Talk:Taiwan: Difference between revisions - Wikipedia

Article Images

Line 164:

#'''Support'''. I guess it will always be a tricky thing with this place in the world of politics, but by COMMONNAME usage it's overwhelmingly ''Taiwan''. I'm not sure I've ever heard people call it anything else. We could then put in parenths (''Official name - Republic of China''). [[User:Fyunck(click)|Fyunck(click)]] ([[User talk:Fyunck(click)|talk]]) 21:35, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

#'''Support'''. [[WP:COMMONNAME]] is quite clear and the evidence in this case is conclusive. --[[User:Taivo|Taivo]] ([[User talk:Taivo|talk]]) 21:45, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

#'''SUPPORT'''. This change is long overdue and necessary since most people as well as virtually all the news media whether CNN, the BBC or CBS or ABC news, or Fox News, they all just use the common name. [[Special:Contributions/222.186.101.77|222.186.101.77]] ([[User talk:222.186.101.77|talk]]) 20:01, 6 March 2012 (UTC) {{spa|222.186.101.77}}▼

#'''STRONG SUPPORT'''. Originally the PRC/ROC situation was given a fair and unbiased discussion, complete with both flags, official names and everything, in the first paragraph of the original "China" article until the recent move in which the PRC article replaced the original balanced NPOV China article. So this current proposed move to use the common name would serve to prevent confusion in the intricate semantics of official names by using the simple [[WP:COMMONNAME]] that is used by all the international media press outlets. [[Special:Contributions/114.229.254.215|114.229.254.215]] ([[User talk:114.229.254.215|talk]]) 15:13, 7 March 2012 (UTC) {{spa|114.229.254.215}}▼

#'''Support'''. Virtually no one outside of East Asia knows anything about the ROC, they know only about the PRC which is why this move is a clear cut effort to create a clear and precise article that everyone can understand, even those reading Wikipedia for the first time. The usage of the common name is absolutely required as it is mandated by official Wikipedia policy, read here [[WP:COMMONNAME]]. [[Special:Contributions/114.229.158.96|114.229.158.96]] ([[User talk:114.229.158.96|talk]]) 13:33, 8 March 2012 (UTC) {{spa|114.229.158.96}}▼

====Oppose====

#'''Oppose''' as inconsistent with [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(Chinese)&oldid=477391984#Republic_of_China.2C_Taiwan.2C_and_variations_thereof WP:NC-TW]. The NC-TW principles were challenged when an activist, who evidently found the "Text should not imply that Taiwan is a part of the People's Republic of China" stuff too restrictive, called for a review of them. Views came in supporting the status quo and the activists, apparently not happy with the direction the wind was blowing, starting deleting some of them. In the end, there was a 28 to 18 conclusion that the ''NC-TW principles represented consensus'' which, at a minimum, ought to have meant no consensus which in turn generally means a default keep, but the minority with the axe to grind took it upon themselves to delete the principles anyway citing [[WP:NOTAVOTE]]. The activist that had first called for a review then moved the deleted guideline to a [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(Chinese)/Taiwan&oldid=473578563 separate page] and titled it "This is a failed proposal." "Failed proposal" is a highly misleading characterization in my view as it implies a history quite at odds with the actual history of NC-TW and this ongoing mischief is going to be further encouraged if the editing community does not alert itself to this background to the question at hand. Previous steps in the activist campaign have been used to excuse additional steps such that this will undoubtedly be cited as a precedent for all sorts of dubious content changes. This is more than just a move proposal that can be considered in isolation. I might add that the common name argument is not determinative since if it were, "United States" should redirect to "U.S." or "US" or "USA" rather than the other way around.--[[User:Bdell555|Brian Dell]] ([[User talk:Bdell555|talk]]) 09:07, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

#'''Oppose''' - I am also concerned about the propriety of the procedures being followed here; Has this proposal been adequately publicised? I believe it should have been flagged well in advance, and then opened for comment on a fixed flagged date. As it stands, I could well have missed that this poll was even going on. [[Special:Contributions/86.42.28.118|86.42.28.118]] ([[User talk:86.42.28.118|talk]]) 10:39, 19 February 2012 (UTC)— [[User:86.42.28.118|86.42.28.118]] ([[User talk:86.42.28.118|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/86.42.28.118|contribs]]) has made [[Wikipedia:Single-purpose account|few or no other edits]] outside this topic.

#'''Oppose''' - Not least due to the <s>[[Talk:Taiwan (disambiguation)#Requested move|ongoing move request]] at Taiwan (disambiguation) and the</s> complete lack of reassurance that content at the new Taiwan article must not, apart from a brief mention in the intro, include ''any'' information on those islands which are not part of Taiwan Province, ROC. This is not to mention the inappropriate WP:CONTENTFORK (namely a full article at a separate title, [[Taiwan (island)]]) or that the move will fail to be precise, a required for WP:AT, or that there is no primary topic for the term "Taiwan"<s>, or something in the real world far more grave and dangerous that were to occur if this proposal were enacted</s>. Also of note is the complete dissonance and lack of harmony amongst those involved in this proposal: Kanguole on one side advocates for brief inclusion of ROC 1912–1949 history at <nowiki>[[Taiwan]]</nowiki>, while the others, as far as I know, are mute about this. Due to the gap in specific details that should address the subtleties of this issue (which hardly any supporters of this move are aware of or even willing to acknowledge), this proposal is the only failed one. Also, I echo Benlisquare's concerns regarding the promises some above made during the PRC->China move. ''GotR'' [[User talk:Guerrilla of the Renmin|Talk]] 23:04, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

