User talk:Jpech95/taiwan

Hello and welcome to my Taiwan talk page. A proposal is available at User talk:Jpech95/taiwan/Taiwan, please put in your two cents.

Kudos!

This is an excellent idea, bypasses the endless debate at Talk:Republic of China. I'll certainly do some work on this. There should be subpages with the exact article titles we want. Then they can be RMed to the right location when they are ready. Kauffner (talk) 06:59, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

I don't think there is a reason to write a fresh Taiwan (island) article since that proposal is just a way of getting the current Taiwan article out of the way. Kauffner (talk) 12:16, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Agreed on this statement. The Taiwan (island) article should very much be the current Taiwan article renamed, albeit a few sections removed or transplanted to the new Taiwan article. The Economy can be reduced down, as much of it will be transplanted to the new article on the country; the island article doesn't need to describe the economy in such detail. The section on Government can also be removed. Kirby173 (talk) 19:20, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

That's pretty much what I plan to do. We will work on it more in detail when we get to that point. I encourage you to work on the articles I've created in my subpages. Jpech95 19:31, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Thank you very much, I thought so too. I knew that there were people from all sides wanting to move this along and whenever a page was being reverted, the disucssion went on forever. Here we can create and revert the pages with no side effect until we are happy with the finished product (a.k.a. the consensus) and we can implement it into the pages. As for the "Taiwan (island)" article, we're not rewriting it, as far as I know, we are going to end up moving the (current) Taiwan article to "Taiwan (island)" once we are finished, but it is here because it's part of the proposal (again to the best of my knowledge). I will create the subpages immediately. Jpech95 17:20, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Opening sentence on Taiwan

If you have a "names" section there should normally be only one version of the name in the first sentence. Even the Taiwanese government usually gives the name of the country as "Taiwan", so we cannot say that the "local official name" is a long-form name does not even include the word "Taiwan". "Republic of China" is already given in the second sentence. You can't tell the reader everything in one sentence. Kauffner (talk) 05:02, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

I agree with that, whomever it was that changed it to both names, that kinda goes against the whole idea of doing this, I understand the intention, but since we have the name section, it makes much more sence. Jpech95 21:51, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

I found a directly relevant guideline in WP:LEAD: "If possible, the page title should be the subject of the first sentence." There is also: "When the page title is used as the subject of the first sentence, it may appear in a slightly different form." Kauffner (talk) 16:07, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

I had modified it yesturday to it opening with "Taiwan, also known as...". By the way, if you know any other Wikipedians who want to get involved with this, please do, because I can't do it all alone (although I haven't been doing all too much anyway). Jpech95 22:08, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Republic of China

I just hope you are not going to replace your Taiwan with the Republic of China on Countries of the world as that would cause serious issues with the supporters of the Republic of China, which see it as the legitimate government of China after the Xinhai Revolution with the overthrow of the Qing Dynasty in 1911, and issues with the People's Republic of China, for affecting Taiwan's political status in favor of Taiwanese independence. This issue can affect Wikipedia with serious implications like lawsuits from the PRC. Remember this is a very serious and sensitive issue that has many implications if done wrong. China's page should be change back to the People's Republic of China as it insults people who are strong supporters of the Republic of China who believe the PRC is a 'false' government. You may find it confusing, which it is, but this is a serious issue which we should respect until the issue is settled peacefully or militarily. This is towards anyone who supported changing the Republic of China to Taiwan.71.184.217.18 (talk) 00:24, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

The next step is to move the Taiwan article here to the Taiwan lemma. So this is getting ahead of the game. Taiwan already gets double the readership of Republic of China. The purpose of a Wikipedia title is tell the reader how the subject is commonly referred to in real-world English-language usage. It should not be conflated with the issue of legitimacy. I'm trying to create a "Taiwan" article that is about the nation state referred to 99 percent of the time when English-speakers use this word. I see the POV fork issue as someone else's problem. Kauffner (talk) 02:54, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

Only considering that since on the article List of sovereign states it lists various sensitive states with their common name, including, North Korea, South Korea, China, Israel, and Palestine and Taiwan in the non-UN section, all of which afterward have their legal name afterward. And we don't need to change "my Taiwan with the Republic of China" because it already shows "Taiwan" as the name of the country, and it has been that way since at least August, which is before the proposal started (hint: I checked the revision history). Jpech95 02:58, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

