Talk:Taiwan Province, People's Republic of China

message: I see no reason why this should be a seperate page other than someone wanting to make a political point; surely the situation would be made clearer to a reader by including it within the Taiwan article. Cripipper 22:44, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Separate page

message: Are the books in the "further reading" specific enough to the topic of China's supposed province to be listed here?  Based on their names they seem to be about the general relationship between Taiwan and China, not the specific aspect that is the topic of this article.Readin (talk) 18:44, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Further reading 

message: I don't think I've ever read the PRC refering to the ROC as "provincial" authorities.  Even doing so would give the ROC some legitimacy. Roadrunner (talk) 04:20, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The term used in most press releases and statements is to refer to the ROC as a "local authority". An example of the PRC view towards the ROC can be found in this white paper.-Loren (talk) 17:15, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed statement 

message: We have an edit war going on between
Taiwan Province of the People's Republic of China () is an adminstrative province of the People's Republic of China (PRC), covering an area over which the PRC has no control. PRC claims the entirety of the island of Taiwan and its surrounding islets, including the Pescadores, as parts of its Taiwan Province. The PRC has never controlled any of this territory, which is currently under de facto control of the Republic of China (ROC). The People's Republic of China claims that Taiwan is part of China, that the PRC succeeded the ROC as the sole legitimate authority in all of China upon its founding in 1949 (see Political status of Taiwan). 
and 
Taiwan Province of the People's Republic of China () is a theoretical province of the People's Republic of China (PRC), covering an area the PRC has never controlled. PRC claims the entirety of the island of Taiwan and its surrounding islets, including the Pescadores, as parts of its Taiwan Province. The PRC has never controlled any of this territory, which is currently under de facto control of the Republic of China (ROC). The People's Republic of China claims that Taiwan is part of China, that the PRC succeeded the ROC as the sole legitimate authority in China upon its founding in 1949, and that the ROC currently in Taiwan is unrecognized by PRC and most of countries (see Political status of Taiwan).
It seems to me that the second paragraph is superior.  The first paragraph is wrong to say "Taiwan Province...is an adminstrative province of the PRC" because the PRC does not in fact "administer" the area it is claiming as "Taiwan Province".  Since the PRC has no control over Taiwan, Taiwan is a province of the PRC only in theory, not in established fact. Readin (talk) 05:29, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Again, this is not fiction. The province exists in the administrative apparatus of the PRC, it sends delegates to the People's Congress, etc.. Thus wordings like 'theoretical' are unsuitable. Other wordings in the lead are quite clear on that the PRC has no control at all over the territory. I think a delimitation is needed here, and perhaps the best would be to weed out large parts of the article. This article should deal with the actually existing institutional framework of the PRC province (how it's 'exile' apparatus functions, etc.), leaving the broader political discussion about PRC claims and cross-strait relations to other articles. --Soman (talk) 08:16, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Opening paragraph 

message: The caption of the map has switched back and forth between saying "mainland China" and "People's Republic of China".  I believe the latter term is more appropriate here because we are talking about a legal fiction, that is to say, something having to do with laws and government.  The article is not about "Taiwan Province, mainland China"; the article is about "Taiwan Province, People's Republic of China".  The NPOV may not be an issue because the map doesn't say whether Taiwan is part of the PRC or not.  The map may be interpreted either way.  Perhaps the caption should say "Taiwan in relation to areas under the control of the People's Republic of China". Readin (talk) 05:33, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: A better caption would be "Areas claimed by PRC as its Taiwan Province". That relates better to the core subject of the article. --Soman (talk) 08:20, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  map caption 

message: The heading used to say:
Now it says:
I'm not real happy with either. The first suggests that the province really exists.  But it doesn't.  Taiwan Province, ROC exists.
On the other hand, this article isn't really about the claims, it is really about the fictional province.  Anyone have any suggestions? Readin (talk) 05:41, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  What the article is about 

message: I happened to press 'Enter' a bit to soon before my last edit summary was completed. I removed the 'Terminology' section, since it fits better in overall articles of the political status of Taiwan. This article should be limited to the institutional framework of the PRC provincial administration 'in exile', rather than being about PRC claims on Taiwan in general. --Soman (talk) 15:28, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hasty editing, Terminology section 

message: I still think that we should change the name of the article itself, Because it still makes me and maybe others that it sill is the property of the PRC not the Roc.
Change from:
Taiwan Province, People's Republic of China
to
China's claim on Taiwan 
;or something like that.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by AMERICAN MIGHT (talk • contribs) 02:34, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Oppose, for various reasons. First of all, both Chinese governments (PRC and ROC) claim Taiwan as part of China. Moreover, there are several other articles on the Taiwan question in general. What this article would need is rather an expansion. How does the provincial administration 'in exile' function? Does it have a governing body? Who are the people at its helm? --Soman (talk) 07:43, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

text: Oppose Presumably people don't come to the page just to read the title.  They at least read the first sentence to answer the question "What is Taiwan Province, People's Republic of China?"  So as long as the first complete thought of the first line (that is, up until the point someone may think the question is answered) is very clear about the nature of this theoretical administration, then I don't think there is a problem.  The need for this page comes from the PRC using the term in various settings to push their agenda.  Someone seeing the term "Taiwan Province, People's Republic of China" will want to know what it is, and it makes sense to have this page to tell them. As for Soman's suggestion that we include more information about how the PRC stages the pretend government, that sounds like good information to include as the body of the article. Readin (talk) 13:41, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

