Talk:Prostitution in China/Archive 1

Scope and NPOV issues

Prostitution has existed in China for centuries. Why start only with the Communists?

Parts of the article seem to be written from the point of view of the PRC government. It presents prostitution as a problem that clearly needs to be eradicated. this is not npov. For example, instead of stating "governmental authorities of mainland China have acknowledged that prostitution has not only reappeared, it is also becoming an endemic problem", we can state something like "since the loosening of government controls over society in the 1980s, prostitution has reappeared..." --Jiang 04:56, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

The Communists brought a particular approach to the eradication and now the control of prostitution, which was sort of a mixture of Confucian moralism and Marxism. Their strategies for the elimination of prostitution are quite particular and different from that of previous regimes, so it is appropriate to write an article particular to the period after 1949. Also, by using the title of "Prostitution in mainland China", the article focuses on mainland China, at the exclusion of Taiwan, Hong Kong etc., where the environment is completely different.

I appreciate your concerns about NPOV. I don't see a problem with stating the position of the Chinese government, but I agree that the introduction needs rework. As per your suggestion, I've changed the offending sentence to: Since the loosening of government controls over society in the early 1980s, prostitution has not only reappeared, it has also been associated with a number of endemic problems. I think all sides of the prostitution debate would agree that a lot of problems are associated with prostitution.

I just started the article. As other parts come together, I'm sure there'll be a better sense of balance. Yeu Ninje 05:07, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

How about renaming to "Prostitution in the People's Republic of China" like we have economy of the People's Republic of China, education in the People's Republic of China, etc.? and add "Prostitution in Hong Kong" and "Prostitution in Macau" as "see also" links. This way, the scope of the article is clearly from 1949 onwards.--Jiang 12:28, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

Since the PRC includes Hong Kong and Macau, distinguishing these two areas within the article is a bit problematic. I'm inclined to stay with the term "mainland China". I'm thinking along the lines of Internet censorship in mainland China. I think the same principle should be applied to the two articles you mentioned. What's the point of disambiguating at the top of the page when you could more easily do so within the title? Yeu Ninje 14:29, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

The problem I have with the title is that it does not clearly imply that the chronology begins in 1949. This article is history-heavy, unlike "Internet censorship in mainland China" which only applies to the last decade. There's no need to use a disambiguator at the top. links at the bottom will do. Besides, prostitution has existed for a long time while 1997/1999-2005 is not a long time. --Jiang 02:25, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

In that case I agree. Yeu Ninje 04:03, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

I'd have to oppose the move. From a geographical aspect Hong Kong and Macao are not within the scope of this article. Furthermore there's little reason not to cover prostitution in mainland China before 1949. Same for the economy article. — Instantnood 07:20, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

we haven't mentioned Tibet or Gansu in the article either. Articles for HK and Macau can be considered subarticles and unavoidably must cover the period before 1997 or 1999 when these territories were not part of the prc. Prostitution before 1949 should be covered in a general Prostitution in China article, not in an article limited mainland China. --Jiang 08:57, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

The scenario may be better illustrated with economy. The economies of Hong Kong, Macau and Taiwan were separated from the mainland since they became colonies. Although Taiwan was for a short period under the same government as the mainland, It's far from integrated with the mainland. I'd suppose cultural elements like prostitution was also quite different over that short period of time. Post-1997/1999 prostitution issues in Hong Kong and Macau remains different from the mainland. — Instantnood 09:38, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

Given the long period of separation, the period of "prostitution in the People's Republic of China" is largely synonymous with the "Prostitution in mainland China (after 1949)". Hong Kong and Macau can be subarticles whereas under the title "Prostitution in mainland China" we cannot all of a sudden add in the pre-1949 prostitution. I think we should make it clear that the article is on the mainland in the lead, though. --Jiang 06:20, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

I don't agree the time frame of the term "mainland China" is 1949 (although it's true the term has become useful after 1949 and after 1997/1999, when simply saying "China" became ambiguous). — Instantnood 11:35, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

