Jump to content

Talk:Taiwan

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Tilkax (talk | contribs) at 21:13, 24 April 2023 (Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 24 April 2023: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:Vital article

Adding "sovereign" to the renew description

I noticed the recent changes that arised by one particular IP who disputed and challenged the longstanding consensus which referring Taiwan as country. If the community really decide to accept the change, the description should give a full picture that the ROC/Taiwan is its own sovereign country for over seven decades with no association with the communist government in Mainland China. At least it need to be emphasised that the country possesses its own sovereignty and has never been a subordinate region of the People's Republic of China, with its de facto embassy independently conducting diplomatic affairs in more than 80 countries, and Taiwan Passport is generally accepted by international community as a valid identity document except for only China and Georgia. The references attach to the first sentence also support the due fact. Seabourn101 (talk) 03:04, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

We have to conform to the WP:Neutral point of view policy. Undeniably, there are reliable sources which consider Taiwan as a part of China, therefore we cannot simply assert in the intro that Taiwan is a sovereignty country. Also, a sovereign country has its nearly undebatable territory; just because a regime has de facto embassies and issues passports does not necessarily mean it has territorial sovereignty over a territory. And please avoid adding new content into your message like this after other editors have replied you so that other editors don't need to adjust their replies accordingly. When you have something new to say, publish it below. Matt Smith (talk) 03:26, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
As which part of China? Also countless sources regard the ROC is a comtemporary sovereign country, does those info deserve to be disregarded? Per above discussing topic, just one particular IP pursues a dispute to the longstanding version and I see no consensus has reached as well, in which part of the discussion made by @Stephan rostie had met the overall consensus to the community which gave him the authority of an "automatic allowing edit" to the stable version? May I ask? Seabourn101 (talk) 03:34, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I would like to add that there are also reliable sources which consider Taiwan to be neither a part of China nor a sovereign country. In other words, they consider the status of Taiwan to be unsettled or undetermined. Therefore, we cannot favor only one of the point of views in the intro. Matt Smith (talk) 04:14, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
And by the way, I suggest that you do a self-revert to your addition of the "sovereign" word. Any other editor's edits, be they have consensus or not, do not change the fact that your addition has been challenged and has no consensus. You can also revert User:Stephan rostie's edit if you think his edit contradicts the long-standing consensus. Matt Smith (talk) 03:30, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I won't bother to do the reversions by myself, when the other editor's changes remain in the article. My purpose of adding the additional wording is to present the balanced weight of both divergent views which would stimulate the Wiki community to join and give attention to this issue and creat a broader consensus rather than a POV from a few particular IPs. Seabourn101 (talk) 03:54, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I noticed the recent changes that arised by one particular IP who disputed and challenged the longstanding consensus which referring Taiwan as country. Can you point out to these changes that “challenged the longstanding consensus which referring Taiwan as country” ?
Regarding your recent edit proposal and edit warring,
  • I disagree. There is no country wiki page on wikipedia is written as “sovereign” before “country” in all wikipedia because it’s meaningless. Even US doesn’t have this “sovereign” title in it’s wiki page intro.
At least it need to be emphasised that the country possesses its own sovereignty and has never been a subordinate region of the People's Republic of China, with its de facto embassyindependently conducting diplomatic affairs in more than 80 countries, and … these are all mentioned in the article and intro already, so what is the point ? Stephan rostie (talk) 07:30, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
My point is, your edits which present to your sole personal point of view, when the past discussions of the change over the term in use have given the decision that "country" as the terminology referring to Taiwan. I saw only objection from you and kept running around in circles for the numbers of diplomatic recognition in which states have achieved. Politics are power struggle, the only reason that Taiwan cannot achieve widespread diplomatic recognition only because the communist China's aggressive attitude coerces any nation whom defy to comply with its political propagenda, set prerequisite to any party who intend to establish somewhat relations with them, even in a pure non-political activity as business or sporting aspects. And you deem it as a normal behaviour that is be considered as a "generally accepted docstrine" by nations in globe??
As many IPs pointed out in previous topic. The rule of the PRC on Mainland does not automatically grant them the rights to domineer the self-determination of Taiwan. The sovereignty of the ROC/Taiwan is long existed before the PRC ever created. Over 23 millions Taiwanese people residing on the island nowadays still represented by the nation and a democratically elected president, which evidence the sovereignty the country is now possessing. Does their opinion towards their own home country deserve to be disregarded?
The current version has been stable since 2020 when the society decided to change from simply "state" to "country" through a general discussions among participants in Wikipedia to form a commonly accepted consensus (a.k.a RfC), how is it not to be "longstanding"? If you strongly want to change the current version, please go through the conventional procedure of consensus formation like any other editor used to do before!