#'''Oppose''' - A change based on common name alone would make "ROC" and "Taiwan" feed into the same article about the political entity now governing Taiwan and previously having governed the mainland. But the proposal also seeks to change the content of the ROC article such that it (a) exists in parallel to the new Taiwan article and (b) contains only a short summary of developments since 1949, which casts doubt about the continued existence of the ROC. The ROC still exists and has not changed its name. All official documents in Taiwan still bear the name ROC. Procedurally, the seven day voting period is much too short for Wikipedia. Most Wikipedia contributors do not check discussion pages once every seven days. Voting should be open for at least 30 to 60 days for ample participation. There is no urgency for this vote. [[User:NumbiGate|NumbiGate]] ([[User talk:NumbiGate|talk]]) 16:31, 19 February 2012 (UTC) (passport image evidence moved to discussion section below, due to it making the response section harder to read at lower screen widths - [[User:TechnoSymbiosis|TechnoSymbiosis]] ([[User talk:TechnoSymbiosis|talk]]) 20:10, 19 February 2012 (UTC))

Line 189 ⟶ 185:

#'''Very Strong Oppose''' - Not only on the basis of all the various arguments already presented here in this ''Oppose'' section, but also because [[WP:UCN]] is very widely misapplied throughout Wikipedia. I also consider it a misrepresentation to number these responses as is being done here, because these are not "votes" to be tallied up. Rather they are [[WP:!VOTE]]s: ''"The exclamation mark in "!vote" is the symbol for logical negation and can be read literally as "not vote". It serves as a cute little reminder that it is "not the vote" that matters, but the ''reasoning behind the !vote'' that is important."'' [[User:Milkunderwood|Milkunderwood]] ([[User talk:Milkunderwood|talk]]) 02:40, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

#'''Oppose''' - Not much to add since much is added already, but will cite [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(Chinese)&oldid=477391984#Republic_of_China.2C_Taiwan.2C_and_variations_thereof WP:NC-TW]. [[User:Hanfresco|Hanfresco]] ([[User talk:Hanfresco|talk]]) 06:59, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

#'''Oppose''' - The subject of the article is not just the ROC in its current status as the de facto government of Taiwan, but the ROC which in the past governed the mainland as well. Referring to that physically larger entity as "Taiwan" is nonsensical. — Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:JasonAQuest|JasonAQuest]] ([[User talk:JasonAQuest|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/JasonAQuest|contribs]]) 17:06, 9 March 2012‎ {{diff|Talk:Republic of China|diff=481028983|oldid=480992405}}

====Other====

Line 195 ⟶ 192:

#I am a Canadian residing in Asia. I had always thought Taiwan and China are strictly two countries with only neighbour ties just like United States and Canada. After reading the whole debate I tend to agree with Liam's idea. If that isnt adopted I would oppose the whole proposal. [[Special:Contributions/210.17.196.24|210.17.196.24]] ([[User talk:210.17.196.24|talk]]) 11:52, 2 March 2012 (UTC){{SPA|210.17.196.24}}

*# While I take no position on the RM itself, being unfamiliar with the various issues, I do strongly object to those who claim it must be moved to satisfy [[WP:COMMONNAME]]. This provision is a relative late-comer to [[WP:TITLE]], and the idea that the "most common" name has to be used has been pushed by one editor in particular ([[User:Born2cycle]]), often against a lot of pushback. The provision still allows for considerable flexibility in naming: "Ambiguous or inaccurate names for the article subject, as determined by reliable sources, are often avoided even though they may be more frequently used by reliable sources. ... When there are several names for a subject, all of them fairly common, and the most common has problems, it is perfectly reasonable to choose one of the others." So, if Taiwan has problems, sticking with the official name, which is also commonly used, is not a problem per [[WP:COMMONNAME]] as sensibly interpreted. Also, I strongly object to the process whereby so many of the "oppose" votes have been moved to "challenged"; the basis for these challenges seems worse than flimsy in many cases, and they ought to be moved back. [[User:Dicklyon|Dicklyon]] ([[User talk:Dicklyon|talk]]) 02:22, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

*#* The people whose !votes have been moved have been moved because they are either likely the result of ban evasion, or inappropriate canvassing on zh-wiki. -- [[User:Eraserhead1|Eraserhead1]] <[[User_talk:Eraserhead1|talk]]> 20:25, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

====Challenged====

*<s>'''Oppose'''. The ROC hasn't yet been transformed into an independent Taiwanese state. Neither the Kuomintang nor the DPP, nor the US nor the EU, would agree with this. Commonname does not apply per Npov and Arbcom re ROI. [[Special:Contributions/119.237.197.247|119.237.197.247]] ([[User talk:119.237.197.247|talk]]) 10:21, 18 February 2012 (UTC)</s> Struck as a sock of [[User:Instantnood]]

