Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of World Heritage Sites in China/archive1: Difference between revisions

List of World Heritage Sites in China (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Nominator(s): Tone 07:01, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, time for a big one. China has 60 World Heritage Sites and 61 tentative sites (these two numbers may change in the upcoming week since the UNESCO assembly is taking place but we’ll update if needed). The list is therefore massive. And this is also the reason why the map this time is set a bit differently than usual, but I think it works fine. Otherwise, standard style. Do not get afraid of reviewing it, I believe it is a fascinating read. Tone 07:01, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• File:泰山 南天门.jpg – Public Domain
• File:The Great Wall of China – Badaling.jpg – CC BY-SA 4.0
• File:Forbidden City Beijing (3019178959).jpg – CC BY 2.0
• File:Jiucenglou of Mogao Caves.jpg – CC BY-SA 3.0
• File:Terracotta Army Pit 1 – 2.jpg – CC BY-SA 3.0
• File:Zhoukoudian Entrance.JPG – CC BY-SA 4.0
• File:Huangshan-瀑布云 20141109.JPG – CC BY-SA 4.0
• File:1 jiuzhaigou valley wu hua hai 2011b.jpg – CC BY-SA 4.0
• File:1 huanglong pools aerial 2011.jpg – CC BY-SA 4.0
• File:Zhangjiajie National Forest Park 38021-Zhangjiajie (48757252178).jpg – CC BY 2.0
• File:Putuo Zongcheng Temple.jpg – CC BY-SA 4.0
• File:Qufu Confucian Temple 49255-Qufu (49055650421).jpg – CC BY 2.0
• File:Wudangshan pic 12.jpg – CC BY-SA 2.0
• File:Potala palace21.jpg – CC BY-SA 3.0
• File:Mount Lushan – fog.JPG – CC BY-SA 2.5
• File:Leshan Buddha Statue View.JPG – CC BY-SA 2.5
• File:1 lijiang old town 2012a.jpg – CC BY-SA 4.0
• File:PingYaoCity.jpg – CC BY 3.0
• File:Humble Administrator Garden 48396-Suzhou (49171766422).jpg – CC BY 2.0
• File:Longevity Hill of the Summer Palace.jpg – CC BY 2.0
• File:Temple of Heaven – Hall of Prayer for Good Harvests.jpg – CC BY 2.0
• File:Wuyi Mountains Sea of clouds 4.jpg – CC BY 2.5 cn
• File:Dazu-Baoding Shan-150-No5-2012-gje.jpg – CC BY-SA 4.0
• File:青城山山门 01.jpg – CC BY-SA 4.0
• File:HongCun AnHui.JPG – CC BY-SA 4.0
• File:DragonGateCave2.jpg – CC BY 2.5
• File:Nanjing Ming Xiaoling 2017.11.11 08-10-27.jpg – CC BY-SA 4.0
• File:61292-Yungang-Grottoes (28498548881).jpg – CC BY 2.0
• File:Tiger Leaping Gorge.jpg – CC BY-SA 2.5
• File:Tomb of the General 1.jpg – CC BY-SA 3.0
• File:Ruínas de S. Paulo.jpg – CC BY-SA 4.0 The uploader of these images seems to infringe on copyright quite frequently. This specific image seems fine but just noting that.
• File:26245-Anyang (49086226266).jpg – CC BY 2.0
• File:Panda Cub from Wolong, Sichuan, China.JPG – Public Domain
• File:Zili Village 18622-Kaiping (49038394322).jpg – CC BY 2.0
• File:87471-Li-River (29881896297).jpg – CC BY 2.0
• File:Snail pit tulou.jpg – CC BY-SA 4.0
• File:19250-SanQingShan (39873732113).jpg – CC BY 2.0
• File:五台山塔院寺.jpg – CC BY-SA 4.0
• File:Shaolinsi.JPG – CC BY-SA 3.0
• File:38997-Danxiashan (48988860616).jpg – CC BY 2.0
• File:西湖平湖秋月.JPG – CC BY-SA 3.0
• File:Maotianshania-cylindrica.jpg – CC BY-SA 3.0
• File:Yuan Shangdu.jpg – CC BY-SA 4.0
• File:Jengish Chokusu from BC.jpg – CC BY 2.0
• File:Terrace field yunnan china edit.jpg – CC BY-SA 3.0
• File:Dayanta Gisela-Brantl 01.JPG – CC BY-SA 3.0
• File:拱宸橋·浙江杭州·（航拍自東南往西北）.jpg – CC BY-SA 4.0
• File:海龙屯 朝天关.jpg – CC BY-SA 4.0
• File:Rock painting hua mountain 1.jpg – CC BY-SA 3.0
• File:VM 5331 Muyu town north.jpg – CC BY-SA 3.0
• File:Hoh Xil.jpg – CC BY 2.5 cn
• File:Gulangyu.jpg – CC BY 2.0
• File:梵淨山紅雲金頂（新金頂）.jpg – CC BY-SA 3.0 This image looks very professional but it has somewhat low resolution
• File:Liangzhu Ancient City Site, 2016-06-18 17.jpg – CC BY-SA 4.0
