The real strength of wikipedia is the referencing, if you see something that you feel is inaccurate, look up the reference and decide from that.

Wikipedia is no good for citing or quoting (basic rule for many universities is to never use it in papers and especially not reference, cite or quote from it.). At best it may be useful in providing a rough overview on something. Even then you have to be careful as it can be full of old (and erroneous) data, biases, and outright errors. Same goes for most websites other then recognized academic sites & databases or governmental (depending on which government of course). This applies to references within Wikipedia as well.

As for Ma and Chen I can't comment on its accuracy. I would verify it myself, but I don't have the time to right now (exams).

I think China's behavior towards Taiwan is very similar to US behavior towards Cuba (particularly during the cold war). Both islands represent(ed) a threat (real or perceived) to the mainland country by being supported by a "hostile" superpower. Both islands also had been previously under the control of the mainland country (Cuba before the Communist revolution, Taiwan after WWII). Both mainland countries are still decidedly hostile to "their" islands. A major difference is the threat presented by Cuba has largely evaporated over the last 20-30 years due to the backing down during missile crisis and then the fall of the U.S.S.R., where as Taiwan has been receiving increased military backing and equipment during that time period.

As for what will result from this meeting, personally i don't think much at all will. This event is definatly being used by both countries towards their own ends (such as China trying to clean up its worldwide image a bit) and will probably not result in much.

If I get some time either in the next few days or next week I'll look up the news articles for it. (assuming I can still find the articles).

Thanks for your awareness of this. A fundermental understanding is vital to the discussion here, I think.

This shows the result and consequence of misunderstandings.

http://edition.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/as...ina/index.html

CNN's Cafferty described Chinese as thugs and goons, and this backfired as Beijing accused Cafferty is being racist and violating ethics of journalism. I guess Cafferty might only want to ask the PRC government to change, but this ended up ironly with PRC government asking CNN to change.

Ethics of journalism in the United States? We still have that antiquated thing called a journalist where we get news reports about events that occur domestically and internationally? Nah, that breed died out a long time ago.

Here we call them propagandists.

There are some like that, to be sure. Most of the ones I have dealt with, however, really consider themselves as neutral and have a strong desire to serve the public, which makes them at least try to be honest. Sadly, with some rare exceptions (and those folks are A1 in my books), most reporters are profoundly ignorant of the real world and too many of them, at least the young ones, are utterly idealistic, which blinds them to ugly facts.

A free press is like deomocracy - the worst possible system. Except for all the others.

You're blessed to have met great professionals (the ones who try that is). I still haven't met any yet.