*'''Oppose''' - I am also concerned about the propriety of the procedures being followed here; Has this proposal been adequately publicised? I believe it should have been flagged well in advance, and then opened for comment on a fixed flagged date. As it stands, I could well have missed that this poll was even going on. [[Special:Contributions/86.42.28.118|86.42.28.118]] ([[User talk:86.42.28.118|talk]]) 10:39, 19 February 2012 (UTC)— [[User:86.42.28.118|86.42.28.118]] ([[User talk:86.42.28.118|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/86.42.28.118|contribs]]) has made [[Wikipedia:Single-purpose account|few or no other edits]] outside this topic. 
*[[File:%E5%8F%B0%E7%81%A3%E8%AD%B7%E7%85%A7.jpg|thumb|Passport jacket used by Taiwanese independence supporters. Quemoy, Wuchiu, Matsu, Pratas and Taiping are missing, although the Pescadores, Green Island and Orchid Island appears.]] [[File:Flag of WTC.svg|thumb|One of the proposed flags of Taiwan. Quemoy, Wuchiu, Matsu, Pratas and Taiping are missing, although the Pescadores, Green Island and Orchid Island appears.]] ~~<s>~~'''Oppose''' per Brian Dell, GotR, 119.237.197.247 and TechnoSymbiosis. Not even Taiwanese independence advocates agree that the Republic of China is now Taiwan. They call for a new constitution and a new flag. And they call for pulling out from Quemoy and Matsu. And they pulled out the navy from Pratas and Taiping islands. It was President Ma who redispatch the navy to these islands. Independence supporters call for secession of Taiwan, the Pescadores, Green Island and Orchid Island from the ROC, or handing over Quemoy and Matsu to the People's Republic of China. They don't put Quemoy and Matsu and the southern islands on their proposed flag or their passport jackets. It's apparent that the ROC is not yet replaced or displaced by a Taiwanese state. Furthermore, calling the ROC "Taiwan" ''is'' '''[[WP:RECENTISM]]'''. [[Special:Contributions/147.8.102.172|147.8.102.172]] ([[User talk:147.8.102.172|talk]]) 08:36, 21 February 2012 (UTC) {{Spa|147.8.102.172}}~~</s> blocked for ban evasion~~

*'''Oppose''' [[Special:Contributions/24.22.232.117|24.22.232.117]] ([[User talk:24.22.232.117|talk]]) 11:59, 22 February 2012 (UTC) {{Spa|24.22.232.117}}

*Strongly '''Oppose'''. Republic of China is still used by the government and why some of us can decide it should be disappeared?-[[User:Cobrachen|Cobrachen]] ([[User talk:Cobrachen|talk]]) 16:21, 22 February 2012 (UTC) {{SPA|Cobrachen}}

Line 209 ⟶ 207:

*'''Oppose''' per Dr Cravix and Deryck. [[:zh-yue:User:CantoneseWiki|CantoneseWiki]] 11:45, 27 February 2012 (UTC) — Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:CantoneseWiki|CantoneseWiki]] ([[User talk:CantoneseWiki|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/CantoneseWiki|contribs]])  {{SPA|CantoneseWiki}}

*I agree unless this move fails to close with a consensus, as doing parallel moves at exactly the same time is impractical. Additionally isn't it POV to use a different naming scheme for one of the world's most important countries than any other important country. -- [[User:Eraserhead1|Eraserhead1]] <[[User_talk:Eraserhead1|talk]]> 19:01, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

*<s>'''Oppose''' per Brian and above (147.8.102.172). Taiwan is part but not the whole of the ROC. It's pars pro toto. [[Special:Contributions/58.152.80.75|58.152.80.75]] ([[User talk:58.152.80.75|talk]]) 14:05, 21 February 2012 (UTC) </s> Sock of [[User:Instantnood]]

*<s>'''Oppose'''. Per WP:RECENTISM, ArbCom re Macedonia and Ireland, Leftcowrightcoast, and Dr Crevix. [[Special:Contributions/110.4.4.106|110.4.4.106]] ([[User talk:110.4.4.106|talk]]) 13:48, 27 February 2012 (UTC)</s>Struck as an [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Instantnood/Archive|Instantnood sock]]

** The two 'socks' aren't using the same ISP. It's doubtful they're socks of the same person. [[Special:Contributions/202.189.98.140|202.189.98.140]] ([[User talk:202.189.98.140|talk]]) 09:31, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

*'''support''' as the common name in English. I am a native English speaker in HK. [[Special:Contributions/203.184.138.132|203.184.138.132]] ([[User talk:203.184.138.132|talk]]) 19:52, 27 February 2012 (UTC) {{SPA|203.184.138.132}}

:*inb4 double standards. I thought currently the entire city of Hong Kong is Instantnood apparently. --[[User:benlisquare|''' 李博杰 ''']] | —[[User talk:benlisquare|Talk]] [[Special:Contributions/Benlisquare|contribs]] [[Special:EmailUser/User:Benlisquare|email]] 09:02, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Line 224 ⟶ 223:

*'''Oppose''', Republic of China is country name and it not same as Taiwan. Taiwan just a island and NOT a country. --[[User:Suguru@Musashi|Suguru@Musashi]] ([[User talk:Suguru@Musashi|talk]]) 02:47, 2 March 2012 (UTC) {{SPA|Suguru@Musashi}}

*'''Support'''. I support the usage of the common name to prevent confusion among Wikipedia readers. [[Special:Contributions/114.229.252.184|114.229.252.184]] ([[User talk:114.229.252.184|talk]]) 18:12, 6 March 2012 (UTC) {{Spa|114.229.252.184}} Also, this anon user has already been blocked for a 3 revert violation. --[[User:Born2cycle|Born2cycle]] ([[User talk:Born2cycle|talk]]) 01:08, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