It is true that the term "mainland China" isn't confined to the period after 1949. That's the main reason I agreed with Jiang to move the article to "Prostitution in the People's Republic of China" - so there would be a more clearly defined time frame. The problem which arises from this is that Macau and Hong Kong are now part of the People's Republic and so strictly speaking, for the period from 97/99, they should be included. But to do so wouldn't be all that meaningful, since these two SARs still operate under different legal regimes and social conditions to the mainland and partially as a result, prostitution activities differ very widely. I'm not sure how appropriate the links to Prostitution in Hong Kong, Prostitution in Macau and Prostitution in Taiwan are in the see also section since these articles don't exist at the moment and probably won't be created in the near future. I'm more in favour of placing a disambiguation notice at the beginning. As I come closer to finishing the article, I'll also make it clear in the lead paragraph that the article refers to mainland China. Yeu Ninje 11:03, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

In fact I'm interested to know why the time frame is set at 1949. :-) That's not a critical time of the history of prostitution that things changed drastically. — Instantnood 17:16, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

In 1949 the Communists began enforcing controls on prostitution activities. In Beijing, all brothels were closed down and in other cities like Tianjin and Shanghai regulations were put in place which would eventually eliminate prostitution activities. So I would say that things did change very drastically and also quite dramatically. Yeu Ninje 19:45, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

Thanks. IMO it'd better to include the history of prostitution in modern (mainland) China, including the time before 1949. If Hong Kong, Macao and Taiwan are to have their own articles, history of prostitution in China after they became colonies would still be better covered by this article. — Instantnood 21:41, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

The reason the period is confined to 1949-present is that the Communist Party brought a specific social policy on prostitution, which is markedly different to anything beforehand. Chinese regimes before 1949 were generally liberal on brothels and prostitution, representing what the Communist Party would call the "old society". Because of this, they should be treated separately. I'm not sure what your proposal on HK, Macao and Taiwan is. Are you saying they should be included in this article? If so, why? Yeu Ninje 22:36, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

Actually I said if there are articles for prostitution in Hong Kong, Macau and Taiwan, prostitution in China after they became colonies would still be better covered by this article. — Instantnood 08:02, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

I understand Yeu Ninje's concerns on why this article should only cover prostitution in mainland China from 1949 onwards (see peer review). Would prostitution in mainland China after 1949 (or perhaps prostitution in mainland China (2/2)) an acceptable title to everyone? — Instantnood 07:33, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Then there's the problem of what date to start from if you're talking about "mainland China". Maybe the landing of Hong Kong or Macau? Choosing a date like that is pretty arbitrary since it didn't signal any major changes in prostitution in mainland China. Prostitution in China can be meaningfully split into three periods: 1) pre-Republican China; 2) Republican China; and 3) People's Republic of China (excluding Hong Kong and Macau). Each period had a particular way of dealing with prostitution and its own culture of prostitution. (Although prostitution before 1911 probably was subject to changes, I don't think there's enough information to write more than a single article.) Because of that I think this article should retain its present name. Yeu Ninje 08:41, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Nevertheless the current title creates confusions on why Hong Kong and Macau after 1997/99 is not included, and may lead to allegations of separatism. It is for this reason I suggested prostitution in mainland China after 1949, suggesting the geographical and time frame in the title. — Instantnood 10:05, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

I don't how there's any confusion here. The page has been properly disambiguated already. It's fitting that the article reside here given how small (population/geography-wise) and how insignificant (from a broad historical perspective) HK and MO are compared to mainland China. What we need is an article on the Prostitution in China, not more articles on "Prostitution in mainland China"--Jiang 10:16, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Don't think there have been enough connections, not to mention integration, to cover prostitution in Hong Kong and Macau in this article. The two territories remain different enough from the rest of the PRC. — Instantnood 10:24, 10 December 2005 (UTC) (modified 12:08, 10 December 2005 (UTC))

That article would use wikipedia:summary style. prostitution since ancient times would be included--Jiang 10:26, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

This article is titled "prostitution in the PRC", but Hong Kong and Macao are clearly excluded, and there's little reason to have them included. That's the reason why I proposed to have an even better title. — Instantnood 16:47, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

I can certainly see Instantnood's point. His proposed article title is much more clear, but I don't think we should get bogged down with semantics. If we were to be so precise about everything, we'd end up with something like this:

• Prostitution in China before 1911
• Prostitution in mainland China before 1949 (without a clear starting date); or Prostitution in the Republic of China before 1949
• Prostitution in mainland China after 1949
• Prostitution in the Republic of China after 1949; or Prostitution in Taiwan
• Prostitution in Hong Kong
• Prostitution in Macau

I suggest that this would confuse things rather making them more clear. As Jiang points out, prostitution in Hong Kong and Macau are relatively insignificant historically. The present title makes a small sacrifice for the sake of simplicity. The disambiguation makes clear the scope of the article. Yeu Ninje 20:24, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

I understand why the current title should be preferred. My proposal above was based on my experience that some certain editors would try their way to force the inclusion of Hong Kong and Macau, using the title as an excuse, say, list of airports in the PRC (edit history), list of companies in the PRC (edit history) and economy of the PRC (edit history). Even worse was that the latter two articles were previously titled ..in mainland China. When I tried to restore them to what they were like by removing the materials on Hong Kong and Macau, I got labelled as sinophobic, advocating Hong Kong's independence and POV pushing. I know "prostitution in the PRC" as a title is good enough to most readers, but I sincerely don't want the same nightmare to be repeating. — Instantnood 21:48, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Do you have some proposals as to what the other articles on prostitution in historical and present day China could be named? Yeu Ninje 21:56, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Do we need separate articles for the time before and after 1911/12? — Instantnood 22:00, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

They could all be covered in a general article on prostitution in China before 1949. But if we were to discuss them in any detail, I think they do need to be differentiated. The cultures of prostitution in traditional and modern China were reasonably different. Just compare for example the often swanky brothels of Shanghai, often frequented by foreigners, to one in Beijing during the Qing dynasty. Yeu Ninje 22:10, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

I'd say the period of modern China before 1949 (let's say, after 1911/12) is far less a matter of confusions or ambiguity comparing with to-day situations. Taiwan, Hong Kong and Macau were all colonies by then, a fact the then government had to recognise or acknowledge. For traditional China, we can simply say China in the title.. and stop talking about those territories starting from when they were ceded (if there's much to talk about them before they were ceded ;-) ). — Instantnood 07:37, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

International Sex Guide

I'm a bit concerned about the inclusion of the International Sex Guide in the external links section. The site is basically an instruction booklet on how to engage in prostitution in China. On that site, the subpage "The debate about the legal situation" is very limited and in any case outdated. Each of the individual city pages include specific venues, prices etc. Some of the posts also seem to be mildly racist. For example, "Frankly, if you have to pay for it in China you are well and truly a loser." Leaving aside any moral objections, I don't think it's appropriate for Wikipedia to refer to an external link which is encouraging illegal acts. Also, the content of the site isn't serious academic discourse, a lot of it seems to be hearsay and more seriously, a lot of the language is demeaning to women (e.g. "whores", "sluts"). Yeu Ninje 03:21, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

Well, if you want to see the truth about prostitution, a booklet written explicitly to guide you to brothels would provide much more information than say, a government sponsored report. And prostitutes ARE whores... its not derogatory... a whore, by definition, is a prostitute..

see Wikipedia:What_wikipedia_is_not#Wikipedia_is_not_censored_for_the_protection_of_minors. We are not responsible for the content of external links. The site provides useful practical information on prostitution, about how to obtain prostitution, what the experience is like, etc. This article is titled "Prostitution in the People's Republic of China" and not "Legal status of prostitution in the People's Republic of China", so I don't see why you would want to exclude a site simply because it is lacking in legal discourse. Furthermore, we dont exlude sites just for not being "academic discourse". We would find none of the information there in an academic paper, but the information is still relevant. Leaving aside the slang used there, I think the site sheds good light on the practical aspects of prostitution. --Jiang 20:21, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

The site you've now linked to is slightly different to the one before. Whilst I still have some reservations though, I'll leave them for now to concentrate on getting the article up to FA status. Yeu Ninje 23:44, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks!