• File:Spoon-billed sandpiper.jpg – CC BY-SA 4.0
• File:20230130 Old City of Quanzhou 01.jpg – CC BY-SA 4.0
• File:Soultea-Pu-erh-first-grade.jpg – CC BY 3.0
• File:Bilutu Peak.JPG – CC BY-SA 3.0
• File:Central Axis of Beijing from Yongdingmenwai (20240812145818).jpg – CC BY-SA 4.0
• File:Dongzhai Harbour Mangrove Forest.jpg – CC BY-SA 3.0 This image’s resolution is horrible, please find something better. If you can not, then just remove it and leave the space blank.
• File:China-Alligator.jpg – Public Domain
• File:Birds on Poyang Lake (15273717673).jpg – CC BY-SA 2.0
• File:RMB20dollarbackscene.jpg – CC BY-SA 3.0 Quality is bad, could you find a replacement? If not that is also fine, you can keep it if nothing better exists.
• File:YumbuLhakhang.jpg – CC BY 2.5
• File:Qutang Gorge on Changjiang.jpg – CC BY 3.0
• File:Mount. Jinfo 1.JPG – CC BY-SA 4.0
• File:Xiaozhaitiankeng.jpg – Public Domain
• File:1 mount hua shan china 2011.jpg – CC BY-SA 4.0
• File:China2011 Zhejiang YandangShan.jpg – CC BY-SA 4.0
• File:楠溪江最美丽的一段 – The Most Beautiful Section of Nanxi River – 2010.04 – panoramio.jpg – CC BY 3.0
• File:Majishan entire hill 20090226.jpg – CC BY-SA 3.0
• File:Hornito in Wudalianchi 1, Aug 2019.jpg – CC BY-SA 4.0
• File:Pingtan Beach – panoramio.jpg – CC BY 3.0
• File:South Jade Cloud Road.JPG – CC BY-SA 3.0
• File:水井街酒坊遗址照片.JPG – CC BY-SA 4.0
• File:Dangjiacun.JPG – CC BY-SA 3.0
• File:City wall of Xi’an 51550-Xian (27959363326).jpg – CC BY 2.0
• File:Five Pavilion Bridge and White Pagoda 2017.jpg – CC BY-SA 4.0
• File:Zhouzhuang 2.jpg – CC BY 2.0
• File:Summer Vacation 2007, 263, Watchtower In The Morning Light, Dunhuang, Gansu Province.jpg – CC BY 2.0
• File:Fenghuang Ancient Town.jpg – CC BY-SA 2.0
• File:Jade Burial Suit of Zhao Mo, King of Nanyue.jpg – CC0
• File:白鹤梁石鱼.jpg – CC BY 3.0
• File:Xijiang Qianhu Miaozhai.Skyline.jpg – CC BY-SA 4.0
• File:Turpan-karez-museo-d02.jpg – CC BY-SA 2.5 es
• File:Liu Wang animals.jpg – CC BY-SA 3.0
• File:The Songshan Buddhist Academy Lied in Mount Song.jpg – CC BY-SA 4.0
• File:Taklamakan desert.jpg – CC BY-SA 4.0
• File:LakeKanas.jpg – CC BY-SA 3.0
• File:Tashkurgan River Delta Meadow.jpg – CC BY-SA 2.0
• File:Pagoda of Fogong Temple at Dust.jpg – CC BY-SA 4.0
• File:Neolithic jade dragon, Hongshan Culture, Inner Mongolia, 1971.jpg – CC BY-SA 4.0
• File:Yue-Kiln sites at Shanglin Lake, 2014-11-23 05.jpg – CC BY-SA 4.0
• File:东百中心A馆10楼瞭望台西三坊七巷.jpg – CC BY-SA 4.0
• File:Xixia.jpg – CC BY-SA 3.0
• File:Chengyangqiao, Guangxi, China.jpg – CC BY 2.5 the copyright seems weird but the author hasn’t been warned on Wikimedia for copyright infringement and is quite good at photography.
• File:Lingqu Canal.jpg – CC BY 3.0
• File:Danba diaolou.jpg – CC BY-SA 3.0
• File:Archaeological Site of Jinsha.jpg – CC BY-SA 3.0
• File:Yardangs in the Tsaidam Desert.jpg – CC BY-SA 3.0
• File:Dunhuang Yardang National Geopark 2.JPG – CC BY-SA 3.0
• File:Tianzhushan.JPG – Public Domain
• File:革命圣地井冈山啊.JPG – CC BY-SA 4.0
• File:Jianmenguan.JPG – CC BY-SA 2.5
• File:Tsaparang-ruins of ancient capital of Guge Kingdom 03.JPG – CC BY-SA 3.0
• File:HulunLake2.jpg – CC BY-SA 3.0
• File:Qinghai Lake May 2006.jpg – CC BY 2.0
• File:Kailash north.JPG – CC BY 2.5
• File:TaihangMountain8.jpg – CC BY-SA 3.0
• File:Baitou Mountain Tianchi.jpg – CC BY-SA 3.0
• File:Xinpusaurus-Tianjin Natural History Museum.jpg – CC BY-SA 4.0
• File:HuangguoshuFall.jpg – CC BY-SA 3.0
• File:五指山 – panoramio.jpg – CC BY 3.0
• File:Landscape in Minqing from Hengfeng-Fuzhou Railway.jpg – CC BY-SA 4.0
• File:Molaire de Platybelodon grangeri.jpg – CC BY-SA 3.0
• File:Flickr image 29851221553.jpg – CC BY-SA 2.0
• suitable alt text for all images
• support, pass image review

