Template talk:Republic of China infobox

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] edit this box

  • Jiang, thanks for looking after the entry. However, with the edit this box link, it would make future updating easier. For example, Template:Japan_infobox has a link of similar function. --JamesTseng 05:34, Nov 8, 2004 (UTC)

I removed it for aesthetic reasons. I added a hidden link after the last line for access to the template. --Jiang 06:30, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)

[edit] The capital of ROC

According the law of the Republic of China, there's not regulation that the formal capital is Nanking and the provisional capital as Taipei.

The capital is where the Executive Yuan is located, now Taipei. Cherico, Apr 16 17:48:24 CST 2005

what law are you citing? Encarta cites Nanking as the official capital. I think they declared Taiwan "provisional" after they moved and no one has bothered to declare otherwise. --Jiang 03:41, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I am citing no law. In fact, the term, Capital(首都), doesn't appear in any law of the Republic of China. The bare "synonym" is "the location of the central government" (中央政府所在地). And the central government, which is the Executive Yuan, is located in Taipei currently. So, you can say that the ROC has no capital for the reason that there's no regulation in law; otherwise if you refer to the term "capital" as the city where the government is, then it's Taipei. -- Cherico Apr 17 16:23:31 UTC 2005
Actually why there is so many resources saying the official capital stays at Nanking, and Taipei is provisional? Was that a claim by the KMT government without any legal basis? — Instantnood 19:15, Apr 28, 2005 (UTC)
SchmuckyTheCat 21:12, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
What about "Four years later, the Central Government relocated to Taiwan and made Taipei its provisional capital."? --Xiaopo ℑ 21:33, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

This is a matter of political opinion. The gov.tw site is run by the DPP controlled central government. The tpe.gov.tw is run by the KMT controlled Taipei government. Please dont trust everything in the GIO site since where is gross POV, such as referring to the mainland as "China". --Jiang 06:21, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)

but does anything on *.gov.tw say that Nanking is the capital? does the KMT still say that on whatever partisan website they run? With no evidence to say anyone currently claims that, why is there any need for a discussion about it at all? SchmuckyTheCat 14:40, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
During the last KMT administration the government did not actively claim that too, together with the claims on the mainland and Mongolia. And that's why we'd have to look for legal sources. If what Cherico said was true then there's no provisional capital. Wherever the Executive Yuan moves to, that will be the capital. We'd have to look for further evidence, on whether what he said was true, or the other way round. — Instantnood 14:26, Apr 30, 2005 (UTC)
There are a few more edits, such as Jhongsing Village and Historical capitals of China, removing the word "provisional". This problem with the capital has to be settled before any further edits. — Instantnood 09:18, May 11, 2005 (UTC)
And List of capitals and larger cities by country. — Instantnood 16:17, May 11, 2005 (UTC)
Attribute the nanking as capital idea from credible sources. Fairly simple to do. SchmuckyTheCat 14:09, 11 May 2005 (UTC)
Encarta. --Jiang 17:35, 11 May 2005 (UTC)
  • Don't go there. Encarta is primary source material? Wikipedia is derivative of Encarta? Should we then also follow Encarta's example and rename this infobox to "Taiwan"? SchmuckyTheCat 19:59, 11 May 2005 (UTC)
Nothing is primary source here. Encarta is peer reviewed and if Professor Pannel and Dr Lee of the University of Georgia say so, should we follow? Not necessarily, but that's evidence we might want to take into account. We're arguing content, not naming conventions so the red herring isnt relevant. Contentwise, there's not much wrong with renaming this infobox if we want to ignore NPOV and use common names no matter what.--Jiang 22:48, 11 May 2005 (UTC)
  • Everything should be primarily sourced here! It's a non-negotiable wikipedia policy. Wikipedia:Verifiability. In the last few edits, which Instantnood will gladly point you to, I haven't removed anything that said "Chiang Kai Shek moved the ROC to Taiwan and declared Taipei the provisional capitol." That's verifiable, afaik, he said it. What I removed were statements saying "Nanking is the official capitol." So far that isn't verifiable. Official means official. The government there doesn't say that, they say Taipei, period. Maybe it's true in some old document - if so, cite it. Or maybe it was just the bitter ramblings of the loser of a civil war - and not, actually, official at all. SchmuckyTheCat 02:46, 12 May 2005 (UTC)


