Jump to content

Talk:Three Represents

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The phrase " "the overwhelming majority of the Chinese people", such as businessmen and managers " seems to imply that businessmen and managers are the overwhelming majority of the Chinese people. I believe statistics do not support this claim. I would recommend further clarification of this phrase, including references, or else it must be deleted. Syats (talk) 14:07, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm so confused. How did you arrive at that conclusion? (talk) 17:53, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Where does the quotation (described as the formal statement of the theory) come from? Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 17:34, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)

It was from Jiang's speech at the 16th CPC Congress. Colipon+(T) 18:58, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Thanks — I've added the reference. Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 19:51, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Translation of Title[edit]

Shouldn't the title be "Three Representation" instead? The term "代表" in Chinese can mean "represent" or "representation". I think the term "representation" is the better term for this translation. Arbiteroftruth 06:29, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Follow the provided link. Chinese sources call it "Three Represents". That's about as official as it gets, no matter how silly it sounds in English. (I have similar problems with the word "International". To me it's an adjective, not a noun. To committed communists it is a noun.)
There's no issue to be had with the International; you can noun or verb any word in English. In German, French, Spanish and so on it works likewise. —Nightstallion (?) 08:46, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You can noun or verb any word in English
You, sir, are a genius! 17:43, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. :)Nightstallion (?) 20:18, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
While it's true that you can noun or verb any word in English, it is a practice that is best used sparingly because it confronts the reader's expectations, and thus detracts from the conveying of information. It's moot here, however. We should be using whatever translations are used by those who author, promote and report on these concepts. -Harmil 13:01, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

is there any connection with traditional socialist thoughtBacknumber1662

Removal of the most questionable assertions[edit]

Without proper referencing, the following statements should be removed from this article as original research which borders on POV:

  • "... as a result has been the subject of quiet but heated opposition within the party.
  • "... Second, it is an attempt to cement Jiang Zemin's historical legacy as a [[Marxist]] theorist"
  • "... many Chinese, including members of the Party, find it incomprehensible."
  • "... there have been reports of private unease at this theory from within the [[Communist Party of China]]"
  • "Many dislike the focus of the theory on the advanced social productive forces"
  • "Also many feel that [[Jiang Zemin]]'s promotion of the theory was similar to the creation of a [[cult of personality]]."
  • "Since the ideology's inception its reception has been cold both inside the party and in the general populace."

These statements simply cannot stand on their own without significant sourcing, as they appear to place Wikipedia in the role of critiquing the Chinese government from a non-neutral point of view. Properly sourced, of course, these statements would be fine (though the use of "many dislike" and "many feel" is too weasel wordish and should be edited to be more exact). -Harmil 12:53, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

After almost 4 years I've removed these from the article. I hope some editors will come along and repopulate the article with content from reliable sources. Sean.hoyland - talk 16:14, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Three Represents. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:59, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Broken citations[edit]

There are three references to 'Kuhn 2011' (is it Robert Lawrence Kuhn ?) but they are incomplete. 2001:8003:265E:2D00:1B1:D817:A1AD:6C45 (talk) 20:30, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education assignment: History of Socialism[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 30 August 2022 and 23 December 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): SlyRedeemerJT (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by SlyRedeemerJT (talk) 16:15, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]