• I very much respect and appreciate Easternsahara’s contributions, but I disagree with his statement that the Mangrove image is so bad, it would be better to have no image. Bgsu98 (Talk) 15:55, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• “It has featured in poems and paintings and has a school of painting named after it” → “It has featured in poems and paintings, having a school of paintings named after it” we don’t want to have 2 ands in one sentence generally
• “Of these, the most famous is the Terracotta Army (pictured), thousands of life-sized and realistic terracotta statues of warriors, as well as horses and chariots. ” → “Of these, the most famous is the Terracotta Army (pictured). The Terracotta Army consists of thousands of life-sized, realistic statues of warriors, horses, and chariots.” I thought that the wording was clunky and the sentence was a bit long
• The defining feature of the landscape is the collection ” → “a collection” I think a sounds more natural over the since the topic is only being introduced
• “Qufu was the birthplace of Confucius, the great Chinese philosopher, educator, and politician, who died in the 5th century BCE.” → “a great Chinese philospher,” There are other great Chinese philosophers.
• will add more comments
• I think it is allowed but I just want to confirm, a lot of these comments about the World Heritage Sites are positive in nature rather than netural, has this been okay for other World Hertiage lists? I think so but idk about consensus, so I just want to clarify.
  • Fixed the above as well. As for being positive in nature, I try to avoid overly tourist brochure-style language but the criterion vii refers to “exceptional natural beauty and aesthetic importance” so I suppose it is only fair to say that something is considered beautiful or similar (according to the sources, of course). I am open to specific suggestions if you see where I could improve on the wording. —Tone 16:52, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• I noticed there’s no mention of Taiwan in the article and would assume it’s because it’s not a signatory of the convention but some explanation should still probably be added to the lead to clarify it, i.e. explain that since the end of the civil war, Taiwan has been disputed between the Taiwan-based ROC and mainland-based PRC, with both claiming the island as their own territory. Because of the One-China Policy and protests by the PRC, Taiwan has had limited representation in many international organizations and has been unable to join the convention. Also answering the questions: Why has the PRC been unable to add any sites for Taiwan? Has the PRC tried before? How did it go? What is the official UNESCO position? Has that position changed since the convention began? How are cultural heritage sites in/around Taiwan handled? What is Taiwan’s position on the status of UNESCO sites in mainland China? Any other related information?
• For the main map caption, mention that the disputed territories of Taiwan and claimed parts of Arunachal Pradesh are shown in dark tan and broken lines for claimed borders while the claimed borders in the disputed territories of the Kashmir region are shown with broken lines and map coloring there reflecting de facto territorial control
• For the “Location (province)” column in both tables, for better accuracy, it should changed to “Location (prov. level)” or something similar, with prov. level/something similar being a abbr. template for “province-level” linking to Province-level divisions of China; a efn note along the lines of {{efn|The four types of administrative divisions in China at the provincial level, which is the [[Administrative divisions of China#Summary|highest order administrative division in the country]], are [[Provinces of China|provinces]] (23), [[Autonomous regions of China|autonomous regions]] (5), [[Municipalities of China|municipalities]] (4), and the two [[Special administrative regions of China|special administrative regions]] of [[Hong Kong]] and [[Macau]]. China’s recognized World Heritage Sites as well as the sites on its tentative list are spread out across all of these administrative divisions except for the [[province of Taiwan]], which is [[Political status of Taiwan|disputed and currently controlled]] by the generally unrecognized [[Republic of China]].}} should also be added (I checked a bit and it looks like Taiwan is the only subdivision without any sites either on the WHS/tentative list but could use a second look and feel free to reword/reorganize this footnote too
• Not as important but something I was curious, has any of China’s WHS sites ever been listed on List of World Heritage in Danger? Maybe not so much for this list but it might make sense to include brief mentions of each country’s previous site(s) inclusion on that list if applicable, when/how long they were on that list, and for what reasons they were listed and then removed
• Also something else I was thinking might maybe make a good addition to the WHS lists in the lead is if all the WHS sites of that country are also simultaneously recognized as national heritage sites by that country’s legislation (i.e. if that country also classifies WHS heritage sites as national protected areas/heritage sites). In the case of this list, something like “All of China’s World Heritage Sites and sites on its tentative list are also simultaneously protected by the country’s legislation as national priority protected sites for cultural sites and protected areas for natural sites.”