Just thought I'd say thanks for the interesting article. I had originally intended just to translate the first two paragraphs or so (since I was doing it myself) but it was interesting enough that I decided to do as much as possible in one go and ended up doing about half of it. The seven levels and the bit about the GDP being reduced by a full 1% in 2000 were the most interesting parts. Mithridates 18:27, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for translating so much of the article into Ido. Great job. Yeu Ninje 02:04, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

This 'Prostitution in [country]' article is bizarre in that it is vastly larger than any of the other ones. Unusual. Skinnyweed 22:38, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

" Prostitution has also become associated with a number of problems, including organised crime, government corruption and sexually transmitted diseases. " I find this line either naive or endorsing of the criminals that create the supply side of the prostitution market. Organised crime earns money from prostitution ( in any country ), corrupt officials receive the pleasure of prostitutes in any country and a fair proportion of the stds in any country are there because of those who use prostitutes Jeremy P Lewis 01:40, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

When I wrote the article last year, I tried not to take a moral stance on the subject. There is an argument that prostitution is a valid form of work servicing a valid need, which is why in some Western countries it's been legalised. In the interests of NPOV, it makes sense to focus on the problems that are associated with prostitution. As for those who create the supply side of the prostitution market, it's up to the reader to decide how they feel about them. Yeu Ninje 01:52, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Focus of article too narrow?

"They are almost all female, though in recent years male prostitutes have also emerged." "Since 2003, male homosexual prostitution has also been prosecuted under the law."

Except for these two lines, to read this article, one would think there's no male prostitutes in the PRC. Are there levels of male prostitutes, also, or do they exist so far outside "normal" society that there's no concept for them? And males are the only buyers? There's no real mention of child prostitution or sexual slavery, either. --Markzero 03:30, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

I agree. I don't think this should be a featured article because those are very important aspects of prostitution in China, and they don't even get mentioned at all. Theconroy 01:56, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

"These tiers highlight the heterogenous nature of prostitution and prostitutes."

Okay, so homosexual prostitution never exists, at least not in China? Seriously? --Markzero 22:35, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

I agree that there should be more on homosexual prostitution. However, when I did research for this article late last year, I found very little information on its existence or its practice. I'm not aware of any statistics or any study done in the area. All I found were some isolated reports of criminal cases involving male prostitutes. If there is information available, then by all means it should be added. This article made featured status because it was judged to be complete as far as the information was available. Yeu Ninje 09:58, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

What is there no article prostitution in the United States?

Or any other country? Prostitution only exists in thePRC now?

If you look at Category:Prostitution, you'll see we have articles on prostitution in 13 countries and one continent. You're welcome to get an account at Wikipedia and start an article on Prostitution in the United States.-gadfium 09:20, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Prostitution in the United States does not exist, hence there is no article on it. Skinnyweed 15:17, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

have you ever heard of the term "hooker"?Osmo250 04:44, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

I hope you're joking. I really do. --Joshuagross 05:16, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Ever heard of the moonlight bunny ranch? --monte 05:16, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Those hookers portrayed in Grand Theft Auto (series) aren't Chinese - they are all American girls. Skinnyweed, I put to you that prostitution exists in every inhabited place on this planet. DanielBC 07:36, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Hello folks, did you notice the article exists???? pfctdayelise (translate?) 12:03, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

It exists now. It didn't a few days ago. Henry^Flower 12:10, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Ref links

Each ref link at the bottom links to a reference number corresponding to one less, e.g. number 40 on the list links to #ref-39. Why? --Falcon9x5.com 13:35, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

The ref links start counting from 0 whereas the list starts from 1. --Cherry blossom tree 17:08, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Unsourced statement

I realize that one is tiny and not of too much importance to the article as a whole ... which is all the more reason it should have been either sourced, taken out or rewritten before this was on the Main Page. It is terribly embarassing when what we hold out as the best we can produce, and in what is otherwise IMO a very well-done article on a subject bound to attract some controversy, has an unsourced statement. Daniel Case 20:34, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

I see it's been fixed now. Good. Daniel Case 23:14, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Misleading statement?

"Despite lobbying by international NGOs and overseas commentators, there is not much support for legalisation of the sex sector by the public, social organizations or the government of the PRC."

