing this and I think the subject matter is really cool. Self-nomination. BlueShirts 00:58, 19 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support. This is a substantial article on a relatively obscure topic. It counters systematic bias and is an informative read on a subject that not many people know about. (This is a semi-self-support.) -- Миборовский ^{U|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai!} 01:07, 19 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Object. Definitely an interesting article, but there are a few minor problems. While it's well-footnoted, I think you need more than two references. Your opening should also be at least two paragraphs. Finally, your article doesn't cover the last sixty years. How has Sino-German cooperation evolved over that period with both East/West Germany and China/Taiwan? Palm_Dogg 02:05, 20 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The problem with footnotes is that the subject matter is relatively obscure, and it's hard to find book sources on it, let alone web sources. I can of course use the sources used by the two sources I listed, but I think that would be considered cheating :). As for the naming, we are thinking about renaming the article to something more specific like Sino-German cooperation (1911-1938) BlueShirts 02:37, 20 January 2006 (UTC).[reply]

I'm sure there are many more sources that can be used to flesh out this article, even if said sources aren't books solely about the history of relations between China and Germany. Andrew Levine 03:37, 20 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

*Object, there is a lot of information here, but ths article completely leaves out the entire post-WWII (and PRC) era. Of what nature were China's relations to East and West Germany? What about post-Reunification? Andrew Levine 03:37, 20 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

- objection no longer relevant or valid as the article has been renamed--Jiang 08:44, 21 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Just to add on, this article was never meant to be a detailed account of Sino-German relations. It simply documents this unique period of cooperation between China and Germany from 1911-1940ish. Sino-German relations could be another article, covering both normal diplomatic relations between 1911-1949 for the ROC and then 1949- for the PRC and 1949- for ROC on Taiwan, with both East and West Germany. -- Миборовский ^{U|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai!} 00:54, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - Comment: They weren't really "cooperating" between 1941 and 1945, were they? Being that they were at war with each other and all. I think another rename is in order. Andrew Levine 01:20, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    - Bleugh... That's a good point... I think a declaration of war conclusively put an end to any cooperation that could have been going on... :) (I'll rename it and delete the 1911-1949 redirect.) -- Миборовский ^{U|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai!} 06:20, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      - Bleugh! Dunno what's wrong, mistyped 2 edit summaries in a row just now. Anyway, done. -- Миборовский ^{U|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai!} 06:24, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Very good article, but a minor object on various technical issues (which should be fairly easy to fix):

~~The title should be more specific (this should also address Andrew Levine's objection).~~
~~The lead should be two or three paragraphs.~~
The origin and copyright status of the first image are unclear.
~~The "See also" section is entirely redundant with links in the article, and should be eliminated.~~
~~The article needs a thorough copyedit, as there are numerous grammatical errors scattered throughout.~~

On the broader issue of referencing, it is acceptable to cite the sources Kirby is using (e.g. "Book A, cited in Book B"; see the CMS for the exact format to use here). As it stands, the article is extremely dependent on Kirby; this is not improper per se, but it would be nice to have some other authors listed, if only to demonstrate that what is being described isn't a figment of his imagination ;-) —Kirill Lok s hin 03:47, 20 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

okay, changed the name of article, added sources, and extended the lead section to reflect objections. BlueShirts 19:00, 20 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support Great article on obscure but important topic. Wikipedia needs more articles like this. The minor aspects of history, politics, and economic development help provide a framework from which other articles can expand and grow. Wendell 00:32, 21 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support great article--Jiang 08:44, 21 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Conditional suport: lead needs more ilinks, for example, Republic of China is not linked. Second, make sure that all positions mentioned in notes are also added to references section.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 02:31, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support. The topic seems to be interesting, esp. before WWII. Brandmeister 01:04, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support - the recent changes make it an example of what Wikipedia should be about. It's well written, well resourced, good pictures, good links and it informed me about a subject I knew next to nothing about. • U|T|E 01:20, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]