@Tone: As always great work with continuing the WHS series and this list overall looks amazing! I have to admit I might end up using this when planning a future vacation 😉 Dan the Animator 04:27, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Another comment to add on to earlier suggestions, it might be worth also explaining what UNESCO’s official position is on sites located in other disputed territories claimed by China but controlled by other countries. Taiwan should still have its own distinct, detailed mention given its unique case and Taiwan not being a party to the convention but other disputed territories should also be addressed if possible. Dan the Animator 21:59, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Dantheanimator: Good comments! Yes, political issues here, but since this is a list of UNESCO sites and follows the official source, I would not want to go too much into details. I tend to keep the articles to the minimum in view of content, otherwise they quickly spiral to large lengths. List of sites, map, dates, endangered (if), shared sites, country serving on UNESCO Committee, that’s more or less it. There are no sites and also no tentative sites in the disputed parts of the map. For example, the FLs for India and Venezuela do not mention details on the disputed areas either (and not sites in that area). I would consider adding a discussion in a situation similar to List of World Heritage Sites in Serbia, where the Medieval Monuments in Kosovo had been listed some years before Kosovo declared independence. The other specific situation is with the Old City of Jerusalem site, which was proposed by Jordan. There actually is a List of potential World Heritage Sites in Taiwan, but this list is not recognized by UNESCO because of the reasons you mention above. There is some discussion in that article but I’d prefer stronger sources. I changed the province-level, good suggestion. I think the link provides the required details. For the US list, I used state-level for location and footnotes for non-states, such as the unincorporated territories (Puerto Rico), but here the link makes perfect sense. As for the sites previously in danger, if I see correctly, China had none. Otherwise, I tend to include those details, as well as reasons why they were listed and removed from the endangered list. As for the national heritage, I don’t know. Again, it seems going into details. There are two links in see also, maybe that part could be extended? —Tone 10:02, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I support Tone in ignoring the irrelevant details of disputed areas, changing provinces to province level subdivisions, etc. Much of the format could be understood if you looked at other FLs on World Heritage Sites. Easternsahara (talk) 00:25, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @Tone: for the comprehensive reply and apologies for the late follow-up. About the suggestions:

• I agree with keeping details to a minimum and in the case of this article, I also agree adding the List of potential World Heritage Sites in Taiwan link to the See also section would be a great idea.
• For disputed areas, I think it should be fine if there is no mention in the article/lead. That said, for the map caption, given the map uses different shading/lines, it should be mentioned (maybe add to the caption something along the lines of Disputed territories of China are shaded tan while claimed borders are shown with dashed lines; there are no sites located in disputed areas.). I think adding something similar to the map captions on the India, Pakistan, Venezuela, Israel, Palestine, Cyprus, Sudan, Syria, Russia would also be helpful since the maps used in all those articles also all use unique shading/lines to indicate disputed territories/borders, which should be clarified in the map captions imo. Also, in the case of List of World Heritage Sites in Morocco, the caption should also mention that Western Sahara is not shown, with the dashed line representing the border claimed by Western Sahara.
• I won’t oppose here regarding this since it is mostly about the WHS Morocco list but I think it would be good to consider: in the case of this list, there thankfully is the Taiwan list which would be an ideal location for the information but in other cases, there doesn’t seem to be any findable places for information about the WHS status of disputed regions. In Morocco’s case, List of World Heritage Sites in Morocco, List of World Heritage Sites in Africa, List of World Heritage Sites in North Africa, and World Heritage Sites by country all make no explanation of the status of Western Sahara in regards to the WHS Convention and their sites. Overall, I couldn’t find any article on the English Wikipedia that discusses the WHS status of Western Sahara though it’s possible I could have missed it. Personally I think a lot of readers searching for information about the WH sites/status of disputed territories will naturally go to the article or articles of the territories’ claimants so having some sort of information on those articles to explain the situation or direct them to some other article where it is explained would be ideal but in any case worth considering this more imo in future/past WHS lists.
• Also, for province-level and administrative divisions in general, yup that works. I wasn’t sure what would be best but you’re right, the Wikilink to the province-level article fits perfectly. I think the way the US list was done also works great too though I agree the province-level link is good enough for this list

Dan the Animator 03:03, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Tone it’s been roughly a month since the earlier replies/comments. Hope all’s well and let me know if I can help with finishing this nom. Dan the Animator 18:59, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Huh, yes, I was busy, I hope I get to work on this soon properly. Tone 05:34, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, take your time. 🙂 Wanted to check just in case. Dan the Animator 20:01, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think I still owe you a reply here 🙂 I am not sure if adding the potential list of sites in Taiwan would be best here since this list is not UNESCO-backed (that list as a stand-alone is probably fine, just not linked here). As for the disputed areas, the map used here is used in hundreds of other articles on WP and there is typically no explanation. But there is no direct relevance to the sites themselves (as opposed to the Serbia-Kosovo case mentioned above) so I wouldn’t go further. Happy to see you like the administrative divisions approach here. Tone 16:46, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @Tone for the reply! For my thoughts…

• The See also section of an article is for navigational purposes to help readers find similar articles (i.e. One purpose of “See also” links is to enable readers to explore tangentially related topics…[an] article on Tacos might include Fajita as another example of Mexican cuisine.), so the potential list of WHS in Taiwan would make sense imo to add here since it is more or less a direct subtopic of WHS in China. Also, the current two links in the See also are unrelated to UNESCO as-is
• Good point. I don’t fully disagree though I still feel it adds a lot of value (also there is some direct relevance to the topic vis a vis the absence of any sites in Taiwan and I’m sure a lot of readers would go to this article first to search for info on Taiwan WHS, which is also another reason to add the link to the See also). Also up to you to weigh but considering confusion with the map was already brought up in this nom by another editor, it wouldn’t hurt to add a single-sentence disclaimer.