What about this from the Academia Sinica? — Instantnood 20:49, May 11, 2005 (UTC)
Says nothing about Nanking and isn't a primary source. SchmuckyTheCat 21:46, 11 May 2005 (UTC)

Why do I want to argue with you where the capital of ROC is? I thought Wikipedia wants the most accurate fact? The sit of the Executive Yuan or the Presidential Palace doesnt represent where the capital is! Look! The ROC government is an exile government thus its capital is a provisional one, therefore Taipei is a provisional capital. I guess you as an administrator should put the sit of the ROC government is in Taipei rather than the Capital of ROC is in Taipei. As to be politically correct, I suggest you doing this.

Basically agree. If the Executive Yuan defines the location of its seat a provisional one, then the capital is a provisional one too. — Instantnood 17:42, August 12, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] The territory of ROC

The same as the vague concept of the "One-China" policy of PRC, the formal dominition and territory of ROC overlays that of the PRC. Any action to make it clear will be involved with "pro-Taiwan-independence" actions. Cherico, Apr 16 17:48:24 CST 2005

It is inappropriate to picture the ROC's 1949 borders since the claims over the mainland and Mongolia are all but ignored. For NPOV sake, I believe we only color in territories under one's de facto control in the locator maps. We clearly labelled this the "current jurisdiction" so we are not possibly implying the ROC=Taiwan.--Jiang 03:43, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)
There's also no formal definition (in law) stating that the "current jurisdiction" of the Republic of China ONLY includes TPKM. If you want to make things clear, then the ROC border including Mongolia is what we mean as speaking of ROC. When we refer to the territory of all other countries in the world, there're no such "jurisdiction" things. I think it is NEUTRAL to aplly this in the case of ROC. -- Cherico Apr 17 14:42:35 UTC 2005

The formal defitinion is not relevant here. This is a locator map and we are to use the de facto situation as its basis. I've been arguing the other direction at Talk:Republic of China...We use "jurisdiction" here because the ROC's official borders can be interpreted to be mainland China + Mongolia and we want to be neutral. There is nothing non-NPOV about showing only the current jurisdiction if we label it as such.--Jiang 00:12, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

for example, the map at the People's Republic of China does not have Taiwan colored in--Jiang 00:18, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Of course it's not correct to use "jurisdiction" here since both sides agree with the One-China policy. If so, it's NPOV to have the ROC map include the mainland. I'll re-draw the map of PRC including Taiwan soon. It should be replaced as well. -- Cherico Apr 27 02:04:25 UTC 2005

both sides do not argee with the "one-china policy". perhaps both sides adhere to "one-china" by law, but no such policy exists in Taiwan. All locator maps depict terriotories controlled/wideley recognized. are we to replace both maps at the South Korea and North Korea articles with a map of the entire peninsula because each side officially claims the other's territory? --Jiang 03:37, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
The case of south & north Korea is different. Both have seats in the UN, so can be viewed as two seperate countries. The mainland and Taiwan belong to "one China." And there is "九二共識", meaning that both sides agree with the one-China policy since 1992. I think the Taiwan map should be used only as describing the Taiwan island geographically, not here in the ROC article, because Taiwan is not a country but a geographical term. Defining the "de facto territory of ROC" as only Taiwan, not including the mainland and Mongolia implies that Taiwan = ROC is a de facto independent country. Therefore the locator map of "Taiwan" should be removed. -- Cherico Apr 28 01:49:57 UTC 2005

