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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Table tennis, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Table tennis 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.Table tennisWikipedia:WikiProject Table tennisTemplate:WikiProject Table tennisTable tennis articles
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 articles
It open doors for the China-U.S. relations —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.52.216.5 (talk • contribs) 18:38, May 12, 2005 (UTC) a burning blaze
The purpose of the Russian's question was to remove the ambiguity that arose after the split between the Soviet Union and the Peoples' Republic of China as to whether the U.S. nuclear umbrella, which protected all countries not in the Soviet camp, now extended to protect China. By his reply, the American said that it did. The Soviet Union was then in an advanced stage of preparation for a nuclear attack on China's military and industrial facilities, which would also have caused the death of at least 300 million Chinese. A few weeks later, a higher-level Russian official asked the same question of a higher-level American official and got the same answer. Finally, Leonid Breshnev asked the same question of Henry Kissinger. He got the same answer, and decided not to go through with it. Shortly thereafter, the Chinese found out how the U.S. saved them from nuclear attack, and on April 6, 1971, they invited the U.S. ping-pong team to Peking. The rest is history.
If this is true, it puts a chilling note. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 213.250.143.131 (talk • contribs) 11:09, November 14, 2005 (UTC)
"the first Americans to set foot in the PRC capital since Mao's communist party had come to power 22 years earlier"
Theres something wrong with this - shouldnt it say 'officially sent' or something like that - there might have been American born Chinese or random tourists or whatever. You cant really be sure there wasnt a single american in beijing in 22 years -- Astrokey44|talk02:25, 10 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I slightly revised the wording in response to the comments and added a little, but I don't think I changed the meaning of anything. I might track down another reference to Ping Pong Diplomacy on the Chinese side and add it later. ch (talk) 04:46, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
There was a programme on BBC Radio 4 yesterday that might be of interest to any editors here: The Ping Pong Diplomats. It is available on the Listen Again facility until Friday 27th June - you can get it here. I must confess that I was only half listening to it (I was driving at the time) so was unable to make notes and references for clean-up. However, I thought I would post the link here in case any editors who are far more studious than I would like to use it as a point of reference. StephenBuxton (talk) 11:33, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
"The U.S. Table Tennis team was in china in 1971 for the 31st World Table Tennis Championship on April 6th when they received an invitation to visit China", what? How could they get a invitation to visit China while they were already IN China? 96.25.248.210 (talk) 03:49, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The "Nixon's Visit" section is not actually about his visit itself, but about the effect of his visit on Ping-pong diplomacy. I propose that the subheading title be changed to "Aftermath of Nixon's Visit." Sandtalon (talk) 07:30, 11 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, after looking at it further, the section "Result" has the information on Nixon's visit that the preceding section could use. I now propose that the two sections be combined into a single "Nixon's Visit and its Aftermath" section. Sandtalon (talk) 07:35, 11 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
All this detail, and no mention of the names of the nine American players who went to China and actually established such friendly relations? Even one of them who was quoted at length is referred to as simply "one of the players". – AndyFielding (talk) 06:55, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I've found an article here, on the website of an American university:
…with a list of the names of the US players who visited China in 1971—which I'll paste here for someone's convenience:
Rufford Harrison (captain), Tim Boggan, George Buben, Jack Howard, John Tannchill, Errol Resek, Glenn Cowan, George Braithwaite, Connie Sweeris, Judy Bochenski, Olga Soltesz
(Personal note: When I lived in Orlando, Florida, Soltesz and her family were my neighbors.)
I'm on my phone and can't easily create a <ref> for the entry—but if someone would be kind enough to add this information in an an appropriate place, that'd be great. It doesn't seem like info that should be lost in the mists of time. – AndyFielding (talk) 07:39, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I was going to insert this information that you found, but the number of people and their roles contradicts what is already in the article. The sentence, "On April 10, 1971, nine American players, four officials, and two spouses stepped across a bridge from Hong Kong to the Chinese mainland..." is uncited but I'm not comfortable replacing it without knowing more. Cerulean Depths (talk) 16:59, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]