Talk:Guangzhou/Archive 1

Sentence removed

Sentence removed:

Guangzhou was sacked by Arab raiders in the 8th century.

May one provide the source? kt2 02:35, 27 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Source: A Borrowed Place: The History of Hong Kong by Frank Welsh, Maya Rao (Editor). page 13. The text of this page can even be viewed at: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1568361343/ref=lib_rd_ss_TT03/103-1055282-6603831?v=glance&s=books&vi=reader&img=7#reader-link - so, I am restoring the sentence. olivier 03:02, 27 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Surprising, more opposing evidences would be needed. Keep this sentence for now kt2 03:11, 27 Sep 2003 (UTC)

okay, the incident was verified to be true. kt2 04:00, 27 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Good job kt2! olivier 12:07, 27 Sep 2003 (UTC)

:) 大将军, 都督中外诸军事 (talk) 07:23, 28 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Hi

This website rox!Who here agrees??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.138.1.134 (talk) 23:40, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

All of us. That's why we edit here. ➨ ❝REDVERS❞ 23:41, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

Population

There seems to be a complete mess and inconsistency in terms of the relative populations of Chinese cities. This article states that Guangzhou is the 5th biggest city, but doesn't say on what list or compared to what other cities on what terms. Other places within wikipedia place it from 3rd to 9th. Does anyone have a proper sourced official list of the cities that could be properly referenced or used as a basis of bringing some consistency to this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.83.11.170 (talk) 04:55, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

Guangzhou is a net migrant intake province. It has a large floating population of 30 million from doing google search. It would be nice if someone can find out more info about the number of migrant workers "floating" in Guangzhou as with the rest of the provincial cities such as Shenzhen.--Zhongxin (talk) 14:06, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Reference to marimari.com

Can someone change this link to the right page - I have searched high and low on that website and I can't find anything to do with GZ there. It should be deleted if it doesn't link to anything related to this topic. (JROBBO 07:15, 30 December 2005 (UTC))

Done. Yeah, I've always thought this policy of "put the main page of the website, not the specific page" had problems. Perhaps I've misunderstood something... JackyR 10:52, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Park 19

Random passerby: Could someone check out Park19, they claim to be an artists group from this city, but I can't read a word of their site, if someone is framiliar with the group, or can do a pinch of research, perhaps you could add it to a stump category, or do a bit of a write up? Or of course, there is the chance that this is a local garage band that wanted free web presence, in which case, give it the axe? bigmacd24Bigmacd24 22:25, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

i don't really noe because many people has to pay to BOb in order to research this WHOLE SITE! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 15:21, 4 September 2008 (talk) 24.83.145.51 (UTC)

Its name in Cantonese

Should its name as pronounced in Cantonese be mentioned somewhere in the article? Cantonese, instead of Putonghua, is natively spoken. — Instantnood 04:32, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I just noticed that too. It would also help explain "Canton", which is explained in the article as having come from Cantonese, but the source is not given. Any Cantonese speakers willing to help? Lesgles (talk) 16:34, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

Done. Yuje 03:17, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks so much. — Instantnood 08:00, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

The best Cantonese pronunciation for GuangZhou I can get from Microsoft Sam is Gornd Zout, by LeurngZiiHynd 04 october 2006. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.31.48.6 (talk) 02:12, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Romanizations

Removed zhuyin for the same reason given at Talk:District Council of Hong Kong#Romanizations. It is neither the original Chinese script nor a romanization system. --Jiang 03:19, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

The Name

I realise I'm talking to the air here, but this article ought to be titled Canton (City) or Canton (China), as this name is far, far more commonly used in English than Guangzhou, and much more recognisable. Moscow not Moskva, Venice not Venezia, Germany not Deutschland. Can't we be more consistent and user-friendly here? Sikandarji 14:41, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

As far I know Canton is sorta outdated...if it's worth anything, my old globe (like '95?) has "Guangzhou". plus, isn't Canton the translastion of the province name, not the city? 66.41.59.162 15:12, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

