This subject is featured in the Outline of Taiwan, which is incomplete and needs further development. That page, along with the other outlines on Wikipedia, comprise Wikipedia's Outline of Knowledge, which also serves as the table of contents or site map of Wikipedia.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Taiwan article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers.	Be polite Assume good faith Avoid personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8

	Taiwan was a good article nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones Date Process Result July 29, 2006 Peer review Reviewed December 6, 2006 Good article nominee Not listed Current Status: Former good article nominee

This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:

WikiProject Taiwan (Rated B-Class, Top-importance) TaiwanWikipedia:WikiProject TaiwanTemplate:WikiProject TaiwanTaiwan-related articles Taiwan portal v • d • e This article is within the scope of WikiProject Taiwan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Taiwan on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.  B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.  Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. WikiProject Islands (Rated B-Class) IslandsWikipedia:WikiProject IslandsTemplate:WikiProject IslandsIslands articles v • d • e This article is within the scope of WikiProject Islands, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of islands on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.  B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. Version 1.0 Editorial Team This article has been reviewed by the Version 1.0 Editorial Team. Additional information: ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the assessment scale. ??? This article has not yet received an importance rating on the assessment scale. This article is included in the 2006 Wikipedia CD Selection, or is a candidate for inclusion in the next version. Please maintain high quality standards and, if possible, stick to GFDL-compatible images. Version 0.5      (Rated B-Class) This Geography article has been selected for Version 0.5 and subsequent release versions of Wikipedia. It has been rated B-Class on the assessment scale (comments).

This talk page is automatically archived by MiszaBot I. Any sections with no replies in 90 days are automatically moved. Sections without timestamps are not archived.

Archives
Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7 Archive 8

Contents 1 Merging with ROC or Taiwan Province (of the ROC) 2 Island or Group? 3 Modern Democratic Era 4 Proposing Reform 5 Various issues with recent edits 6 Military

[edit] Merging with ROC or Taiwan Province (of the ROC)

Everything in this Taiwan article can fit into sections of the Taiwan Province article and the ROC article. Much of the information is actually repeated in said articles. The alliance (talk) 22:34, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

No, we can't merge the 2, the 2 are entirely different things. This article is about the island, the ROC is the State, and The Province is the Province. You're talking about putting a province, island, and state all on the same article. The ROC doesn't just include the island and the province, and the province doesn't include all of the island, nor does it include only the island. Liu Tao (talk) 04:40, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm not saying that we should combine three articles into one. I am saying that everything in the Taiwan article (except the History before 1945) overlaps with the sections and information about the ROC in those respective categories. The History of Taiwan before 1945 can go in the Taiwan Province article. I don't understand what you mean by "the province doesn't include all of the island, nor does it include only the island" The alliance (talk) 07:19, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

This would be the same as merging South Carolina into the United States article. Cheers! Scapler (talk) 19:24, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

I do not understand your analogy. Please explain. The alliance (talk) 22:23, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

ROC is the Country, Taiwan is the Province. South Carolina is the State, United States is the Country. As for that quote, it means exactly what it says. Apparently you don't know that there's an island called "Taiwan" just like the Province is. Liu Tao (talk) 02:07, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

First of all, there is no need to be rude. Second, it is a faulty analogy, because SC is a small part of the USA while the island of Taiwan comprises almost 100% of the ROC's jurisdiction; therefore the two are inextricably related. Third, the Taiwan article includes much more information than just the geographical aspects of the island, including culture, history, government, etc., all of which can easily be combined with the two articles in question. The alliance (talk) 03:29, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

The only major place where Taiwan is used to mean STRICTLY ONLY the main island of Taiwan is on Wikipedia. This artificial usage was created specifically to keep people from merging the ROC and Taiwan articles. Now people use it as evidence as if it were really the way Taiwan is defined. Pretty ridiculous and circular.--61.224.52.87 (talk) 10:29, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

I know, the Taiwan (Island) article includes way too much of the political and the other irrelevant information, which is what I've been trying to get fixed for the past month, but apparently they stopped replying to my rebuttals and requests. Tried to change it myself, but it just gets changed back. Apparently people can't tell the difference between the island, province, and state. Liu Tao (talk) 14:44, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