Seabourn101 (talk) 10:06, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

User:Seabourn101, sovereign country is such an awkward pairing of non-compatible words. Why don’t you use the proper term, sovereign state?
English language sources use “country”, not “state”, not “nation”, for Taiwan, probably because “country” means something ill-defined, and verging on the land as distinct from humans. Chinese seems to lack word to distinguish the English “country” from “nation”.
If you want to talk in terms of “sovereign country”, can you please explain what it means relative to “sovereign state”? - SmokeyJoe (talk) 09:09, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
My point is, your edits which present from your sole personal point of view. No it’s not my point of view, it’s the fact of taiwan’s lack of international recognition, it’s only recognized by 13 UN members. it’s a number.there is no point of view in that. In addition to this. We reached consensus to mention this important fact in the talks.
when the past discussions of the change over the term in use have given the decision that "country" as the terminology referring to Taiwan. Did we refer to Taiwan by anything other than a “country” ? Did we deny or remove that ?
If you strongly want to change the current version, please go through the conventional procedure of consensus formation like any other editor used to do before!. I did, that’s why i made it to the talks page and reached consensus before making any edit.
the only reason that Taiwan cannot achieve widespread diplomatic recognition only because the communist China's aggressive attitude coerces any nation whom defy to comply with its political propagenda. I won’t get in taiwan’s legality because it is irrelevant and will consume a lot of time. But assuming you are right, So what ? That doesn’t change the facts on the ground. It’s also the same reason why does US get to invade, occupy, divide, make economic sieges and destroy other nations, engineer coups, and in certain cases support dictators and apartheid states, all without facing consequences. Is it good for the west and bad for the east ? That’s how things is, so ? Stephan rostie (talk) 10:56, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Why not keep it as is, it is a country, as it is distinct and separate from the PRC. Slatersteven (talk) 12:12, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No one is discussing or changed taiwan’s status as a “country” here in the first place. no one is even arguing about that. Stephan rostie (talk) 15:06, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Odd then how your edit changed country to state. Maybe we need to see what the suggested text will be here. Slatersteven (talk) 15:11, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Simply because I wasn’t aware of the RFC that says that we should mention Taiwan as a country rather than state. After i noticed i changed it to a “partially recognized country” instead of “partially recognized state” as i did in all my next edits like this [1] and this [2] Stephan rostie (talk) 15:24, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
In the diff provided you appear to have made the target of the link partially recognized state. Was that intentional? Horse Eye's Back (talk) 15:32, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No, I didn’t make the title of that wiki page, that’s how it is named on wikipedia, it’s just the list of countries with limited recognition, you can argue there about why is the article title is “List of states with limited recognition” instead of “List of countries with limited recognition” if you want or ask them to move the article to another title. But that’s something to discuss there on that wiki page not here. Either ways the RFC was not violated because i called Taiwan a “country”, not a “state”. Stephan rostie (talk) 16:01, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Its odd that so many of those in that list are not called "partially recognized countries" in their article intro's. So why should Tawain be any different? Slatersteven (talk) 16:10, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Those who are not called “partially recognized countries” and exist on the list are recognized by UN and other international organizations and recognized by the overwhelming majority of world countries except a small minority. They can be said to be “partially unrecognized countries”, it’s silly and not informative at all to write a such thing because few countries don’t recognize PRC or north korea. South Korea is recognized by all world countries and international organizations except North Korea, it’s on the list because of North Korea’s unrecognition only. On the other hand Taiwan lack international recognition Of UN and any international organization and have the recognition of all world countries excluding roughly all world countries.
by using just simple logic. SADR that has the recognition of 45 UN members is written as “partially recognized”, Kosovo that have the recognition of 101 UN members is written as “partially recognized”, then by what sense Taiwan which have the recognition of only 13 UN members not have the mention of it’s lack of international recognition ? Stephan rostie (talk) 16:26, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Problem is the RC was a member of the UN. What happened was a change in who is "officially" China, politically. It is not the same, as has been pointed out it is more analogous the North and South Korea. It is not a region in revolt. Slatersteven (talk) 16:30, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That was in the past, you can mention and explain that it once recognized in the 50s and 60s in the past if you want, i have no problem with that. but we are writing the facts of our present and facts on the ground today. The facts today is that Taiwan is not recognized by the international community. Both Korean states today have wide international recognition by all international organizations and are almost universally recognized. While Taiwan is almost universally unrecognized by the international community. Stephan rostie (talk) 16:35, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
So then we could say "Taiwan,[II][n] officially the Republic of China (ROC),[I][o] is a formally recognized sovereign country", how about that or "Taiwan,[II][n] officially the Republic of China (ROC),[I][o] is a partially recognized country, that at one time had been formally recognized as sovereign", or we can just leave it, as this is the lede and we do not need to go into uneeded detail. It is too complex to discuss in the lede. Slatersteven (talk) 16:46, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Taiwan,[II][n] officially the Republic of China (ROC),[I][o] is a partially recognized country. No problem, Just mention it’s lack of international recognition, and mention that it is recognized by only 13 UN members. Just like all other countries that lack international recognition including those who have even more international recognition. After that, you are free to write whatever more details you want discuss with the community where and how to mention that ROC was once recognized as a country.
we do not need to go into uneeded detail.. uneeded ?. There is no doubt that this fact is of significance and importance. That’s why it’s mentioned in the lead of all articles of the countries that lack intentional recognition like Taiwan, and That’s why some people here removed it with no argument at all and some say anything even if it’s flawed like that guy who said that “partially recognized country” is not calling it a “country” to argue that it goes against an RFC to avoid the inclusion of this fact in the lead.
either ways i have nothing to lose here. if taiwan’s lack of international recognition wasn’t included then i am providing more evidence of wikipedia’s Eurocentricity and double standards, if it got included then i helped getting rid of Eurocentric bias and spread factual awareness to the readers. Stephan rostie (talk) 17:26, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
One quarter of the lead is dedicated to discussion Taiwan's political status. DecafPotato (talk) 21:29, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You called Taiwan a "partially recognized country" not a "country" which is what consensus is for. You clearly linked to partially recognized state not country. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 16:13, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
So you believe if i (for example) called Taiwan an “east asian country” that would violate the consensus and in that way i am not calling Taiwan a “country” ?
It’s your opinion and logic anyway, who am i to argue with that :) Stephan rostie (talk) 16:40, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes [1]. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 17:40, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Then you should really remove the “in east asia” in the article now, because Taiwan is a “country” not a “country in east Asia”.honestly I won’t even argue with your impressive logic, all i am going to say is that the title of that RFC is “Taiwan, "country" or "state"”. Stephan rostie (talk) 18:03, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
What we have now appears to work, not seeing how the proposed addition is an improvement. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 15:17, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

