Talk:Mao Zedong

water margin

Mao learned the Water Margin book as a child. And later during the fighting of the revolution Mao carries a copy of the Water Margin with him. The Water Margin book helped to inspire Mao's revolution. This information is found in a translation of the Water Margin. It was translated by J.H. Jackson and it was published by Tuttle books. The title is The Water margin Outlaws of the Marsh the classic Chinese novel.

I am unsure that would pass wp:rs and what is its revalevance anyway? Slatersteven (talk) 17:28, 10 October 2024 (UTC)

Inconsistency regarding Stalin's Birthday

Mao is photographed with Stalin in 1949 celebrating Stalin's 71st birthday, however in the paragraph covering Mao's State Visits, it states that Mao visited Stalin to celebrate his 70th birthday. Stalin was born in 1878 according to the Wikipedia page on him. 150.160.109.107 (talk) 16:34, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

Cite 223 establishes that Stalin had his 70th birthday in 1949 but doesn't talk about when Mao's state visit was. Simonm223 (talk) 16:38, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

Recent change

@Amigao: Why restored the content that does not exist in main body in the article("deaths of 15 to 55 million people", "lasted for 10 years") or possible MOS:EDITORIAL ("Conversely")? Y-S.Ko (talk) 00:14, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

I am in agreement with @Y-S.Ko. Much of the trimming was fluff. I had a different reason for agreeing about trimming deaths for Great Leap Forward, namely that we already have a good deal of millions of death material in the lead. JArthur1984 (talk) 00:17, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

I don't disagree with this as stated. Remsense ‥ 论 00:25, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

A few bullet points, some not directly related to the main reason for reversion:

• Conversely is a word to watch, but the way it is being used here is clearly fine, as the two perspectives are clearly not compatible in most cases. In fact, your phrasing itself plausibly implies that the two views are
• Your linking of Hunan runs afoul of WP:SOB.
• While 55 million may not be attested in the article here, it is clearly cited at the article linked. The most productive thing to do here is to copy the references over, not force others to go and do it on your behalf. I don't think there's an NPOV justification in omitting figures as such.
• Your removal of any mention of escalation or motion is not encyclopedic in my view, akin to above, it actually has the unintended effect of mischaracterizing events by describing them as little as possible. There is a point where slimming summaries goes too far, and in this case you've crossed it imo.

Remsense ‥ 论 00:24, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

• If the phrase give the impression "two perspectives are clearly not compatible", which is not well-sourced fact, then the phrase must be fixed.
• I removed the content that does not exist in main body, but link to Great Chinese Famine is remained, which ("great ... famine") give impression of numerous deaths already, without worrying on the contents does not exist in main body. and general number of deaths is already treated in last paragraph of lead section (whose contents exists in main body of the article).

Y-S.Ko (talk) 01:07, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

I'm saying that whatever the relationship is, your particular juxtaposition also creates a synthetic connotation to my eye. I'm sure you've seen it, but the examples given at WP:SYNTH are pretty analogous to the contention here, though without an explicit linking and, it's analogous. Remsense ‥ 论 02:03, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

The examples in WP:SYNTH are problematic, because "but" and "only" gave some sort of impression, which is not neutral. "Conversely" creates much stronger non-neutral impression than my phrasing. My phrasing does not include these sort of words. I think my phrasing has less problematic connotation, and more neutral than using such problematic words. Of course, the best option is giving no impression about the two perspectives' compatibility. Y-S.Ko (talk) 03:44, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

I am saying the effect is subtler: I would not find an argument compelling that mere juxtaposition cannot ever take up its own connotations in this context. But it is a minor tone issue. Remsense ‥ 论 04:30, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

Mao Zedong's heart attacks and reported time of death

At the time of writing this talk topic the Death and aftermath section of the article page reads:

"He suffered two major heart attacks, one in March and another in July, then a third on 5 September, rendering him an invalid. He died nearly four days later, on 9 September 1976, at the age of 82. The Communist Party delayed the announcement of his death until 16:00, when a national radio broadcast announced the news and appealed for party unity."

