User:Raiolu/Positions on the "China" naming dispute
Wikipedia has recently been plagued by an edit/renaming conflict arising from the use of the name "China". As a background, one should note that there are in fact currently two different sovereign states existing across the Taiwan Strait, namely the People's Republic of China (PRC), a one-party socialist state led by the Communist Party of China; based on the mainland and controls the Special Administrative Regions of Hong Kong and Macau; as well as the Republic of China (ROC), a free multiparty democracy historically led by the Kuomintang, which is based in Taiwan and controls several offshore island groups, namely Kinmen and Matsu, which are located off the mainland's Fujian Province.
Historical Background
[edit]The Republic of China was founded after the Xinhai Revolution, which began on October 10, 1911 during the Wuchang Uprising. Led by its leader Sun Yat-sen and his comrades, the revolution spread across China, and a majority of the provinces declared independence from the ailing Qing government. Taiwan at that time was an annexed dependency of the Empire of Japan, which earlier was ceded by the Qing court in 1895 after it lost the First Sino-Japanese War. The ROC itself was fraught with internal disunity, unrest, official corruption and civil war with the communists, as well as being involved in World War II when the Imperial Japanese Army began a full-scale invasion of China. With Japan being defeated, it accepted the Potsdam Declaration, which contained references from the earlier Cairo Declaration that Taiwan and its surrounding islands "be restored to the Republic of China". After losing control of mainland China to the communists in 1949 after the civil war, the ROC government was forced to retreat to Taiwan.
The communists declared the founding of the People's Republic on October 1, 1949. Despite never having actual control over Taiwan and other island groups under ROC control since its founding, it still asserts its position that "Taiwan is a sacred territory of the People's Republic of China, and the Central People's Government of the People's Republic of China is the sole legitimate government of all China". It officially states that the ROC has been sent to the annals of history and considers the now Taipei-based ROC government as illegitimate, referring it as the "Taiwan Authority", a "local authority in Chinese territory". The People's Republic has also gained control of the former European colonies of Hong Kong in 1997, in addition to Macau in 1999, and has since granted them autonomy as Special Administrative Regions (SAR) under the principle of One country, two systems. It has also sought to reunify the territories currently governed by the ROC under the same principle. Countries wishing to have official relations with the communist state have to subscribe to its version of the "One-China Policy", and terminate all official relations with the ROC government. They are however, permitted to have "unofficial economic and cultural relations with the people of Taiwan", with consent from Beijing.
In contrast, the ROC up to today, also officially claims sovereignty over "all of China". It considers itself a de-jure independent sovereign state, albeit with a reduced territory and still does not officially recognize the communist regime. But under what former ROC President Lee Teng-hui said during his time in office, the ROC "does not dispute that the communists control the mainland". Once recognized by many nations in the non-communist bloc during the Cold War as the sole legitimate government of China, it lost its United Nations Security Council seat to the communists in 1971 and withdrew from the UN (See China and the United Nations for more background information). It has since struggled with limited formal recognition due to the increasing political and economic clout of the mainland communist regime, and is often forced to use the term "Chinese Taipei" when it participates in international organizations and competitions. In recent decades, the ROC has democratized and began direct presidential elections elected by its people residing in territories it exercises control of. However, there is an independence movement, most of it based in Taiwan, which seeks to abolish the Republic of China and replace it with a "Republic of Taiwan" or under similar monikers. Therefore, politics in the Republic of China today largely relate to a pro-Taiwan independence side (Pan-Green Coalition) and a anti-Taiwan independence side (Pan-Blue Coalition). However, despite their political differences, a large majority of the population still prefer to retain the current status-quo.
Current Situation
[edit]As there are many people, especially those who are not familiar with the sensitivities in terms of names, titles and contexts arising from historical and current cross-strait issues, they would often confuse the terms "Republic of China" and "People's Republic of China", and think that both names are the same. There are also a number of Wikipedians who claim that the ROC has "given up its claims of the mainland", which are in fact erroneous. To prevent confusion by people arising from this dispute, English mass-media before (especially during the Cold War) used "Nationalist China" to refer to the ROC and "Communist China" (or "Red China") to refer to the PRC.
After the ROC lost its UNSC seat and withdrew from the the UN, English-language mass-media have by and large call it "Taiwan" while the term "China" has been increasingly used to refer to the People's Republic. This has been hotly disputed, by a section of the population in Taiwan (especially those leaning towards the Pan-Blue Coalition) as well as many Overseas Chinese who do not support the communist regime due to its authoritarian rule over the mainland. It has crushed any internal challenge to the dominance of the communist party and flatly refuses to allow any opening up of political space on the mainland.