Great to see you editing again and let me know what you think about the above. Cheers, Dan the Animator 14:59, 11 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Saw that PresN promoted below so will give my belated support before the nom closes but still would encourage adding in the link to the See also. Dan the Animator 17:41, 11 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Of these 60 sites, 41 are listed for their cultural, 15 for their natural, and four sites for both cultural and natural significance – Make it 4 sites, so that it complies with MOS:NUMNOTES: “Comparable values near one another should be all spelled out or all in figures, even if one of the numbers would normally be written differently”.
• One site is transnational, the Silk Roads: the Routes Network of Chang’an-Tianshan Corridor is shared with Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan – I feel something’s missing there. Maybe One site is transnational, as the Silk Roads: the Routes Network of Chang’an-Tianshan Corridor is shared with Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan?
• under the Emperor Qin Shi Huang who connected earlier existing sections -> under the Emperor Qin Shi Huang, who connected earlier existing sections
• Three sections of the wall are listed, the terminuses at Jiayuguan City and Shanhai Pass, and the Badaling section (pictured) near Beijing -> Three sections of the wall are listed: the terminuses at Jiayuguan City and Shanhai Pass, and the Badaling section (pictured) near Beijing
• In the 19th century, the caves were occupied by Buddhist monks while they drew the attention of archeologists and were protected after 1930 – When did they draw attention? I don’t think that’s clear.
• a rich assemblies
• in nine different architectural style
• in history of Chinese civil engineering – A the is missing here.
• in a particular local architecture, urban planning, and traditions – Given that it’s not singular, you should lose the a.
• with waters from the mountains being collected in the Black Dragon Pool and are then distributed through a series of canals and channels – Something is not working there.
• Both are important due of their architecture and art collections
• Out of more than 50 such gardens in the city, four were listed in 1997, and a further five were added in 2000 – Make it fifty.
• damaged in during
• largest largely
• that has by now largely disappeared – The by now is not needed.
• alpine karst and danxia landforms – The Oxford comma is missing there before the and.
• the area a biodiversity hotspot
• The Koguryo, or Goguryeo kingdom ruled – You have to either add or remove a comma here.
• during the early and middle period – periods?
• They originate in the time of the Ming dynasty when they served -> They originate in the time of the Ming dynasty, when they served
• Additional four clusters – Four additional clusters?
• is a type of a large earthen buildings -> is a type of large earthen buildings
• of south-eastern China where – Add a comma.
• The characteristic feature are – features?
• (23,000 ft) (Jengish Chokusu – Those parentheses all together read a bit weird. Can the mention about the picture be made a bit later, in the following sentence?
• They use … that uses – That could read better. Maybe that relies on in the second half?
• The Hani worship the nature and their land – Add a comma before and.
• World Heritage site – This is the only instance I could find where site is not written with a capital S.
• 33 sites on the roads are listed, 19 of which are in China – Something like Of 33 sites on the roads listed, 19 are in China to avoid beginning the sentence with a figure?
• The canal was constructed in stages, with the first ones dating to the 5th century BCE and it got fully connected – The canal was constructed in stages, with the first ones dating to the 5th century BCE, and it got fully connected
• materials, allowed distribution -> materials, and allowed distribution
• A total of 31 sites along the canal are listed, the Gongchen Bridge in Hangzhou is pictured -> A total of 31 sites along the canal are listed. The Gongchen Bridge in Hangzhou is pictured
• from 5th to 2nd century BCE -> from the 5th to the 2nd century BCE
• of the bronze drum culture, a culture once widespread in the region – It’s already been stated that it is a culture, so maybe of the bronze drum culture, once widespread in the region?
• in the fusion traditional – of?
• You have both Overseas Chinese and vverseas Chinese.
• The serial site comprises 12 components with wetlands, mudflats, beaches, and marshes, that were – Lose the comma before that were.
• Jingmai Mountain (景迈山) – That’s the first time you have the name in Chinese.
• The Western Xia or the Tangut civilization existed from 1038 to 1227 when -> The Western Xia or the Tangut civilization existed from 1038 to 1227, when

