Talk:Taiwan

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Former good article Taiwan was one of the Geography and places good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
edit·history·watch·refresh Stock post message.svg To-do list for Taiwan:
  • Improve article based on feature article review
  • Add a short section about the culture and the geography of the ROC territories (with links to the main articles)
  • Review alt text of images
  • Should the role and influence of Sun Yat-sen be introduced in the History section?
Stock post message.svg Taiwan Article Guidelines


The following guidelines have been established by consensus and convention:

  1. Simplified Chinese shall remain in the linguistics infobox per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (use of Chinese language)#Simplified and Traditional
  2. Please do not add Simplified characters and tongyong pinyin to the country infobox.
  3. Please refrain from adding "(Taiwan)" all over the article as this article includes substantial information about the Republic of China prior to the Taiwan post-war era.

Republic of China should not be redirected here[edit]

Taiwan is originally the name of a geographic region. Republic of China is a state. This article should be related only to Taiwan which is currently so. However, it is totally confusing when one types Republic of China into the search box and redirected to Taiwan. Republic of China is a state established in 1912 in mainland China with completely no relation to Taiwan before 1945, and has only become the de-facto state of Taiwan since 1949.-Miklcct (talk) 14:18, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

It is only confusing to anyone who buys into the "1 China" delusion. Since 1949, China is the mainland state and Taiwan is the island state. Just because the leadership of Taiwan began as the leadership of China and the constitution was originally the constitution of China doesn't change the fact that the idea that current Taiwan is the "same state" as pre-1949 China is totally ludicrous. And the sooner the people of both states just get over themselves and FREAKING MOVE ON, the better the world will be. --Khajidha (talk) 13:54, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
No. This was thoroughly discussed five years ago, and the consensus was for the current arrangement. See Talk:Taiwan/Archive 20. If you want to change this it would need a similar discussion to overturn that consensus but that seems very unlikely to succeed. If anything in the five years since that discussion the consensus seems even clearer. The use of "Republic of China" has become even more historic and the country is overwhelmingly known as "Taiwan".--JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 15:07, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
The Netherlands is a state often called Holland. That doesn't make Holland the Netherlands. Stick to facts and you won't go far wrong.Roger 8 Roger (talk) 09:31, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
As far as I can tell more people say "Netherlands" than "Holland". Szqecs (talk) 01:48, 25 July 2017 (UTC)
I haven't heard anyone calling it Holland in DECADES. --Khajidha (talk) 18:17, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
There are two questions here:
  1. What should be the title of this article? The linked RM and various discussions since have repeatedly demonstrated a consensus for the common name of the state, i.e. "Taiwan".
  2. What should readers get if they search for "Republic of China"? The usual way to settle that is to ask whether there is a primary topic for the term. That depends on whether you're interested in current events or in history, and as JohnBlackburne says the use of this term with reference to the present is increasingly rare. If there isn't a primary topic, that argues that "Republic of China" should be either a disambiguation page or a WP:CONCEPTDAB page. Previous discussions of this issue can be found here and at Talk:Republic of China (disambiguation).
Kanguole 16:10, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
As seen above there are still many people who think the state is best called "Republic of China". They are best served by the redirect. This article is still the primary topic, as the only modern use for "Republic of China". There is a disambiguation page, linked in the first lines, for other uses of "Republic of China". but none of them comes close to challenging the primary topic, being either historic or dependent on the modern ROC. A concept dab is even worse – there is no "broad conceot" for the "Republic of China", different from the current article at Taiwan, and it would be in danger of quickly becoming a content fork, as editors who disagree with the consensus established five years ago seek to create an article reflecting their views.--JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 16:26, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
Historical topics can continue to be important, and people continue to talk and write about them, so it does not follow that modern uses of the phrase "Republic of China" are exclusively about Taiwan. Readers of volumes 12 and 13 of The Cambridge History of China, for example, might search for "Republic of China", and would be surprised to be sent here.
The move discussion you reference decided that this article should be called "Taiwan", but did not specify that "Republic of China" should be a redirect. In fact the closing statement suggested that it could be an article on the government and history of the ROC.
As for the broad concept, I would suggest that the article currently at History of the Republic of China could serve. Kanguole 17:05, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
Although in modern terms Republic of China = Taiwan, the existence of the redirect implies that Republic of China is identical to Taiwan. This is clearly not the case as ROC has no relationship with Taiwan in a significant period of her history. The discussions years before did not specify that the redirect should be here, but only specified that this article should be named Taiwan. I also agreed that this is the Taiwan article because it focuses on the modern state but I think that the redirect is simply ignorant to the integral part of the ROC history before she came (or, in some groups political view, exiled) to Taiwan.
Furthermore, French Fifth Republic also exists as a separate article to France, and it is always the French government since the establishment. However. ROC is the Chinese government before 1949 and the Taiwanese government after 1949, and I see no reason to the redirect. -Miklcct (talk) 03:00, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
It does not imply that Republic of China and Taiwan mean exactly the same. Only that it is the primary topic, for that name. If someone types "Republic of China" into the search box, what is the most likely article they are looking for? It is the country, Taiwan. Until 2012 the article was located at Republic of China and although the consensus in 2012 was for the article to be moved, there were then and still are editors who think the article should be at Republic of China. I.e. they think it is best called "Republic of China".The best thing therefore is to have it as a redirect to where the article actually is.--JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 03:32, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
The official name of "Taiwan" is the Republic of China, removing the redirect would serve absolutely no one (except for either pro-Communist Party of China or pro-Taiwanese independence editors), and claiming that this article should only focus on the island 🏝 of Taiwan negates the article Geography of Taiwan completely. Comparably it would be like deleting the redirect "United States of America" because it's commonly called the "United States" and make it a disambiguation to the Confederate States of America ans the current U.S.A. --1.55.183.244 (talk) 07:37, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

