Jump to content

Talk:Republic of China (1912–1949)/Archive 4

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4

Requested move 9 August 2020

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Third page moved, others no consensus. There broad support with some neutrals that the third should be moved for WP:CONSISTENCY reasons (apart from one oppose which cited WP:NATURALDIS), so it seems we have consensus for that. The other two don't seem to have a clear consensus to move though, with #1 opposed on the grounds that it's a country page not a history page and #2 opposed for seemingly excluding Taiwan. If they are ever resubmitted at RM, I would suggest doing them individually and not together, as it confuses things when people are voting on two separate proposals.  — Amakuru (talk) 20:53, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

– I think we should put the years in parentheses to indicate which period the time period is referring to. Hatnotes may help with aiding readers to what they are looking for. Related discussions for reference: Talk:History_of_Bangladesh_(1971–present)#Requested_move_7_June_2020, Talk:History_of_India_(1947–present)#Requested_move_10_July_2020, Talk:History_of_Pakistan_(1947–present)#Requested_move_10_July_2020. Interstellarity (talk) 20:43, 9 August 2020 (UTC)

  • Strongly oppose the second, neutral on the first and the third. "History of the People's Republic of China" and "History of China (1949–present)" should be distinguished. The United Nations still recognized Republic of China as "China" until 1970s, although Republic of China only controlled Taiwan after 1950 or so. The mainland was controlled by PRC. So "History of China (1949-present)" clearly creates huge controversy. --SCreditC (talk) 00:49, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
  • It is not about whether the UN has power over Wikipedia. It is about 1) international consensus and 2) controversy. Why would we support a move that might create huge controversy that relates to over 1.4 billion people in PRC and ROC? In a word, the stated benefit of moving a page seems trivial given the huge controversy the move may incur. The Wikipedia:Neutral point of view requires us not to take a stance. And the simple name "China" after 1949 is controversial already. When one says "History of China after 1949", does it mean history of PRC, or history of ROC, or history of both? --SCreditC (talk) 20:10, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
After 1949 "China" is the PRC. That's the common English name. Or haven't you seen the China article?--Khajidha (talk) 20:57, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
That is not. Wikipedia is created after 2000, when the world recognizes "China" as PRC. But you are talking about history after 1949, when ROC standed for China for an extended period of time worldwide. Do not take your opinion as common sense. The fact that we have an ongoing discussion here is already an indication of controversy. Accept it. --SCreditC (talk) 21:27, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
"Wikipedia is created after 2000" Yes. And we are talking about an article written on said Wikipedia. Which is why it should follow current English language norms. Thank you for defeating yourself. --Khajidha (talk) 23:46, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
LOL for revealing your ignorance, lack of logic and arrogance to an even higher level. Wikipedia documents history, so it must respect history, not removing/altering historical consensus using today's consensus. China today means PRC, but for quite an extended period of time after 1949 means ROC. This is historical consensus globally. Thus, "History of China (1949-present)" is controversial. Period. You seem not capable of even recognizing the controversy here. SMH. --SCreditC (talk) 00:25, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
Historical retrospectives of any country include all previous states within their territories during the time in question. So "history of China (1949-present)" is perfectly normal usage. Or would you say that we could only write a "History of Russia (1992-present)" article but not a "History of Russia (1900-present)" one? --Khajidha (talk) 02:59, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
Look, Russia (1992-) and the Russia during Soviet Union exist at different times. However, PRC and ROC exist at the same time after 1949, and have been recognized by different groups of countries. In early years, ROC was recognized by most countries as "China", and after 1970s PRC was recognized by most countries as "China". Hence, the controversy comes from who represents "China" when both PRC and ROC exist. When you said "retrospectives of any country", you didn't realize there is no universal way to define whether it is PRC or ROC that represents "China (i.e., the country)" after 1949. This IS the controversy. Throughout the discussion, you have been stating explicitly or assuming implicitly that "China after 1949" is PRC. Always remember this is your own opinion and all your analyses based on this assumption are against historical consensus globally and are controversial to many people. I suggest you accept that there is controversy instead of pushing your own opinion around as "common sense" implicitly or explicitly. --SCreditC (talk) 05:25, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support #1 and #3, Oppose #2. The Republic of China during this period had various government types including the Beiyang government, numerous warlords, the Nationalist KMT government, Japanese puppet governments, and several more. #2 (number two) doesn't make as much sense as the People's Republic of China is the name of the country that rules Mainland China but not all of China, if Taiwan wouldn't claim to be a part of China then the move would make sense, but Taiwan currently claims that it is'" China so it wouldn't make much sense to claim that the People's Republic of China is somehow all of China (well, it would make sense if you redefine the term "China" to only mean the PRC). Taiwan from 1945 makes sense as it would includes its entire history under ROC rule as opposed to only from 1949 and it would fall better under the naming conventions. --Donald Trung (talk) 20:32, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose first, Neutral on the other two. I see no reason to change an article on a sovereign state to a history article. Whatever changes in government took place can be covered in the state's article. Dimadick (talk) 11:11, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose – The first article, "Republic of China (1912–1949), is a historical country article, not unlike, for example "Soviet Union". The reason why the years have been added to the title is in order to distinguish the historical country from the currently-existing country Taiwan (which, in the lede, is said to be officially referred to as the "Republic of China"). Taiwan (Republic of China) is more-or-less viewed as a successor state to the Republic of China (1912–1949), but the situation is much more complex than that. The first article is not a historical period article and hence I oppose the suggested article-move. The second article-move that has been suggested isn't unreasonable but it's also not necessary, so I neither support nor oppose it. As some others have suggested, it might imply that Taiwan isn't part of China, which could be controversial, though I'm not really concerned by that particular point. The third article-move is reasonable (as others have said, for consistency) and I support it. Jargo Nautilus (talk) 10:06, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Today part of...