It doesn't matter if 99 percent of the English world refers the Republic of China as Taiwan. It's a politically and socially sensitive issue that we need to respect and changing Republic of China to Taiwan or creating an article that says 'Taiwan is a country' is saying Wikipedia recognizes Taiwanese independence which it does not.71.184.217.18 (talk) 03:57, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

Taiwan original purpose as an article was dedicated to the island of Taiwan not to the current nation governing it.71.184.217.18 (talk) 04:10, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

Lemmas don't belong to the person who originally created them. People of all POVs on this issue have no problem calling the ROCT "Taiwan," including Xinhua. This issue is disputed only in the sense that there are Wiki editors who will dispute anything. Kauffner (talk) 08:38, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

Taiwan(island) is what I was referring to but fine I will allow you to continue. However, I will say this really clearly if this replaces the Republic of China article or creates another acticle stating 'Taiwan is a country', in anyway or form, means Taiwanese independence and complete ignorance to the Republic of China situation entirely which violates neutrality of Wikipedia. I must also state Taiwan is not a country but the Republic of China is a country. I understand you are trying to make it easier for English users and that we use 'Taiwan' to refer to the Republic of China but this situation can insult many people if we replace the Republic of China article or state 'Taiwan is a country' and can have some very unwanted negative outcomes for Wikipedia.71.184.217.18 (talk) 13:40, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

I don't see it so much in terms of making things easy for anyone, but rather about providing the reader correct information as to common name. The title should be something that's used in real world English, not a name that reflects a POV on cross-strait relations issues that I suspect most readers will find obscure. But by all means vote in the RM when it comes up. Kauffner (talk) 14:46, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

If you trying to be correct then politically the article should remain Republic of China it doesn't matter if it's commonly refered as Taiwan. People can read why Republic of China is on Taiwan and the political status. This is one of the few article that is very politically and socially sensitive as your mere title change is supporting Taiwanese independence which the People's Republic of China doesn't approve of and while the Republic of China can't do much to Wikipedia they can. Tell me how many people around the globe can read and understand English? Many. Even stating 'Taiwan is a country' is politically incorrect as switching Republic of China with Taiwan is supporting Taiwanese independence and Taiwan is not a country. Please read the articles of Taiwanese independence, Taiwan's political status, One-China Policy, foreign relations of the Republic of China and Chinese reunification.71.184.217.18 (talk) 15:48, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

TO 71.184.217.18: If you are going to argue the point of creating these articles, you can leave now. We are not here to discuss why are we making them, we established that on Talk:Republic of China. Whether or not you disagree with the proposal is your decision, and I am forced to respect it, however I am not forced to watch you argue with me and my editors over why we are doing this. As Kauffer already said (and Kauffer, thank you for doing so much on these articles, seriously, you are a very big help) there are various sources that all indentify the ROC as Taiwan. Although many people against this proposal claim it goes against NPOV, I find that hard to believe, only considering that would mean that nearly every news source and even some encylopedias are very biased (not to say that news isn't biased, of course it is, but most soucres tell it how it is). It might not be poltiically correct to say Taiwan is a country, however it is understood commonly as a country different from China. When a common person hears "Republic of China" they won't think of Taiwan, unless they already know about the status of Taiwan. Indeed, Taiwan even operates entirely seperate of China, and they have intense informal relations. Citizens from Taiwan and China can travel to each other's countries, and citizens of most outside countries can travel to either country without having to do with either. Taiwan hosts representative offices to other countries and they in respect host representative offices in Taiwan. And I already understand Chinese reunification, and I entirely support that Taiwan reunite with a democratic China, but until then Taiwan is an entirely indepenent country, which its name bears no likeness to China or Chinese lands (as they reliquenished all active claims to China after 1992). Don't argue with us about why we're doing this, if you don't want to see this implemented, when we go to petition Talk:Republic of China to use the articles we created, just say "no, I don't want this." Don't fight with us about this, because in all reality, technically speaking, this means aboslutely nothing to Wikipedia, only to those who support the move and would like to work on the proposal independantly. If you have any other comments you'd like to make, you can discuss it on the article talk page, not this one. Jpech95 02:29, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