The UN is irrelevant here. Both are allowed seats in the UN because neither had the Security Council veto to exclude the other. The UN offerred the ROC co-existence with the PRC back in the 1960s, but Chiang Kai-shek refused to take the offer and opted the "all or nothing" approach.

wtf your information is ten years outdated. in 1999 Lee Teng-hui said that they would deal with the mainland on a "state-to-state" basis and in 2002 Chen Shui-bian declared that there is "one country on each side". We used "Current jurisdiction" to denote that Taiwan is not necessarily the same as the ROC. I repeat: All locator maps depict terriotories controlled/wideley recognized. --Jiang 02:31, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)


In the Consitution of the ROC, Article 4 The territory of the Republic of China within its existing national boundaries shall not be altered except by a resolution of the National Assembly.

Since the National Assembly never make a alteration, the territory of the ROC is much the same as that in 1912. --Rocbot 03:14, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

That Constitution of the ROC was drafted in 1947, not 1912. It includes that sentence, but I don't believe it actually defines the territory of the ROC - which kind of makes it moot. In fact, I don't believe it includes Taiwan itself, as Taiwan was ceded by the Qing to the Japanese at the time of it's signing. The ROC Constitution territorial claims can be effectively ignored, and is by the Taiwanese government.
Second, this is an encyclopedia of what is. The ROC doesn't control that territory, so we ignore those territorial claims for the actual facts: Taiwan & the other assorted smaller islands are the ROC territory.
Jiang and others more versed in Taiwan issues might want to add in their two cents here about why which statistics are used. SchmuckyTheCat 04:18, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
I mean the territory in 1912, not the Constitution. Taiwanese people are "controlled" by their elected government, named ROC, but not the one established in 1912. There're differences. The term "ROC" bears too many meanings. The Republic of China does include the mainland China & Mongolia, in every context books in school of Taiwan and many documents. According to the NPOV policy, the other meaning of the ROC (in the historic aspect) should be described as well. I might make a new ROC page as in the case of the United_Kingdom_(disambiguation) and Netherlands_(disambiguation), so I can put the historically existing ROC data there. --Rocbot 06:39, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
That locator map can be used for history of the Republic of China. — Instantnood 07:22, August 8, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] 中華民國 JhongHuá MínGuó

nativism is nice and all, but this is an english encyclopedia... SchmuckyTheCat 05:23, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Would you consider modifying other infoboxes too, say, Germany's? — Instantnood 15:43, Jun 1, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Statistics

In a recent edit[1], someone changed several statistics from what I assume were the de facto numbers from the territories under the effective control of the ROC to the "official" numbers, reflecting (I'm assuming) the population, area, etc. of the Chinese mainland, Taiwan, and perhaps even Mongolia. First of all, where do these numbers come from? And second, which statistics should we go with, the de facto quantities or the official quantities (if there is an official source for them)? --MarkSweep 20:48, 24 July 2005 (UTC)

22.8 million according to google according to the CIA world fact book
22.68 million according to the Taiwan government, official as anything.

SchmuckyTheCat 00:35, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

In [4], that's statistics of Taiwan, not ROC. Taiwan & ROC are not the same. ROCRobot 20:30, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

The estimate of the statistics population: 1,306,313,812(cn) + 2,712,315(mn) + 22,894,384(tw) + 6,898,686(hk) + 451,000(mo) = 1,339,270,197

density: 1331920511 / 11,418,174 = 117 / km²

gdp(ppp)/per capita: (32,292(hk)*6.8 + 27,122(tw)*22.8 + 19,400(mo)*0.4 + 6,193(cn)*1306.3 + 2,046(mn)*2.7 )/1339 = 6236

gdp(normal):1,843,117(cn) + 345,105(tw) + 172,932(hk) + 1,400(mn) = 2,361,154(mil) 4th

gdp(normal)/capita: (24,626(hk)*6.8 + 14,860(tw)*22.8 + 1,411(cn)*1306.3 + 547*2.7)/1338.6 = 1756 107th

--rocbot 02:08, 8 Aug 2005(UTC)

[edit] Protection from vandalism?

