Talk:Confucius Institute: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 12:10, 16 July 2020

Linguistics: Applied Linguistics B‑class Low‑importance

	Linguistics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Linguistics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of linguistics 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.LinguisticsWikipedia:WikiProject LinguisticsTemplate:WikiProject LinguisticsLinguistics articles
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Applied Linguistics Task Force.
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

China B‑class Top‑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
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archives

1, 2

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by when more than 1 section is present.

In South Korea or not?

The History section's first paragraph reads as follows (with bold face added by myself to point to the problem):

The CI in South Korea is no longer active. The second Confucius Institute was opened on the campus of the University of Maryland, College Park, also in November 2004. Hundreds more have opened since in dozens of countries around the world, with the highest concentration of Institutes in the United States, Japan, and South Korea.

The first sentence of that paragraph would appear to conflict with the last 14 words of the paragraph. I can guess (but only guess) what is meant here. Un school 23:42, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

GAO Report

A GAO report from last year that summarizes a year long investigation into Confucius Institutes in the U.S. largely discredits many of the accusations levied against institutes in America. Much of this page seems to regurgitating debunked talking points, some of which are over a decade old and unsubstantiated. I see that the report has recently started to be cited, but the page is still wildly inaccurate. https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-401T

--Repugnantduck (talk) 19:30, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Many programs renegotiated"

There's a statement "however many programs have renegotiated their contracts to protect the academic freedom of host universities" with a source https://as.tufts.edu/confuciusinstitute/about however the source does not state that many programs have renegotiated their contracts to protect the academic freedom of host universities. The closest thing it has is that Tufts university and Hanban have signed a new agreement in 2019 without providing any more details. It does have agreement text in Chinese which is of course a primary source requiring interpretation not to mention understanding Chinese. So whats the proper procedure on English Wikipedia when the given source does not have a statement supposedly taken from it? Shall I add {{fact}} or just delete the statement in question? --Nomad (talk) 12:10, 16 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 31: / Line 31: @@
 --[[User:Repugnantduck|Repugnantduck]] ([[User talk:Repugnantduck|talk]]) 19:30, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
+== "Many programs renegotiated" ==
+There's a statement "however many programs have renegotiated their contracts to protect the academic freedom of host universities" with a source https://as.tufts.edu/confuciusinstitute/about however the source does not state that many programs have renegotiated their contracts to protect the academic freedom of host universities. The closest thing it has is that Tufts university and Hanban have signed a new agreement in 2019 without providing any more details. It does have agreement text in Chinese which is of course a primary source requiring interpretation not to mention understanding Chinese. So whats the proper procedure on English Wikipedia when the given source does not have a statement supposedly taken from it? Shall I add <nowiki>{{fact}}</nowiki> or just delete the statement in question? --[[User:Nomad|Nomad]] ([[User talk:Nomad|talk]]) 12:10, 16 July 2020 (UTC)