I'll stop continuing commenting on your page after this one comment. Your Taiwan article would only work if DPP successfully renamed Republic of China to Republic of Taiwan thus making Taiwan legally country and making the Republic of China either a government-in-exile or defunct.71.184.217.18 (talk) 20:01, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your comments. Again, we welcome any help however you have been more or less against our entire plan. If you truly want to improve the articles, we welcome you to, but do not go against our core ideas, located on the main page. Thanks! Jpech95 22:51, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

As a fellow ethnic Chinese, I can fully understand "71.184.217.18"'s opposition to this plan. I've still not overturned my opposition to the renaming, but since the "pro-communists" had their way with the "China" article, somewhere inside me still feels that the ROC to Taiwan move, which had for many years been swept under the carpet, has gained a lot of ground partly as a tit-for-tat "counterattack". Therefore to break the deadlock, I started contributing to these draft articles to help things move forward, while saving my final stance on this until the end product is out. But I would still like to kindly remind contributors to please understand the sensitivities resulting from this issue (even though Wikipedia is supposed to be neutral), and edit the articles in question where it can satisfy the majority of readers, regardless whether they belong to the "Blue" or "Green" camps, and still present the facts in an objective and factual manner. Peace out. Raiolu (talk) 19:39, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

And I'm not saying he can't oppose, but that's not our point here, you have been helpful in your opposition by critqing and possibly even editing the articles, whereas the IP just condemned everything we are working on, which is not the point of this talk page. Jpech95 22:13, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the offer but no thanks. You would view my edits as "vandalism" to your paper.71.184.217.18 (talk) 00:13, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

I understand your frustration, but do you at least understand why we don't want you to be making all these comments about why we shouldn't be doing this? Technically speaking, this has no assocation with the Republic of China article until we put it up for proposal upon completion. I understand and respect your viewpoints about the Taiwan-China, but expressing your views of the situation on something that is exactly opposite of yours is pointless. I would welcome edits you made to my articles as long as they were productive to our goal. If you did start changing everything up so that we have to revert everything, that would be vandalism. Thank you for understanding. A reply is not necessary. Jpech1995-2012 02:32, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Taiwan article opening

Would it be easier to say "Taiwan, offically the Republic of China" or "Taiwan, also Republic of China (Taiwan)"? I find it that the second option is redundant and I am not sure how long it's been there, but I feel that we should go with the first option, seeing how it lists the title as the first word, and then gives the name it is offically called, instead of giving another name it is known by, which includes the first name inside itself. While I understand the idea of the second option, I find it to sound weird, just the way it looks and is written in the opening, I feel that it is strange. Jpech95 01:00, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

"Republic of China (Taiwan)" is the standard long-form name that the Taiwanese government uses nowadays, weird or not. I don't think the word "officially" adds anything. "Taiwan" is pretty official too, used even in the most formal context by the government of every English-speaking country. Since the article has a names section, there should be only one name in the opening, per WP:LEAD. Kauffner (talk) 01:35, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

I was typing that kinda fast because life got in the way, so sorry if it made no sence. If we were to do that, would it make more sence if we just said "Taiwan is..." and nix the "Republic of China (Taiwan)" as it is included in the infobox? Jpech95 02:00, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Just plain "Taiwan" as the subject of the first sentence is my preference, an easy-to-read SVO opening. "Republic of China (Taiwan)" could be given in the second sentence. If it is just in the infobox and the "Names" section, that's fine too. Kauffner (talk) 03:25, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

It feels weird reading the opening sentences. Most country articles (if you were to do a check) start with ("common name of country", officially "long-form name"). I would still prefer "Taiwan, officially the Republic of China". The second sentence "Although it describes itself as the Republic of China (Taiwan), it does not recognize the authority of the mainland Chinese state, or People's Republic of China." I have an issue with this "describing" - kinda feels like Ireland, which describes itself as the Republic of Ireland, but that isn't its official name.