The recent anon edits can only be characterized as persistent vandalism. There were 5 vandalism episodes in the last 24 hours alone. Should this page be protected for the time being? As I see it, the logged-in users who have edited it all seem to be in agreement regarding its contents. If someone is planning to change it, please say so here. Otherwise, it may be best to lock it down if the anon vandals continue. --MarkSweep 00:45, 7 August 2005 (UTC)

  • It may be better to let them attack this page and quickly ban them - this is vandal bait. I worry if they can't attack this template they'll go find another target. Otherwise, yes, good idea. Make an html comment in the source that says "This page is protected from frequent vandalism. We still welcome changes and updates. If you'd like to make a change, please mention it on the talk page." SchmuckyTheCat 01:08, 7 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Internet TLD & Calling code

According to ISO 3166, the "tw" code belongs to "Taiwan, Province of China" not the ROC. The 886 calling code is also listed Reserved in ITU-T E.164 I will mark both N/A in 24 hours. --Rocbot 04:08, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

The fact that it says "Taiwan, Province of China" in an ISO document is not surprising and quite possibly due to the PRC's international political influence. Nevertheless, this is irrelevant: .tw is quite the de facto TLD of the Republic of China on Taiwan. Similarly for the 886 internaional dialing prefix set by the ITU, another international standards body. If you change any of this information, it'll likely be considered vandalism. --MarkSweep 04:22, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
Com'on, vandalism again. Any opinion opposite to yours is considered as vandalism by you? Stop talk in such a threatening way. A standard is what it is called: People believe and follow it as some kind of regulation. It will not be irrelevant just because you said it is. Maybe you can explain why the two standards are "irrelevant" (as you said) in a more relational & clear way. --Rocbot 05:15, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
Indeed, .tw belongs to the province of Taiwan, which is controlled by the ROC.
The ITU only recommends country codes. Since 886 is what Taiwan uses, and Taiwan's government is the ROC, it is the effective controller of that code. That the ITU hasn't actually defined it doesn't change the fact that the worlds telephone systems, including those in the PRC, will dial Taiwan via that country code.
Again, this is an encyclopedia of what is. If the article on country codes doesn't list the discrepancy between the ITU recommendation and reality, then that would be the appropriate place to do it. As is, Taiwan has claimed 886, so that is what is. SchmuckyTheCat 04:32, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
There're many way how "ROC controls Taiwan": Taiwan is a part of ROC, Taiwan is equal to ROC, or Taiwan has nothing to do with ROC. As the first sentence says in Legal_status_of_Taiwan, "The legal question of which legal entity holds de jure sovereignty over Taiwan is a controversial issue," I think assuming that "ROC = Taiwan" is biased. Further, assuming you're correct, you're saying that "ROC is equal to Taiwan, Province of China." Don't you think that the sentence has some logical contradiction? How can a state become a province of another country?--Rocbot 05:15, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
This infobox is not making any assertions about the status of Taiwan and the ROC. As SchmuckyTheCat has pointed out, it's merely a concise description of reality, as a quick reference. And it is a fact that in reality the .tw TLD is under the effective control of the ROC. I'm sure one can find examples of websites in the .tw domain that are not affiliated with Taiwan island, e.g., internet hosts in the Pescadores. --MarkSweep 05:25, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
There are also .tw domains hosting in the U.S and other countries as well, but the U.S. is not representive of the ownership of the .tw domain. In the same way, .tw domain is distributed to Taiwan, province of China. It can be part of ROC or not, whatever. Yet the ROC doesn't get the ownership of the .tw domain as in the case of the U.S. I mentioned above. For the ITU-T calling code case, any entity using the reserved code doesn't mean that it can be identified with that code. Since the code is for reserved usage, maybe there will be other parties who will use as well. No one assign it to the ROC, neither can we. --Rocbot 06:01, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
You may add a link to the list of country calling codes, but you cannot remove information that represents the status quo. — Instantnood 06:35, August 8, 2005 (UTC)
(response to MarkSweep's comment at 05:25, August 8 2005) The Pescadores is part of ROC's Taiwan Province, wheareas Taipei and Kaohsiung cities are not. Territories not part of Taiwan Province nor Taiwan Island include Quemoy, Matsu, Wuchiu, Taiping, Pratas, etc. — Instantnood 06:35, August 8, 2005 (UTC)
Yes, good point. Thanks for clarifying. --MarkSweep 02:05, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
Who controls an internet TLD is not always clear in many cases. There are several country TLDs that aren't controlled by the government of the area they are assigned to. As a web host, I provide hosting to caribbean, south pacific and african TLDs. Geographical location of the hosting is totally irrelevant. SchmuckyTheCat 06:43, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
In this case, names within the .tw TLD are assigned by the Taiwan Network Information Center[5] with a mailing address in Taipei. --MarkSweep 02:05, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