We run a grave risk in assuming that there are two separate states - China and Taiwan. That amounts to twisting the facts to suit a POV. There is only one China. The complication is that it has two governments that happen to control two separate parts of China. That may not suit some of the above editors who want to create the artificial situation of two states because 'most people think' there are two states. That assumption is simplistic in the extreme and will only lead to contradictions and confusion. The average reader of WP deserves better. This article is (I think) about the part of China that is a few islands off the east coast. It is not about the actual island of Taiwan and it is not about the ROC, most of which is not controlled by the govt of the ROC. In that sense both headings - Taiwan and ROC - are incorrect. We need to think harder than just to take the easy option of choosing either Taiwan, the ROC, or a combination of both. Perhaps the term 'Chinese Taipei', horribly artificial though it is, does have some merit because it does identify the part of China that this article is about without making any incorrect factual assumptions. Both "Taiwan" and ROC" could be redirected here. Consensus was created years ago? Well, consensus can be wrong. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 20:44, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

It is also running a risk in assuming that Taiwan (island) is part of China because many reliable sources do not agree with that. As for the nature of this article, I think it is not about any island and is about a political entity called Republic of China, which claims to be the sole legal representative of China. --Matt Smith (talk) 01:35, 22 July 2017 (UTC)
Consensus is never wrong, as consensus is how things are decided here. So once consensus is settled on an issue, that is the right answer to whatever is being decided
Consensus can change though. Over time facts change to make an old decision wrong. A non-notable subject becomes notable, for example, or evidence is uncovered to support a different outcome. In fact in this case it did change, with the move from Republic of China to Taiwan reflecting an update from the previous consensus. If anything the arguments now are even stronger for the current name, as over time the formal name is less and less known, and the country is overwhelmingly referred to as "Taiwan", even by its government.--JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 11:17, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
Thank you for your reply. You are correct that consensus is never wrong: it is also never right - it is what it is, consensus. That though is a pedantic point in this discussion. To say 'the decision reached by consensus was wrong' would be better grammatically and for that old decision to be wrong we do not necessarily need new facts. We might perhaps need new facts to open a discussion that leads to a new consensus that leads to a change in the article, if that is what you mean. However, I do not want to be dragged off course by technicalities but instead stick to some general points. The fact that there are so many editors who have an issue with this article (not just one or two) confirms that the decision reached years ago by consensus might need to be looked at again. Confusing Taiwan with the ROC, as this article does, opens all sorts of contradictions and illogical statements. For example, the formal name of Taiwan is not the ROC, it is Taiwan, which forms part of the ROC. Any debate about secession movements from the ROC within Taiwan, and within the ROC govt, is another matter and should not be muddled up with the 'name' debate, which it usually is. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 12:34, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
I would like to point out that it's not conforming to WP:NPOV to assert that Taiwan (island) is part of the ROC because there are reliable sources which disagree with that opinion. --Matt Smith (talk) 13:44, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
There may be many differing opinions, but we should include sources that are neutral. So yes, I agree with Matt that we should remove any wording that implies Taiwan or the ROC is recognised as an independent state. There are reliable sources that strongly disagree with such an assertion. The importance here is to correctly word the article in a neutral tone. For example, "Taiwan, officially the Republic of China (ROC), is a state in East Asia." is an assertion that is not neutral as there are reliable sources disputing this assertion, however, "Taiwan, also known as the Republic of China (ROC), is an area claimed in its entirety by the People's Republic of China (PRC). Although its government maintains all the characteristics of one belonging to a typical independent state, it is not recognised as a state in the United Nations and only 20 countries in the world have official diplomatic relations with it." I believe my statements here are more neutral and acceptable to all. Always leave no room for disputes if we are making an assertion. Katie.lim (talk) 06:36, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