In the infobox, it says that the Republic of China is today part of:

  • Bhutan
  • India
  • Mongolia
  • Myanmar
  • Russia
  • Kyrgyzstan

Did the ROC actually ever control or have sovereignty over parts of these countries? Or does this purely just refer to the ROC's unenforced territorial claims?

I do know that the ROC briefly occupied Mongolia. Jargo Nautilus (talk) 10:31, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

It currently also lists Taiwan which is de facto independent but neither claims to be an independent country de jure nor is recognised as such by the PRC or any country with diplomatic relations with the PRC. Kiore (talk) 08:54, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Middle of the article a mess for anyone else?

Before the province table and after the government section, there's a big blank in the middle of the article with just the pictures lining the sides. I'm seeing this happen on a 1920x1080 monitor, but if I view the article at a lower resolution (by making the browser window smaller), there's no big white gap anymore. Anyone else with a widescreen monitor seeing this happen? How can we fix this? LittleCuteSuit (talk) 06:27, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

I see it too if zoomed out, it's an issue with the article having a large amount of media and templates that are messing with the formatting. The lead infobox is absolutely enormous, the Names infobox is about four times longer than the names section, and there are two history vertical sidebars (two too many really). These boxes push all the images from every section above Government into the Government section, which is visibly overwhelmed. The first easy action would be to remove the two history sidebars (there is currently a general discussion on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Lead section about the value of their existence and use), which by itself shifts the issues upwards and removes the blank space. I would also remove the Names infobox as far too long and is already present in the main Names of China article. More tricky is cutting down the huge lead infobox, which will require a mixture of simplifying and culling. CMD (talk) 06:53, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

Misleading name - "Republic of China (1912–1949)"

As the Republic of China is still operating in Taiwan, the current title will confuse people, the reader might think ROC has been dead. Please correct the ambiguous. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Halon c (talk • contribs) 11:27, 11 January 2021 (UTC)

See the extensive list of page-move attempts given above and the extensive discussions linked from it. The current title, if potentially confusing, has been arrived at after much thought. Some effort has gone into making it less confusing by the placing of hatnotes, links, and explanatory text. Dhtwiki (talk) 20:25, 11 January 2021 (UTC)

"Tridemist china" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Tridemist china. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 June 12#Tridemist china until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. signed, Rosguill talk 18:28, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Requested move 8 November 2021

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Not moved (non-admin closure) Natg 19 (talk) 00:59, 15 November 2021 (UTC)

Republic of China (1912–1949) → China (1912–1949) – There is already a article like Cambodia (1953–1970) so why not follow the trend per WP:COMMONNAME? 142.112.224.41 (talk) 20:35, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