For starters, the referenced source that was apparently retrieved on 25 October 2014 is a broken link, and the currently accessible live version of the same article source now has "https://archive.nytimes.com/" appended to the beginning of the url as follows: https://archive.nytimes.com/www.nytimes.com/learning/general/onthisday/big/0909.html

Now the main contention: The referenced source only mentions that Mao Zedong died at 12:10 a.m. on September 9, but it does not mention how many heart attacks Mao Zedong had, nor the time that Mao had the heart attacks, therefore the following quoted claim does not currently have a source attributed to it:

"He suffered two major heart attacks, one in March and another in July, then a third on 5 September, rendering him an invalid. He died nearly four days later..."

The same sourcing issue is apparent in regard to information described in the article about the Death and state funeral of Mao Zedong, which uses the same source attribution and currently reads:

"At around 17:00 on 5 September 1976, Mao had a heart attack, far more severe than his previous two earlier that year which affected a much larger area of his heart, leaving him bedridden. On the afternoon of 7 September, Mao's condition completely deteriorated. Mao's organs failed quickly and he fell into a coma shortly before noon and was put on a ventilator and life support machines.
On 8 September, when it was clear the comatose Mao was beyond recovery, Chinese government officials decided to disconnect his life support machines at midnight..."

Is anyone able to find a source that verifies these claims that time Mao Zedong's heart attacks to March, July, and 17:00 on 5 September?

I have identified a source by James Palmer (Chapter 6: "You die, I live" of Heaven Cracks, Earth Shakes: The Tangshan Earthquake and the Death of Mao's China, published 3 January 2012) that alternatively claims that Mao Zedong suffered a heart attack at about 5:00 p.m. on September 2. This source is also referenced at least one time by other authors including in Chapter 7: "Selective Integration" of Peter Martin's China's Civilian Army: The Making of Wolf Warrior Diplomacy, published 2021.

Is anyone able to find any reliable sources earlier than 3 January 2012 that affirmatively verify that Mao Zedong had heart attacks in March, July, 2 September and/or 5 September, 1976?

As Mao Zedong's heart attacks thus far have an identifiable source attribution referenced to James Palmer's Heaven Cracks, Earth Shakes (2012), I can propose a revision to the article on the Death and state funeral of Mao Zedong as follows, however someone with greater editing privileges can investigate making changes to the main Mao Zedong page.

e.g. "At around 17:00 on 2 September 1976, Mao had a heart attack..."

and so on. Re.educated (talk) 21:40, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

Luckily, Spence (1998) has us covered, pp. 176–177:

“ On June 26, Mao had a second heart attack. A third came on September 2, more serious than the previous two, leaving him weakened and comatose. On September 8, he was alert enough to spend some short periods reading reports, but he dozed off repeatedly. Around 11:15 P.M., he drifted into a coma. Ten minutes after midnight, on September 9, 1976, Mao died in the presence of the ranking members of the Politburo, who had been summoned to his room, and his attendant physicians. ”

Remsense ‥ 论 22:13, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 December 2024

As discussed in Talk:Mao Zedong#Mao Zedong's heart attacks and reported time of death, it is advised that in the section on Mao_Zedong#Death_and_aftermath the following sentence:

"He suffered two major heart attacks, one in March and another in July, then a third on 5 September, rendering him an invalid."

Should be changed into something like:

"He suffered two major heart attacks, one in March and another in July, then a third on 2 September at about 5:00 p.m., rendering him an invalid." Re.educated (talk) 22:09, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

 Done My own way, at least. That should work, right? Remsense ‥ 论 22:33, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

Noting that according to Spence the second one was actually in late June... I think so. Thanks! 👏 Re.educated (talk) 22:42, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for giving me something quick, concrete, and important to do! Remsense ‥ 论 22:43, 2 December 2024 (UTC)