Jump to content

Talk:Taiwan: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit New topic
Line 407: Line 407:
:*{{Partly done}}: [https://www.9news.com.au/world/china-taiwan-tensions-explainer-what-is-behind-long-running-dispute/04749e94-19c6-4dc2-9482-1061bde59e87 Citation 49] says "Holy See" while [https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-09-20/kiribati-to-switch-diplomatic-ties-from-taiwan-to-china/11532192 citation 51] says "Vatican City". Solution for this is to say "[[Holy See]], which governs [[Vatican City]]". As for the numbers, none of the citations currently used explicitly say how many UN countries maintain diplomatic relations with Taiwan, though citation 49 says indirectly that it is 14. Additionally I found [https://www.newsweek.com/who-recognizes-taiwan-two-change-china-1460559 this source] which also states 14 so I've changed it to that. ––[[User:FormalDude|<span style="color:#004ac0">Formal</span><span style="color:black">Dude</span>]] [[User talk:FormalDude|<span style="color:#004ac0;font-size:90%;">(talk)</span>]] 20:37, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
:*{{Partly done}}: [https://www.9news.com.au/world/china-taiwan-tensions-explainer-what-is-behind-long-running-dispute/04749e94-19c6-4dc2-9482-1061bde59e87 Citation 49] says "Holy See" while [https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-09-20/kiribati-to-switch-diplomatic-ties-from-taiwan-to-china/11532192 citation 51] says "Vatican City". Solution for this is to say "[[Holy See]], which governs [[Vatican City]]". As for the numbers, none of the citations currently used explicitly say how many UN countries maintain diplomatic relations with Taiwan, though citation 49 says indirectly that it is 14. Additionally I found [https://www.newsweek.com/who-recognizes-taiwan-two-change-china-1460559 this source] which also states 14 so I've changed it to that. ––[[User:FormalDude|<span style="color:#004ac0">Formal</span><span style="color:black">Dude</span>]] [[User talk:FormalDude|<span style="color:#004ac0;font-size:90%;">(talk)</span>]] 20:37, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
:*:I have no problem with that change. [[User:LVTW2|LVTW2]] ([[User talk:LVTW2|talk]]) 05:05, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
:*:I have no problem with that change. [[User:LVTW2|LVTW2]] ([[User talk:LVTW2|talk]]) 05:05, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

== Sanctions proposal ==

I am inviting all of you to participate [[[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Proposition to the China-Taiwan articles|regarding the sanctions related]] to the PRC-ROC articles. Hope this helps! [[Special:Contributions/174.89.100.7|174.89.100.7]] ([[User talk:174.89.100.7|talk]]) 16:38, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

Revision as of 16:38, 2 April 2023

Template:Vital article

Use Official Name

Based on the following facts: No country named Taiwan. But there's a regime called it self The Republic of China. Taiwan is only the area under the actual control of ROC. "China" is not only the People's Republic of China, ROC is also China, but China now has ROC and PRC regimes. If Taiwan is an independent country, why not call it the "Republic of Taiwan"? I suggest to rename "Taiwan" as "Republic of China", rename China as People's Republic of China. 58.176.1.159 (talk) 12:12, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Its its wp:commonname. Slatersteven (talk) 12:35, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Taiwan and Transnistria comparison notes.

When i take a look at both articles i find huge differences that reflect an obvious bias to western point of view.

in Transnistria article the first thing you read is that Transnistria “is an unrecognised breakaway state that is internationally recognised as a part of Moldova.”, while in Taiwan article which is literally in the same exact case as Transnistria the first thing you see is that “it is a country in East Asia.”, not to mention the other contradictions in the articles

I wonder why is this difference or should i say obvious bias ?

both Taiwan and Transnistria can be said to be “de facto sovereign state”, both have full functioning government and full control over their territory, and both have no legal stances regarding their claim, and both don’t lack official UN recognition or even US or EU recognition and lack international recognition, both are running by illegal separatists and militias and both are supported by foreign nations against the territorial integrity and sovereignty of china and moldova.

This is obvious contradiction and Eurocentric bias.