I know, the Taiwan (Island) article includes way too much... That is why there has been so much back and forth about the title of this article. An article about "Taiwan" should not be limited to the rock and dirt under people's feet, and to make it solely about the "island" is too limiting. But the proposed solution, to tie Taiwan to a provincial article, is a blatant attempt at POV pushing. Why not tie it instead to the "Taiwan Area" Why not make it about any or all the Taiwans that have existed in various forms - as an area, a colony of China, a province of China, a nation in its own right as the ROC, a colony of Japan etc.. Readin (talk) 17:49, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

• Oppose - Taiwan has been part of the ROC for only a small portion of its history. Similarly, the ROC has controlled Taiwan for only about 2/3 of its history. Unlike, for example, the French Republic where the location has always been limited to France, Taiwan and ROC have very different histories and are very different concepts. Also, the province is problematic as to why it should be preferred over the "Taiwan Area". Readin (talk) 13:52, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

I understand what you mean when you say that ROC has only controlled Taiwan for a small portion of its history. However, does that mean that we need to have separate articles for things like California before and after it became a state of the United States? The same applies to Taiwan, in my opinion. Just because it has only been under ROC rule since 1945 doesn't mean that we cannot include the history of Taiwan island in the Taiwan Province article. The alliance (talk) 01:54, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

I think that's exactly what Alta California is. It has specific information about that era's territorial aspects. There are also separate history pages for different (approximately) centuries. DMacks (talk) 02:18, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

• Oppose Completely different things. Valerian456 ^{Hush, Rush} 18:15, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Comment: Having a rational discussion here on the talk-page is the right way to resolve this issue and decide about the merger. Any user trying to establish "facts on the ground" or change the status quo of any of the related articles prior to consensus here will be blocked immediately for disruptive editing. DMacks (talk) 22:49, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Comment: Were we to have a single article for ROC and Taiwan, making it a state/country articles similar to France (French Republic) and Spain (Kingdom of Spain), naming conventions would dictate that we call it by the common name, "Taiwan" and that would draw a lot of protest and edit warring from people wanting to change it to "Republic of China". It's is disruptive enough when article content is frequently changed. Frequent changes to article title would be a greater problem. Readin (talk) 17:52, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

• Oppose - Better to keep the different articles than try to put everything into one which will lead to major edit wars. BritishWatcher (talk) 14:39, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

• Oppose - These articles are over two completely topics. The RoC is the political entity that occupies the island, while the Taiwan article is over the island itself. It would be similar to us trying to merge North America into the United States/Canada article, because those nations are on it. Doesnt work. Thanks, Ono (talk) 03:27, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
• Oppose. Definitely not. Taiwan is the common name which should continue to be used for the RoC as it is today. However, the RoC was the government of mainland China for several years. Republic of China is just as much about that entity that controlled the mainland as it is about the one that controls Taiwan today. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 06:03, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
• Oppose One is a geographic region and the other is about a government. It is best to keep the two separate, than to create confusion. Citybug (talk) 04:32, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
• Agree The separation of Taiwan and the Republic of China is confusing to most readers who normally identify the two as one single entity. The Times, Le Monde, El Mundo, The China Post and plenty of well respected newspapers use Taiwan and the ROC interchangeably, and I think that Wikipedia should reflect this consensus. Likewise, major encyclopedias like Encyclopaedia Britannica and Encyclopedia Universalis have only one article for Taiwan and the Republic of China. Finally, the threat of an edit war shouldn't be a criteria for splitting articles that way, because it would open the door to all sorts of abuse and innacuracies on Wikipedia. Laurent (talk) 10:23, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

  Comment: The main arguments that keep coming back against the merge kind of make sense, however they are not in my opinion incompatible with a merge:

1) "Taiwan and the ROC are two different things" - but so is "France" and "French Republic", "Germany" and the "Federal Republic of Germany", etc. Yet they both have a single article for both the geographical location and the political entity. We can definitely do the same for Taiwan, and eventually end up with a much clearer article.

2) "Don't do it because that would trigger an edit war" - not a valid reason, as there are ways to deal with edit wars. The main one obviously is to reach a consensus, which can be done by properly integrating all the POV into the article.

3) "The ROC has not always been located in Taiwan." - agree, and this is definitely something that we'd need to document, perhaps by creating a separate "History of the ROC" article? The French governement was not in France either during World War II, yet nobody would split the France article in two for that reason.