I would also like to point out that although adding the (Taiwan) after the ROC has become common, even on government websites, it only serves to inform readers that they are looking at a government website from Taiwan, instead of the PRC, to prevent confusion. To me, ROC (Taiwan), which was first used by the Chen Shui-bian presidency, is just like the "ROC on Taiwan", which was used during Lee Teng-hui's term as President, but it isn't the country's official name. As for the correct official name, we should still look at the ROC Constitution (I don't think we can go wrong using that as a reference). Since the article is already titled "Taiwan", I somehow do not see the point in adding (Taiwan) to the official name in the beginning or in the infobox already, since readers already know that this article is about Taiwan (whose official name is the ROC), rather than the PRC (in their minds "China")

I propose editing the introductory paragraph to "Taiwan, officially the Republic of China, is a sovereign state located in East Asia. In 1949, the government of the Republic of China relocated to Taiwan from mainland China. It currently administers the island groups of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen, Matsu and a few other minor islands. Neighboring states include the People's Republic of China to the west, Japan to the east and northeast, and the Philippines to the south." I hope this proposal will be seriously considered since it reflects the common name, official name, current status and territories administered, as well as geographical location. It is much simpler, mirrors most introductory paragraphs of other country articles, and most importantly not as confusing (personal opinion) compared to the others. Raiolu (talk) 19:39, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

That's what I was thinking, and I was looking at various other countries, including those which offical and common names are different (e.g. North Korea), and what was given in the proposal Raiolu just said, to me, makes a lot more sence. It's not that what is there now wrong, it just is uncomfortable and I can't find any article similar to it, even though it does follow policy. While "Taiwan" is offical, I think the term offical is moreover applied to the constitutional name of a country. For example, we still refer to North Korea as North Korea even in offical context for the most part, but it's constitutional (offical) name is the Democratic People's Republic of Korea. Jpech95 20:51, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

First off, the guideline specifies one name in the opening. In this case, "Taiwan" and "ROC" represent the national yin and yang. They need to be introduced early, so I'm fine with having them both in the opening. But in general, I do not think the [common name], officially [long-form name] opening represents good writing style. I helped write the NK opening, so I can tell you why it is done that way. Several editors wanted the long-form name first and we mashed it up as a compromise. The word "officially" made the editors who favored the long-form name feel better about getting second place. But "Taiwan" is at least as official as "Republic of China". I don't think the word "officially" adds anything if all you mean by it is "longer." The official name of the country is what the current government says it is. Let's not the wave the constitution at the Taiwanese government and tell them that the name they are using is unofficial. Kauffner (talk) 18:39, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

True, again, it's all really a matter of what sounds more presentable. If one way sounds like you're writing as a mature reader and the other as a 10-year-old, then obviously you'd choose the first opening. Although it may not neceesarily be perfect writing style, there are a number of other articles that have it. If you can show me an article that uses your format ,I will gladly accept it, I just don't see how the opening being worded your way will sound any better than mine. I make this sound so much like an arugment but I promise I'm not trying to argue with you. Jpech95 02:59, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Agreed. The "common name X, officially XYZ" format, although not perfect, is used widely in country articles. I do not see why we cannot have a similar compromise based on the North Korea context here. I would like to politely remind Kauffner that the ROC constitution is the fundamental basic law - the government, whichever party is in power must adhere to it, and not take it as a mere guideline. I've asked a Taiwanese friend's opinions on this matter. He said that although "Taiwan" is a common name, and is used by both the government and media, the term "Republic of China" is still used widely for official matters. As for the "(Taiwan)" matter, this webpage (http://www.roc-taiwan.org/glance/en/ch12.htm) might prove useful, not only for official names and whatsoever, but the other pages (http://www.roc-taiwan.org/glance/en/index.htm) have general bite-sized information. It's still the 2010 version, hope the 2011 one will be uploaded soon. Raiolu (talk) 05:16, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

If everyone agrees that "Republic of China" is the official, correct name used by the smart set, while "Taiwan" is a nickname favored by disyllabic Neanderthals, why are we creating this article again? I can cite of the opening of the South Korea article. But since I wrote that, that would be citing myself. Kauffner (talk) 08:22, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