#*'''Oppose''' - I note there is politically charged rhetoric by certain Users on who support the move. The reference to the KMT "imposing" a name by User:John Smith is totally against the rules, he also makes an (unsupported) claim about Taiwanese rarely claiming they are from the ROC. He also goes into (again) totally unsubstantiated speculation ({[WP:CRYSTALLBALL]]), claiming that Taiwan "would" have changed its name if China did not "threaten" it. it looks as though the move camp is trying dissassociate Taiwan from any connotation of Chinese, rather than really caring about WP:COMMONNAME.[[User:Niyaendi|Niyaendi]] ([[User talk:Niyaendi|talk]]) 04:07, 7 March 2012 (UTC) {{Spa|Niyaendi}}

::::*That's a bad faith post. For this section the instructions say "''State whether you support or oppose this proposal. Please do not respond to other people's posts here; use the "Discussion" subsection below. Thanks.''" The post is not a post against the proposal, but explicitly criticises '''Support''' posts and posters. It should either struck out or ignored. [[User:HiLo48|HiLo48]] ([[User talk:HiLo48|talk]]) 17:45, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

▲#*'''SUPPORT'''. This change is long overdue and necessary since most people as well as virtually all the news media whether CNN, the BBC or CBS or ABC news, or Fox News, they all just use the common name. [[Special:Contributions/222.186.101.77|222.186.101.77]] ([[User talk:222.186.101.77|talk]]) 20:01, 6 March 2012 (UTC) {{spa|222.186.101.77}}

▲#*'''STRONG SUPPORT'''. Originally the PRC/ROC situation was given a fair and unbiased discussion, complete with both flags, official names and everything, in the first paragraph of the original "China" article until the recent move in which the PRC article replaced the original balanced NPOV China article. So this current proposed move to use the common name would serve to prevent confusion in the intricate semantics of official names by using the simple [[WP:COMMONNAME]] that is used by all the international media press outlets. [[Special:Contributions/114.229.254.215|114.229.254.215]] ([[User talk:114.229.254.215|talk]]) 15:13, 7 March 2012 (UTC) {{spa|114.229.254.215}}

▲#*'''Support'''. Virtually no one outside of East Asia knows anything about the ROC, they know only about the PRC which is why this move is a clear cut effort to create a clear and precise article that everyone can understand, even those reading Wikipedia for the first time. The usage of the common name is absolutely required as it is mandated by official Wikipedia policy, read here [[WP:COMMONNAME]]. [[Special:Contributions/114.229.158.96|114.229.158.96]] ([[User talk:114.229.158.96|talk]]) 13:33, 8 March 2012 (UTC) {{spa|114.229.158.96}}

===Discussion===

Line 375 ⟶ 377:

::Of note the Taiwan Wikiproject has been notified. -- [[User:Eraserhead1|Eraserhead1]] <[[User_talk:Eraserhead1|talk]]> 19:47, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

:::Glad you think what I did was basically ok. I am curious. Why do you think the Hong Kong post is "borderline"? My logic was that it is a part of "Greater China" so to speak and so its editors could well be interested in what was proposed re the ROC article. Thanks. Agree that the Taiwan project page should be notified - and it has been. [[Special:Contributions/86.42.178.193|86.42.178.193]] ([[User talk:86.42.178.193|talk]]) 19:00, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

~~{{collapse top|IP blocked for ban evasion}}~~

==== Other articles and categories ====

~~<s>~~This move request has attracted a lot of "voters" who only care about the title of this single article. They don't care about the content of this article and related articles, and the titles of other articles. Yes this article can be easily renamed, but that's going to leave a whole mess to the rest of Wikipedia. It's going to create a lot of ambiguous situations where no term will be precise and accurate. No one has yet to suggest any practical solution to prevent the mess. [[Special:Contributions/147.8.102.172|147.8.102.172]] ([[User talk:147.8.102.172|talk]]) 08:36, 21 February 2012 (UTC)</s> (IP blocked for ban evasion)

==== Credibility of the proposal ====

~~<s>~~[[User:Jpech95/taiwan/Taiwan]] got lots of errors even in the lede. The island of Taiwan had never been ruled by the Ming dynasty (but only a Ming loyalist after Ming had fallen). And the size given, 36,008 km², is for the island of Taiwan but not the entire ROC. The credibility of the proposal is in doubt. (Furthermore, nominators of move requests don't normally vote. By the same token the co-movers of this move request should not vote.) [[Special:Contributions/147.8.102.172|147.8.102.172]] ([[User talk:147.8.102.172|talk]]) 08:36, 21 February 2012 (UTC)</s> (IP blocked for ban evasion)

:Reason being for the area, is we want Taiwan to represent the country, not the island. As for Taiwan not being ruled by the Ming, it never says that it was, but rather says that it was ruled by Koxinga, the Ming loyalist. [[User:Jpech95|JPECH]][[User talk:Jpech95|95]] 12:14, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Line 395 ⟶ 396:

==== ArbCom rulings re: Ireland and Macedonia ====

~~<s>~~Do they apply here? As a matter of principle they obviously should. [[Special:Contributions/147.8.102.172|147.8.102.172]] ([[User talk:147.8.102.172|talk]]) 08:36, 21 February 2012 (UTC)</s> (IP blocked for ban evasion)

