This is an archive of past discussions about Portal:Taiwan. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
2. The Geography Portal pages are for the geographic entities. Having a geography portal page doesn't necessarily imply it's a nation or any type of political entity. For example, Portal:Ireland is for the island of Ireland, contains information related to both the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland.
3. To name the portal page for Taiwan as Portal:Republic of China is improper. Firstly, the name clearly implicates it is a nation, which causes political disputes obviously. Secondly,
the Republic of China is not a firm concept in Geography, since the areas controlled or claimed by it have varied greatly over time, the name Portal:Republic of China will confuse readers who are interested in different periods of ROC.
4. The name Republic of China is disputed even within Taiwan, many people consider it as a doubtful concept, and argue the range of its territory, or avoid using it due to its controversial political meanings. For example, pro-china political organizations in Taiwan usually take off the flag of ROC or all things related to ROC when they have visitors from China. Captain016:29, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
ROC ≠ Taiwan. Having a separate portal for the ROC may be an option, but it is pretty impractical and meaningless, since in modern times they're in most circumstances closely associated. For readers who're interested in politics, history, etc., of the pre- and post-1945/1949 ROC, this is naturally the portal they'd go through. — Instantnood11:01, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
The state is the Republic of China. I don't care whether some people do that or whatever. The state is the Republic of China. It is in existence no matter what you believe. There is no "Taiwan." It is Taiwan Province, Republic of China. So stop moving it to Taiwan. The ROC should be the name. The green background is also implicating pan-green favoritism. It is not suprising that some guy named captain keeps moving it to "Taiwan." -Chiang Kai-shek23:03, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
This portal page is for the geographic entity Taiwan
Just like Portal:Ireland is for the geographic entity Ireland. The geographic range of the Republic of China has various definitions, all have some disputes. It is better to name the article with a geographically clear entity, like Taiwan, then discuss the (political) issues related to it in the article.Captain008:55, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
The UK is neither a geographical concept according to your definition. What United Kingdom means varied in different point of history. — Instantnood11:01, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
That is, informal mediation and please do not move the article to change its name so we can discuss the matter instead of having a revert war over it. The last thing we want is for this to turn into a heated revert war. Instead, discussing the matter will be better than edit-warring over it. Cowman109Talk15:04, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
Please note that we will not "determine the naming of the portal". That is for the participants to determine. We will only assist. Ideogram15:57, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
The name of the portal is actually the problem. I'm trying to find a way to make it known and understood that Portal:Taiwan is about the island and its history, not the ROC (which is also included equally as a part of the island's history and identity) which causes all kinds of problem such as "pro-aborigines = anti-ROC, green color = pro-Taiwan independence = anti-ROC. The Chinese Wikiportal is also named Portal:Taiwan (in Chinese), there is no Portal:Republic of China at their end.
Even though I've tried to explain this to User:Chiang Kai-shek (maybe I didn't do a good job at explaining) he/she seems determined to keep moving the portal to Portal:Republic of China. Did he/she understand what this portal is about? Or only interested in asserting ROC as a country? If not Chiang, who else in the future will also start moving the portal to ROC, it will never end unless people settle on and accept a portal name.
I'm interested to know what you, the mediators decide about this naming dispute. Even though it's not binding I'd like to hear what you think is reasonable and what other steps should be taken if users such as Chiang doesn't agree with the mediator remarks. — Nrtm8116:37, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
As neutral parties we cannot issue opinions on the name. If this mediation fails you will have other dispute resolution options, see WP:DR. Ideogram17:18, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
I believe User:The Halo is currently looking for some evidence policy-wise to see if there's any mention of which should be used. It's best to wait to see what he finds, and if some sort of consensus can't be guaged, determining the opinion of a wider audience may be necessary through a RFC or a question on the village pump, for example. Cowman109Talk17:50, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
Hello. Yes, I was having a look at other policies, and at other portals. I'm afraid I can't find any policy regarding this political/geographical debate. However, I did find some precedents, and some similar situations.
If we look at other geographical portals, we can see some similarities with other portals, most notably, the Portal:Ireland, which is about the united Ireland (that is the republic of Ireland, and Northern Ireland.) While this is not exactly the same situation, it does show a geographical (and to some extent a cultural) portal, without a political tie to either country.
