73:
321:
I may say that this list is uncompleted and wouldn't complete at any time (unless
Chinese government stop its censorship). If the leading section is kept and the article is moved to some name like "Search engines censorship in the People's Republic of China" that would be fine, but if this is still a
343:
exists. Is it not useful to have an article on what is censored as long as it is well sourced it should not matter if it changes or is never completeable. The topic could be narrowed if editors thought the inclusion criteria were too broad and the list was getting out of control.
225:"Knowledge is not censored" either. Censorship practices are most certainly notable, as are methods of detecting dissidence in a police state. The only valid objection that I see here is that some of these may be out of date. Even the fact that certain words were censored
100:
95:
172:
104:
87:
283:. You can easily find tons of sources if you try to search "Search engine+censorship" or some similar keywords in some Chinese search engines, say google.cn. Maybe people outside China don't give a fuck about this, but I don't think that would make the article fail
166:
132:
216:
127:
390:
373:
353:
331:
313:
296:
273:
254:
57:
187:
154:
340:
148:
144:
91:
194:
83:
63:
264:. I have added a References section to avoid original research accusations. Let's source the article, even though it's trivially easy to verify the claims. --
160:
207:
and a lack of notability. Additionally, this list is nearly impossible to be updated in time. Most of the content are out-of-date.
17:
405:
36:
229:
is notable, regardless of what nation it's taken place in. Here in the United States, when we were at war with
404:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
327:
212:
386:
250:
180:
349:
309:
292:
74:
Articles for deletion/List of words censored by search engines in the People's
Republic of China
323:
208:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
53:
382:
269:
238:
204:
246:
345:
305:
288:
242:
121:
284:
49:
265:
234:
366:
304:
This may be a job for the cleanup crew. There is no good reason to delete.
84:
List of words censored by search engines in the People's
Republic_of_China
64:
List of words censored by search engines in the People's
Republic_of_China
230:
322:
list, maybe it's not very suitable. BTW, apologies for my
English.--
398:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
117:
113:
109:
179:
341:
Internet censorship in the People's
Republic of China
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
408:). No further edits should be made to this page.
193:
8:
71:
7:
245:" that some people took seriously.
70:
24:
241:". More recently was the silly "
237:was referred to in the press as "
62:
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
1:
391:16:22, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
374:15:35, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
354:15:24, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
332:14:56, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
314:14:48, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
297:14:10, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
274:13:52, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
255:13:33, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
217:11:12, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
58:17:39, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
425:
401:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
69:AfDs for this article:
416:
403:
371:
198:
197:
183:
135:
125:
107:
50:Kevin Rutherford
44:The result was
34:
424:
423:
419:
418:
417:
415:
414:
413:
412:
406:deletion review
399:
367:
239:liberty cabbage
140:
131:
98:
82:
79:
67:
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
422:
420:
411:
410:
394:
393:
381:per Blodance.
376:
359:
358:
357:
356:
335:
334:
316:
299:
277:
276:
258:
257:
201:
200:
137:
133:AfD statistics
78:
77:
76:
68:
66:
61:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
421:
409:
407:
402:
396:
395:
392:
388:
384:
380:
377:
375:
372:
370:
364:
361:
360:
355:
351:
347:
342:
339:
338:
337:
336:
333:
329:
325:
320:
317:
315:
311:
307:
303:
300:
298:
294:
290:
286:
282:
279:
278:
275:
271:
267:
263:
260:
259:
256:
252:
248:
244:
243:freedom fries
240:
236:
232:
228:
224:
221:
220:
219:
218:
214:
210:
206:
196:
192:
189:
186:
182:
178:
174:
171:
168:
165:
162:
159:
156:
153:
150:
146:
143:
142:Find sources:
138:
134:
129:
123:
119:
115:
111:
106:
102:
97:
93:
89:
85:
81:
80:
75:
72:
65:
60:
59:
55:
51:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
400:
397:
378:
368:
362:
318:
301:
280:
261:
226:
222:
202:
190:
184:
176:
169:
163:
157:
151:
141:
45:
43:
31:
28:
379:Strong keep
365:per above.
281:Strong Keep
227:in the past
223:Strong Keep
167:free images
383:Racepacket
235:sauerkraut
247:Mandsford
346:Polargeo
324:Jimmy Xu
306:Polargeo
289:Blodance
209:Jimmy Xu
205:WP:IINFO
128:View log
319:Comment
231:Germany
173:WP refs
161:scholar
101:protect
96:history
145:Google
105:delete
369:Grue
266:Dandv
188:JSTOR
149:books
122:views
114:watch
110:links
16:<
387:talk
363:Keep
350:talk
328:talk
310:talk
302:Keep
293:talk
285:WP:N
270:talk
262:Keep
251:talk
213:talk
203:Per
181:FENS
155:news
118:logs
92:talk
88:edit
54:talk
46:keep
195:TWL
130:•
126:– (
389:)
352:)
330:)
312:)
295:)
287:.
272:)
253:)
233:,
215:)
175:)
120:|
116:|
112:|
108:|
103:|
99:|
94:|
90:|
56:)
48:.
385:(
348:(
326:(
308:(
291:(
268:(
249:(
211:(
199:)
191:·
185:·
177:·
170:·
164:·
158:·
152:·
147:(
139:(
136:)
124:)
86:(
52:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.