Eventually, I think it all boils down to the fact that Taiwan is not officially a country. However we don't need to describe it as such - we can do as the Encylopaedia Britannica did and call it a "self governing island", which I think cannot be denied. Even China would accept it since being "self governing" doesn't make Taiwan independent and is not incompatible with the One China policy. Again, there is a nearly international consensus that Taiwan and the ROC are interchangeable, yet this consensus is not reflected on Wikipedia. Laurent (talk) 09:20, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Uh... for the first one, there's French Fifth Republic... -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs email 11:37, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

This article is purely about the form of government and its origins, and is not comparable to a country article. Probably the closest equivalent for the ROC would be Government of the Republic of China. Laurent (talk) 16:54, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

But then if you look at the historic French Third Republic, it is written in the historical states format. -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs email 02:11, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Oh, there's Kingdom of the Netherlands and Netherlands. -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs email 10:45, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

• oppose,be a chinese,Taiwan(island) is not ROC(contry),it is a diffence conception. --Time mades Hero (talk) 09:48, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
• Oppose As has been stated, these are two very different topics. The merger of the two would invite no end of edit warring and even more disagreement then we have now.  _{Folic_Acid | talk}  07:20, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

One important factor to consider is that Taiwan is the name most often used by Taiwan to describe itself and is also used internationally to represent the area of land governed by the ROC. But it is in such common usage, as opposed to ROC. Here's an example: if you sent a letter addressed to "TAIWAN" it would reach its recipient. If it was addressed "REPUBLIC OF CHINA" it would end up in some dead end office in the PRC. (Of course, if you sent it from China as "TAIWAN" rather than "TAIWAN, R.O.C." the letter would be destroyed) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.116.8.172 (talk) 15:23, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Original research, irrelevant, and a hasty generalization. I've held a ROC flag in Beijing many times, and look, I'm not in prison. Oh, and non-verifiable and WP:POV. -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs email 08:06, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

• Strong Oppose: Merging of entirely different concepts. Just like "Macedonia" the country and "Macedonia" the province of Greece, the notions of Country, Island and Province do not equate under any circumstances. -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs email 08:04, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

• Strong Oppose: These pages is looking up the ones with the names of selves in Chinese Wikipedia. They are two different definitions on historical and political issues. Same as the Fujian Province (minor places) of ROC and the Fujian Province (major places) of PRC. --Gzyeah (talk) 07:15, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

• Strong Oppose: People tend to (conveniently) forget that the Republic of China did NOT include Taiwan from 1912 to 1945 i.e. quite a significant portion of its history. --TokyoJapan (talk) 07:57, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Agree: Taiwan was definitely under Japanese rule from 1895 to 1945, therefore absolute equation between Taiwan and the ROC is absolutely absurd. -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs email 12:39, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

• Oppose as per above. TastyCakes (talk) 15:07, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Island or Group?

There seems to be a slow edit war simmering over whether the article should be about just the island of Taiwan or the island group of Taiwan and its nearby archipelago. I suggest the issue be discussed so it can be settled and the article made more stable. --Cybercobra (talk) 02:09, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

"Region". It allows for both usages and such ambiguity is consistent with other regions where precise boundaries are not defined. I'll copy and paste part of something I wrote above:

I say "region" because like other place names, usage and exact boundaries can vary. For modern states, there are borders that are usually considered when defining the region, so one can make a strong case that there are exact limits. But even then, can we say Vatican City is part of Italy? (It is in the peninsula, but not governed by the Italian Republic)? Can we say Sicily is part of Italy (not in the peninsula, but governed by the Italian Republic)? To use better examples, since we are writing an article about a region rather than a state, consider the boundaries of Tibet and Kurdistan; can they be defined exactly? Taiwan is no different. It is a region of shared traits such as culture, history, government, and ancestry. The amount to which certain traits are shared vary within the region, and serve to cause some of the ambiguous as to the exact borders, but again this is no different from many other regions such as Transylvania and China Proper.

Perhaps it would be more proper to refer to Taiwan as a "country" in the same way that we refer to Amish country. But due to political sensitivities we know that won't happen. So "region" probably a more neutral term. On the other side of the political sensitives, we shouldn't let people push us into pretending there is no such thing as "Taiwan". They would push us to say that there is only "Republic of China" and "Taiwan Island" (just a piece of dirt sticking out of the ocean, never mind the shared culture and history of the peoples both there and on surrounding islets). The simple fact is that people do use the term "Taiwan" and they use it very frequently to refer to a region that while not perfectly precise, is as precise as many other regions that are well documented by Wikipedia.