I hope those suggestions will be helpful. I will carry on with the tentative list as soon as I have time. Kind regards, Alavense (talk) 19:24, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Alavense: Alright, I am through! Great suggestions, I fixed all. Sorry for late reply. Are you planning to check the tentative list at some point as well? I would appreciate. Tone 16:41, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Good to see you could get to it, Tone. 🙂 Here are some more comments:

• that helps with raising of the animals – That reads a bit weird.
• have been renown – Renown or renowned? Just asking.
• The natural beauty of the mountains […] have inspired poets – Should be has.
• floristic regions of north and south China – Maybe North and South China?
• The oldest excavated site is the Lidu Workshop which has – Comma before which.
• Finding at these sites demonstrate different stage – Findings and stages?
• City Wall of Nanjing, and city walls of Jingzhou and Xingcheng –> the City Wall of Nanjing, and the city walls of Jingzhou and Xingcheng
• 1400 karez wells – I think this should be 1,400 karez wells. There’s also an instance of 1200 years below.
• I would rewrite the sentence like this: There are more than 1,400 karez wells in the Turpan area, where they supply water for irrigation
• Joint tombs of boat-shaped coffins – Does it have to be a capital J? And maybe it would need a “the” before?
• is a granite mountains
• take shape of pillars –> take the shape of pillars
• with Picea meyeri spruces – I guess the scientific name should be in itallics.
• and a large Huangguoshu Waterfall –> and the large Huangguoshu Waterfall
• to endangered endemic Hainan black-crested gibbon –> to the endangered and endemic Hainan black-crested gibbon. Something like that?
• The Hlai people, or Li, that live on the island, have developed a culture – I think you could lose the last comma.
• to the life in a tropical setting –> to life in a tropical setting or to living in a tropical setting
• the complex, and at times unpredictable shape – Lose the comma.

That’s what I saw. Kind regards, Alavense (talk) 14:31, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent comments, fixed all. Thank you! Tone 19:50, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Impressive work on such a long list. It was very nice reading it. Happy to support. Alavense (talk) 20:24, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• There are a lot of primary sources from UNESCO used, could some secondary ones be added.
• Could a tentative list map be made.
• Could the specifics of the criteria be listed, currently it just says if they are cultural or natural? I think it would be better if the specific criteria were listed so it is known.
• I think an as if template should be added to “ The most recent additions took place in 2025 when the Xixia Imperial Tombs were listed.”
• Why are there two different ways on the map to show contested territory, one in the east with India and one in the west with India and Pakistan?
• Why are there no specific criteria listed for the tentative lists?

Ping when done, History6042😊 (Contact me) 00:29, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Time for me to work on the comments, finally. Starting with @History6042:.

• It has been established before that the UNESCO sources are the best, since these are the sources on which the list is based. More or less all other sources would be derivative, except in cases where I wanted to cite something that is actually missing in the UNESCO sources or if there was a mistake (it does happen sometimes).
• We don’t have a map for the tentative sites. These sites tend to be more fluid in nature, with nominations being replaced, merged etc with time.
• There is a wikilink to the ten criteria in the intro to the main sites section. Since there are ten of them, listing them separately would make the list even longer.
• At some point in another nomination, I was discouraged of using the “as of” template. I don’t remember the reason. In any case, when new sites are added, this will also be updated.
• The map uses a file that is also used in hundreds other China-related articles, so I suppose there is some general consensus the map is good.
• They are, just some of the older nominations are missing the exact criteria. In general, those 20+ year old nominations are often not as elaborate as the more contemporary ones.

Thanks to everyone for patience! This nomination is taking more time that I originally thought, mainly to busy times and its sheer size. Tone 15:19, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, sounds good I support. History6042😊 (Contact me) 15:54, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Tone: Just a heads up, I see that you’ve been busy with other things and certainly after 75 lists you’ve earned some grace on timelines, but there’s comments here that are almost 2 months old and if this nomination goes too much longer I’m going to have to close it. Just let me know if you think you can continue with this now or if you need to revisit this list at a later date. —PresN 22:33, 5 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, I will get to it during the weekend. Thanks for your patience 🙂 Tone 07:30, 6 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@PresN: I think I am through the comments now. Tone 21:48, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Source review passed; promoting. —PresN 17:39, 11 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through.