At this stage, I have said all I can say. Do not take further silence to be agreement, until I say I agree with this change I do not. Slatersteven (talk) 17:02, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What we have now is longstanding consensus and changing it with sovereign or partially recognized does not make it better. For a long long while it was simply a "state in east Asia"... some occasionally added "sovereign state in east Asia" but it was usually put back to rights quickly as simply a "state." Then after lots of discussion and another huge rfc the term "state" was finalized as "country." That is how it has stood and how it should remain unless another huge rfc takes place. Fyunck(click) (talk) 06:19, 11 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

But Taiwan legally isn't a state, let alone a country.[2] What exactly is the criteria for a country here? Because Australia’s most distinguished international lawyers, the late James Crawford, former Judge of the International Court of Justice, concluded Taiwan was Chinese territory, with governance disputed. As long as Taiwan lacks the official capacity to enter with the international community. As of Current, it is very dubious to announce Taiwan as a country. It is more accurately a partially recognised soverign state who claims all of China, and recognised by very few.Tudor89manners (talk) 05:42, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"As long as Taiwan lacks the official capacity to enter with the international community..." – It does not. In fact, it has formal diplomatic relations with 13 states, informal relations with many others, is a member in some international organizations and an observer in others. Yes, it is less integrated with the international community than the PRC, but it very much is still a part of the community.
(And "partially recognized sovereign state" still includes 'sovereign state'). DecafPotato (talk) 20:10, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Additionally, Taiwan legally isn't a state, let alone a country is a misinterpretation of the source. The article says "Legally, Taiwan isn’t a state", however it makes no comment about the legal status of Taiwan being a country (a looser and more inclusive definition), other than saying that Taiwan sees itself as one. DecafPotato (talk) 20:13, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Here you used false analogy to deliberately categorize Taiwan (ROC) with other breakaway states, which means you tend to oversimplify the situation to sort them all together and disregard the historical context while making your own judgement about the use of "country" in this article as an unfair treatment upon other states also with lesser universal recognition. The other comments have bluntly explained about why your description is even more "unfair" to paint them all with the same brush for Taiwan when its government and sovereignty have existed long before the current communist regime ever bornt. LVTW2 (talk) 02:40, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Didn't misinterpret the source. They're very clear and wasn't trying to offend but you should really read the articles yourself. It's not an opinion but a fact that it doesn't fully satisfy the 4th criteria. Yes a very small like less than one percent of global population, which is small. I quote, The fourth criterion, a capacity to enter into legal relations with other states, is more problematic, precisely because most other states don’t accept that Taiwan enjoys the legal rights of a state. The rights Taiwan lacks include full diplomatic representation, the capacity to enter into multilateral treaties, and membership of international organisations like the UN. Decisively, though, an entity can’t be a state if the entity itself doesn’t claim to be a state. Taiwan does not make that claim. - Taiwan hasn’t formally declared itself to be a new, legally independent state.[3] So you can censor my quote or call it a lie whatever. Despite what media hides, it's just a legal fact that Taiwan never declared independence from China, doesn't claim to be a seperate new state on its own and lacks recognition to be the government of China. So yes legally the author is right. Because you can't have TWO CHINAS when the One China policy is still active yet disregarded on Wikipedia. It's not even legally a state, let alone a full fledged one.Tudor89manners (talk) 22:14, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Britannica encyclopaedia is far more professional and neutral in their article on Taiwan as they doesn't explicitly call it a country but describes the territorial conflict which is active. Wikipedia should understand why they do that.