Since no one can give a further comment on why the TLD & Calling code should stay, I'll remove both in my next editing. --Rocbot 09:13, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

Hang on there, as MarkSweep said and several others mentioned, listing the TLD and Calling code assert nothing about sovereignty but are a mere statement of what actually transpires. Consider Kinmen, technically not part of Taiwan Province (by both the ROC and PRC definitions). Despite this, the official county webpage is http://www.kinmen.gov.tw/. Calling any locaton within ROC jurisdiction requires that you first dial 886 for the country code. If you have an ROC passport look at the country code, it's "TWN". For better or for worse these are all used by areas under ROC jurisdiction. It would be a disservice, and biased to remove them simply because you claim the official title isn't ROC. -Loren 01:21, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
I don't really care about the sovereignty things, but the fact whether the 886 code belongs to the ROC. For the calling code case, 886 is reserved. Since the ROC doesn't have a calling code, so they use it. But this doesn't mean that the ROC can be identified with the code or the ROC owns it. I don't think anyone got the power to give the ROC the 886 code. Doing this is biased; removing it is not. --Rocbot 17:48, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
It's a not a matter of "who owns it" but what it effectively represents. Effectively, ".tw" is used only by websites related to the ROC and areas under it's jurisdiction. Effectively the Olympic team belongs to "Chinese Taipei" and not ROC, effectively the ROC is represented in the WTO as the "Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen, and Matsu". Are you advocating removing these too since they aren't explicitly named for the ROC? Are you advocating removing information on Mongolia since it's not officially recognized by the ROC? I'm sorry but I consider all these to be deleting relevant information.-Loren 18:06, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
It does matter "who owns it." If the ".tw" belongs to Taiwan, Province of China, then it should be attached to the infobox of Taiwan, Province of China, not here. The HK and Macau, for example, doesn't contain the ".cn" in their infobox, but both of them are parts of China. Does ROC join the Olympic Consortium? No, it's Chinese Taipei that joins it. Is ROC a member of the WTO? No, it's the "Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen, and Matsu" that is a member of the WTO. And the membership has nothing to do with the political status of the ROC. If you'd like to describe the ROC as a member of the WTO, which is considered incorrect, I will remove that as well. This is the same case with the TLD & the calling code. If you agree that the ".tw" TLD belongs to Taiwan, Province of China, which is clearly stated in the standard ISO 3166, then it shouldn't appear in the infobox of ROC, nor Taipei, Kaohsiung, Quemoy, and Matsu. Doing this, you have to prove that "ROC = Taiwan, Province of China." --Rocbot 11:12, 12 August 2005 (UTC)
What's your point? De facto, ROC=Taiwan and Taiwan=ROC and so forth for every other silly name used to avoid the wrath of the PRC. All of these arguments are entirely pointless, by 2008. SchmuckyTheCat 15:09, 12 August 2005 (UTC)
There is nothing de facto, you can't get anything supporting that "ROC=Taiwan." I'd avoid to use emotional term, such as "silly name", in describing the well-recognized fact/name used in international standard text. Maybe you can explain why these arguments will become "pointful" in 2008 --Rocbot 08:50, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
Can't get anything that supports ROC=Taiwan? Dang, all over the taiwan.gov.tw site you gots to try really hard to find the words "Republic of China" anywhere. And if you don't understand 2008, that's fine, you can go back to your plans on invading the mainland. SchmuckyTheCat 14:36, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
No need to find taiwan.gov.tw, I live there. I know the firsthand public opinion. Yet, there's nothing to do with the dispute right now. If "ROC=Taiwan", we can do many interesting things here in the Wikipedia. However, I think the assumption has been broken long ago by some voting here. --Rocbot 19:14, 19 August 2005 (UTC)
www.taiwan.gov.tw is actually an alternative url to the site, which official link is www.gov.tw. On the right hand side there are the words "中華民國政府改造工程" (ROC government re-engineering project). — Instantnood 17:07, August 16, 2005 (UTC)
This doesn't violate my idea on the removal of the TLD & calling code. Think about the HK & Macau TLD example I mentioned earlier. I am not assuming that Taiwan if part of, total of, or nothing to do with the ROC. Just follow the standard. Speaking EXACTLY the word in the standard is a safe & neutral way. Any additional explanation of the text in the standard is however dangerous & may be biased. --Rocbot 19:14, 19 August 2005 (UTC)
