Talk:Comprehensive National Power

China Mid‑importance

	China portal 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 articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Power in international relations (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Power in international relations, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Power in international relationsWikipedia:WikiProject Power in international relationsTemplate:WikiProject Power in international relationsPower in international relations articles

International relations Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations 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.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Power or Strength[edit]

It may be worth noting, not just as a point of semantics, that the normal translation into English in official Chinese government publications is comprehensive national strength, not power. Cripipper (talk) 10:00, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

POV[edit]

This was challenged:

Unlike most Western concepts of political power, Chinese political thinkers believe that CNP can be calculated numerically by combining various quantitative indices to create a single number held to measure the power of a nation-state.

At the same time, Composite Index of National Capability says:

It [the Composite Index of National Capability] is still “among the best-known and most accepted methods for measuring national capabilities.”

This seems to contradict the challenged sentence and makes it look POV-ish, so I'm rephrasing it. GregorB (talk) 17:59, 26 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Copyrighted List[edit]

Per WP:CIL, including the list of countries and their score is a copyright violation. This is because the score, and thus a country's ranking, are derived from some creative formula as opposed to raw facts (as in List of countries by population in 2000). Please do not re-add that list, thanks. Crow^Caw 21:49, 17 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Whose creative formula? If the formula is the work of Chinese government, then wikipedia's use of the formula is within Chinese copyright law. Spumuq (talq) 13:08, 21 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes that is the question: who developed the formula or methodology to perform the ranking, and under what offices? If that can positively be identified as being PD/free or otherwise compatible with our license, then it can of course be added back. Crow^Caw 21:39, 21 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Comprehensive National Power. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:44, 11 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Reference needed[edit]

I have this shifted unreferenced content from the article here:

Comparing the top 10 countries for each ranking in 2020
Rank	Economic	Natural	Capital	Knowledge and Technology	Government	Military	International	Cultural
1	United States	Russia	Singapore	Japan	Denmark	United States	United States	Italy
2	China	United States	Japan	United States	Sweden	Russia	Russia	France
3	India	Saudi Arabia	South Korea	South Korea	Norway	China	China	Greece
4	Japan	Canada	Russia	Russia	Finland	India	Germany	Russia
5	Germany	Iran	Finland	Germany	Australia	France	United Kingdom	Spain
6	Russia	China	Ireland	Israel	New Zealand	Japan	France	India
7	Indonesia	Brazil	Australia	United Kingdom	Netherlands	South Korea	Japan	Mexico
8	Brazil	Australia	Canada	Canada	Austria	United Kingdom	Israel	Turkey
9	United Kingdom	Iraq	Netherlands	China	Germany	Turkey	Saudi Arabia	Thailand
10	France	Venezuela	Sweden	Finland	Japan	Germany	South Korea	Japan

DTM (talk) 06:01, 5 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]