[4] because legally they are all one country and disputed domestically. But it doesn't matter if Wikipedia recognise. As long as UN and most countries legally recognise PRC and not ROC. It wouldn't matter if PRC doesn't control Taiwan. Just like how Crimea or Donbas is not controlled by Ukraine, it's still ukranian territory. Similarly Taiwan is legally Chinese territory, via UN Charter or global community consensus, as long as the one China policy is active as explained by one of Australia’s most distinguished international lawyers, the late James Crawford, former Judge of the International Court of Justice. I didn't write those articles but it spits the truth. However I know how people are on this topic and I don't really care as much. So this is going to my final reply here but telling you to read the article as they're just facts that contradicts OP saying Taiwan is its own sovereign country, and more specifically "not part of China" despite even ROC still agrees with the One China policy and Never declared independence. So they are still legally part of China as long as those two conditions are still current. So overwhelming global consensus should outweigh some anonymous editors on Wikipedia in terms of legal weight on the official designation of Taiwan as under one China policy, there cannot be officially two countries and today only one government of PRC satisfies the fourth criteria majorly, unlike the republic of China. [5]Tudor89manners (talk) 22:14, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I concured that the ROC itself can be defined as an ethinic Chinese state, but this does not make Taiwan/ROC less to be its own sovereign country. The cross-strait relations are basically two rival states vying for their legitimacy of "China", so it's in fact more similar to the current situation of Two Koreas, in which both Koreas are regarded as "countries" as well, and by your criterion, neither of them enjoy universal recognition, claiming each other as integral part of its own territory and simultaneously position themselves as the legitimate government in either of their own constitutions, same as the ROC and the PRC. Well... despite of these similarities, both Korean states are still identified as two distinct sovereign countries. The terminology in referring the ROC as a "country" is based on the essence of history, which is also in conformity with the standard of other existing rival states. Even in Chinese Wikipedia, the main article of Taiwan also gave the first sentence as 中華民國是位於東亞的民主共和制國家 ("The ROC is a republic and democratic state located in East Asia") in Chinese speaking community.
LVTW2 (talk) 02:37, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I would like to point out that the legal status of Taiwan (island) is complicated and the assertion of "Taiwan is legally Chinese territory" is not neutral because opposing opinions exist (such as [6]). Matt Smith (talk) 02:39, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. What we have now is the most reasonable per sourcing and consensus and it took a large rfc to do it. Nothing has changed since the rfc to warrant making it different. Fyunck(click) (talk) 06:41, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 26 March 2023

change: Ma also made an official apology for the White Terror; a foundation to compensate the victims had been established by law in 1998 and over 20,000 people were compensated until it's cessation in 2014.[263][264]

to: Ma also made an official apology for the White Terror; a foundation to compensate the victims had been established by law in 1998 and over 20,000 people were compensated until its cessation in 2014.[263][264] Silamandoran (talk) 10:03, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Actualcpscm (talk) 11:16, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Individuals living in Kinmen and Matsu do not refer to themselves as "Taiwanese"

Why is the demonym for the Republic of China (ROC) only "Taiwanese"? The island of Taiwan is as much foreign to those living on Kinmen and Matsu, under the control of the ROC, as the People's Republic of China (PRC) is. The demonym "Chinese" was present on this article as recently as 2021, before it got removed. The term "Chinese" is not synonymous to mean a citizen of the PRC but rather as an ethnic Han Chinese with ROC citizenship. These include thousands of individuals who live in these islands that are not Taiwan geographically.

