Talk:Taiwan: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Matt Smith (talk | contribs) |
Matt Smith (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 406: | Line 406: | ||
::::::::I see no problem in interchanging verb (represent) with noun (representative). And representing all of China means being the sole representative of China, doesn't it? --[[User:Matt Smith|Matt Smith]] ([[User talk:Matt Smith|talk]]) 03:28, 4 November 2017 (UTC) |
::::::::I see no problem in interchanging verb (represent) with noun (representative). And representing all of China means being the sole representative of China, doesn't it? --[[User:Matt Smith|Matt Smith]] ([[User talk:Matt Smith|talk]]) 03:28, 4 November 2017 (UTC) |
||
:::::::::No, Matt, the other Chinese source also called it a “government,” not a representative. And do not insert “sole” where the source says no such thing. Why are you so desperate to preserve that “sole representative” wording? You really do seem to be grasping at straws. Let it go, and focus your energy elsewhere. [[User:Phlar|Phlar]] ([[User talk:Phlar|talk]]) 04:39, 4 November 2017 (UTC) |
:::::::::No, Matt, the other Chinese source also called it a “government,” not a representative. And do not insert “sole” where the source says no such thing. Why are you so desperate to preserve that “sole representative” wording? You really do seem to be grasping at straws. Let it go, and focus your energy elsewhere. [[User:Phlar|Phlar]] ([[User talk:Phlar|talk]]) 04:39, 4 November 2017 (UTC) |
||
::::::::::The reason that I propose "sole (legal) representative" is because it's the most common phrasing when it comes to the topics of the representation of a state |
::::::::::The reason that I propose "sole (legal) representative" is because it's the most common phrasing when it comes to the topics of the representation of a state. Anyway, if you can only accept the longer version, I can compromise with you. --[[User:Matt Smith|Matt Smith]] ([[User talk:Matt Smith|talk]]) 05:20, 4 November 2017 (UTC) |
||