Your belief is wrong. The current introduction section is neutral and explains the complicated history (e.g. about the UN, the fact that the ROC was a founding member is not less important than that it is now a non-member). The question may be what the word "state" means here. If you believe in the declarative theory of statehood (say, the Montevideo Convention), the sentence is obviously correct. If you believe "state" means "recognised by most other countries", do you agree that the PRC was not a state before the 1970s? —Kusma (t·c) 09:44, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
The current introduction section is of course not neutral. Even from the viewpoint of the declarative theory of statehood (say, the Montevideo Convention), the sentence is still controversial. See the reliable source below.[1] --Matt Smith (talk) 01:50, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Stephen D. Krasner (2001). Problematic Sovereignty: Contested Rules and Political Possibilities. New York City: Columbia University Press. p. 46. ISBN 0231121792. Many have argued that Taiwan qualifies for statehood, since Taiwan has its own government that controls a population on the territory of the island of Taiwan and conducts its own foreign affairs, and since Taiwan has already been recognized in the past as an independent state. But to make such an argument, one has to reject China's claim of sovereignty over the territory of the Taiwan island, a claim that has been recognized by most states in the world. 
Thank you Matt Smith for giving another example of the confusion that occurs by veering from the official facts. You raise an interesting point in international law but it is off topic and not relevant to this discussion about this article's name. In addition, it is nothing to do with breaching wp:npov by preferring one opinion over another, wp:rs or not, and there are plenty of reliable sources that say the opposite anyway. In fact, the assertion that Taiwan is the name of ROC, or vice versa, could amount to a wp:npov breach because it flies in the face of legal reality accepted in international law. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 14:53, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
I know it's not relevant to this discussion, but I thought it still needs to be pointed out so that the spreading of potentially misleading information could be prevented. Although we have the right to prefer an opinion over another, the expression of such a preference should be avoided in an irrelevant discussion. --Matt Smith (talk) 15:06, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
I agree with Matt. This article is violating Wikipedia's NPOV policy and it is certainly on topic. We should remove or change any non-neutral wording (such as the implication that Taiwan is an independent state) to conform to Wikipedia's rules. Not everybody in the world agrees with you, therefore we have no consensus to include such wording. Since there is no consensus, we should change the wording to something more neutral and acceptable by everybody. Katie.lim (talk) 06:14, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
Consensus does not require that "everybody in the world" agree. See WP:CONSENSUS for an explanation. There was a clear consensus in 2012 (see Talk:Taiwan/Archive 20) when this article was renamed from "Republic of China" to "Taiwan," which led to the redirect that is the topic of this current Talk section. If you want to revisit the topic and try to achieve a new consensus, you are entitled to do so. But claiming that there isn't, and never was, a consensus is disingenuous. Phlar (talk) 22:58, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Nothing is going to happen as a result of this discussion, but I would like to point out Republic of China (1912–49) as the best existing alternate redirect target. Power~enwiki (talk) 03:53, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

Lead sentence[edit]

@Berting Li: The lead sentence was established by consensus. "Taiwan, officially the Republic of China (ROC), is a state in East Asia." Changes to this should be discussed first. Szqecs (talk) 00:31, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

The consensus was, in your own words: "Alright I think we have a consensus to use "state" without link. Szqecs (talk) 16:55, 14 June 2016 (UTC)" This followed a discussion about state v country (by a small group). The lead sentence covers a little bit more than state v country, much of which is POV. Therefore, there is no consensus relating to what to call this place. Taking an even wider view, this article is a cluster of different articles covering different topics, all squashed together. A complete rethink is needed. I suggest we try to obtain a consensus on 1/ what this article is about, and 2/ what it should be called. Please remember, we are not undoing a consensus, because one does not exist: we are creating consensus. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 09:32, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

The consensus is that without changing anything else, the definition of the topic is a "state". It is still a consensus even if it wasn't discussed the way you want. You're welcome to re-discuss this, but don't disregard other's opinion just because you don't agree. Szqecs (talk) 01:58, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