Furthermore, the state is literally officially called the "Republic of China" and not the "Republic of Taiwan". Until the ROC officially renames itself and formally drops anything "China" or "Chinese" entirely from its documents, having the demonym specifically being stated as merely "Taiwanese" is incomplete and erroneous. 211.185.2.79 (talk) 19:11, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nonsense. Yue🌙 20:25, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The demonym has been discussed multiple times. See Archive 34 for the thread from 2021. Phlar (talk) 20:51, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Not all Northern Irish favour to be called "British", plenty of Ryukyuans (Okinawans) oppose to be called "Japanese", also many Hawaiians do not consider themselve "Americans", hence do we have to decline these use of "British", "Japanese" or "American "as demonym to entire nation just because of the objection of certain group of peoples as "not considered "Taiwanese" geographically"?? your opinion is illogical and make no sense. LVTW2 (talk) 20:54, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 26 March 2023 (2)

Honduras recently officially withdrawn it’s recognition of ROC and recognized PRC

The Honduran Foreign Ministry said that its government recognizes “only one China in the world” and that Beijing “is the only legitimate government that represents all of China.” And that “Taiwan is an inalienable part of Chinese territory.” [2]

  • My suggestion is to replace:

- Taiwan maintains official diplomatic relations with 13 out of 193 UN member states and the Holy See

With

- Taiwan is officially recognized by 12 out of 193 UN member states and the Holy See [1]

Basically “ maintains official diplomatic relations with” and “is officially recognized by” are the same thing, but the latter is shorter, more summarative, and is exactly what the reliable source say, the reliable source say: “Only 12 countries and the Holy See now recognize Taiwan” Stephan rostie (talk) 22:25, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Done with adopting the first proposal, as the ROC once retain widespread formal diplomatic relations with most of nations in globe but have gradually diminished since 1970s, thus "maintaining relations" is a more relevant phrase as it did not obtain most of its existing diplomatic relations after its withdrawal of the UN.
LVTW2 (talk) 23:44, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Chien, Amy Chang; Mega, Emiliano Rodríguez (2023-03-26). "In Blow to Taiwan, Honduras Switches Relations to China". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved 2023-03-26.

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 30 March 2023

Change the title from "Taiwan" to "Taiwan (Republic of China)" or "Taiwan (ROC)"

This will better reflect the actual political status of the nation in question and it's legal name Warmonger82 (talk) 08:35, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If change of the title were right, in my opinion, we should change to "Republic of China (1949-)".--とんずらする豚 (talk) 08:43, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done by longstanding overwhelming consensus, the common name is Taiwan. Fyunck(click) (talk) 08:55, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

EC Edit Revert


I'm asking for a review and possible revert of this diff (I believe I have linked it correctly). The changes made in this edit are to alter a link from Holy See to a misspelled version of Vatican City ("Vantican City state"). I don't agree with the change; firstly the misspelled version of Vatican, nor the claim that "Vantican City state" is a more formal or recognizable designation.

Apologies for the edit request on something this simple - I'm not EC, however. King keudo (talk) 20:03, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

References

Pinging LVTW2 who made the edit in question and  Reviewing... ––FormalDude (talk) 20:17, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sanctions proposal

I am inviting all of you to participate regarding the sanctions related to the PRC-ROC articles. Hope this helps! 174.89.100.7 (talk) 16:38, 2 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Distinguishing

The distinguishing of "Thailand" from "Taiwan" seems slightly unnecessary. The names are similar in some ways, but I don't think it's enough to warrant a {{distinguish}} template. To clarify: this is not an edit request, simply a discussion, as I would like to hear more well-rounded users' thoughts. ChocolateAvian (talk) 00:07, 11 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Distinguish templates should be used for fairly reasonable and common mistakes, not to account for the most ignorant readers out there. Yue🌙 06:04, 11 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yep... totally unnecessary addition. Fyunck(click) (talk) 06:12, 11 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 18 April 2023

change its a country to not a country MuchoMango83 (talk) 01:30, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done ....join chat above if you likeMoxy- 01:33, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 24 April 2023

Typo: change "purchasing power party" to "purchasing power parity". Tilkax (talk) 21:13, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]