Readin (talk) 04:36, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

I say "Island" because it has always been island all the way from the start. There is already an article for Taiwan Region, we've no need for a second article. Also, in the article, "Taiwan" was not listed as a region, but as an island group. Taiwan is not an archipelago, it is an island. If Readin would like to write an article on the region, he/she may do so by expanding upon the region article. There's an article for the region and an article for the island, there is no need to make the island into a region so that there are 2 regional articles. Liu Tao (talk) 13:22, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Taiwan is an island. The term "island" most commonly refers to the geographic features of land, not to politics. Neurofish (talk) 19:43, 27 August 2009 (UTC)Neurofish

[edit] Modern Democratic Era

The final subsection on the Modern political era suggests Ma Ying-jeou campaigned for closer ties with mainland china. But are ties closer now then they were two years ago? Neurofish (talk) 19:50, 27 August 2009 (UTC)Neurofish

I added some references regarding economic ties. Feel free to edit my wording or change the references, but I feel the underlying message is accurate, that China has grown rapidly in the last 10 years, resulting in closer economic ties to Taiwan (and the rest of the world). Military and political ties are still strained. Neurofish (talk) 18:14, 28 August 2009 (UTC)Neurofish

[edit] Proposing Reform

I'm proposing reforming and cleaning this article. This article is becoming more politically oriented and much of its information is more about the ROC as a whole instead of just about the Island itself. I propose we clean out the "non-relevant" information, whether deleting them outright or moving them to the ROC article, and begin to remodel it to the geographical article it should be. We can use the Great Britain article as a model, they've seemed to have done a good job with separating the Great Britain article as well as the United Kingdoms article. I also propose we renaming the article to "Taiwan Island" and making the DAB page the "Taiwan" article like what was done with the Britain article. Liu Tao (talk) 15:47, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

I propose we reform by ending the idea that we can treat Taiwan as a hunk of rock and dirt. It has a population with a unique culture. It has a unique history very distinct from the Republic of China. The idea that this is a "geographic article" is the problem. Readin (talk) 16:10, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Per policy, dab pages should not exist when there is a primary topic for a word. Making Taiwan a dab page won't work, because the primary topic of the word "Taiwan" in reliable sources refers to the current gov't of the RoC and current territory of the Free Area of the RoC. The reason this article keeps getting political edits is because generalist readers expect to find it here. SchmuckyTheCat (talk)

I expounded on this above, but consider "Italy". It is a state (the "Italian Republic"), it is a geographic area (the peninsula), it is a historical region, it is a cultural region. But everyone simply says "Italy" regardless of which they are talking about. And in most cases they mean all of them at once. The same is true of "Taiwan" except that the state doesn't fit quite so nicely. Unlike the Italian Republic which uses "Italy" for short and which has always made its home in the historical, geographic and cultural Italy, the Repuglic of China does not officially use "Taiwan" for short (though everyone else does) and it has not always made its home in the historical, geographical and cultural Taiwan. We can't do anything about the history. And the only real way to fix the name is to persuade the "Republic of China" government to change its name, which won't happen so long as it remains dependent on the US for defense from China's threats. Until that happens, we're stuck with one article for the government and a separate article for the cultural, geographic and historical region. Readin (talk) 16:32, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

(READIN)This article IS a geographical article, and is NOT the problem. The problem is that you act upon by your POV and are constantly trying to make this article into a political article. Look at the Great Britain article, what's wrong with article? They don't seem to have any issues with it being an article about an Island called "Great Britain". It talks about the Geography, History, Terminology, Wildelife, Settlements, and Major Cities. As for Italy, there is a SEPERATE Italian Penninsula article, which is even MORE ambiguous then the Great Britain article. And as for the ROC's "short" name being "Taiwan", some says it's "Taiwan", some "ROC", some "China", etc. ugh, it gets complicated. Anyways, point is that the British has made separate articles and distinctified and identified exactly what the different terms are. Great Britain is the Island, British Isles is an island group, United Kingdom the state, etc etc. You want to do culture? Sure, you can do it, but do it in the ROC state (You heard me, STATE, ROC IS A STATE, NOT A GOVERNMENT, IT HAS A GOVERNMENT THAT'S CALLED THE "GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF CHINA, WHICH ITSELF HAS A SEPARATE ARTICLE) article or the Taiwan Province article like every other article does. Or, you can be like Europe and do an entirely separate article for Taiwan Culture and link it to these 3 articles (Republic of China, Taiwan, Taiwan Province), heck there is an article for Taiwan Culture already. As for politics, they don't belong in this article at all. Taiwan is a hunk of rock, when you are using it in the geographical context. We're talking about the island, not the people, there's a separate article for the people that's titled Taiwanese People. You have to differentiate between all the different entities called "Taiwan". There's the DAB page which lists clearly as hell the different entities that are called "Taiwan". However, because apparently you seem to be too lazy to check out the page yourself, I take the liberty of copying and pasting it for you to read the different uses of "Taiwan":