:Both were to do with a commonname conflict leading to an unclear [[WP:Primary topic]]. We don't face that problem here. [[User:Chipmunkdavis|CMD]] ([[User talk:Chipmunkdavis|talk]]) 12:07, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

:The Ireland case is relevant for comparison since since part of the present dispute is over Island-vs-state nomenclature, but the resolution was basically holding a structured RfC, which is what's already happening here. --[[User:Cybercobra|Cybercobra]] [[User talk:Cybercobra|(talk)]] 12:18, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Line 405 ⟶ 406:

(UTC)

:::: It's the same issue. The two concepts of Ireland do not cover the same area. The two concepts of Taiwan are likewise non-coterminous. [[Special:Contributions/147.8.202.87|147.8.202.87]] ([[User talk:147.8.202.87|talk]]) 12:00, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

~~{{collapse bottom}}'''.~~

====Sources that distinguish the "Republic of China" from Taiwan (island or physical locale)====

Numerous comments have been made about how English language sources rarely refer to Taiwan (state) as the Republic of China or that sources make no distinction between the Taiwan (island) and Republic of China. These commenters should review English language documents prepared by or for the government of the ROC or state-owned companies of the ROC. In those documents, especially laws, regulations, contracts and legal documents, these distinctions are readily made.

Line 652 ⟶ 651:

:@Deryck, yes, that's what I tried to point out: many of the oppose votes seem to be based on the following claim: ''In other languages this move is inappropriate''. This claim may or may not be true, I don't know; different languages have different conventions regarding names. But the point is that it doesn't matter: we should only really be considering English-language sources. [[User:Mlm42|Mlm42]] ([[User talk:Mlm42|talk]]) 21:26, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

:Indeed, Deryck. The same word "Taiwan" may means something interrelated but quite different under different situations. Speakers of any of the Chinese languages are more likely to be able to tell the differences when the same word appears under different situations. In many cases, it means the entire post-1949 (or perhaps 1955, after Tachen was lost) Free Area of the ROC, which is Taiwan plus Kinmen plus Matsu plus the South China Sea islands. In many other cases, it means Taiwan the main island, or Taiwan including the Pescadores, Green Island and Orchid Island. Most people here ignore such differences, because such differences are rarely relevant in English-language sources. The proposed draft [[User:Jpech95/taiwan/Taiwan]] got all these concepts confused, as mentioned above ([[#Credibility of the proposal]]). [[Special:Contributions/147.8.202.87|147.8.202.87]] ([[User talk:147.8.202.87|talk]]) 12:22, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

===Decision-making process===

Line 764:

The vote above began with one single section. It was later separated into four sections. Votes were moved around by other editors. Some of the references in their remarks, such as "per above", may be referring to remarks previously located right above but relocated elsewhere. Some votes may also be mis-relocated to the wrong sections. [[Special:Contributions/202.189.98.135|202.189.98.135]] ([[User talk:202.189.98.135|talk]]) 15:58, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

==Discussions related to [[#Requested Move (February 2012)|Requested Move (February 2012)]]==

== Naming convention link ==▼

▲=== Naming convention link ===

The banner at the top of this talk page includes [[Talk:Republic of China/article guidelines]], which includes the sentence "# Remember to adhere to the naming conventions listed here: [[Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Chinese)#Republic of China, Taiwan, and variations thereof]]", but the referenced section does not appear to exist. Was this naming convention repealed? Can someone more knowledgeable fix the link? --[[User:Boson|Boson]] ([[User talk:Boson|talk]]) 10:51, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Line 782 ⟶ 784:

::::Done. [[User:John Smith's|John Smith's]] ([[User talk:John Smith's|talk]]) 12:00, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

=== Reminder to all editors from ArbCom ===

Most of the recent discussion on this page has remained relatively civil, which is great; but since so many people are currently taking part it seems like a good venue to disseminate a recent statement from ArmCom:

Line 850 ⟶ 852:

:Agreed. HiLo what you've said isn't good enough. -- [[User:Eraserhead1|Eraserhead1]] <[[User_talk:Eraserhead1|talk]]> 18:51, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

====Ip addresses and socking====

I'm a new editor (but i've been watching this debate and I have read wikipedia policy), I am not the anon ips who edited earlier. I want to point out that Mlm42's accusations against the ip (not the sock one) are invalid. The ip address never said editing multiple accounts and pretending them to be separate was okay

Line 875 ⟶ 877:

:Just noting here, Niyaendi, that the Hong Kong IP editor you mention has been blocked repeatedly for ban evasion, not for sock puppetry. It's common practice to refer to a banned editor who returns on an IP address to circumvent their ban as a sockpuppet, usually because the IP is deliberately hiding the fact they belong to a banned editor for obvious reasons. In the case of the Hong Kong editor, it hasn't been suggested that, for example, 147.X is a sock of 147.Y, but rather that both 147.X and 147.Y are socks of [[User:Instantnood]]. And as noted, these addresses have been blocked for ban evasion in most cases, as can be seen in their block logs. [[User:TechnoSymbiosis|TechnoSymbiosis]] ([[User talk:TechnoSymbiosis|talk]]) 22:06, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

=== Posts from those struggling with English ===

The latest oppose post above reads "''Republic of China is country name and it not same as Taiwan. Taiwan just a island and NOT a country.''" This is clearly from someone for whom English is not a first language, nor even a strong one. This is not the only post of this nature.