My baby sister was just adopted from QingYuan SWI in Guangzhou in August 2006. My parents and the agency called it Guangzhou. 68.171.240.254 13:29, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

The article's name has just been moved to "Guangzhou", and I agree this is correct. LDHan 10:45, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

No, this is an English-language encyclopedia, and the name in English is Canton. It is exactly as Sikandarji has reasoned. I don't doubt that you can find some recent references that have preferred "Guangzhou", but they are simply out of alignment with common English usage. What we ought seek, here, is the name that is most easily recognizable to English-speakers, as against a name that some parties want to foist onto the English-speaking world as (politically) "correct". -- Lonewolf BC 21:04, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

WP naming convention for Chinese place names states that place names in mainland China should be named using pinyin. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 04:38, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Sikandarji's reasoning there is not exactly correct. That logic only applies to why we don't name the article "廣州". Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 04:49, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Ahem... A guideline page with neutrality tag atop it is not what I'd call convincing. In any case, guidelines are only guidelines, and have their exceptions. The guideline is that for places in Mainland China, the Pinyin names should be used (as opposed to Wade-Giles or some other system of romanisation). Fair enough, but most places in Mainland China have no well-known names (or any names known at all) in the English-speaking world. Canton is a rather glaring exception to this and, despite the strenuous efforts of name-revisionists, Canton remains the name by which this city is most commonly known to native English-speakers. Sikandarji's reasoning is exactly correct -- though I don't know what you mean by "廣州". (Do the questionmarks represent characters of Chinese writing, perhaps? If so, you make a false parallel, whereas Sikandarji's examples of cities with native-tongue names that differ from their English names were all written in the roman alphabet, either way.)
-- Lonewolf BC 10:56, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

廣州 is Guangzhou in Chinese. You need a font to see the characters.

Also, the Chinese and American governments refer to the city as Guangzhou:

• [1]
• [2]

Let me give another analogy:

Quite recently the Korean city of Seoul requested that Chinese speakers refer to the city as 首爾 (Shou'er). Before this, Chinese speakers have always referred to the city as 漢城 (Hancheng), and have done this for decades. 首爾 (Shou'er) is an invention of the Seoul Municipal Government, and was designed so that its pronunciation is close to "Seoul".

To be honest, many Chinese people were not impressed by this. 首爾 (Shou'er) was perceived to sound somewhat comical / unnatural, and many crude jokes appeared based on puns of this name. Everyone was used to referring to Seoul as 漢城 (Hancheng). After all, 漢城 (Hancheng) was the Chinese name for Seoul, and why should Koreans dictate what is right or not right in the Chinese language? Clearly, the strenuous efforts of these "name-revisionists" should not affect what Chinese people use.

Nevertheless, the Chinese Wikipedia switched over to 首爾 (Shou'er) within a month, probably before many Chinese even knew about such a change. After all, if other people prefer to call themselves something, and there's no coherent reason not to call them that, then we will call them that.

-- ran (talk) 15:45, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

[interjected] You're right: The actual Chinese usage ought prevail over what Koreans (or more probably the Korean government, merely) would prefer be the Chinese usage. I encourage you to make it so in the Chinese Wikipedia.
I am aware that many government agencies have taken to using Guangzhou. The Chinese do it because they are the very ones pushing "Guangzhou". The Americans follow suit for diplomatic reasons. Neither one is following prevailing English usage, but attempting to lead it, or aquiescing to such attempt. Nevertheless "Guangzhou" still lacks the name-recognition of "Canton". -- Lonewolf BC 21:16, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Oh I'm sorry, let me rephrase, the fact that this is English WP is the reason that Moscow is not named "Москва". At any rate, those examples are not correct for a second reason - Guangzhou is a commonly accepted name in English whereas Moskva and Venezia are not. And the fact that there seems to be disagreements on how to name the city is precisely why there's a guideline to follow. But hey, I'll tell you what, if you can get concensus to move Beijing to "Peking", Mumbai to "Bombay", Kolkata to "Calcutta", etc etc. I'll support the name change here to "Canton". Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 16:18, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Cute rephrase, but now it misrepresents Sikandarji's actual argument. Moreover, even if it were not such a misrepresentation in the case of Moscow, that would leave the examples Sikandarji gave in which the native language is written in roman characters. Spare me the straw-man arguments (also the mock-apologies and other irony and sarcasm).