Dispute of article titles on Wikipedia
[edit]To mediate the dispute, Wikipedia has sought to instead use the official name of the two sides as the title for their respective articles (e.g. the ROC's article is called "Republic of China", while the PRC's article is called "People's Republic of China"), leaving the article titled "China" with content largely related to the Chinese civilization as a whole. The article named "Taiwan" deals with the island exclusively, rather that the entirety of the ROC. There was also a Wikipedia guideline (Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Chinese)#Republic of China, Taiwan, and variations thereof) to settle this dispute until it was deemed as a failed proposal in early 2012.
However, over the years there have been calls on the articles' respective discussion pages to rename or move the articles in question to their perceived English language "common name" (PRC as China and ROC as Taiwan). The PRC article recently in September 2011 has since succeeded in being moved/renamed to "China", while there is still a fierce debate for the ROC article to be moved to "Taiwan" (some consider it a tit-for-tat move since the PRC article was renamed "China"). There are a few proposals to end the deadlock, but there has not been any outcome yet as of February 2012 (See Talk:Republic of China).
The "pro-Taiwan title" and "pro-Republic of China title" camps are pretty much split right down into the middle, often resulting in heated debates (including instances of mudslinging) in the article's talk page. Pro-Taiwan editors arguing that Internet search engines and most of the international mass media use "Taiwan" nowadays to refer to the entire sovereign state. However, pro-ROC editors rebutted the arguments saying that the ROC is more than Taiwan, asserting that Kinmen and Matsu are geographically and legally part of Fujian Province and there is no legal backing in relevant laws including the ROC constitution that explicitly state the common name of the nation is "Taiwan", a notion by some editors alleging to be pro-independence ideology, and question the motives of the pro-Taiwan title camp.
There is also a Republic of China (1912-1949) article, created by some Wikipedians with the aim of reducing confusion for readers. However, it has largely backfired due to a dispute on its accuracy and context as it is categorized as a "former country", and has overlaps with two articles, namely the Provisional Government of the Republic of China (1912) and Beiyang Government articles respectively. These two articles deal with the period between 1912 to 1928. However, there is no article to represent the 1928-1949 period when the Kuomintang was in power in the mainland as well as Taiwan after 1945. There has been a proposal to rename the article to only reflect the 1928-1949 period (See Talk:Republic of China (1912-1949)). As of February 2012, a new article titled Nationalist Government was written to bridge the post-1927 and pre-1949 period. The so-called 1912-1949 article is pretty much still in a limbo due to the still ongoing dispute over what should be the article title of the sovereign state officially known as the Republic of China.
Current proposals to end the dispute
[edit]Despite many other earlier proposals which have been struck down over the years, a move request and proposal has been submitted by a group of editors to try to break the deadlock. Response is still largely divided equally, with the final tally of 43 valid votes in favor and 45 valid votes in opposition. However, some editors who have supported the vote have voiced concern about future unilateral renaming of all, if not most ROC-related articles to "Taiwan" (e.g. President of the Republic of China to "President of Taiwan"), and have called for safeguards against such future action by reforming the WP:NC-TW guidelines. The move proposal is as follows:
|
Version as of February 20, 2012 – The current Taiwan article treats Taiwan only as a geographic entity, while the WikiProject Countries template for countries is located at Republic of China. When referring to the Republic of China in the modern context as both a geographical and political entity in the English language, Taiwan is overwhelmingly the WP:COMMONNAME. Opponents of the proposed move claim that "Republic of China" is the more politically neutral title for the article about the modern political entity; similar claims were made by opponents of last year's PRC / China move. In fact neither name is completely politically neutral,[1] so we should use WP:COMMONNAME to determine the article titles (see WP:POVTITLE). The subtleties of meaning between the terms "Taiwan" and "Republic of China", and any purported political meaning, should be left to the text of individual articles. Mlm42 (talk) 23:26, 17 February 2012 (UTC) Proposal:
Usage examples[edit]
So recent English language reliable sources refer to the modern political entity as "Taiwan" (see also this list of sources) to such a degree that it is no longer controversial to do so. As evidence that the term "Taiwan" is widely used to include the smaller islands, and not just the main island, one could compare Google search results, such as in the following case of Penghu: "Penghu, Taiwan" (~191,000 hits), "Penghu, Republic of China" (~411 hits). Per WP:CONCEPTDAB, the article titled "Taiwan" should be about the broad concept of "Taiwan", and not just the main island. Mlm42 (talk) 23:26, 17 February 2012 (UTC) Proposal co-written by: |
The ROC article rename and its aftermath
[edit]The Republic of China article was finally moved to "Taiwan", and the original Taiwan article was moved to "Taiwan (island)" by Wikipedia admins on March 22, 2012. The admins also issued a joint "final closing statement" regarding the move. The text is as follows:
|