    * Taiwan, the island in East Asia, historically also known as Formosa    * Republic of China, commonly known as Taiwan, the state governing the island of Taiwan.          o Taiwan Area, the geopolitical area which is governed by the Republic of China (ROC).          o Taiwan Province, the administrative division of the ROC.    * Chinese Taipei, the name that the Taiwan or the ROC competes under in the Olympics and many other international events.    * Tainan City, historically named "Taiwan Prefecture" or "Taiwan-fu" in the 19th century    * Republic of Formosa, the historical republic    * Republic of Taiwan, the proposed state    * Taiwan Province, People's Republic of China, the theoretical province claimed, but never controlled, by the People's Republic of China    * Ilha Formosa: Requiem for the Formosan Martyrs, a musical composition by Tyzen Hsiao 

Aparently you keep on thinking that all of these DIFFERENT entities are the same thing, that's what's wrong with you. You REFUSE to differentiate between all of these uses. You got 2 lads who are named John, does it mean they're the same person? No, they're two people called John. Same is here, we got multiple entities named or referred to as "Taiwan", but it does not mean that they're all the same entities. We got an island, a state, a region, a province. They're not the same thing, and it is stated DISTINCTIVELY which is what and the difference can me touched upon as well.

(Schmucky)There is no 'primary' target for the term "Taiwan". I have said already, there's the 3 'biggies' of what "Taiwan" can mean in common speech, the ROC, Island, and Province. And as for those primary sources, exactly what sources are those? Because I have read plenty of encyclopedias and they have separate entries for the ROC, Island, and Province. And as for those 'generalist' people, it is more reason to make the DAB page the main page.

There is no single definition of the term 'Taiwan', in different contexts it means different things. Also, there is no universal 'general' definition of the term 'Taiwan'. Some people use the term to describe the ROC, some the Province, some the Island, Region, etc. Some people specifically define what they're talking about before only using the term 'Taiwan', and some don't 'generalise' the term at all. To make the Island the main page is to support the viewpoint that the term 'Taiwan' is 'generalised' as the Island which is barely the case at all. And as for the generalist readers, if they know what they're looking for (state, island, province, region, etc) then they know which link to click on. All of the links have a description besides it, I think they should be able to understand what it says and don't mind the 'one-more-click'. Liu Tao (talk) 18:50, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Agree: What Liu Tao has proposed is what I have been trying to express all along in this talk page. I have checked out the new article pages for Taiwan and ROC and think it is much better than before when there were so many overlapping areas that were unnecessary. The alliance (talk) 13:02, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Various issues with recent edits

An IP editor has been making changes that have many problems.

1. Attempting to use "the mainland People's Republic of China (PRC)". However while we have accepted as convention to include the POV term "mainland China" for want of a better term, it is far more POV to claim that the PRC is the "mainland" of Taiwan.
2. "Since the unofficial end of the last Chinese Civil War following World War II, the island group has been under the government of the Republic of China (ROC)". This is simply incorrect. Taiwan was annexed by the ROC at the end of WWII, not at the end of China's civil war.
3. "while the mainland has been". While the term "mainland China" is POV as it tends to imply that China is the "mainland" of Taiwan, it at least leaves open the interpretation of it being a simply geographic location. However to simply return to China as "the mainland" in the context of Taiwan does not leave open this interpretation and is therefor even more POV. We have a convention of always using "mainland China" rather than simply "mainland" for that reason.