Although "Guangzhou" has achieved some currency in English, but it still lacks the name-recognition of "Canton". There are other cities that are about the same in this respect: Contrary to what you say, Venice/Venezia is an example. In fact, I'd not be surprised if more native English-speakers are aware that "Venezia" is Venice than are aware that "Guangzhou" is Canton. The difference is that Italy is not pushing "Venezia" as the "right" English name for Venice, nor "Milano", "Roma", "Napoli", and so forth as the "right" English names for those Italian cities.

Other cases are other cases, and need to be considered individually. Supposing some of these others to be wrongly titled for an English-language encyclopedia, that is no excuse to have Canton wrongly titled. (The lame form of arguing in which you are implicitly indulging often comes up in AfD debates, where the existence of other articles that ought be deleted is used as an excuse for keeping the one under consideration.) I'm sure you don't really expect me to try to attend to all those other cities first -- that falls in the category of silly suggestions. Please keep to a reasoned consideration of this case. -- Lonewolf BC 21:16, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

If Lonewolf wants to make his argument that the name used is still Canton, then let him justify that claim. On the other hand, I can easily show that Guangzhou is the name used now in modern publications. New York Times [3][4] LA Times [5]. Washington Post [6], the Christian Science Monitor [7], Time Magazine[8][9], Frommer's [10], Columbia Encyclopedia [11], the US Embassy [12] etc etc. Now, I challenge you to do the opposite, and show that Canton is the more common English name in modern times. If your claims are justified, it shouldn't be so hard to do. --Yuje 20:06, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

L31 G0NG L41:

Canton is not known to any English Speaking countries as "Guangzhou"

I am mix blood Chinese born in America and all the people I know, Chinese or non-Chinese, refer to Canton as the entire South China Province, often any area above Honggkong in Guangdong. Including Shenzhen, Guangzhou, Shunde, Dongguan, Zhongshan, Etc. Canton is known in America as Guangdong --L31 G0NG L41 (talk) 07:07, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

L31 G0NG L41:

Canton is used by all Cantonese-speaking overseas Chinese to refer to Guangdong Province, NOT Guangzhou City alone, but the surrounding areas where all Cantonese call home. "Cantonese" does not mean Guangzhou people, but ALL Guangdong people from the entire Province. It is not used to refer to Guangzhou city, Even in America, nor was it ever. It was ALWAYS used as a reference to the Guangdong/Canton Province.--L31 G0NG L41 (talk) 07:07, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

guangzhou infobox needs clean up

the existing infobox is a bit mess up. It does not conform to the other info box which I have seen for other Chinese cities. I will attempt to clean it up a bit more, more clarity and simplicity. --Visik 13:09, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

New box

The new box http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Guangzhou&diff=prev&oldid=79803090 is very unattractive. Badagnani 06:58, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Picture

Hi guys - really like the article - when I learn a bit more about Guangzhou I'll try to contribute productively. Just a small point, but I wondered if it might be possible to substitute the first picture in the info box (Pearl river at night) for something a little brighter and with better contrast - this one is a little gloomy and doesn't give a great first impression (although would be fine further down the article). I noticed that there were quite a lot of photos on the Chinese version, but I didn't want to unilaterally change it. If you disagree, no probs :) Have a great day Hongshi 09:10, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Economy stats

News reports yesterday were saying the GDP per capita in Guangzhou had broken $10,000 in 2006, meaning it was "developed" by World Bank standards. This report [13] attributes that figure to the Guangdong Social Sciences Academy. It also says that the 2005 numbers for Guangzhou, Beijing, Shanghai and Shenzhen were $8,500, $5,457, $7,600 and $7,300, respectively. -- Beland 15:32, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Actually the report said that Guangzhou was expected to have broken the $10,000 mark. Maybe we should wait till another report confirms this actually happened? Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 16:07, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Please, restoring the original name: Canton?