I suggest either changing the Taiwan article to make it like Transnistria or changing Transnistria article to make it like Taiwan, personally, i support the former suggestion. In both cases the two articles can’t remain as they are now. Stephan rostie (talk) 18:15, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The status of Taiwan (island) is still in dispute and is not internationally recognized as a part of China. Therefore, it's different from the other case you mentioned. Matt Smith (talk) 05:34, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The status of Taiwan (island) is still in dispute and is not internationally recognized as a part of China. That’s not anyway close to truth or reality, the entire world including US and EU recognize taiwan island as integral part of china almost all world countries including EU and US and all international organizations including UN don’t recognize Taiwan as a state, and the overwhelming majority of all world countries and international organizations consider Taiwan as integral part of china [1], only 13 UN member from all the 193 very insignificant members don’t recognize taiwan’s statehood, by no way this makes it “in dispute” or “not internationally recognized as a part of China, the UN and the entire world except 13 very insignificant UN members that you might have never heard of like Honduras, nauru, tuvalu, etc. heck even the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic is recognized by 45 UN members it’s article says that it’s a “partially recognized state”, the article of Donetsk People's Republic which is also recognized by Russia, a permanent member of UNSC with VETO power is written “is an unrecognised republic”, taiwan, in the eyes of UN and the entire world (except Hondura and nauru) is not recognized as a state and integral part of sovereign Chinese territory, hence, putting it as a “in dispute” or claiming that it is “not internationally recognized as a part of China” is completely void. Taiwan’s state is exactly like Donetsk People's Republic (before russian annexation), Transnistria, Kosovo, South Ossetia, and Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic. Perhaps the only difference is that Taiwan is politically and militarily supported by US and europe while the others are not. Stephan rostie (talk) 09:18, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"the entire world including US and EU recognize taiwan island as integral part of china". That can hardly be true. A number of Western governments, including the U.S., already protested to the U.N. back in 2007 to force the global body to stop using the reference “Taiwan is a part of China”. Please see this source. Matt Smith (talk) 10:33, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That’s just an unofficial proposal/request by european and ex-british colonies (now countries) governments to the UN regarding their wishes, non of it is official, even the information in the source you cited is using WikiLeaks as a reference. officially the US, EU and more importantly UN officially don’t recognize Taiwan as a sovereign state, read more about One China. These are the only 13 countries that recognize Taiwan as a state, ironically enough, one of these only 13 state (Honduras) decided to withdraw Taiwan recognition recently Stephan rostie (talk) 11:58, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Officially, the U.S. also does not recognize Taiwan as a part of China. The U.S regards the status of Taiwan as an unsettled issue. Matt Smith (talk) 02:23, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
officially neither US nor almost the entire world nor UN recognize Taiwan as a state. That should be mentioned in the article intro by noting that Taiwan is “unrecognized by international community” or “partially recognized state”. Please respond to this point first because this is what the article needs to include.
regarding US, US doesn’t deny that Taiwan is part of china neither. the United States "acknowledges that all Chinese on either side of the Taiwan Strait maintain there is but one China and that Taiwan is a part of China" and "does not challenge that position."[2]. The People’s Republic of China (PRC) claims sovereignty over Taiwan. The U.S. “acknowledges” but does not “endorse” PRC’s position.[3]
Apart from US, the overwhelming majority of world countries and all international organizations recognize the Chinese sovereignty over Taiwan and consider it an integral part of china. Stephan rostie (talk) 14:19, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I have no problem with mentioning Taiwan's controversial status in the intro.
Yes, the U.S. does not recognize nor deny that Taiwan is part of China. The "acknowledges..." remark merely means that the U.S. is aware of the view of all Chinese on either side of the Taiwan Strait and that the U.S. does not challenge the view. Again, the U.S. does not recognize nor deny that.
It's not just the U.S., the source I provided before already says there are also a number of major countries that hold the same view. Matt Smith (talk) 14:32, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I have no problem with mentioning Taiwan's controversial status in the intro.. Great !, so you agree on mentioning the fact that Taiwan is a “partially recognized state” in the intro ?
It's not just the U.S., the source I provided before already says there are also a number of major countries that hold the same view. Perhaps saying “western” instead of “major” will be more accurate, either way, they are a small minority in the international community and are not anywhere close to being a majority. Stephan rostie (talk) 15:20, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, something like that is fine to me.
"major countries" means well-known and influential countries. It does not mean the majority of countries. Matt Smith (talk) 15:34, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@LilianaUwU do you realize that the recent disruptive editing by @Seabourn101 had nothing to do with the content you removed in your last edit in this article which we have reached consensus about here ? Seabourn101 was arguing about other thing than the one you just removed. May i know why did you remove it ? Stephan rostie (talk) 15:34, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Stephan rostie I didn't remove it per se, I simply reverted to a version before the dispute. LilianaUwU (talk / contributions) 16:06, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The dispute wasn’t even about the content you reverted. it was about @Seabourn101’s disruptive editing which wasn’t about the content you reverted. Stephan rostie (talk) 16:10, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The situation is different, because Taiwan did not "breakaway", instead it was the other way around. So we don't have to add confusion by making the two articles alike. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 05:41, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Without arguing about this “breakaway” point, just leave it for now. It should be said that the Republic of China is “is an unrecognised state that is internationally recognised as a part of China (People's Republic of China).”, or at bare minimum it should be said that it’s a partially recognized state in the first two lines in the article just like Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic, Kosovo, and South Ossetia Stephan rostie (talk) 09:35, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The following response is to make clear about some previous comments you left, hope this would help you understanding the decision why "country" is favoured by the community:
Taiwan aka the ROC is never a "breakaway state" or "renegade Province" as the communist China favour to use, which constitutionally regarded itself as a continuation of the original Chinese Republic dates back to its establishment in 1912 with its own sovereignty that never ceases to exist even after the end of Chinese Civil War, plus the fact that the Communist regime in Beijing never have actual rule in its history over any part of Taiwan, the PRC actually has no ground for pursuing the political propaganda about Taiwan as any form of "renegade Province" seceded from the communist China. This is the basic factual and historical difference about your comparison with breakaway states of Transnistria, Kosovo, and South Ossetia which were established from secession, nothing is similar between them.
What I was mentioning about is that you used false analogy to deliberately confuse Taiwan (ROC) with other breakaway states, which means you tend to oversimplify the situation to categorise 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. Hence I explained to you bluntly 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.
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. 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").
LVTW2 (talk) 16:19, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Taiwan aka the ROC is never a "breakaway state". Let’s just put aside the “breakaway” debate for now, we will come back to it after we finish this point, my main focus is about the fact that Transnistria , Kosovo , Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic and formerly Donetsk People's Republic before joining the Russian federation are written as either “ unrecognized state by international community” or “partially recognized state”, why is taiwan article hiding this information in the intro unlike all the other partially recognized states ? Why isn’t that mentioned ? That’s not a false analogy, Taiwan is not recognized as a state by either UN or international community . This should be mentioned in the first two lines in the article just like all other similar states.
The Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic which was never under moroccan sovereignty (didn’t secede), have UN support[4], recognized by 45 UN member states is written as “partially recognized state”, while Taiwan which neither have international community (except 13 insignificant states) and UN recognition nor support is written as “a country in east Asia” without mentioning anything about it’s recognition statue ? By what sense does this work ?
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. Not true, both North Korea and South Korea are UN members recognized as sovereign states by UN and the greatest majority of world countries, with north Korea being recognized by all UN members except 7 UN members and south Korea being recognized by all UN members except North Korea, neither have any significant lack of international recognition. That’s nothing compared to Taiwan lack of recognition that must be mentioned in the article intro just like all other internationally unrecognized state wiki pages. Stephan rostie (talk) 19:40, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The United Nations itself does not have the power to recognize individual state, directly from the United Nations [1]: "The United Nations is neither a State nor a Government, and therefore does not possess any authority to recognize either a State or a Government."
And for your information, Taiwan a.k.a the ROC was a former member before 1971 and even a founding member of the United Nation, UN Resolution 2758 in 1971 removed Chiang Kai-shek (although technically he quit the UN before the vote) and thus the ROC discontinued as the representative of "China", but it did not determine a final position of territorial sovereignty or representation over Taiwan within the resolution. Just that the KMT-dominated ROC government no longer represents the seat for "China". If it matters so much to you to stress on the acknowledgement by the UN recognition, should you add additional information over China's article highlighting about the historical fact that "the PRC was not recognised by the United Nation and the majority of the world states as legitimate government of China from 1949 to 1971" to make more consistent on both sides? By your definition, the People's Republic China only came to be a "country" from 1971 onward, before the United Nations said so, isn't it?
LVTW2 (talk) 23:16, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
and for your illogical comparison of SADR,the four-fifths western Sahara is effectively occupied by Morocco, and SADR only controlled Eastern fringes of the area, completely different with Taiwan, so what aspect it could be a relevant example to compare? The PRC has never controlled Taiwan even for one second, that's the fact. LVTW2 (talk) 23:26, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Notice that you divert from the main point which is the fact that Taiwan is not recognized as a state by the (international community) and UN.it’s only recognized as a state by only 13 insignificant states among all world countries. which should be mentioned in the intro as either “unrecognized state by international community” or “partially recognized state”. Again i am not talking about the statehood of Taiwan or it’s legitimacy here, i am talking about mentioning the fact of lacking international recognition just like in the articles of all other states that lack international recognition.
You are now diverting from the main point by questioning the weight of UN and it’s recognition which is not the core of my argument rather than the fact that taiwan lack international recognition in general by both ≈ all world countries and international organizations.
This is the main topic i am talking about. Please respond to it first before reading any other thing i write. Stephan rostie (talk) 01:25, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
now regarding the UN,
UN is the largest and most influential international organization in the whole world. It’s represents the international community and comply the UN charter and international law for no personal goals.
The same UN page you cited also says: “The recognition of a new State or Government is an act that only other States and Governments may grant or withhold.
the reason why SADR despite having full legitimacy according to the international law and moroccan occupation have no legal stances, and UN doesn’t even grant SADR observer status is because as you said UN doesn’t recognize states, the general assembly and UNSC who does that, all UN can do is just condemn the moroccan violation of international law by occupying lands outside it’s recognized sovereignty. It doesn’t recognize SADR as a state simply because two thirds of it’s members don’t despite having full legitimacy.
thus the ROC discontinued as the representative of "China", but it did not determine a final position of territorial sovereignty or representation over Taiwan within the resolution. Neither said that any territory of the chinese state will no longer be part of the new government, it’s just as if the unofficial haftar government in libya ousted the official sarrag government after the libyan civil war, if haftar won and became recognized as the legitimate government and representative of libya by UN and international community, sarrag government won’t have any legitimacy over any Libyan territory it still militarily hold and don’t have the legitimacy to establish country on it and divide libya.
