Talk:East Asia

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


Is Bhutan considered part of East Asia? If Mongolia and Tibet are then I don't see why it isn't.-Anonymous —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 00:39, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

No, not by most sources. In fact, I'd say Bhutan's culture and geographical region is closer to South Asia or India than East Asia or China. - M0rphzone (talk) 09:17, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
By convention, no. However, most Bhutanese speak Sino-Tibetan languages. (talk) 12:08, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

Hong Kong and Macau[edit]

Whether or not Taiwan is a separate country might be up for argument (I wont bother with this mess). These two, however, are definitely not separate countries, therefore should not be listed under "countries." Special Administrative Regions are not countries. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 00:58, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

East Asia vs. North and Southeast Asia[edit]

i think there is confusion regarding the differences between East, Northeast, and Southeast Asia on this page. East Asia is the overarching region and should include both Northeast and Southeast Asian countries which are distinct subregions of larger East Asia. This "East Asia" page currently only represents Northeast Asian countries and should not be titled "East Asia" as it currently stands. It should be updated to include the mainland Southeast Asian countries (Thailand, Laos, Cambodia, Vietnam, Myanmar or Burma) and the islands and archipelagos (Singapore, Indonesia, the Philippines, Malaysia, Brunei) to provide readers with a more accurate description of the region and it's subregions. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Unagibloggy (talkcontribs) 03:25, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Personal opinion isn't enough to serve as sources for any content that you want to add. You'll need reliable sources, otherwise your proposal/opinion is just original research. - M0rphzone (talk) 09:17, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Japan a 'Core Region'?[edit]

The map 'location eastasia shows japan as a 'core region' of east asia. My problem with this is that I have two atlases that both show it as being a seprate region. So, should it be changed to light green, 'sometimes included'? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 19:39, 8 January 2012‎

Same as above. Maybe you saw something stated specifically on your copy of an atlas or world map, but until they are identified as reliable sources, personal opinion and "I saw/they saw" isn't enough to serve as sources for any content that you want to add. You'll need reliable sources, otherwise your proposal/opinion is just original research. - M0rphzone (talk) 09:17, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Variation in English usage.[edit]

A moderately notable modern semantic difference between the English language used in different countries, is that the unqualified word "Asian" in Britain tends to refer to people from South Asia ( India and nearby countries ), but in the USA and Australia it tends to refer to East Asians ( China and nearby countries ). This sometimes causes confusion.Eregli bob (talk) 10:25, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

It's mentioned at Asian and Wiktionary. - M0rphzone (talk) 09:17, 2 January 2013 (UTC)


But it's not highlighted on the map.... and my understanding is that it's South Asia (Along with Thailand, etc).... Plus the Wikipedia categories list "Russia" (parts of it) not Vietnam... Please fix.--Hitsuji Kinno (talk) 19:36, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

James Watson[edit]

East Asian = high IQ Mongoloid (not Inuit, Amerindian and Southeast Asian) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:587:410F:F200:5099:16D:18D3:761 (talk) 03:05, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Request for edit[edit]

The notes column for Independence Movement is entirely unsourced and contains at best biased, if not false, information. Both PRC and ROC claim Tibet, Inner Mongolia, and Xinjiang, and ROC in addition still officially claims Mongolia, due to their successor state status to the Manchu-ruled Qing Dynasty, which had internationally recognized sovereignty over those regions. While military action and Han migration did occur under PRC, these were not the origin of Chinese control of the territories, and the notes completely skims over the complexities of these issues. I suggest link to each movement's respective Wikipedia page instead. Additionally, Inner Mongolia Independence Movement is a minor movement that's more comparable to Cascadia Independence than those of Tibet and East Turkestan. Also, East Turkestani is not the demonym of proposed East Turkestan; the movement is largely associated with Uyghurs, and it lacks support from other Muslim groups historically occupied the region such as Kazakhs and the Hui. And the table is messing up with the page's format toward the end. (talk) 12:08, 21 March 2017 (UTC)