This article should be titled Canton. My Candian history prof. tells me that many Westerners and foreigners stil use this name because it is easy for them to pronounce and remember. Furthermore, more and more Guangzhou residents call the city CANTON as well. Personally, I'm proud to be a Cantonese. Vive le Canton libre! The Canton Province should be independent from the mainland. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fatck (talk • contribs) 01:38, 25 January 2007 through 05:18, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

The Guangdong Province should be independent from the PRC —Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.31.38.174 (talk) 10:21, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Both common usage and naming convention would support that we keep the name as "Guangzhou". Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 03:05, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Please don't delete others' comments. And now that you've added that bit about how "Canton Province should be independent", you've fully revealed your POV motivations. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 05:35, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Who deleted my comments? Who did that? To Hong Qi Gong, why not? Quebec is trying to separate from Canada, and this is a great model for Canton Province because the Cantonese language and its great culture are so different from the mainland. This is a similar case as Quebec Independence Movement. At present, Cantonese culture is delincing because Mandarin is eroding in the Great Cantonese District. Also, I don't think every HongKonger loves the communism mainland. Fatck (Talk - Contribs) 10:12, 31 January 2007 (UTC) —The preceding comment signed as by Fatck (talk • contribs) was actually added by 24.79.140.141 (talk • contribs) -

Check the Talk page's edit history if you want to know who removed your edits. And please read WP:NOT#SOAP - Wikipedia is not a soapbox. You would be better served if you write this stuff on your own blog or on some forums. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 20:45, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Obviously, Hong Qi Gong, you are the criminal who deleted my comments! Finally - 你個PK乞丐點解吾加入共產黨? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fatck (talk • contribs) 22:52, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Actually, no, I didn't delete your comments. Like I said, check the edit history, 竹升仔. "你個PK乞丐"? Hahhah what the heck are they inventing new Cantonese slang in Calgary now? Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 23:15, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, buddy! My fault. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.79.140.141 (talk • contribs) 13:03, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

We are Cantonese, not Chinese! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.79.143.72 (talk • contribs) 16:12, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Everybody, calm down. Get yourself a blog or something, as Hong Qi Gong said. (I also believe that Mandarin culture is eroding Cantonese culture, but let's not talk about that...)Flight cx873 (talk) 01:13, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Guangzhou is the official name because the PRC is a putonghua state with multiple dialects of Chinese. Canton is used by old colonial history textbooks and historical out of date books. Guangzhou is the official pronunciation and there should be used. Canton is arguably Cantonese people's favourite term and for Hongkongers. Canton is a screwed up word used by the French during the treaty port days because they couldn't prounounce Kwongjau properly. --Zhongxin (talk) 14:01, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

---

"more and more" eh? thanks to your false Wiki no doubt.

if you spread enough ignorance, who knows, Canton might become the name of Guangzhou city, and Black could become White..

"restoring" the Name of Goangzao to Kuantun is impossible, as you cannot "restore" the name of the province to the name of the city

the only thing you would be "restoring" is the ignorance of uneducated drunken sailors, rapists, and greedy and devious traders and thieves to a more civilized, more modern age.

no thanks

you are trying to "restore" the brainchild of people who probably didnt spend a day of their lives bothered by an education, who landed in China and just started naming things with one ear toward a native speaker, whilst preoccupied with how they were going to belittle and destroy the country and take the inferior "Heathen" Natives for all they were worth

it's like trying to "restore" the name "New England" to the city Boston

it's just not possible, unless you think you are SO superior to the people living there that what ever YOU say takes precedence over whatever stupid idea they come up with on their own.

and if thats the case, maybe we can just wait for you to rename everything you see, as you see fit

and maybe we can "restore" the name "The Sandwich Islands" to Hawai'i, and "Restore" the name of Tonga to "The Friendly Islands", and we will all just live by whatever European racist Bigots say things should be.