Line 913 ⟶ 915:

::::::::I'm not sure this is even worth replying to, given how fatuous the "bibi" example is. First, it is not as common or as clear as Binyamin Netanyahu anyway; secondly, it is a nickname. Our [[WP:AT|naming rules]] - especially when applied to country articles - are quite clear that we prefer the common name as found in reliable and authoritative sources; and fairly obviously, as a purported encylocpedia, we are going to use more formal, although not necessarily official, names and terms. It's not hard. '''[[User:N-HH|N-HH]]''' '''[[User talk:N-HH|talk]]/[[Special:Contributions/N-HH|edits]]''' 13:27, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

=== Would doing this be better? Just think of it suddenly. ===

Would it be better to, instead of moving [[Republic of China]] to [[Taiwan]] and create a new [[Republic of China]] article with those content that's not suitable for article [[Taiwan]], put those content that suitable for [[Taiwan]] into [[Free area of the Republic of China]] and then move it to [[Taiwan]] and leave the remaining parts as is? [[User:C933103|C933103]] ([[User talk:C933103|talk]]) 10:47, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Line 928 ⟶ 930:

:::::我的意思就是“Taiwan”（英文词语）不是一个地区，“Taiwan”是一个'''国家'''。Same as above, but with a note it's the English term, not the Chinese, which I'm discussing. [[User:Chipmunkdavis|CMD]] ([[User talk:Chipmunkdavis|talk]]) 12:24, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

===Political rhetoric, Taiwanese identity===

There is politically charged rhetoric by certain Users on who support the move. The reference to the KMT "imposing" a name by User:John Smith is totally against the rules, he also makes an (unsupported) claim about Taiwanese rarely claiming they are from the ROC. He also goes into (again) totally unsubstantiated speculation ([[WP:CRYSTALBALL]]), claiming that Taiwan "would" have changed its name if China did not "threaten" it. it looks as though the move camp is trying dissassociate Taiwan from any connotation of Chinese, rather than really caring about WP:COMMONNAME.

Line 957 ⟶ 959:

:::::[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Republic_of_China_Armed_Forces&diff=prev&oldid=478504828 Adding a paranthetical note so that people will know what the topic that's being discussed is], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Chinese_people&diff=441086638&oldid=439697572 removing a meaning from a disambiguation page that the term is never exclusively applied to], and [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Vania_King&diff=prev&oldid=475186798 removing a redundant overarching category] are not massive political statements. Neither is his train of thought, which is just a little forumy, but not at all an issue. At any rate, this means what exactly? One user, making a simple statement, does not affect the move request in any way. This is an irrelevant tangent, attempting to pin political motivations on all the supporters, and which as you admitted in your first post says nothing at all about [[WP:COMMONNAME]]. If you want to refute "the only non political argument which was brought up", then please try, as that is ''the'' argument. Everything else is pointless irrelevancy. [[User:Chipmunkdavis|CMD]] ([[User talk:Chipmunkdavis|talk]]) 10:51, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

=== Island fallacy ===

The [[Kingdom of Bahrain]] and [[Bahrain Island]] are clearly very different articles. The Kingdom of Bahrain calls itself Bahrain in both arabic and english, which is why the common name Bahrain is used for both country and island. The Republic of China does not call itself the republic of taiwan. Taiwan is a physical location, an island.

Line 994 ⟶ 996:

:::::::::::::::I agree to move this article to [[Taiwan]], which can cease the disambiguation and is much easier to find the article in this way.[[Special:Contributions/68.227.252.40|68.227.252.40]] ([[User talk:68.227.252.40|talk]]) 07:29, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

:::"''The citizens of Taiwan can call the country whatever they want in the Chinese-language Wikipedia. But English speakers are looking for "Taiwan" and that's what we need to call the article in the English-language Wikipedia.''" - On Wikipedia there should be no language barrier to human knowledge, Taivo. I speak English as my first language (although I can read some Chinese) I don't agree that Wikipedia should be a hegemony of native English speakers. We cannot disregard people who speak English as a second language. [[Special:Contributions/202.189.98.135|202.189.98.135]] ([[User talk:202.189.98.135|talk]]) 18:54, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

::::You just don't get the issue here. It's simple. Taiwan is called "Taiwan" by the majority of English speakers and in the majority of English-language publications. That's all the matters. The name most commonly used is "Taiwan" and that's what Wikipedia policy ([[WP:COMMONNAME]]) dictates will be used. No complex arguments about hurt feelings or anything else matter. The country is called "Taiwan" by the great majority of English speakers, so that's its name. --[[User:Taivo|Taivo]] ([[User talk:Taivo|talk]]) 20:22, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

::::: ~~<s>~~Wikipedia is international and language should not be a barrier to human knowledge. The hard fact is that even in English "Taiwan" isn't strictly speaking a reference to this country. It's alright for loose usage, but not so for an encyclopaedia entry. [[Special:Contributions/202.189.98.140|202.189.98.140]] ([[User talk:202.189.98.140|talk]]) 09:09, 9 March 2012 (UTC)~~</s>~~

:::::: Then why practically every other encyclopedia uses "Taiwan" as title? I really would like to know. [[User:MadGeographer|mge'''o''']] [[User talk:MadGeographer|talk]] 17:47, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

:::::::Other encyclopaedias have entries for the countries under the titles Ireland, Macedonia, and even Micronesia. All these aren't accepted on Wikipedia. Why? I really would like to know too. [[Special:Contributions/202.189.98.131|202.189.98.131]] ([[User talk:202.189.98.131|talk]]) 17:35, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