I had seen South Korea, and if we were to set up our Taiwan article in that way, I would accept that. The only thing I would add is the word "offically" or "constituionally", because saying it is also called x just sounds like it is another name, but technically the constituitonal name is the actual name of the country, the common name is just, well, the common name, which is what we want to name this article. Of course I can't speak for everyone else here. Jpech95 18:33, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Officially or Constitutionally is much better than just Also called, and I think it should be quite understandable. The name section explains the switch from China to Taiwan for any reader who is interested. Chipmunkdavis (talk) 18:47, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Sorting out the ROC articles

ROC history splits naturally with the creation of the KMT government in Nanjing in 1927. The post-1949 government in Taipei is a relocation of the earlier of the government in Nanjing. This is obscured by the current article structure, Republic of China (1912-1949), Beiyang Government, and Nationalist Government. "Beiyang" is a name will pass over the heads of most readers. "Nationalist Government" is supposed to be an article about the structure of the KMT administration, but it repeats a lot of the history. I'd restructure these articles as Republic of China (1912-1928) (Beiyang) and Nationalist China, which would cover China as a whole for 1927-1949, as well as Taiwan until 1971. An article entitled Republic of China can explain the nuances why ROC history gets divided up and where to find it. IMO, the next step is to RM User:Jpech95/taiwan/Taiwan over to the Taiwan lemma. ROC history can be sorted out later. If that works for everyone, I'll write up a formal request. Kauffner (talk) 11:50, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

I think that's a generally well supported idea. The current Nationalist Government page was simply created by a user and seems to be mostly copies from other articles. Chipmunkdavis (talk) 16:42, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

This is where I need to start reading up more history on China/Taiwan. I know that the Republic of China was ruled as different governments, I just don't know exactly when. For the history of China between 1912-1949, I feel that there should be an article for that.

I don't want it to seem like I have no idea what I'm talking about, but I do need to brush up on some things. Let me just go over the articles that we have and should create, because I agree with you we need to "sort out the different articles."

/Taiwan -- the country commonly known as Taiwan
/Taiwan (island) -- self-explaintory, the island of Taiwan
/Republic of China -- the government which rules the island of Taiwan (this is debatable, and I would be willing to modify this into different articles)
/Republic of China (1912-1928) -- the government which ruled China between those years, after the Revolution
/Nationalist China -- the government which ruled China between 1928 and 1949, as well as up until it lost Chinese recongition by the UN in 1971.


These are things we need to work on, however, from what I understand, I support the proposal, especially since, as Chipmunkdavis said, the Nationalist Government page is basically copy/pastes of other current articles, which is unnecessary. Jpech95 18:19, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

We have all those articles bar the "Republic of China", in some form or another. I don't think there's much need to involve the individual historical articles in this proposal, they should exist with or without this change. Chipmunkdavis (talk) 22:44, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

That's true. I'm trying to also keep in mind what Kauffer had originally said, and you supported. We could get rid of the Republic of China article, the only point of it would be to reform the Government of the Republic of China article. Jpech95 23:00, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Draft of an RM

I’m working on an RM, and here is the current draft:

The current Taiwan article treats Taiwan only as an island, while the article for the government and state that this term refers to is located at Republic of China, a constitutional name now rarely used outside Taiwan. Taiwan itself uses the name far less than it once did. Most Taiwanese see it simply as a way to avoid confrontation with Beijing, or at least that’s the gist of this report by Reuters. A proposed article that treats Taiwan as a nation-state has been written. This RM would allow the proposed article to replace the current island article. “Taiwan" is the WP:COMMONNAME of this country by an overwhelming margin. All the most authoritative sources refer to it this way, as you can see below:

Usage examples

• "Taiwan". The World Factbook (2024 ed.). Central Intelligence Agency.. This reference is recommended by the Chicago Manual of Style as a source for ”country names”. (§8.43)
• “Taiwan country profile”, BBC, article title, 27 October 2011.
• ”use Nationalist China or Taiwan for references to the government based on the island.” Associated Press Stylebook, p. 46. (Note: This advise should probably be updated, but that's another issue.)
• “Taiwan”, Britannica. This is the title of their entry on this subject.
• “President Ma Ying-jeou told newly promoted military generals Tuesday that the government's efforts to improve relations with China has created a new line of defense for Taiwan.” CNA, Dec. 27, 2011. CNA is Taiwan’s main news agency.
• “Taiwan is already a `normal country'”, article title, Taipei Times, Oct 17, 2007.
• If you Google ”Republic of China” -wikipedia, more than half the results on the first page refer to mainland China. So our readership does not necessarily link the term “Republic of China" to the Taipei government. Kauffner (talk) 11:32, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