(response to Rocbot's comment at 11:12, August 12 2005) The majority of the international community recognise Taiwan as a province of China, with China meaning the PRC, because of the political pressure from the PRC. The TLD is therefore, technically, assigned to the PRC's Taiwan Province, which does not actually exist. Quemoy and Matsu are not part of PRC's Taiwan Province, but Fujian Province. In reality this TLD is used by all territories under ROC administration, not limited to ROC's Taiwan Province. The provincial government of ROC's Fuchien or Fukien Province, municipal governments of Taipei and Kaohsiung and the county governments of Kinmen and Matsu use it too. You may add necessary footnotes under the infobox and a section to the TLD article, and perhaps a few sentences to political status of Taiwan, but you cannot removed it from the infobox. — Instantnood 15:57, August 12, 2005 (UTC)
I dont' even think footnotes are a good idea. After all, this is an infobox, not a full article. It makes no sense to me to clutter it with footnotes, disclaimers, etc. Perhaps a single line of fine print pointing to political status of Taiwan could be Ok, but all this further info can already be found quite easily by going to the Republic of China article. --MarkSweep 17:21, 12 August 2005 (UTC)
Yea agree.. a pointer to the relevent section or sentences will already do. — Instantnood 17:50, August 12, 2005 (UTC)
(response to Instantnood's comment at 15:57, August 12, 2005) I've said in my previous response, and I say again if you didn't see it (but I suggest that you go through the entire discussion before participating.). If the ".tw" TLD is assigned to the "Taiwan, Province of China", then it belongs to "Taiwan, Province of China," not the ROC, not the Quemoy & Matsu, and not Taipei & Kaohsiung. The usage & hosting of the ".tw" domain in area other than "Taiwan, Province of China" doesn't mean that the ownership of ".tw" domain belongs to them. There may be, for example, many ".cc" domain, originally belonging to the Cocos Island, hosted or used in the U.S, maybe much more than those in the Cocos Island itself. The U.S. doesn't got the right to claim the ownership of the ".cc" TLD. So the "effective using" means nothing here, but what is actually said in the ISO 3166 standard. Further, if you think that the ".tw" domain is assigned to the PRC's Taiwan Province, which does not actually exist, you're assuming that it is assigned to the ROC, which includes more than Taiwan Province. I'm telling you, the assumption is wrong. The ROC got no TLD (nor Taipei, Kaohsiung, Quemoy and Matsu); only "Taiwan, Privince of China" got one, as said in the ISO 3166. And I'd like to remind you again that "effective using means nothing here." as in the example I've mentioned above. --Rocbot 08:50, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
Yes. The ROC got no calling code and no TLD officially. Nonetheless many things are actually done in a de facto manner, owing to ROC's status. The TLD and the calling code have got no official recognition, but that just because official recognition has to be avoided. Unlike .cc or .tv, which are owned by Cocos (Keeling) Islands and Tuvalu respectively and are sold, the use of .tw TLD is not granted by the PRC's Taiwan Province to the ROC. If you want to let readers know that the 886 and .tw are not officially assigned, add a pointer to the right sentences in a right article. — Instantnood 17:07, August 16, 2005 (UTC)
You didn't get it. If you'd like to blame everything on the PRC, there's thousands of explanation, since no one really knows what the PRC thinks. For me, I don't think it that the ROC got no calling code & TLD is because of the PRC, but the dispute of its sovereignty & existence. Neverthelesss, the Taiwan, Province of China got an effective TLD in the cyber world. This seems to be a valid explanation as well, right! In fact, I don't want to argue about the political status of the ROC. I just want to follow the standard. And I don't think that every standard is the conpiricy of the PRC as you said. --Rocbot 19:14, 19 August 2005 (UTC)
There is absolutely no consensus to remove anything here. So far, you've heard objections from four different editors. The consensus is clearly in favor of keeping this factual information. Do not remove it against consensus. --MarkSweep 02:05, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
I'am really tired of the commands you've issued. Don't just yell "stop this stop that" "you violate this violate that." Please make your point to convince people. --Rocbot 17:48, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
People have already made their points. The only one who's apparently unconvinced is you. The burden of proof is on you if you want to remove information that others consider relevant and accurate. --MarkSweep 22:42, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Image:LocationROC.png