If you mean an independent entity answerable to nobody else then 'sovereign state' is all that is needed. Is "Taiwan" a sovereign state? Not according to its own government, or to mainland China, or to numerous other UN members. The term 'self governing island' appeals to me because it explains the defacto reality without giving opinion. Common sense says that there is no point creating an article that defines 'Taiwan' as a sovereign state' when the govt of Taiwan itself disagrees. However, seeing as that is what you, and some others, have tried to do with this consensus, then you will have to accept a multitude of editorial problems, which is what is happening. This consensus amounts to nothing more than POV and should be regarded as invalid because it contradicts a basic WP principle. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 02:27, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

The current term used is "state", not "sovereign state", so stop talking nonsense. As for your proposal, shall we also call China and North Korea "self-governing places"? This term is totally biased. Szqecs (talk) 05:08, 28 July 2017 (UTC)
Are you now confirming that consensus has not established that Taiwan and ROC are one and the same thing, and that the consensus only dealt with calling it a state or a country. But if we do not know what we are referring to (because we have no consensus on whether Taiwan and ROC are the same or not), then how can we agree if it is a state, a country, an island, a province, a sovereign state, or anything else?

Now, before you start accusing me or any other editor of talking nonsense, please consider that you will inevitably get a whole host of confusing discussions if you insist on trying to fit a square peg into a round hole. That is what we are doing by treating Taiwan and ROC as the same. Please remember that this article is meant to be encyclopedic, not for a travel brochure. Wikipedia readers deserve better. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 03:05, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

Whether Taiwan and ROC are the same thing is discussed elsewhere and I have no interest in that. Consider it temporary if you will, but we have to define the topic because that is how Wikipedia works. Szqecs (talk) 06:02, 29 July 2017 (UTC)


@Berting Li: I agree with you that not everybody in the world agrees with the status of Taiwan as a state. I'm not just talking about the PRC alone, but other countries including in Southeast Asia and the rest of the world, do not agree that Taiwan is an independent state. As for the suggested wording "Taiwan, officially the Republic of China (ROC), is a state in East Asia.", I think we all can agree that this statement is disputed and there is no consensus to include such wording in the official page.

So since there is no consensus, if that statement were to be included in the official page, we should at least mention that this article is disputed and the facts therein may contain inaccuracies, and invite contributions from the community to make this article more neutral. A notice on Wikipedia's policy of speaking from a neutral point of view (NPOV) should be included prominently on the article.

Otherwise, I suggest that we revert the wording to a previous version that abides by Wikipedia's NPOV policy.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Katie.lim (talkcontribs) 06:09, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Consensus needed[edit]

Please do not duplicate posts in talk pages to illustrate a point. Alex ShihTalk 02:33, 28 July 2017 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

I inserted this above in 'change to lead'. I have copied it here under a specific heading so it is not lost in obscurity.

The consensus was, in your own words: "Alright I think we have a consensus to use "state" without link. Szqecs (talk) 16:55, 14 June 2016 (UTC)" This followed a discussion about state v country (by a small group). The lead sentence covers a little bit more than state v country, much of which is POV. Therefore, there is no consensus relating to what to call this place. Taking an even wider view, this article is a cluster of different articles covering different topics, all squashed together. A complete rethink is needed. I suggest we try to obtain a consensus on 1/ what this article is about, and 2/ what it should be called. Please remember, we are not undoing a consensus, because one does not exist: we are creating consensus. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 09:35, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

If you're replying to something reply to it in the same section so that there is context. Nothing is obscure if you format properly. Szqecs (talk) 02:01, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Semi-protected edit request on 21 September 2017[edit]

Taiwan is province of China and not a state or country 72.71.236.221 (talk) 10:53, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

While it is not conforming to WP:NPOV to assert that Taiwan is a state or country (the current article is failing on this matter), it is not conforming to WP:NPOV to assert that Taiwan is a province of China, neither. --Matt Smith (talk) 12:05, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
Not done: Per above. — nihlus kryik  (talk) 14:01, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 September 2017[edit]

Please change the caption "The ruling DPP has traditionally leaned in favour of Taiwan independence and rejects the so-called "One-China policy"." to "The ruling DPP has traditionally leaned in favour of Taiwan independence and rejects the One-China policy." (i.e. removal of "so-called" and the quotation marks surrounding One-China policy.), given that the phrase "so-called" is quite subjective and not neutral. Per WP:NPOV:"All encyclopedic content on Wikipedia must be written from a neutral point of view (NPOV), which means representing fairly, proportionately, and, as far as possible, without editorial bias". --123.161.171.194 (talk) 02:54, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

 Done. Thanks. Dr. K. 02:59, 22 September 2017 (UTC)