I like the RM, however wouldn't you want to include something that mentions our proposal? And before that I figured we were to post it onto Talk:Republic of China so we can get general consensus from there. Again, something else we just need to straighten up. Jpech1995-2012 02:41, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Never mind, I see that you have already mentioned our prorposal. We should still at least mention to the ROC talk page we're done (when we are) so they can have a say in the prosposal. Jpech1995-2012 23:01, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Taiwan article setup

Due to seeing the RM preparation above, I looked over the Taiwan draft and added a massive amount of text from the ROC article. Many standard country sections were missing, which need to be included before any RM goes through, or the RM risks failure on just being a not up to par article rather than due to political thisandthat. I'll do some substantial cutting (probably half the prose has to go!) on this soon, so please forgive me for doubling the article size. To be fair, despite the current ROC article's GA status, the article really isn't all that good. Chipmunkdavis (talk) 12:18, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

I had noticed, and I thank you, we should make this article pretty much the same as the current ROC article just with remodifications for our purpose. We also need to start paying attention more to the other articles that I had created, especially Taiwan (island). Jpech95 18:51, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

wow, we did the same thing four years ago

• Wow, we did the same thing four years ago... Good luck! –OneLeafKnowsAutumn (talk) 15:16, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Did you actually set up articles as we're doing? Because if you did thanks for bringing our hopes down :( but nevertheless I am fairly sure we could be able to get this through, because there is a lot of voice. Jpech95 18:31, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Moving forward

Hey everyone! I can see that the articles are nearing completion, and this is the time where we need to start thinking ahead. Do we want to add any more articles (I had proposed a few which haven't been written in accordance with other people's ideas, although they aren't as important to the proposal as the three we have now)? Are we fine with the articles that we have? Taiwan is basically complete, all we need to do if check for grammatical errors and basic problems. The island article is also moving along. Republic of China still has a bit of work to do, and we are still going to want an article titled ROC, although some can debate this.
So again, I just basically want to get a general feeling that we're all on the same page and ready to move on into the next stage soon. Once we all feel we're done I'll let Kauffner make the RM and I'll let the people on both Talk:Republic of China and Talk:Taiwan know that we're done and ready to implement. I don't know exactly how an RM works, and I assume that we won't just be moving word for word the articles, we should be using the ones we created here, because that was the whole point. Just things to think of for the near future.
Thanks all! Jpech1995-2012 23:01, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

The RM would be User:Jpech95/taiwan/Taiwan → Taiwan and User:Jpech95/taiwan/Taiwan (island) → Taiwan (island)? That adds a complication, since at first glance such a request appears to be malformed. Editors will wonder what happens to the current island article. Editors don't always read long nominations, so the proposal itself should be as self-explanatory as possible, in this case User:Jpech95/taiwan/Taiwan → Taiwan and Taiwan → Taiwan (island). We can deal with the content of the island article later on. Then of course people will ask, "What happens to the ROC article?" We need a concise answer like "See this link for a proposal", or some other idea to prevent discussion from being sidetracked. Kauffner (talk) 01:12, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

I'm sure either way would be fine, it produces the same result. Kauffner may have a point though, simplicity is best. It should be simple to use the page here to improve the article in the mainspace, and if asked we can point to it as what the island article should eventually look like. Chipmunkdavis (talk) 10:18, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Simplicity is best, and I think that it's fine if we don't mention each article and such. As long as it is put somewhere in the proposal that these articles exist, with or without a link. Also, do we want to create the other 2 articles (on the main page in red) and the ROC article? If not, that's fine, and then I support moving to RM. Jpech95 20:56, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Jpech, I think you and the other guys should just move ahead. Use what you've drafted and let the community do the rest. John Smith's (talk) 17:56, 15 January 2012 (UTC)