Talk:Taiwan (island)/Archive 2

message: This is the most euro-centric article i've read on wikipedia..
:The current status of the Republic of China is that it is de facto independent from China while technically it still calls itself the de jure government of China (see the ROC Constitution).
This implies China=PRC for it to be "de facto independent from China". The Constitution does not call the ROC the de jure government of China.
:Thus, although these two parties are bitterly opposed to each other, and each represents roughly half of the voters (see Presidential election of March 20, 2004), there is actually no dispute about what the correct policy should be -- preserving the status quo. The only dispute is about the reason for that policy.
People can't agree on the status quo. There is a dispute. For example, creating a new constitution could be seen as disrupting the status quo. --Jiang 08:04, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I would rather suggest that they all agreed on preserving status quo (enjoying de facto sovereignty but refraim from announcing de jure independence and this is probably the most basic concensus on the so-called status quo), but disputed on the measure to preserve it. Thus, IMO, the new constitution debate does not conflict on their concensus on their intention of protectin status quo. It is the question whether a new constitution would disrupt the status quo being disagreed. I do not have strong opinion on the removed text. But if I was asked, I would support keeping it.Mababa 21:58, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed text 

message: Dear All,
I have started a Wikipedia:Taiwan-related topics notice board in the hope that contributers on Taiwan related topics can have a place to discuss on different proposals.
I also made a page List of Taiwan-related topics (by category) so that we can keep track on the topics by category. I hope this would be useful for us.
Mababa 07:22, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Taiwan-related topics notice board

message: Note: :Image:Taiwan map large.gif has long had no information as to source, and is listed on Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images. If anyone has information on the source and copyright status of the map, please add it to the image page. For more information on Wikipedia image copyright policies and practices, see Wikipedia:Images and pages linked there. Thanks, -- Infrogmation 05:03, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Map image 

message: Under political status, it is best and most important to talk about 1) the kind of government (democratic) and 2) explain the roots of that gov't (ROC WAS KMT from China, but today it is locally elected gov't).  Thus 1930 ROC is not equal to 1955 ROC is not equal to 2005 ROC.  I made sure to call it a state since Taiwan is de facto self-ruled without responsibility to any higher authority and is in relations with several other states showing that it has the capacity to do so, though it is not actually recognized by most countries.  State I feel is the most neutral word we can use to avoid controversy about "country" and ideas about nation (some people in both China and Taiwan consider themselves Chinese ethnically though divided and perhaps incompatible politically).
I removed the attempt to put Province at the beginning since that is clearly POV from the PRC perspective and I removed the reference to Taipei as the temporary capital given that it has been "temporary" for over 50 years now.  The political status still makes clear reference to the fact that China claims that the government in Taiwan (formerly KMT/ROC but now democratically elected ROC and we shouldn't confuse the two), but this is Wikipedia and we still have to explain the clear reality even if the political and the legal is highly controversial and disputed.--160.39.194.93 17:13, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent Changes March 8 2005