1949? Guidelines to follow on when a state stops existing

On one hand, the title states the years 1912 - 1949, on the other hand, the very same article states the fact that the state was still recognized in the UN as a sovereign state until 1971. At the very least, it creates a kind of paradox: a non-existing state was a functioning member of the UN from 1949 till 1971. Does Wikipedia have any guidelines on how it defines whether a state in question is still existing or has already ended? I am new to Wikipedia so I don't know. 118.232.8.200 (talk) 11:03, 19 November 2022 (UTC)

The government of Republic of China move to Taiwan in 1949,in the same year,CCP control the mainland of China.So 1949 is the end of ROC mainland period,and ROC lose UN representation in 1971. Re-pasako (talk) 12:26, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

Requested move 23 December 2022

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. Favonian (talk) 11:35, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

Republic of China (1912–1949) → Republic of china Mainland period – This entry mainly introduces the period of the Republic of China in the mainland,before retreat to Taiwan. So maybe "Republic of China Mainland period" would fit this entry Re-pasako (talk) 08:45, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 12:52, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Significance of the name quote

The quote from Sun Yat-Sen has several errors, I believe. Such as the US "While the United States, with its fourteen states" quote (unless that was intended to refer to the US in historic times from before it was said) and "All kinds of the rest the industries".

Were these originally in the source the quote came from? GoutComplex (talk) 17:47, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

Extended edit summary (10/20/23)

Some detailed justifications for my edits:

  • Giving placenames in Wade-Giles misleadingly implies there has been a name change when there hasn't been (only the preferred romanization has changed). Most historical sources on this period published since the 1980s do not mention the Wade-Giles names at all, or only do so when required. It's only appropriate to give a period name when the Chinese name of the place has changed, or where an alternate name is based on a non-Mandarin Chinese language (e.g. Canton).
  • Postal romanization of the country's name should be included at the start of this article, but not used elsewhere
  • Beijing was never called "Beiping" while it was the capital, so no need to say Beijing/Beijing was the capital
  • Notes about the administrative history of provinces after 1949, excepting general clarifications about what modern provinces a place is part of, have been deleted. The fact that the PRC rescinded the Sino-Soviet treaty of friendship in 1953 is irrelevant to this article, as is the fact that the rump provincial government of Fujian was eventually abolished by the modern ROC.
  • The section on the modern ROC changing its official name will be moved to the relevant article. The name of the ROC (1912-1949) is relevant to the modern ROC, but the opposite isn't true.

SilverStar54 (talk) 02:52, 21 October 2023 (UTC)

potential merger with Taiwan

NOT DONE
Please see the 18,000 move and merger requests, and make any additional suggestions with those and mind, while explicitly citing Wikipedia policy (e.g. WP:COMMONNAME) plus the RFC at the top of Talk:Taiwan.) Remsense诉 12:34, 13 March 2024 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


Looking at the Chinese language wikipedia, the consensus seems that the "republic of china" article is the same article that describes "Taiwan" as far as nation goes. There may be a separate article about the island of Taiwan, but there is no article like in the English language wikipedia article about the Republic of China (1912–1949) where it specifically indicates "1911 to 1945" on the article, which makes the assumption that the Republic of China, as a country, does not exist anymore. However this is not the case, and Taiwan is still officially the Republic of China. I believe it may be necessary to merge the two articles Taiwan and Republic of China (1912–1949) as Taiwan province is not the only jurisdiction the ROC government has, which includes Kinmen and Matsu of Fujian province and several other islands in provinces such as Hainan. As independence of Taiwan province itself is a politically contentious topic in Taiwan itself, I think it's in bad faith to separate the articles about the Republic of China and Taiwan, as the Republic of China is Taiwan. In the Chinese language wikipedia, the Republic of China is recognized as a country, and it shows both the officially claimed land, and officially administered land (Taiwan, Kinmen, Matsu, penghu, etc). I think this is a far more objective way to portray these articles and more appropriate for wikipedia. This is true in both the Mandarin language Wikipedia and the cantonese language wikipedia. For the pre 1949 era of the ROC, this is the article known as 中華民國大陸時期, which talks about the history of the Republic of China during the era.