Readin (talk) 14:54, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Okay, either your geography sucks or I dunno what to say. Mainland China is Mainland China, it's a geopolitical term. There is nothing POV about it. The ROC doesn't just claim the PRC, it claims other territory as well. Mainland China can be interpreted to include all those territories or some. And nobody said that the PRC is the "mainland" of Taiwan. "Mainland Taiwan" is the same as the Taiwan Island. I mean same as in their the same exact geographical entity, just different names. Anyone who is in their right minds know that Mainland China refers to, well, mainland china. There is nothing POV about it. Liu Tao (talk) 00:08, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

That is one interpretation, and perhaps it would be helpful to capitalize the M, but the other way to look at it is that in an article about Taiwan, saying "mainland China" implies that "mainland China" is the "mainland" of a larger entity Taiwan is a part of. That is POV. Despite this problem, "Mainland China" is used per convention because we don't have really good NPOV terms to use and "Mainland China" seems least problematic of the POV terms available.

As for the specific edits - the IP editor was changing "mainland China" to just "mainland" or to "mainland People's Republic of China", both of which have more serious POV issues. Readin (talk) 00:24, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Mainland China is a very POV term. It's also a lensed term - from the perspective within TW/HK/MO. From a global perspective, "mainland China" is just plain "China", without the lens. Wikipedia should be written from a global perspective, without the use of specialised terms. SchmuckyTheCat (talk)

There are indeed very few instances when the term "mainland China" is useful. Perhaps it can be used to avoid ambiguity when discussing the One-China policy or the Chinese Civil War, but otherwise it can easily be replaced by just "China". The POV is not really a problem IMO because it may both mean that Taiwan is part of the PRC, and that China is part of the ROC. In my experience, editors don't really care when I replace it with just "China". In any case, "mainland People's Republic of China" is definitely wrong. Laurent (talk) 01:39, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Mainland China in no sense includes Taiwan. Mainland China in chinese is "Dalu", it does NOT include Taiwan, Hong Kong, and Macau. It's just mainland. It's used in the same sense that mainland Europe is used. I seriously don't see how it can even include Taiwan. Mainland means mainland. Liu Tao (talk) 00:35, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Nobody said the term included Taiwan. SchmuckyTheCat (talk)

Well, that's what Readin's trying to assert. 06:50, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

I did not assert that. Perhaps you should quote the words that concern you. Readin (talk) 17:32, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Quote, ""while the mainland has been". While the term "mainland China" is POV as it tends to imply that China is the "mainland" of Taiwan" -- Readin

Mainland China is a geopolitical term, it has always been used to refer directly to Mainland China. That big piece of territory in East Asia, that is Mainland China. It has nothing to do with Taiwan being in whatever. You're trying to twist these already established geological terms which has nothing to do with politics and trying to make em POV based whilst they're not. Mainland China does not mean China is the mainland of anything. Mainland China is the mainland of China. It doesn't just apply to Taiwan as well. Here's an example (I'm not using Taiwan cause one of you are gonna start spewing crap about it), let's take Hainan. Hainan is part of China, but it's not part of Mainland China. Mainland China is bits and pieces of China that is located on the continent, it does not include the offshore islands and stuff. It's the same with the term Mainland Europe. Britain and Ireland are part of Europe, but not part of Mainland Europe. Liu Tao (talk) 23:50, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

I think today the term "mainland China" makes sense when talking about the territory that's not Honk Kong or Macau. Taiwan is so clearly out of it that nobody would seriously use it as a POV term unless there's an ambiguity (maybe when talking about the one-China policy). In general, people just say "China" when talking about "mainland China" and "Hong Kong", "Macau", etc. when talking about the other territories. Laurent (talk) 03:04, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

I agree with you 100%, which is why I have no idea why Readin wants to reword the "Mainland China".Liu Tao (talk) 07:58, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

I think you're misreading this discussion Liu Tao. Per current convention, I've been re-wording "the mainland" to "mainland China" or "Mainland China". I did point out a POV problem with "mainland China", but I also said it is the best term we have so far and so I haven't argued that we should change it.

Leaving aside common usage for the moment, both "mainland China" and "China" have a problem in that one takes a Taiwan subjugation position while the other takes a Taiwan independence position.

The word "mainland" in "mainland China" implies that there is another land that is part of China but not part of "mainland" China. Otherwise "China" and "mainland China" would be exactly the same thing and there would be no need to include the term "mainland". So what is this other piece of land? Is it Hainan? Let's see "..travel between mainland China and Taiwan has been...". In such a sentence we are not attempting to exclude Hainan, so this use of "mainland China" does not make sense if "mainland" is meant to distinguish Hainan from the rest of China.

But if we take the Taiwan subjugationist point of view that Taiwan is part of China, then the sentence makes sense. "...when mainland China and Taiwan were united by the ROC after WWII..."