I have to agree with N-HH. When your sole argument is "Wikipedia policy should not apply to us", then you have zero argument. The majority of opinion is in favor of moving. The policy argument ([[WP:COMMONNAME]]) is sound. The evidence is compelling. In opposition to the move is only [[WP:IDONTLIKEIT]] and a weak [[WP:OTHERSTUFF]]. Neither of these policies is an argument to counter [[WP:COMMONNAME]], which is definitive in this situation. Indeed, the WP:COMMONNAME argument is even stronger because the only real exception is when it causes ambiguity. In this case the real ambiguity problem is between "People's Republic of China" and "Republic of China". Those names are nearly identical and should be clearly disambiguated by Wikipedia policy and practice. So this move of "Republic of China" to "Taiwan" actually reduces ambiguity between two countries that are similarly named. Of course, if that were the only argument, it would be a weak one, but in combination with the absolutely rock-solid policy of WP:COMMONNAME and the evidence gathered here, the move is simply too well-motivated to reasonably oppose. There simply is no valid policy-based Wikipedia argument against this move. --[[User:Taivo|Taivo]] ([[User talk:Taivo|talk]]) 18:50, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Line 1,006 ⟶ 1,009:

:I don't think there would be any issue with using "Great Britain" if it was used more commonly. It would be short for "Great Britain and Northern Ireland". -- [[User:Eraserhead1|Eraserhead1]] <[[User_talk:Eraserhead1|talk]]> 19:50, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

::The '''''only''''' issue here is that the name "Taiwan" has been proven to be the common name of the country among English speakers. Therefore, per [[WP:COMMONNAME]], that is the name to be applied to the country in Wikipedia. It's a simple matter and not one single valid argument has been put forward to the contrary. The opposition to the move only continues to repeat ''ad nauseum'' [[WP:IDONTLIKEIT]], which is not convincing. --[[User:Taivo|Taivo]] ([[User talk:Taivo|talk]]) 20:22, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

:::~~<s>~~ This entry is about everything of this country. But "Taiwan" isn't the common name for everything about this country. For example, this article discusses the history of this country in the 1960s and 1970s. By then "Taiwan" isn't its common name. Further, from what I read, it has been people like you who continue to repeat ad nauseum the single not-so-valid argument and oppose the long established arrangement because "[[WP:IDONTLIKEIT]]". [[Special:Contributions/202.189.98.140|202.189.98.140]] ([[User talk:202.189.98.140|talk]]) 09:09, 9 March 2012 (UTC)~~</s>~~

::::Perhaps you need to actually read [[WP:IDONTLIKEIT]]. That policy clearly states exactly what you and the rest of the opposition have been arguing--without any facts or logic at all, simply arguing that Taiwan isn't "Taiwan" because it would "offend" the Chinese inhabitants of Taiwan (there are other Taiwanese, of course). You have no facts to support your argument, unlike the supporters who have presented quite convincing and sufficient evidence that the [[WP:COMMONNAME|most common name]] of Taiwan in English is "Taiwan". All the opposition has is [[WP:IDONTLIKEIT]]. Nothing more. And, yes, "Taiwan" is, indeed, the most common name for everything about your country. --[[User:Taivo|Taivo]] ([[User talk:Taivo|talk]]) 11:38, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

::<::: That's~~>What~~ ~~about~~because ~~Holland~~you ~~for~~and ~~the~~many ~~Netherlands,~~other ~~Trinidad~~editors ~~for~~refuse ~~Trinidad~~to understand the differences between Taiwan and ~~Tobago~~the ROC, orthe ~~Bosnia~~scope ~~for~~of ~~Bosnia~~the article on the ROC, and ~~Herzegovina?~~the ~~Yes~~need ~~Great~~for ~~Britain~~disambiguation. ~~isn~~"'t'"Taiwan" is, indeed, the most common asname ~~Taiwan,~~for ~~but~~everything ~~still~~about ityour country.'s'" ~~adequately~~This ~~common~~is getting personal. But, no, I am not from Taiwan. [[Special:Contributions/202.189.98.~~140~~131|202.189.98.~~140~~131]] ([[User talk:202.189.98.~~140~~131|talk]]) 0917:0935, 910 March 2012 (UTC)~~</s>~~

:: What about Holland for the Netherlands, Trinidad for Trinidad and Tobago, or Bosnia for Bosnia and Herzegovina? Yes Great Britain isn't as common as Taiwan, but still it's adequately common. [[Special:Contributions/202.189.98.140|202.189.98.140]] ([[User talk:202.189.98.140|talk]]) 09:09, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

:::I know I shouldn't feed the trolls, but the answer is too simple: Those articles are all consistent with [[WP:COMMONNAME]], while the ROC / Taiwan situation is not. Hence the move request. [[User:Mlm42|Mlm42]] ([[User talk:Mlm42|talk]]) 21:26, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

:::: We got articles located at [[Republic of Ireland]], [[Republic of Macedonia]], and [[Federated States of Micronesia]]. Why aren't they named Ireland (country), Macedonia (country) and Micronesia (country), like [[Georgia (country)]]?