Why not "restore" the name of China to "Dinkville", thats way more "restored"

--L31 G0NG L41 (talk) 16:48, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Etymology

The first paragraph of the article states :"Canton, which is based on a French language transliteration of the name", while under the heading 'name'is stated that :" "Canton" was the convenient Portuguese romanisation of "Guangdong" Province ". So,is it derived from French or Portuguese? See also the article on 'Guangdong'. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.173.9.16 (talk • contribs) 01:13, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

I also noticed this! This is a major inconsistency which needs to be cleared up, preferably with a citation. The Jade Knight 02:57, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

According to ''Guangzhou Daily'', " “欧元之父”建议广州推广城市品牌时恢复用英语旧名 　　“Canton”品牌价值足有几十亿 　　蒙代尔昨日在做有关品牌战略的演讲时表示，城市也有自己的品牌价值，广州将 “Canton”改成“Guangzhou”，很多外国人不知道广州在哪里，城市品牌价值受到损失，建议改回“Canton”或在“Guangzhou”后面打括号标识“Canton”。 　　他表示, 城市的名字本身也是一个品牌，比如拉斯维加斯和澳门，这两个城市几乎是“赌城”的代名词。很早以前，一般到香港和澳门来的外国人都会去广州，但是现在很多人都不知道广州是什么地方,外国人熟悉的是“Canton”。广州现在应该大力宣传自己是中国的第三大城市。但是“Guangzhou”这个名字对外国人来说太难发音，也记不住。由于改名，广州损失了几十亿元的品牌价值，特别是在吸引外国游客、提升影响力方面。." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.79.143.72 (talk) 23:36, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Agglomeration or built-up area

Why is this section included? Furthermore, it's written so poorly that I cannot understand what the heck the writer's getting at. This section should be deleted. --Danaidh 03:38, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Shahe District

I'm looking for the Shahe District (沙河), where Shahe fen noodles were invented, but can't find it. Is it still a district? Badagnani 08:15, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Googling around seems to reveal that it is part of the Tianhe District, but I don't know what administrative level its government is. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 19:50, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

I guess we should add something about that to the Tianhe District article. Badagnani (talk) 20:03, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Tons of Lists

OK, do we really need the list of roads & list of hotels in the article? TheAsianGURU (talk) 23:14, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Map

The map is messed up in FireFox. HYENASTE 17:53, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Some problems

I don't think we need roads and hotels. In the tourist attractions the Western Han museum has two different links to two different entries for the same thing just with a slightly different name. How to completely get rid of an entry? Also, should there be a seperate entry for active places of worship for the temples, mosques, and churches, rather than just putting them in the tourist attraction section? What do you think? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrfish33 (talk • contribs) 07:40, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

This article does not address the issue of Cantonese separatism (or nationalism?) at all. Given that there are extremely vocal supporters of such a concept and that there are sound foundations for it, perhaps it would be appropriate for the article to be expanded, perhaps with a link to the relevant article so as to address the said topic.

The section of this talk page about renaming this article has become a farce. As important as the notion of Cantonese independence may be, this is not the place for soapboxing or any other material that merely expresses an opinion. I have, therefore, removed material that is clearly inappropriate for inclusion on this talk page (especially a sentence that was not in English). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.105.147.9 (talk) 10:03, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

25 year gap

There is an aprox. 25 year gap from c 1949 (Communist forces entered the city on October 14, 1949. Their urban renewal projects improved...) to the late 1970s (Reforms by Deng Xiaoping, who came to power in the late 1970s, led to rapid ...) in the article. Can someone write a paragraph or two on this period? I can't beleive nothing happened. 202.89.26.71 (talk) 05:22, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Guangzhou and Foshan

I know there was a lot of rejection last year with the merge but it seem this development is moving forward again this year. It seem like Guangzhou and Foshan are going to merge later but not sure when into one city or is it the whole Foshan are only part of it is going to merge?

Here is a source recent:

• “广州佛山同城化发展规划”开始编制

— ASDFGH =] ^talk? 05:53, 9 March 2009 (UTC)