Talk:Trams in Asia

Trains: Streetcars / By country series Mid‑importance

Trains Portal

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. See also: WikiProject Trains to do list and the Trains Portal.TrainsWikipedia:WikiProject TrainsTemplate:WikiProject Trainsrail transport articles

Mid

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

Associated projects or task forces:
/
	This article is supported by WikiProject Streetcars.
	This article is supported by the By country series task force.

This article lacks references.

Hong Kong[edit]

I have removed a hidden comment from the article copied below:

While the tram system was built during the colonial period, it still exists today under PRC rule. Listing Hong Kong outside of the China header implies independence of Hong Kong and thus breaks neutrality. Rincewind42 (talk) 13:06, 4 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hong Kong is a special case, it's the only city on earth that maintains its own currency & legal system different from it's own host nation. Due to those differences and it's complex history, it's easier list it on its own instead of adhering rigidly to the national boundary here. The time Hong Kong has spent being a British territory is way longer than it being a Chinese territory (appx. 2 centuries vs. appx. 2 decades respectively) and listing history of a crown colony under China may not seem exactly logically sound either. Moreover, listing Hong Kong on its own has never seen as "promotion for its independence" on international commerce, media & publications during large part of its existence as a free trading port. From 1842 - 1997, Hong Kong (being a then British territory) was listed on numerous international rankings separately from the UK, the UK government (nor its people, nor the international community) never really considered about such practice "promotes independence from the UK". When it became a Chinese territory in 1997, I am yet to see any international publication describes the same practice as a "promotion independence from China". So I can't say there are much basis for this accusation. In fact, on international commerce & publications, be it a British territory or Chinese territory, Hong Kong has almost always been listed separately, under various names, e.g. "Hong Kong, China" used in Olympic, or just "Hong Kong" e.g. on The Economist: Countries Profile, McDonald's international website), but from what I observe, the common practice is that Hong Kong do get its own ranking on its own, it has little to do with independence, instead, it's because of the difference currency & legal system in China & Hong Kong, and in this case - colonial history, so media & publications usually present it as a special case. Da Vynci (talk) 00:34, 6 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Just to be clear, you don't really have any disagreement with my hidden comment, do you? You quoted my hidden comment but what you are saying is really something else (the listing country position). I added the hidden comment because there are previously a mistake in the paragraph, which reads like "Hong Kong SAR of China, first tram was first operated in 1904", but in fact, SAR didn't exist in 1904 (nor the PRC). I added the hidden comment to prevent fellow editors might add back the wrong history. The usage is permitted on WP:HIDDEN. Da Vynci (talk) 01:26, 6 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hong Kong is not a special case. There are many similar territories around the world that have their own currency and legal systems separate form their parent nation. Just next door to Hong Kong is Macua that exists under exactly the same legal status as Hong Kong (though not subject of this article). Other examples include Scotland, [Ireland] the Isle of Mann, The Channel Islands all of which have their own currencies and legal system separate form that of England and Wales. There are many more similar cases around the world.

My main objection to the comment is as stated above, "While the tram system was built during the colonial period, it still exists today under PRC rule." You comments wording seems to preclude adding information that covers matters post 1997.

The listing of Hong Kong on its own or as a sub heading of China is trivial. You could move it again but I'm sure someone else will come along later and move it back or even delete the heading completely as other cities within China don't have dedicated headline.

Having said that, it remains inconsistent. Other cities in China (and most of the cities that had tram systems) had their trams lines created during colonial periods when they were not part of China. Tianjin and Dalian cities were under Japanese control when their systems were created. Likewise Harbin was under Russian control and the lines in Shanghai were in British and French concessions. The only difference between Tianjin, Dalian, Shanghai and Hong Kong is that Hong Kong was returned to China a few years later than the other colonial cities.

There is more inconsistency in the article. Why are Malaysia and Singapore lumped together and the two Koreas likewise. Rincewind42 (talk) 06:59, 6 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"I'm sure someone else will come along later and move it back or even delete the heading completely". That's interesting, why would you say that?

Tianjin, Harbin & Dalian are not special cases because they never appears on international rankings HDI index, the Economist country profile or other prominent international rankings on its own, they don't have their own currency (never heard of Tianjin dollar or Dalian dollar). Their sovereignty was never transferred to other country in perpetuity. But Hong Kong has all that.

Malaysia & Singapore should be listed separately because they are different countries currently and 95% of the time during the past 200 years, and they are not special cases that we are discussing now.

Isle of Mann, Republic of Ireland & The Channel Islands are legally not part of the UK, unlike Hong Kong, which is part of China yet maintains its own currency/legal system. Isle of Mann, Channel Island & UK all practice the common laws system. China doesn't use common laws but Hong Kong does. So those examples are can't be compared with Hong Kong's special situation.

My comment doesn't preclude other to edit, and should not be interpreted in any way as such. It just states a note of fact so other don't make the same previous mistake. It comes down to whether you disagree with my comment that "Hong Kong SAR of China didn't exist before 1997", it's that simple. Are you suggesting SAR existed in 1904; or Hong Kong was part of China from 1904 - 1997? Da Vynci (talk) 10:38, 6 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Missing Countries[edit]

The tramways of Turkey and Israel, to name just two, are not listed here. --Eliyahu S ^Talk 23:37, 15 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]