Final closing statement After extensive and thorough analyses of the lengthy discussion on this topic, it has become clear that the weight of policy-based argument comes down squarely on the side of renaming the article currently at Republic of China to Taiwan. As a consequence of this, the article currently at Taiwan will be moved to Taiwan (island). An article narrowly formulated about the government of Taiwan and its history can be created at Republic of China. This decision explicitly does not include any other articles. While there was some incidental discussion of what impact this move might have on other article's names, there was no consensus determined for that. The most important policy cited in this discussion has been WP:Neutral point of view, one of the five pillars upon which Wikipedia is based. Unfortunately, all possible names of these articles carry some political baggage. So deciding on a name purely on such a basis is impossible. Using the guidance given by Wikipedia's policy on Article titles, specifically Wikipedia:Article_titles#Non-neutral_but_common_names and Wikipedia:Article_titles#Common_names, it is clear that we should use the most common name in reliable, 3rd-party English sources to determine the proper name for this article. It has been objected that "Taiwan" is not the official name of the country, but Wikipedia:Article_titles#Common_names is quite clear that the common name should take precedence over the official name where they differ and the official name does not approach the common name in wider usage. The 3rd-party sources cited by the nominators, including many respected news organizations, clearly establish that "Taiwan" is the common name. Indeed, the usage by the Taiwanese government itself is somewhat mixed. No compelling reason has been given to ignore our usual rules and use the name less commonly used in English. This name is not a recent phenomenon; the use of "Taiwan" instead of "Republic of China" has increased over the years to the point that the phrase "Republic of China" is confusing to the average reader. Two further objections should be noted: One, the former guideline currently residing at Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Chinese)/Taiwan, which, before, was part of Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Chinese), would seem to argue against this title. While the process to remove this section from the guideline was flawed, it was always worded as a content/style guideline, and not a naming convention. Even were it a proper naming convention, it is clear from the recent move of the China article, the discussions here, and the discussions at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (Chinese) that it no longer enjoyed the consensus and approval of the community. Two, it was argued that this move would end up creating unacceptable duplications of content across the various related articles. These arguments were not convincing, as this problem can be solved through the normal editing process, as it has on many other occasions on other articles. Further, a note on the behavior of some editors in this discussion. This discussion saw blatant sock puppetry, inappropriate canvassing on this wiki, other language wikis, and off-wiki forums, as well as probable meat puppetry. As a result of the canvassing, there were many non-editors who came here for the express purpose of voting on this measure. However, Wikipedia discussions are not votes, and as such we, the closing admins, have ignored any editors who came here with nothing constructive or policy-based to contribute beyond a mere vote. We also note the many, many instances of disappointingly uncivil, obnoxious, and outright offensive behavior towards other editors in this discussion which do not meet the standard of conduct expected among Wikipedia contributors. As such disruptions can result in binding sanctions, such as from a community-wide WP:RFC or the committee of arbitrators, we strongly recommend that from now on, contributors to Talk:Taiwan and related pages hold themselves to even higher standards of civility than they might normally. It has been said so many times on this wiki that it has become almost cliché, but we implore contributors to these talk pages to respond to the statement, not to the person, whether the contributor be a registered user or not. We would also caution editors who are involved in these discussions that it is inappropriate for them to close discussions and determine consensus from those discussions; even if well-intentioned, this creates an appearance of bias which can be avoided. An uninvolved editor or administrator can always be called on to evaluate consensus. Finally, we urge editors to not be over-bold in making drastic changes to pages on these topics in the days ahead, in order to let tensions cool; seek consensus first for large changes such as (but not limited to) mergers, further moves, or large-scale content revisions. We hope that with this decision, the community can move on from this debate and continue the process of improving these articles to the high level we always aim for. Endorsed:
|
However, the aftermath of the article rename was not without controversy. The promised revamped Republic of China article, as stated in proposal did not bear fruit, and inputting the "Republic of China" phrase in Wikipedia search only redirected to "Taiwan". Yet at the new island article, there has been talk of totally abolishing the said article by the same group of editors who pushed for the ROC to Taiwan article renaming. Comments on the related talk pages alluded these group of editors to be akin to "politicians renegading on election promises".
Reforming the Wikipedia: Naming conventions (Chinese) Guidelines
[edit]In late January 2012, a straw-poll was conducted in the talk page of the Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Chinese) guideline article on whether to re-write the guidelines.