should you add additional information over China's article highlighting about the historical fact that "the PRC was not recognised by the United Nation and the majority of the world states as legitimate government of China from 1949 to 1971" to make more consistent on both sides? By your definition, the People's Republic China only came to be a "country" from 1971 onward, before the United Nations said so, isn't it?. Yes no problem, PRC was an illegitimate government (i said government not a country) of china in that period, but after winning the civil war, overthrowing the ROC regime and gaining the recognition of the international community and UN, it became the sole legitimate government of ALL chinese territory including the chinese territory that the ousted illegitimate regime still occupying (i.e taiwan island). Stephan rostie (talk) 01:46, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
For the record, the State of Palestine, a non-UN member, despite little recognition, is described as a "state" in its lead sentence.
And "legitimacy", as defined at Legitimacy (political), indicates the "right and acceptance of an authority, usually a governing law or regime". By that definition, the PRC is the legitimate government of mainland China, while the ROC/Taiwan is the legitimate government of the Free Area. Given Wikipedia's neutral point of view, we should go off of the de facto situation in most cases (as well as that supported by reliable sources): that Taiwan independent and legitimate country (see the sources in the article for sources describing and providing evidence that Taiwan fits the definition of "country"). DecafPotato (talk) 23:32, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
For the record, the State of Palestine, a non-UN member, despite little recognition
State of Palestine is recognized as a sovereign state by UN, it has a non-member observer status, it’s as a state as the Vatican city, it’s also recognized as a state by 138 UN members worldwide (over 70% of all world countries), the overwhelming majority of world countries, by what sense do you call that “little recognition” ?
on the other hand Taiwan is recognized by only 13 UN member (less that 7% of world countries) and no recognition by UN or any international organization !, how does that even compare anywhere close to palestine ?
even the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic which is recognized by 45 UN member with more international recognition than taiwan is written on it’s page as “partially recognized state”, Kosovo which is recognized by 101 UN member states is written as “partially recognized state”, by what sense can Taiwan which is recognized by only 13 insignificant UN members that you probably have never heard of like hondorus, belize, nauru, etc and have no recognition of any international organization should be written as just “country” without mentioning anything about lack of international recognition and at least saying that it’s a “partially recognized country” ? One can even argue that it “unrecognized country by international community” in the first place. Stephan rostie (talk) 23:57, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
State of Palestine is recognized as a sovereign state by UN - The United Nations does not have the power to recognize a state. DecafPotato (talk) 18:46, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps you don’t get it. “Recognized” doesn’t mean that UN decided to recognize the state of Palestine on it’s own, it’s the international community that recognized the statehood of Palestine first, then palestine admitted to UN observer status, then the overwhelming majority of UN members (international community) accepted it, thus Palestine became recognized as sovereign state by UN. This recognition wasn’t granted by UN on it’s own rather than by the UN member states (the international community). It’s a sovereign state in the eyes of UN and regarded as such. While Taiwan lack any international recognition from the international community and consequently from UN, beside the fact that Taiwan island is recognized as integral part of Chinese territory by the overwhelming majority of the world and (consequently) UN and other international organizations because in the past century they recognized PRC as the sole legitimate representative of china (all china including Taiwan) instead of the overthrown ROC government.
anyway, Taiwan doesn’t compare to palestine by any mean regarding international recognition simply because the overwhelming majority of international community and international organizations (like UN), while Taiwan lack almost any recognition from the international community, that’s not something debatable. It’s facts and numbers. Stephan rostie (talk) 19:36, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Taiwan isn't fully recognized as a state, yes, so we don't describe it as such. But it is nevertheless a country (which includes Scotland, Basque Country, and Greenland, none of which are recognized as either independent nor sovereign by anyone. DecafPotato (talk) 02:25, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Taiwan at one time was China, it is not a break-way state. Slatersteven (talk) 16:24, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it’s just an illegitimate government ruling Chinese land after being ousted and losing most of it’s territory in the Chinese civil war, it’s exactly like GNA front in the second Libyan civil war against Khalifa Haftar front, both are Libya and both claim to be the ruler and representative of the same territory of state of Libya,however if GNA was officially ousted and hafter front became recognized as the official political entity and representative of the state of Libya, the GNA will no longer have any legitimacy over any Libyan territory it is still occupying and have no legitimacy to claim being a sovereign state independent from Libya on that territory. Stephan rostie (talk) 19:53, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An RFC decided we call it a country, so even if we accept there is consensus to change it to "partially recognised" (is there?) it is "partially recognised country". But I think to overturn an RFC, we need a new RFC. Slatersteven (talk) 19:48, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy link to the RfC, where options like "partially recognized state" were discussed and decided against. And I agree that to override the consensus of the RfC, we should have a broader discussion that builds upon that RfC. DecafPotato (talk) 03:38, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Courtesy link to the Rfc, where options like "partially recognized state" were discussed and decided against. Not true, are you intentionally trying to give us misinformation to mislead us ? The entire Rfc talk that you are citing have only one word “partially”, the sentence only sentence in the talk saying the word “partially” is “and might get partially subsidised by their employer”, saying that the Rfc rejected stating the fact of taiwans’s partial recognition or lack of international recognition is simply intentional misleading. It wasn’t discussed and wasn’t even the topic of the Rfc. not once in the RfC it was said that taiwan’s lack of international recognition or that it’s partial recognition shouldn’t be mentioned. Ironically enough the same Rfc even says in the conclusion “We have agreement that most nations don't recognize Taiwan as an independent country”. Stephan rostie (talk) 05:05, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
A quick search saw proposals that include "de facto state" or "largely unrecognized state". I said "options like" for a reason. DecafPotato (talk) 18:51, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Users keep talking about having wp:consensus, I am not seeing it. Slatersteven (talk) 15:48, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