As far as I know women's rights groups don't support legalization. They support decriminaliztion and treating prostitutes as victims rather than criminals but there's very little support for legalization. Indeed most NGOs are happy with treating orginizers and even clients as criminals. At the very least this sentence needs some citations to back it up and even then the correct wording would be some international NGOs or even a few internation NGOs. Smallfish 01:04, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Added relevant links

I added some relevant articles, citations & links to the page and by accident my computer selected the wrong header and said to avoid NPOV. sorry about that. --Nikkicraft 22:52, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

I've removed those links you created on the basis that they aren't related to prostitution in China. Whilst they might be useful on the general article on prostitution, it really isn't relevant here. Yeu Ninje 11:23, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

NPOV

"The illegal activities and problems associated with prostitution point to the benefits of legally recognising it" is unsourced and sounds like the writer's POV. 86.16.96.92 23:03, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Not surprisingly?

FTA:

On November 21, all 224 of Beijing's establishments were shut down; 1286 prostitutes and 434 owners, procurers, and pimps were arrested in the space of 12 hours by an estimated 2400 cadres. Not surprisingly, the Beijing campaign has been much celebrated in historical accounts.

So it is supposed to be obvious that it would be celebrated. But aren't mass arrests, "reeducation" and the like by the PRC usually criticized, not celebrated? Why is this different? Does "historical accounts" mean Chinese historical accounts? Or was it celebrated solely for its swiftness? This may not be surprising to whoever wrote this sentence, but assuming that the reader shares the non-surprise without explanation is a bit too much to ask. -- Coffee2theorems (talk) 13:15, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Rename

Why was this renamed? It clearly focuses on the communist era. — Rlevse • Talk • 10:58, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Cleanup needed

This article is an FA, but would not pass a FAC if it were nominated right now. There is one section that is totally unreferenced and possibly OR, and the footnotes are all over the place (some use citation templates and others don't; of the ones that don't, there isn't even consistency in how they are formatted). I might get to work cleaning up the existing footnotes sometime soon, but something also needs to be done about the unreferenced section (I tagged it back in August, about 10 days after joining Wikipedia, so if someone with that little experience noticed the problem then it definitely needs to be addressed).

The article structure itself is also not that great. The Foreign prostitutes in China is just sort of sitting out there, not well-integrated into anything. The Legal responses, Policing, and The question of legalisation sections are each in 2nd-level headers, but appear to be about more or less the same thing, so it's not clear what they're doing as separate sections. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 20:33, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Other MoS problems with the references:

• There are several book refs that are given once as full long-form footnotes, and then later as stuff like "Jeffreys, note 6". This makes it a pain to go looking for the full reference in the reflist; these book refs should all be pulled out into a Bibliography section, and all the footnotes for them should be short form.
• Numerous book sources are missing publisher info.

rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 20:10, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Questionable content

As I am going through cleaning up the refs, I'm noticing a lot of stuff that seems to be thrown in randomly, doesn't really make sense where it is, and should probably be removed. (It seems that a lot of stuff was added about Russian prostitutes sometime after the article went through FAC and was no longer being closely watched.) I'm putting the problems into a list below. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 21:25, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Intro

• "For example, a Communist Party official who was a top provincial campaigner against corruption was removed from his post after he was caught in a hotel room with a Russian prostitute."

What's this an example of?

• A large number of Russian women work as prostitutes in China.

Probably undue weight on Russians. Also, I'm not sure the source is being interpreted correctly; needs to be checked more closely.

Prostitution after 1978

• <ref>"Consensus and recommendations on HIV and prostitution", note 6 at 104–6.</ref>

What is this?

Types and venues

• "The first and second tiers have become the focus of heated public debate because they are explicitly linked to government corruption."

What does "explicity linked" mean? That it's part of the prostitutes' mission statement? </sarcasm> If not, then who is the person drawing this link? Where are the sources?

• "The All-China Women's Federation, as one of the major vehicles of feminism in the PRC, as well as women's groups in Hong Kong and Taiwan, have been actively involved in efforts to eradicate this form of "concubinage" as practices that violate the emotional and economic surety of the marriage contract.<ref>Act of the People's Republic of China for Security Administration Punishment.</ref>"

Not really sure what this reference is.