The question asked was, "Does NC-TW represent current consensus?", with 14 editors voting in support, while 15 editors opposed. The guideline was subsequently declared as a failed proposal, with the admin stating, "As promised, the poll lasted for more than a week, and without any further efforts to advertise it in the form of an RfC or centralized discussion, it is closed. NC-TW is a polarizing guideline. There is about an equal level of supporters and opponents, with slightly more opponents. As such, the guideline cannot said to be a "consensus guide", as it describes itself. It has been moved to Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Chinese)/Taiwan and marked as a failed proposal. Efforts to make a new guideline on naming Taiwan-related articles to which the majority of supporters and opponents of NC-TW can agree are encouraged."
A draft proposal by a veteran editor on ROC-related articles has been gaining steam. However, there is still intense discussion about the content and wording of the proposal. The draft text is as follows. In addition, the content of the draft proposal may be updated as time goes by.
|
THIS IS A PROPOSED TEXT. FEEL FREE TO EDIT. (Version correct as of March 26, 2012)
|
Personal opinions
[edit]As an overseas Chinese, I lean towards the ROC due to reasons stated in the above sections. I personally do not recognize the legitimacy of the communist regime as it is one which gained power not by free, democratic and credible elections, but by the use of violence and intimidation. (potential Fenqing flame-attractor huh...)
Although I admit that the ROC government, especially during its last years on the mainland, was rotten to the core, it has nevertheless reformed itself into a free democracy on Taiwan that all Chinese people over the world are proud and envious about. Government officials are watched very closely by a free media and active civil society, and any slight mistake will provoke harsh criticism from society. Despite the constant and infamous brawls in the legislature, I feel that it will get better in the future as the process of building a culture of having respect and politeness for one another despite disagreements is progressing well.
To me, democracy is a culture itself. It is a culture that gives an individual a free choice of what to do with his or her life, and is also a culture of participation, moderation, tolerance and respect, even if there is a disagreement. Sadly, the mainland communist regime, in all its economic might, has failed terribly in this section. Many countries I feel are forced to have official diplomatic relations with Beijing due to geo-political and economic considerations (hey, who doesn't want to earn cold hard cash from 1.3 billion people?). That is why despite the absence of formal diplomatic relations, a majority of these countries still have substantive unofficial relations with the ROC, and that the ROC passport is a widely accepted travel document is one of the evidence to show this. Although I do see some little shimmers of hope of further opening up on the mainland, the recent crackdown on peaceful internal dissent and the silencing legitimate societal grievances has made me think twice before I grant this personal "official recognition", no matter how insignificant it may be. (yet another Fenqing flame attractor haha)
Of course, this is Wikipedia. I am supposed to be neutral. That is why I keep my bias against the PRC aside, and to contribute to the best of my abilities in a neutral manner. If it is a fact, I will accept it as a fact when it comes to editing.
Original Personal Proposal
[edit]There are a few proposals regarding how to move forward and settle the dispute in the best possible manner. I still support the reverting of the People's Republic of China article from "China" back to its original title, clean up and streamline the Republic of China article, with separate articles pertaining to the 1912-1928 and 1928-1949 periods as a way to separate the current Taipei-based ROC government and its predecessors. It is very much returning to the old status-quo, but I believe it is the best solution among the "bad" solutions available at present.
Of course, detractors will say that this proposal will just let the confusion continue, and it is "abnormal". I would like to politely inform them that confusion is caused by ignorance. When I was younger, I also had the perception that "China" is just "China", while "Taiwan" is just "Taiwan", with their official names used sparingly, as portrayed by mass-media. Readers have to read through to really learn and understand more about this issue to get rid of the prevailing ignorance and confusion. A truly free and neutral encyclopedia is a tool for information and education, not one that portrays "commonly accepted" stereotypes and bias. Anyway, how can one go wrong with official, legally accepted titles and names since the perceived "commonly accepted" names are in dispute?
Here is my proposal in detail:
- 1. Revert the content now present in the "China" article back to People's Republic of China, with its history beginning after its founding on October 1, 1949.
- 2. The "China" article will just present content on the Chinese civilization as a whole, with a politics section explaining the current cross-strait situation.
- 3. Streamline and summarize the content in the Republic of China article, with more emphasis given to the post-1949 Taipei-based ROC government.
- 4. The Taiwan article will remain as it is; the content being about the island only.
- 5. Rename the "Republic of China (1912-1949)" article to National Government of China (or Nationalist Government or Kuomintang Government; with the years attached if necessary) or any other acceptable title, with the content focused on the period between 1928-1949.
- 6. Expand and improve the content on the two articles, namely Provisional Government of the Republic of China (1912) and Beiyang Government respectively for the period between 1912 to 1928.