I think this makes a strong case for merging the articles Taiwan and Republic of China (1912–1949) as the Republic of China still exists and has jurisdiction over more than just Taiwan — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2620:101:f000:740::146 (talk) 15:40, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi IP, this article does not suggest the Republic of China ended in 1949, it simply covers a particular period of history, much as you note is done on other language Wikipedias. CMD (talk) 16:50, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Should we rename the "Taiwan" article to "Republic of China (1949-present)"? Jkp1187 (talk) 20:05, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
that would confuse a lot of people into thinking the article is talking about the Peoples Republic of China 2603:6011:EB02:132E:BCAC:5D73:CF6F:AC04 (talk) 00:12, 13 July 2023 (UTC)
We should speak things with their real names. Jacques Renaître (talk) 12:32, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
I agree! It’s weird to separate a country’s history into two wikis… ThomasFrancis12 (talk) 06:45, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The article is confusing the lead sentence seem to imply ROC has ceased to exist

The current first line of lead is that: "The Republic of China (ROC) or simply China was a sovereign state based in mainland China from 1912 to 1949 prior to its move to Taiwan." This could be read to imply that the ROC ceased to exist after its move to Taiwan.

I understand the intent after reading through the edit histories. It seems the use of "was" is because the ROC currently being a sovereign state is contentious due to both ROC and PRC claiming to be the legitimate government of China. Hence, I propose the fix:

"The Republic of China (ROC) or simply China was a sovereign state based in mainland China from 1912 to 1949 prior to its move to Taiwan which it currently controls."

I suspect there will be some contention around saying ROC controls Taiwan, but I believe it's quite fair to say ROC governs Taiwan. ROC may claim to be the legitimate government of mainland China, but as of right now, it is clearly currently administered by the PRC. Similarly, the PRC may claim to be the legitimate government of Taiwan but as of right now, it is clearly administered by Taiwan.

I welcome alternate ways to fix this. I just believe that the current lead sentence fails to clearly communicate the current existence of the ROC. Mathchem.21 (talk) 05:25, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

In my mind it's not really even an issue of rightful sovereignty or who governs Taiwan (seems to be the ROC to me)—it's pretty clear there's an intact legal continuity between the ROC in 1930 and in 1960. The issue is that: how do you talk about a prior stage of an existing sovereign state in a way that makes it clear that while there was continuity, the state is very different now? It's not quite the same, but I think immediately of Papal states, which also speaks in the past tense, despite there being a legal throughline between it and the present Vatican. Remsense聊 15:10, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
True. Good analogy. Alexysun (talk) 19:03, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

Culture section?

All other nation pages I've seen have a section for the culture of a nation. I certainly think the republic of China had in many eays a culture distinct for the PRC and imperial China. The shanghai music scene and early evolution of the qipao immediately come to mind for me, and I'm not even well educated on the subject. 2A02:AA1:1049:D53C:22ED:8627:7F7D:C25D (talk) 12:15, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

To be plain: this article is egregiously overweighted on political and military history. There's much more to say in literally every other dimension, but we simply haven't done so. Remsense ‥ 论 12:35, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
Such is the way of such articles on en.wiki. In addition to additions, it may be worth seeing how much of this article should be a briefer summary of History of the Republic of China. CMD (talk) 13:31, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
Someone interested in focusing on this issue could adapt material from the history section of various cultural pages -- for example, I know there is plenty of Cinema of China material during the ROC era, including material I added using academic sources. That might be the quickest way to help give some balance. JArthur1984 (talk) 23:28, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
Here's some sources:
  • Zhang, Yingjin (2015). A Companion to Modern Chinese Literature. Malden, MA: John Wiley & Sons. ISBN 978-1-118-45162-5.
  • Denton, Kirk A. (2016). The Columbia Companion to Modern Chinese Literature. New York: Columbia University Press. ISBN 978-0-231-17008-6.
  • Lufkin, Felicity (2019). Folk Art and Modern Culture in Republican China. Lanham, MD: Lexington. ISBN 978-1-4985-2630-2.
  • Merkel-Hess, Kate (2016). The Rural Modern. University of Chicago Press. ISBN 978-0-226-38330-9.
  • Kaske, Elisabeth (2008). The Politics of Language in Chinese Education. Leiden: Brill. ISBN 978-90-04-16367-6.
  • Zhang, Qing (2023). China’s Intelligentsia in the Late 19th to Early 20th Centuries. Boston: Walter de Gruyter. ISBN 978-3-11-066110-1.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Republic_of_China_(1912–1949)/Archive_4&oldid=1258987599"