May I ask Chiang Kai-shek and Nrtm81 if they would consider changing the name of this portal to Portal:Island of Taiwan, and create a new Portal:Republic Of China which covers Taiwan, the Pescadores, Kinmen, and Matsu, and have these two portals link to each other. This, to me, would not only stop any political/geographic confusion over what these portals would be about, but it would also stop any future revert or renaming wars. This is only a opening suggestion, one that would need to be thoroughly discussed and refined before it is finalised, but I thought that I would ask people what they thought. I put this idea in an email to Ideogram, but I thought that I would put it here too, so that everything was in the open.
The Halo's suggestion is actually positive to a degree, on my end. My opponent accuses me of having a political agenda (pushing the ROC as a country...stuff like that). By the way, the Republic of China is a fully sovereign state. It would make sense to put Portal: Republic of China and then have some info about the current jurisdiction of the ROC (Taiwan, Kinmen, Penghu, Matsu). Why can't the information about Taiwan be under the ROC banner? It is indeed a province of the Republic of China. I don't see other portals such as Portal:Xiamen, etc. That can be a geographical place too, or how about Portal:Kinmen. I believe my opponent is pushing a Taiwan independence based political agenda. On the Republic of China article in Wikipedia, there is a link to Portal:Republic of China. It says ROC, not Taiwan portal. I'm not pushing any political agenda. I'm recognizing the facts and there's no problem with doing that. But come on, why can't information about Taiwan Province be put under the ROC. It will stil be dominant as Taiwan makes up most of the territory of the Free Areas of the ROC. -Chiang Kai-shek00:45, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
If I was pushing for Taiwan independence, why haven't I used Portal:Republic of Taiwan (which is the title independence supporters want). There's even a "Taiwan flag", why don't I use that on the portal page?
ROC is not Taiwan history, it's part of Taiwan history. (By the way, when I use "Taiwan" I'm refering to the island and not intended in the political sense) — Nrtm8107:35, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
What do you think of having both portals? Your opponent can work on the Taiwan portal, and you can work on the ROC portal. There's no problem with sharing whatever material you like between the portals. Ideogram00:55, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
Having portals about a provinces, or counties, or states is actually pretty common place. See Portal:Cornwall, Portal:Paris, Portal:Hong Kong, Portal:Texas, or Portal:Quebec for a few examples. I also agree with Ideogram as far as sharing material, and I would also suggest that the two portal's link to one another, as is suggested in Wikipedia:Portal/Guidelines. Also, I think that no one is trying to stop you putting Taiwan info under the ROC portal banner, it's jus that some people believe that Taiwan is important enough to have it's own portal. However, I see no reason why these two portals can't co-exist, that is if you two are willing to go along with that. The Halo (talk) 01:05, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
Just a quick note to say that it's 2:15 in the morning here, so I'm going to bed now. Please continue to discuss this, and hopefully we'll have a solution sometime soon. Good night! The Halo (talk) 01:17, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
The problem with having both Portal:Taiwan and Portal:Republic of China is that they overlap too much. In reality, it would be inappropriate for the ROC portal to talk about Mongolia, Tuva, Mainland ChIna, although a brief little piece about the Chinese Civil War and how it divided China and the ROC's boundaries should be included. It is pointless to have two very similiar overlapping articles. Taiwan is important, but the ROC covers it. And the excuse of saying that the ROC's boundaries were never officially redrawn and are disputed. In the early 90s, Lee Teng-hui said that he does not dispute nor challenge the fact that the Communists control Mainland China. The only reason that Chen Shui-bian hasn't changed the boundaries, is that it would trigger a crisis. That excuse of the ROC's boundaries is unfounded. The government knows that it only controls the free area of the ROC. The disambugation should be enough. There is no need for two articles that overlap. And if one has to be chosen, it should be definitely the ROC Portal name. I'm not trying to include politics or whatever. The name just has to be correct to begin with. Otherwise, the content is fine. -Chiang Kai-shek03:23, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
First of all Lee Teng-hui and Chen Shui-bian both support Taiwan independence from China. Obviously Lee would say he recognizes that communists control mainland China because he isn't interested in the mainland but only interested in Taiwan. Some KMT claim Lee is a pro-Taiwan indepence supporter who tried to sabotage the KMT by preventing James Soong to run for the presidential elections under the KMT, which resulted in Chen Shui-bian (a supporter of Taiwan indepence) to win.