Please note that the image of LocationROC.png has been updated, if you see the old one containing Mainland China (or 1947 ROC), please refresh your browser. The new LocationROC.png contains ONLY regions currently under administration of the Republic of China (Taiwan): Taiwan, the Pescadores, Matsu, Quemoy, Pratas, and Itu Aba. The old image, which only highlighted the island of Taiwan, is WRONG because this is an article about the Republic of China (on Taiwan), not just Taiwan. Republic of China is often refered as Taiwan, but it also controls several other minor islands. --R.O.C 08:15, 20 August 2005 (UTC)

Additional clarification: Image:LocationROC.png now shows the current ROC jurisdiction while Image:LocationROC full.png shows the 1947 map. -Loren 08:30, 20 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Nanking

(continued from #The capital of ROC)

Several users have provided above different sources referring Taipei as the provisional capital, whereas Nanking (now known as Nanjing) as the official capital; a fact that can hardly be denied. On the other hand nobody has provided any credible evidence that Taipei is officially designated as the capital, replacing Nanking since the ROC lost control in Chinese civil war. Since it is a Wikipedia policy to present different views, we'd have to acknowledge and present the fact that Nanking is seen as the official capital by some, if not many people, and Taipei a provisional one. At the same time Taipei should be presented as the current de facto capital of the ROC. Any idea? — Instantnood 22:33, August 27, 2005 (UTC)

  • Is this another Victoria City argument? SchmuckyTheCat 23:58, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

Re [6] - The Ministry of Interior, as well as textbooks, referred Nanking as the capital, and Taipei as the provisional capital. It was not until 2002, under Chen administration, that the Ministry of Education decided to require textbooks to say "Taipei is the location of the central government of the ROC", or "The ministries and councils of the ROC are in Taipei". [7] — Instantnood 20:24, 6 May 2006 (UTC)