there is no objection to stating the fact of Taiwan’s lack of international recognition. Both I and @Matt Smith agreed that it should be mentioned just as how it is mentioned in all other states that lack international recognition on wikipedia (some of which even have more international recognition than taiwan itself) like Kosovo, Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic, South Ossetia, and all others. No one objection about this was received except from @DecafPotato to which i replied to and didn’t show up again. Stephan rostie (talk) 16:08, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I count at least 4 other users here, did they agree (well 1 did not, as I did not, and indeed have reverted you)? Slatersteven (talk) 16:32, 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]

I would oppose such a change. These situations are not similar. If you want to use the prose from a different wiki page as a source to argue for a change to another Wikipedia article, please be aware we should avoid original research. Very Average Editor (talk) 20:19, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Stephen D. Krasner (2001). Problematic Sovereignty: Contested Rules and Political Possibilities. New York City: Columbia University Press. p. 46. ISBN 0231121792.
  2. ^ "Wilson Center Digital Archive". 2022-07-22. Archived from the original on 22 July 2022. Retrieved 2022-07-23.
  3. ^ "US Does Not Take a Position on Taiwan's Sovereignty, State Department Says". VOA. Retrieved 2023-03-17.
  4. ^ "A/RES/34/37. Question of Western Sahara" (PDF). General Assembly—Thirty-fourth Session. United Nations. 1979. Archived (PDF) from the original on 10 January 2017. Retrieved 15 March 2017.

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 [2]. 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]

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]

 Erledigt 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]

 Erledigt 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 [[[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Proposition to the China-Taiwan articles|regarding the sanctions related]] to the PRC-ROC articles. Hope this helps! 174.89.100.7 (talk) 16:38, 2 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]