"PalaceGuard asks ""is it up to us to decide whether ""China"" is or is not one of these (culture, civlization, nation) [not state])?"" We have to describe ""China"", so we do have to decide for each of those meanings whether there is a China.  We do have to decide whether there is a Chinese culture to describe.  We do have to decide whether there is a Chinese civilization to describe.  We do have to decide whether there is a Chinese nation (or perhaps 2) to describe.  And if all of these exist, and we discover that despite overlaps there are significant distinctions between them, we have to decide whether to try to jam them all into one article - a nearly impossible task as we've seen - or to put them in multiple articles.  And if we put them in multiple articles, we have to decide if one can be said to be the most common usage, and thus the page first reached for ""China"", or whether more than one are equally primary and thus, like America and Britain, the first page for ""China"" should be a disambiguation page.  As an American, the primary meaning of ""America"" is clear to me. But I have to face the reality that plenty of people around the world think differently, and some are even offended when we Americans call ourselves ""Americans"".  Those who think ""China"" always means one thing to all people need to face the reality that many reasonable people around the world seen clear distinctions between Chinese culture, Chinese civilization, and the political entities that use ""China"" in their names.  There is nothing to be ashamed of in those distinctions.  It points out the success of China as a civilization and culture.  Smaller countries, cultures, and civilizations generally don't have these distinctions because they didn't control other territories, didn't have their culture adopted by others, and didn't spread civilization.  
"