== Interwiki links complications ==▼

▲=== Interwiki links complications ===

If this article is changed into Taiwan, then other articles, such as those on the Second Sino Japanese War, the Chinese civil war, articles on warlords in Republican china and wars fought in Republican china, will have a link titled "Republic of China", but redirecting to an article called "Taiwan", which would be entirely innapropiate. Imagine someone reading an article on the [[Second Sino-Japanese War]], [[Yuan Shikai]], or [[Central Plains War]], clicking on "Republic of China", and finding themselves on "Taiwan".

Line 1,017 ⟶ 1,025:

:If this is a real issue then we can make "Republic of China" a redirect page.

:Additionally I would expect that the number of people affected will be so small that it isn't worth worrying about. -- [[User:Eraserhead1|Eraserhead1]] <[[User_talk:Eraserhead1|talk]]> 20:32, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

:: ~~<s>~~"''If this is a real issue then we can make "Republic of China" a redirect page.''" - I'm not sure if you got any problem with English. What Niyaendi suggested was that it won't be correct to link "Republic of China" as appears in articles like Second Sino-Japanese War (in case you aren't familiar: Taiwan was then a Japanese colony and therefore part of the Japanese Empire) to <nowiki>[[</nowiki>Republic of China]] because it will be redirected to "Taiwan". ''Many'' readers will be affected. This is severely underestimated on this talk page because most of the audience here don't edit much about the ROC and Taiwan. They aren't familiar at all with this topic. [[Special:Contributions/202.189.98.140|202.189.98.140]] ([[User talk:202.189.98.140|talk]]) 09:19, 9 March 2012 (UTC)~~</s>~~

:::Whatever will we do? :( If only the [[Republic of China (1912–1949)]] article existed... [[User:Chipmunkdavis|CMD]] ([[User talk:Chipmunkdavis|talk]]) 10:57, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

::::How would a casual reader know that Taiwan and that article are linked? — Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/159.53.46.140|159.53.46.140]] ([[User talk:159.53.46.140|talk]]) 17:12, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

:::::How is that at all relevant to the question of bad wikilinks? (and the answer is through the prose, this being an encyclopaedia) [[User:Chipmunkdavis|CMD]] ([[User talk:Chipmunkdavis|talk]]) 17:32, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

::::Are you suggesting that we should divert some of the links to [[Republic of China (1912-1949)]], Chip? [[Special:Contributions/202.189.98.131|202.189.98.131]] ([[User talk:202.189.98.131|talk]]) 17:35, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

: The interwiki links can and will be fixed after any page moves. Most of it is automatically done by bots, so requires little human intervention, though there are many editors that help too. As for links there are now many links that looks like this <nowiki>[[Republic of China|Taiwan]]</nowiki>, because 'Taiwan' is the common name and so used in many articles. If the page is moved these will become much more accurate and clearer.--[[User:JohnBlackburne|JohnBlackburne]][[User_talk:JohnBlackburne|words]][[Special:Contributions/JohnBlackburne|deeds]] 20:53, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

::~~<s>~~Such an operation cannot be accomplished by bots. Human input is a must. It's going to be huge, and in many cases it isn't easy to decide. [[Special:Contributions/202.189.98.140|202.189.98.140]] ([[User talk:202.189.98.140|talk]]) 09:19, 9 March 2012 (UTC)~~</s>~~

:::Just fix it. Right now, because ''Taiwan'' '''IS''' the common name, there are probably hundreds of uses of that name to reference the country even within Wikipedia. I encountered two myself by accident just the other day. One was [[ANZUS]], the other was on one of the Reference Desks, discussing possible fashion differences between ''China'' and ''Taiwan'', using simply those names. Nobody had any concerns about the name. So, the ROC campaigners have an awful lot of work to do to make the current name of this article make sense across all of Wikipedia. Which way to move? (As if it isn't bloody obvious.) [[User:HiLo48|HiLo48]] ([[User talk:HiLo48|talk]]) 17:49, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

:::And here's a few more, which took very little effort to find, suggesting that there are thousands of others...

::::*[[Religion in Taiwan]]

::::*[[Demographics of Taiwan]]

::::*[[Chinese Professional Baseball League]] (Defined as "the top-tier professional baseball league in Taiwan")

::::*[[Cinema of Taiwan]]

::::*[[Economy of Taiwan]]

::::*[[List of countries with McDonald's franchises]] (There were 338 in ''Taiwan'' in 2004, and I'll bet they don't mean just the island.)

:::So, there we have both massive evidence of the common usage behind this proposed move, and a big problem for those who don't like it. [[User:HiLo48|HiLo48]] ([[User talk:HiLo48|talk]]) 21:12, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

:::: Part of the reason is that there is no McDonald's restaurant anywhere in the ROC outside Taiwan. And there is no CPBL team outside Taiwan. All teams are from within Taiwan and all matches are played within Taiwan. In many other cases, the involvement of the rest of the ROC is not quite relevant or too insignificant. (The CPBL example here is interesting too, since it uses the word "Chinese" to refer to the country. Other similar cases include [[China Airlines]], [[Chunghwa Telecom]], [[Chunghwa Post]], [[China Television]], [[Chinese Television System]], [[:zh-tw:中華人權協會|Chinese Association for Human Rights]], [[:zh-tw:中國天主教大專同學會|Chinese Catholic University Student Association]], [[Chung-Hua Institution for Economic Research]], and the [[Chinese National Federation of Industries]].) [[Special:Contributions/202.189.98.131|202.189.98.131]] ([[User talk:202.189.98.131|talk]]) 17:35, 10 March 2012 (UTC)