"Taiwan" and "ROC" are intertwined but I want you to understand that they are not one and the same because the history of the ROC covers both China and Taiwan. ROC is not the sole history of Taiwan island but a part of its history. Do you know that there are actually two governments on Taiwan? One is the national-level government (the ROC government) which represents "all of China" and is temporarily ruling Taipei City and Kaohsiung City, the other is the provincial-level government which there are two: Taiwan Province and Fukien Province (Kinmen and Matsu islands). Since you have the user name Chiang Kai-shek, you should know that Chiang Kai-shek's will dated March 29, 1975 mentions "recovery of the mainland".
Why don't you go move zh:Portal:台灣 (Taiwan) to zh:Portal:中華民國 (Republic of China)? The Chinese Wiki Portal is also named "Portal:Taiwan", they don't have a "Portal:Republic of China" you might as well raise this issue to them as well so the Portals are actually about the same thing. — Nrtm8107:35, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
Let's try to keep to the Portal issue. There is no Wikipedia policy against having overlapping portals. It does seem to me that having one that looks at it from the political perspective and one that looks at it from the geographic perspective provides a diversity of views, which is encouraged at Wikipedia. Ideogram03:29, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
That is related to the Portal issue. The other guy gave some reasons supporting the "Taiwan" portal. By the way, why did he put Taiwan Portal vs. "Republic of China" Portal (ROC is in quotes? Why? Does he not recognize that state's existence?) There should just be one Republic of China Portal which talks about both politics and geography of the current jurisdiction of the ROC (Taiwan, Kinmen, Penghu, Matsu). -Chiang Kai-shek06:51, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
Aiya! You still don't get it... ROC represents both China and Taiwan. I used quotations because it is a controversial issue. ROC is China and Taiwan not Taiwan only. Otherwise why is it that the Foreign relations of the Republic of China: The 25 nations which have official diplomatic ties with the ROC all recognize it as the sole-legitimate government of the whole of China instead of just its current jurisdiction of the island groups of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen, Matsu and some other islands.
User:BlueShirts understands what the portal is about! Why don't you? I understood it as well and I originally supported "ROC" portal!! Anyway, What BlueShirts suggested is an interesting idea. Portal:Republic of China can be a political portal about the history of the ROC since 1911 until the present, you can use the ROC flag but the map must not be only Taiwan, it must be the entire China with mainland territories shaded and the current jurisdiction highlighted. Because the ROC is "China (inc. Taiwan)" not "Taiwan" OK? You are confusing this portal with politics of the ROC. This portal is intended to be the history of the island. And for the record the green color is neutral! to represent an island color not political pan-Green support! Do I have to add "By the way, the green theme on this portal has nothing to do with Pan-Green coalition"? It seems everything is being turned into politics. — Nrtm8109:31, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
First off can I ask both of you to keep cool heads. Saying stuff to eachother like 'ROC is in quotes? Why? Does he not recognize that state's existence?', and 'User:BlueShirts understands what the portal is about! Why don't you?' are not helpful to either party or this mediation process. The best thing is to relax, try to stay calm over this. It will be sorted out one way or another.
Okay then, It seems that we're still no farther along with this process than when we first started. Because of this, may I ask Nrtm8 what would be included in Portal:Taiwan that couldn't be included in Portal:ROC, and may I ask Chiang Kai-shek what part he means when he says 'The Halo's suggestion is actually positive to a degree'. If you could tell us which bits about the idea you like, we can start to work on that and form a strong compromise.
Well first of all, the ROC represents "China (inc. Taiwan)" this is evidenced by the Foreign relations of the Republic of China. As such, ROC is a rival government to the PRC (i.e. Two China governments exist but control different areas of China) Secondly, ROC is not recognized by the majority 180+ nations and doesn't have a seat at the United Nations (lost the UNSC seat to the PRC in 1971), the ROC has become known as either Chinese Taipei or "Special Customs Territory" in international relations ("Taipei, China" in the case of Asian Development Bank)
A lot of topics concerning Taiwan is applicable to the ROC but the later half of it's government (i.e. starting 1945 when it began rule over the island. However, the ROC rule from 1911-1949 rule in China prior to PRC establishment is not part of Taiwan island's history). The problem is that ROC is not Taiwan therefore to mention the history of the island prior to 1945 would confuse it with the history of China (China wasn't ruled by the Dutch, nor was it a colony of Japan by the Treaty of Shimonoseki), etc... — Nrtm8110:31, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
