Talk:Political status of Taiwan

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

Please help keep this discussion civil. Assume good faith – for many things, there are perfectly innocent explanations, and there is no need to accuse anyone of lies or deception.


Legal status dispute under international law[edit]

"On the other hand, a number of supporters of Taiwan independence argue that Taiwan was only formally incorporated as a Chinese territory under the Qing Dynasty in 1683, and as a province in 1885."

This point doesn't make any sense and it should be included in the article why it doesn't. Taiwan had been colonized by the Dutch and taken by the Japanese as well. This could be an argument why Taiwan aborigines should have the right to be independant, but it's the PRC and ROC arguing whether the island belongs to the one or the other. Nonetheless, both PRC and ROC agree that the island is part of their respective definition of China. Taiwan aborigines have no voice in this dispute since they form only 2% of the island's population. The ROC retreated to Taiwan and outnumbered the aborigines. This whole argument would be only valid if there was be a third party of Taiwan aborigines who would like to kick out all the Han Chinese. --2.245.201.56 (talk) 22:37, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Political status of Taiwan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • 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.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 20:23, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

"Taiwan independence"[edit]

In some parts of the text the term "Taiwanese independence" refers to the independence or the legitimacy of the Republic of China, while in others they seem to be about a Republic of Taiwan independent from the Chinese state (both R.O.C. and the P.R.C.) ¿wouldn't it be better to replace the former to "Republic of China legitimacy" or "Republic of China independence". Sincerely, --86.81.201.94 (talk) 17:08, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

List of alternatives incomplete[edit]

The stated political alternatives are: (1) remain as territories being controlled by the Republic of China (ROC); (2) become unified with the territories now governed by the People's Republic of China (PRC); and (3) declare independence to become the Republic of Taiwan.

However this is wrong, as there are two variations of the second option. These should properly be split, to become "(2) become unified with the territories now governed by the People's Republic of China (PRC) under the rule of the Republic of China", and "(3) become unified with the territories now governed by the People's Republic of China (PRC) under the rule of the People's Republic of China".

It was apparently conveniently overlooked that the Republic of China claimed (arguably still claims) to be the legitimate government of all of China. It actually has a better claim to this than the regime currently controlling the mainland (for historical, legal, constitutional and democratic reasons).Royalcourtier (talk) 19:31, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

I understand your point that the current phrasing might mislead readers into believing that the Republic of China does not claim to be China. But your proposed modification would delete the current (1). I suggest that the whole list be changed to: (1) remain the status quo; (2) become unified with the territories of Mainland China under the rule of the Republic of China (ROC); (3) become unified with the territories of Mainland China under the rule of the People's Republic of China (PRC); and (4) declare independence to become the Republic of Taiwan. --Matt Smith (talk) 02:49, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
I had updated the paragraph, but didn't include (1) because that one doesn't seem to be a solution. --Matt Smith (talk) 01:09, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Political status of Taiwan. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • 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.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:08, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

Austronesians and Dutch[edit]

"Taiwan (excluding Penghu) was first populated by Austronesian people and was colonized by the Dutch, who had arrived in 1623," the article says, in what must surely be one of the more bizarre sentences ever written on the subject of settlements.

It may very well have been first settled by Austronesians, though I have the impression this is the subject of some anthropological speculation. What if some "Austronesia" was settled by proto-Taiwanians? Either way, if so, when? And what was their culture? What was its relationship with the later Han rulers? Etc?

"Colonized" by the Dutch? Um, the way the Dutch colonized Japan by putting a few traders in rotation on an island off Hiroshima? Or the way they ran today's Indonesia for a couple or three centuries? I don't know, and I'd like to know which.

David Lloyd-Jones (talk) 22:51, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

Archaeological researches discovered that Taiwan was first populated by Austronesian people. More information can be found in the first paragraph of article History of Taiwan, in which Taiwanese aborigines (Austronesian peoples) is mentioned.
The information of how Dutch colonized Taiwan can be found in article Dutch Formosa.
--Matt Smith (talk) 07:32, 18 September 2016 (UTC)