Talk:Chiang Kai-shek Memorial Hall

Purpose of the Hall

What is the purpose of the parks and ponds? Are they just decorative? Are they meaningful?

Someone put Chinese after the name of the hall, but my wife says the final character means "Picture" not "Hall" -- We don't know how to fix this. :(

PhiloVivero 23:05, 3 Apr 2004 (UTC)

---

Their website (http://www.cksmh.gov.tw/english/index.htm) has more info, as does this page (http://www.taiwan.com.au/Envtra/Taipei/report08.html). I would add more info if I had the time, but it's bedtime...so please go ahead. --Jiang 10:49, 3 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Great Leader

"Great leader" was added with quotation mark to reflect the purpose of this memorial hall which is not only to commemorate a late leader but also a "great leader". I belive citing the statement itself from the official website[1] (http://www.cksmh.gov.tw/english/a/aa1.htm) on its own is NPOV because the description of "great leader" is attributed to Chiang form the Hall administration. One's opinion on whether Chiang is a great leader or not is entirely irrelevant. The ROC and the memorial Hall administration do not change their opinion based on some random Chinese guy's opinion. They acts on what it believe and asserts, and that is what we are trying to show. By quoting the the Hall administration's position, we are definately not agreeeing to it. Please note the difference.Mababa 22:52, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)

No, no title of "great leader" existed for Chiang. This is not Kim il-Sung and Wikipedia is not the People's Daily. If a title exists, we use it w/o quotation marks. If it doesn't, we dont use it. The quotation is unattributed and therefore inappropriate. Even if it is, the website is not in any way authoritative. The "Hall administration" maintains the premises; it did not build the hall or decide to do so. Was there a government proclaimation? Was it part of legislation? Or was it just the webmaster's editorial choice of words? One does not have to be called "great leader" to have a memorial hall. They don't usually call Lincoln "great leader". This is just absurd. --Jiang 23:05, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Puzzled. This logic is extactly the same as you shared with me in editign Taiwan Relations Act. Sure, one does not have to be called "great leader" to have a memorial hall. Nonetheless, the great leader was used to depict Chiang from the official website. Moreover, Chiang was widely to be called the Lord Chiang and the leader of the spirit in Taiwan. It does not have to be legislated. The Hall was part of the goverment administration. It is certainly more than an editorial choice to call Chiang a "great leader." The quotation mark exist here is because people are so used to call Chiang as lord Chiang; however, without a doubt, he is regarded as a great leader(without quotation mark) in most of the pan-blue activitists. I do not understand how come you have different standard in treating PRC's material versus treating ROC's material. I am extremely puzzled.Mababa 23:13, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)

The "great leader" here is not a title but a true great leader during the rule of KMT. It does not required legislation to be regarded as a great leader. People choose what they want to believe. Please show some respect to the government and the Hall administrator.Mababa 23:21, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)

The quotation at Taiwan Relations Act was a direct and official position. It was attributed to its source and relevant in that it would affect the enforcement of the act. This "great leader" reference is something that just doesn't exist and you are making up. He was called "Lord Chiang" (not even Lord in the nobility sense, but as a respectful form of address such a "sir"). This does not mean people called him a great leader or built this memorial because he was a "great leader".

Again, the website is not authoritative. I dont see a case on how using the phrase "great leader" is not an editorial choice. What authortative source do you have? What primary sources? Is the specific phrase "great leader" being used? If some people think he was great (I don't buy your argument that "pan-blue activists" regard him as "a great leader" per se), what relevance does it have here? Why are we quoting something that's not being used, not official, and without attribution? What you are claiming here is so ridiculous that I am having trouble trying to respond to your post.--Jiang 23:34, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)

This is not a very friendly response I am getting here. You should be embarrassed by your attitude. I am not responding to this one.Mababa 03:09, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)

If your purpose is to prove some people regard him as a "great leader", then the sentence utterly fails and instead implies Chiang Kai-shek used the same title as Kim- il Sung. Even then, I dont see the relevance unless people are entitled to memorials only if people they are a "great leader". --Jiang 23:39, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)

This is totally relevant. It is part of cult of personality in Taiwan. People has being criticizing that the Chiang family has been idolized in ROC. As you said, not usual "great leader" enjoys a huge hall being built to commemorate him. Chiang recieved a special treatment from his follower. Puting "great leader" helps people understand that Chiang was unproportionally exhalted and this is my purpose putting it in. As a random Taiwanese resident, I am telling you as a random Chinese that Chiang was publicly called as a great leader. If you do not agree with me, please consult with roadrunner as you consulted with him on my previous edits on SARS before.Mababa 03:09, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)

If you don't want to discuss then you can't have your way. If my attitude is bad, then it's my fault. If you choose not to ignore my attitude and respond, then it's your fault. I probably am ticked off at what you are trying to do here, but what use is it if you don't make an attempt to clarify or persuade me otherwise?

Tsk, tsk....Your logic is wierd. Nonetheless, I am glad that you finally get my intention. :)Mababa 07:41, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I see your point but your edits do not accomplish what you desire. It just makes the article confusing and silly. No, putting in "great leader" does not "help people understand that Chiang was unproportionally exhalted". If you want to state directly that this memorial was built because Chiang was highly exalted then you should try to do so directly and in a NPOV way. (Note that stating Chiang was "unproportionally exhalted" is stating an opinion and trying to "help people understand" this is to promote a particular viewpoint, which is not allowed.) The text you inserted just seems to suggest "great leader" was his title. Now you're giving the Funeral Committee words it did not say. What the low level public relations employee who was assigned to writing the memorial's tourist pamphlet produced is not what the Funeral Committee said.

No, I'm not a random Chinese. I'm a random American college student. If I asked the local PRC consulate for a passport they wouldnt give me one. --Jiang 04:38, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I guess you are still ethnically Chinese. Then, thank you for your suggestion, Mr. random Chinese American. I, as a random Taiwanese, will need to do a bit more homework on our GREAT GREAT LEADER and see if I can find something that I can quote form. This might takes some time before I can make any actually change as I am in a strange position that should use my time frugal and wisely.Mababa 07:41, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)