On the other hand, if we take the Taiwan freedom point of view, the sentence is more difficult. Why would we say "mainland China" rather than simply "China"? We don't talk about travel between "Japan and mainland China" or "the United States and mainland China", we just say "Japan and China" or "the United States and China".

Simply saying "China" has problems for Taiwan subjugationists. For someone who believes Taiwan is already part of China, saying "travel between Taiwan and China" makes as much sense as "travel between Tokyo and Japan".

It really is a situation where neither term is completely POV free, and there seems to be no third term available.

Hong Kong/Macao provides a little bit of relief for "mainland China" as the argument can be made that "mainland" is distinguishing the rest of China from Hong Kong and Macao. The sentence about "travel between Taiwan and mainland China" then makes sense because we are not intending to include Hong Kong - thus the use of the term "mainland". To use an analogy provided by Liu Tao above, this would be like a Hawaiian saying "Germany either controlled or had a neutrality with all powers of mainland Europe by lat 1943". This would make sense.

However, getting back to my original statement about the problem of "the mainland", it would not make sense for a Hawaiian to say "Germany either controlled or had a neutrality with all powers of the mainland by lat 1943" since "the mainland" for Hawaii is the part of the U.S.A in North America, not the mainland part of Europe. Similarly, unless we consider Taiwan to be part of China (and Wikipedia chooses not to take a position), then saying "the mainland" is unclear because we don't know which mainland is being talked about. Is it mainland Europe, mainland U.S.A, or the largest island of Taiwan?

I think that because of the Hong Kong thing, "mainland China" is workable. Perhaps to clarify that "mainland" is part of the name rather than descriptive in relation to Taiwan, capitalizing the M might be a good idea.

From a common usage perspective, simply saying "China" as proposed by Laurent and Schmucky is the way to go and I would certainly support that change. However, I do know long-time editors, such as PalaceGuard, Jiang, and Blueshirts, who will almost certainly object. This would be a significant change affecting a lot of articles, and they would notice eventually and we would have to argue it out. Before making such a change, we should be sure we get a broad consensus, and I think we all know that won't be possible. Readin (talk) 14:37, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

I think using the terms "mainland China" and "Taiwan" together are the most non-POV terms. They imply that geographically, these are two separate entities without any reference to politics. It is an indisputable fact. Nobody would be able to argue that one is part of the other. To use the terms "China" and "Taiwan" implies "two countries, two systems" and obvious POV. The alliance (talk) 11:03, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

They are technically two countries and they have very different political systems: China has a Communist government while Taiwan has a democratic one not unlike the one we have here in the United States. Additionally, the people of Taiwan do not need to pay any taxes to the Mainland. Just because a country is not a member of the United Nations doesn't mean it's not independent. As a side note, the only reason Taiwan doesn't have UN membership was because Chiang Kai-Shek was not happy about Mainland China (by then a Communist nation) being allowed membership and refused to join.--Twilight Helryx (talk) 20:23, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

I agree with the point about there being two political entities, one on the mainland and one on Taiwan. It is my personal belief that the government in Taipei is legitimate. However, Wikipedia enforces neutrality and I am agreeing with Readin that the terms "Mainland China" and "Taiwan" when used together is the most neutral way to refer to these two political entities. I specifically highlight "two countries, two systems" as problematic, because that was a position adopted by certain prominent politicians on Taiwan that can lead to POV issues here on Wikipedia. However, regardless of one's political beliefs, there is no denying the fact that Mainland China and Taiwan are two separate and distinct geographical areas. The alliance (talk) 12:56, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

You misunderstand me. "Taiwan" and "mainland China" are for the geo-cultural-historical regions. They may be called separate "geopolitical" region as well, having a long history of different political experience (either rule by separate entities, or rule by the same entity but being treated differently by that entity). But for the modern political entities we should continue to use the names "People's Republic of China" and "Republic of China", or I would approve of shortening to more simple terms "Taiwan" and "China". The term "mainland China" to refer to the political PRC would be confusing as the PRC now includes Hong Kong and Macau - which are not considered part of mainland China. Readin (talk) 07:29, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Military

There isn't a section on the current structure of armed forces. --Alchemist Jack (talk) 12:29, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

That section is located here, because it is not specifically a cultural or geographical topic particular to Taiwan. The military is operated by the state. The alliance (talk) 01:56, 19 October 2009 (UTC)