This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Chinese Civil War article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cold War, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Cold War 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.Cold WarWikipedia:WikiProject Cold WarTemplate:WikiProject Cold WarCold War
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics 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.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics
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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Taiwan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Taiwan 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.TaiwanWikipedia:WikiProject TaiwanTemplate:WikiProject TaiwanTaiwan
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Socialism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of socialism 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.SocialismWikipedia:WikiProject SocialismTemplate:WikiProject Socialismsocialism
This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history
This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
The Nationalists' abandonment of their capital in the mainland, seems historically significant because it symbolized their loss of control over mainland China to the Communist forces and marked the beginning of the division between the mainland and Taiwan. But is it important enough to be mentioned in the lead? It wasn't mentioned before so I added it in but not sure if it's important enough for the lead. 49.186.211.203 (talk) 07:13, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It is already mentioned in the lead:
The CCP gained control of mainland China and proclaimed the People's Republic of China in 1949, forcing the leadership of the Republic of China to retreat to the island of Taiwan.
Cool. Thanks for the reply. Would it be alright to mention Project National Glory in the intro? That "President Chiang Kai-shek intended the retreat to be temporary, aiming to regroup, fortify, and eventually reclaim the mainland. This plan, named "Project National Glory," never materialized." I don't see that being mentioned in the lead despite it should be. 49.186.211.203 (talk) 07:25, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think it is too minor a detail to mention a later plan that never materialized in the lead of an article for what was a very large conflict involving millions of people over decades. Remsense诉07:27, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I see someone has quietly changed the end date of the war to 1950, corresponding to the Battle of Hainan Island. Partially per above, this is simply not reflective in my understanding of how sources periodize the conflict. Instead, people usually point to the end of the war being CCP victory on the mainland in 1949, with Hainan treated as clean-up analogous to the periodization of many major wars. What do people think? Remsense ‥ 论01:04, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The question is, should we use 7 December: that is, the date that the KMT retreat began? A few sources seem to cite 10 December, if not explicitly as the end of the war, but as the chronologically final day in which Chiang himself got on the plane to Taiwan. Remsense ‥ 论01:50, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This conflict has always been a messy one as the insurgency activity and remnant fighting lasted quite a while. KMT insurgents on the mainland lasted until 1954, there were guerillas in Xinjang until 58, first Taiwan strait crisis which saw several islands captured was in 1955, the forces in the Burmese Border kept fighting China until 1961, and some remnants continued to operate illegally as drug cartels in Thailand well after. Not to mention the third strait crisis or the lack of a technical treaty ending it.
However, I think 1951 is probably a better ending date than 1949. Everything after that is either Insurgency or minor conventional fighting in the first two strait crisis that’s seperate by a few years (though I note sources at the time seemingly often considered the conflict ongoing until after 1955 when the deadlock was firm).
I advocate for 1951, specifically May, because it covers pretty much all the heavy conventional contiguous fighting. In December 49 the KMT still held huge chunks of the South West of China and had a conventional presence in East Turkestan. Not to mention Tibet was still resisting. By Mid 1950 the KMT lost most of the mainland, then in the back half of the year they lost their conventional control over Xinjiang leaving it to Insurgency as well as Hainan after a hard fought landing. Then in October we saw the start of the Tibet campaign and the distraction that was Korea sapping forces meant for Taiwan.
The last serious conventional threat of the KMT on the mainland was wiped out by February 1951 following the loss of Baoshan in January and the wipeout of defensive forces, leaving the remainder to either go insurgent or flee to Burma. And in May Tibet officially surrendered to China. That would be it for conventional fighting until the strait crisis years later. Ignoring 1950 is foolish given how much conventional warfare occurred then 2604:3D09:1F7F:8B00:2DA9:89CF:5364:B3E4 (talk) 16:52, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I recognize the appeal in this rationale, but for our purposes we need to go by what the balance of sources reflect (or even better, discuss the different dating and logic for doing so based on sources in the body). Your comment is thoughtful, but the driver of the discussion should be -- and what are the best sources for the different constructs of an 'end date?' JArthur1984 (talk) 17:24, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I will note a lot of that is in hindsight(People in December 1949 very much did not consider it over, neither did Chinese military planners, both Chiang and Mao intended to end things militarily prior to the first strait crisis showing Chiang wasn't capable of retaking the mainland and Mao was weakened by the Korean War, US intervention after that effectively locking the conflict as that was the last time territory changed hands between them excluding the insurgents in Turkestan and Burma), December 1949 being when this conflict ended is a very post-Nixon visit mentality rather than what people at the time thought or what's really objectively the most correct(1951 was kind of a compromise, based on what I know of the time the First Taiwan Strait Crisis in late 54 early 55 was really the point this transitioned from active to frozen conflict in both a leadership mentality and in terms of land on the ground), but whatever can't fight the majority. I hate the way a ton of stuff is either named or sorted, it's internally inconsistent with other conflicts or overly stuffy or dumb, but that's how it is. 2604:3D09:1F7F:8B00:C6B:3399:2571:A231 (talk) 03:42, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Like for example, I think the best way to categorize Ukraine(in line with how Nagorno Karabakh or Libya were handled) is 3 articles. "Donbas War' for the active conflict that lasted exactly a year, from February 20th 2014 when fighting first started in Crimea to February 20th 2015 when the battle of Debaltseve ended and Minsk II took effect. Then an article for the low intensity conflict that lasted for 7 years, mostly occasional shelling deaths or skirmishs, a few major flareups like Avdiivka in 2017 or Kerch Strait in 2018. Then the full blown Russo-Ukrainian War in 2022 starts. But nope, because they renamed the military intervention page back in 2019 to that now the war is the entire 2014-today period even though that's terribly misleading and not how Libya or Azerbaijan were handled and trying to suggest otherwise makes me Pro-Russian even though I'm trying to approach this academically 2604:3D09:1F7F:8B00:C6B:3399:2571:A231 (talk) 03:48, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Manchuria, that was the other example I couldn't remember. That's honestly probably the most solid case. The limited invasion and following low intensity conflict are their own things seperate from the full scale war in 37) 2604:3D09:1F7F:8B00:C6B:3399:2571:A231 (talk) 03:48, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
IP, you were asked a direct question, and instead of acknowledging it you blew right past it to continue your extemporaneous musing. This talk page is not a discussion forum, and it was made clear what the criteria for changes to the article would be. If you are interested in improving the article, please stay on topic, and preferably make responses comparatively brief, and with consideration of this and the above previous discussions in mind. Thanks. Remsense ‥ 论04:00, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
level-4 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
