Talk:Han Chinese subgroups

Shanghaier, not Shanghainese. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Anisomycin (talk • contribs) 23:38, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

There are both Wu-Yue and Ou-Yue in the list. Is not it a mistake? -- Gregean 10:34, 19 June 2006

A lot of weasel words ("Some might consider...") in this article; no references. The stuff about one term being used in mainland China and another in Taiwan is unreferenced. Problems with the list, as pointed out above. What on earth is Ou-Yue anyway? Also needs Chinese characters. Wuyue is a defunct state from 1000 years ago. I've never heard it being used to reference a distinct ethnic subgroup. --Sumple (Talk) 07:46, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Wuyue is linked to Jiangnan (Yangtze delta region) which is definitely a subgroup of Chinese.

This seems to just list a bunch of regions in China, with only a few actual peoples with Wikipedia articles. Can anyone with expertise on the subject comment? Saimdusan Talk|Contribs 04:09, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

I changed it to add only ethnic groups with articles. Saimdusan Talk|Contribs 23:22, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Thank you, someone with intelligence. This article was poorly created using terms which were outdated. Szechwan should be spelt as Sichuan. --Visik (talk) 13:58, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Are they all synonymous, or is one a subgroup of the other? Saimdusan Talk|Contribs 23:22, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Fujian people who speaks a variant of Min should be grouped as Min. Hoklo = Fujianese = Min people.

--Visik (talk) 13:57, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Please, whoever it is, stop it. Those alleged ethnic groups need their own referenced articles to be linked to by this one. Saimdusan Talk|Contribs 08:08, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Just to clarify: That isn't to say that you shouldn't find sources of their existance - by all means do, it's just that it can't remain as a sourceless red link. Saimdusan Talk|Contribs 20:03, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Once again, please add the links only once they have sourced articles. Saimdusan Talk|Contribs 05:03, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

I expanded the article into information "by dialect" and "by region" so it's not just a list. Currently the "by dialect" section is somewhat small (and looks somewhat strange with all the sub-sections), so any help with that would be appreciated. Saimdusan Talk|Contribs 08:04, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Ok, I cleaned up the "by dialect" section. Saimdusan Talk|Contribs 04:36, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Wu Chinese is not one single language. Wu Chinese is divided into many different mutally unintelligible dialects. Northern Wu speakers and Southern Wu speakers can't understand each other. But the Cantonese dialects are not like the Wu Chinese and Min Chinese. The Guangxi Cantonese is very similar to the Guangdong Standard Cantonese with the only difference in accents. Guangdong Standard Cantonese and Guangxi Cantonese are compared to Canadian English and American English. Therefore Yue language is the second largest dialect of the chinese family language, not Wu. Sonic99 (talk) 03:40, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Alright i won't object to that unless somebody can come up with a better argument. However I do this by Language not dialect, difference between Wu dialects are visible but they all belong to the Wu Chinese, which i why i think Wu is the second but it can go either way. On a side note, all of these subgroup languages derives from the Middle Chinese and the Old Chinese of Sinitic languages, so...Ya ^-^.

PS check this diagram
Cantonese proper (Yuehai)
-Taishanese is not mutually intelligible with Cantonese proper
-Pinghua is often considered a separate language

PPs. I've fixed the formation of this article but the information on there (especially the subgroup ones) are still messy, would be cool if anyone can adjust some of it :). --LLTimes (talk) 23:54, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Taishanese is mutually intelligible with Cantonese to a small extent because of heavy Taishanese accent and a few word pronunciation differences. Nevertheless Taishanese is still a Yue dialect. Cantonese speakers can understand at least 50% of Taishanese. Sonic99 (talk) 04:14, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Isn't information on which Han subgroups immigrated where relevant to the article? Why was it removed? saɪm duʃan Talk|Contribs 09:36, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

It's basically covered in their own pages, and too much similar information on this page. Besides, it's Han Chinese subgroups only, Oversea Chinese doesn't necessary mean all of them are Han Chinese.--LLTimes (talk) 18:03, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

I think it's useful information. And no, it is necessarily about Han Chinese if we're talking about the Hokkien, Teochew, Cantonese, etc. diasporas. 58.165.101.207 (talk) 09:32, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Han Chinese subgroups. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081129052940/http://www.usc.edu/dept/TSA/faq.html to http://www.usc.edu/dept/TSA/faq.html

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) 05:20, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

It appears that there is a lot of political and ambiguous connotations regarding the use of the 'Han/Chinese' to describe linguistic and cultural aspects of sinitic-speaking people, hence I would like to propose a change in the title of the page to Sinitic people. Since the majority of Sinitic/Sinitic-speaking people are Chinese/Han, many would mistaken Sinitic to be equivalent to Chinese. I believe that Sinitic is a more neutral term, similar to Slavic and Germanic when used to refer to Sinitic/Chinese-speaking peoples.