Legal responses

• "The Regulations makes it an offence to "sell sex" (卖淫) and to "have illicit relations with a prostitute" (嫖宿暗娼).<ref>Note 15, Article 30, at 695–6.</ref>"
• "Adding symbolic weight to these enhanced law enforcement controls was the 1992 Law on Protecting the Rights and Interests of Women, which defines prostitution as a social practice that abrogates the inherent rights of women to personhood.<ref>Articles 36, 37.</ref>"
• "The activities of first-party participants continue to be regulated in practice according to administrative law, with the exceptions of anyone who sells or buys prostitutional sex in the full knowledge that they are infected with an STD; and anyone who has prostitutional sex with a child under 14 years of age.<ref>Note 19, Article 360, at 187.</ref>"
• "The 1997 criminal code codified provisions in the 1991 Decision, establishing a system of controls over social place, specifically places of leisure and entertainment.<ref>Note 19, Articles 361, 362, at 187–8.</ref>"

Again, no idea what these references are. I think they might be articles of the unnamed "act" listed above, but that's meeting the writer of this article more than halfway. Reading a WP article should not require this amount of detective work.

• <ref>"Communist Party discipline regulations". Xinhua News Agency, 1999., trans. ''Selected World Broadcasts - China'', 14 April, FE/2892 S2/1-18.</ref>

Another confusing reference, under Party disciplinary measures.

Intro sentence

Skydeepblue wants to add "Prostitution in the People's Republic of China is illegal" at the beginning of the intro. I believe this is unnecessary because the article is not just about prostitution's legality, but also its history and what things are like in practice; whether or not prostitution is "officially" legal actually says very little about the real-life situation. As far as I can tell, there are two main reasons for including this sentence at the beginning:

1. Consistency with other Prostitution in ____ articles, which start this way
2. Having the first sentence be "ARTICLE TITLE is X", per WP:LEDE

I think the first thing is a non-issue, because most of the "Prostitution in" articles are in shambles and are so poorly written that there's no good reason for us to emulate them here. As for the second issue, that is normally preferable, but in an article like this, which is not defining a specific term but is more of an essay-like explanation of a sub-topic within the bigger topic of prostitution, it's not necessary to have that sort of lede; there is already a precedent (for example, with lists) to have ledes that don't necessarily begin "ARTICLE TITLE is an X", and I think this article falls under that as well. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 01:43, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Yes, the article is not just about prostitution's legality, but also about its history and what things are like in practice, as Rjanag said. However, the legal status of prostitution in China is very relevant to this article or at least relevant enough to be mentioned in the introduction.

I imagine that it is very important for people who want to get imformation about prostitution in a certain country, wheter prostitution is legal or not there, it is probably one of the first things (if not the first thing) they try to find out, this is an essential imformation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Skydeepblue (talk • contribs) 02:04, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

That information can be found easily by clicking the Legal link in the TOC, or by reading just a couple sentences of the lede. The goal of Wikipedia is to present well-written articles, not to distill everything down to a couple factoids that any vegetable could find within a couple seconds. It's more important to write a proper article than to make this a "quick reference" for people who are trying to figure out which countries have legalized prostitution and which haven't; if a quick reference like that is desired, it would be more appropriate to do so within one of the footer templates (such as Template:Asia in topic, which is used in this article). And finally, as I said above, saying "prostitution is illegal" is actually very uninformative—it tells you nothing about the reality of enforcement, punishment, etc. Two countries where prostititution is "illegal" can actually be very different, and trying to boil everything down into one simplistic sentence is not beneficial to the reader. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 02:14, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

As I said above, I believe that the opening paragraph should contain what the reader wants to know first, what is the most important imformation for him/her, that's what makes an article "beneficial to the reader" and well written. While saying "prostitution is illegal" might not tell you anything about the reality of enforcement and punishment, it is an essential imformation, of a crucial importance to the reader, so I believe it should be in the starting paragraph.

If you believe that the phrase interfears with the flow of the article and it makes it appear poorly written, you may rephrase it eg. "prostitution is illegal in China, but in practice.... etc"; however, I believe it is appropriate to start the article with a paragraph about the current situation from China (which includes the legal situation, a crucial imformation).

"Shortly after taking power in 1949, the Communist Party of China embarked..." is, in my oppinion, not a proper way to start this article. The reader is much more interseted in knowing the current legal status of prostitutioin than what happened in 1949, during the 1960s and 1980s. The article should start directly with the current situation and then discuss the history from the last decades.

Anyway, I have to go now, so please don't deleate this from the introduction unless there is a consensus from the other editors. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Skydeepblue (talk • contribs) 03:23, 13 May 2009 (UTC)