text: Interesting points madeAMERICAN MIGHT (talk) 02:31, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name Change 

message: You can't say that a country is in theory under the rule of another country when it clearly is not, but actually an established sovereign country with its own national government.
AMERICAN MIGHT (talk) 00:51, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia's standard is published supposedly-reliable sources, not truth.  While the truth may be obvious here, China has successfully pressured many otherwise reliable sources into accepting her irredentist imperialist claims.  Since some reliable sources will claim Taiwan is a province of China, we can't just ignore the Chinese imperialist editors who want to insist that we not call the claim "fiction" no matter how accurate the term is. Readin (talk) 03:03, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: There are some basic confusions here. To call Taiwan 'a country' is incorrect. There is no 'Republic of Taiwan', there is a Republic of China which claims Taiwan as one of its provinces. Both ROC and PRC claim to be the legitimate government of all of China, the PRC claims over Taiwan are by no means different from the ROC claims on Inner Mongolia. --Soman (talk) 09:28, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Taiwan is a country.  The Republic of China is a state. The Taiwanese might hold a constitutional convention or even stage a coup  to get rid of the "Republic of China", but they will still remain the same country.Readin (talk) 16:12, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

text:  For prove that Taiwan is an Independent counntry just read this quote I got out of the Taiwan article.Below AMERICAN MIGHT (talk) 14:58, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: On September 30, 2007, the ruling Democratic Progressive Party approved a resolution asserting separate identity from China and called for the enactment of a new constitution for a "normal country". It also called for general use of "Taiwan" as the island's name, without abolishing its formal name, the Republic of China.AMERICAN MIGHT (talk) 14:58, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: This is of course something many inhabitants of Taiwan would dispute. If a future DPP government (please note that elections were held, in which DPP were defeated) would declare a 'Republic of Taiwan', then we would have to deal with that issue. For now, ROC is the only political unit with de facto rule over Taiwan. Saying that China's claim over Taiwan (be it PRC or ROC) are 'imperialist' is like calling Spanish claims on Catalonia 'imperialist'. --Soman (talk) 16:17, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  How can a soveirgn country in theory be a province of the PRC? 

message: The entire section is original research, and the spellings are incorrect! Someone needs to fix it, for intelligence's sake! Joe9320 of the Wikipedia Party | Contact Assembly of Jimbo Wales 10:24, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Representation section problem 

message: The information in this article should be merged into Taiwan Province and Political status of Taiwan. The current situation represents a POV fork and describes only part of the dispute. To say that including this information in the Taiwan Province would make things confusing is a false argument. If the article was confusing then that would only be because the situation itself was confusing. 
I don't think that's the case either way. It's not that hard to understand:
# We have Taiwan Province a real, functioning, province run by Republic of China
# PR China still claims the territory and runs an illegitimate shadow government in their country. The provinces are divided up on pre-1949 standards.
That is all. Is there consensus to suitably merge this material? Or perhaps even rename and expand it as Political status of Taiwan Province? Sillyfolkboy (talk) 14:09, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I went ahead and merged the article in a section of Taiwan Province, as I agree this article was a POV fork and shouldn't have been created. The claims of the PRC over Taiwan are already fully documented in Taiwan, Republic of China and now Taiwan Province so I don't think we need an independent article for it. Laurent (talk) 22:46, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Could you explain what the "specific subject" is according to you? If the subject is Taiwan then we already have three articles about it (Taiwan, Republic of China and Taiwan Province) so we don't need a fourth one. If the subject are the claims of the PRC over Taiwan, then we need to rename the article. But again, these claims are already fully documented in the other three articles, so there would be no point having a separate article for it. Laurent (talk) 17:48, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with Laurent. These issues are already fully outlined in the other articles. Readers can be redirected to those sections. The unmerged version only serves the purpose of separating the issue to show PRC's view, ignoring the situation as a whole.Sillyfolkboy (talk) (edits)WIKIPROJECT ATHLETICS NEEDS YOU! 14:10, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The politics of the Taiwan issue is another matter. The subject is the 'Taiwan Province', which has a real-life existence within the administrative framework of the PRC. The PRC has a provincial administration in 'exile' for the province in question. The opening sentence clearly states that PRC has no control of the area that is claimed as part of the province in question. This is not the only case were there are governments-in-exile. That an article on the subject exists doesn't mean that Wikipedia takes sides regarding recognition. --Soman (talk) 18:48, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

text: The PRC province and the ROC province are, politically, two separate entities. There are other cases, we have Judea and Samaria and West Bank as separate articles, even though they deal with an identitical piece of territory. --Soman (talk) 18:52, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge (2009) 

message: This map is simply wrong. If areas highlighted in yellow represent county-level divisions that are administrated by the "PRC" and those in blue represent areas claimed but not controlled by the "PRC", then the whole map should be in blue. The "Taiwan Province" as imagined by the "PR China" is completely under control of the Republic of China except for Tiaoyutai which is occupied by Japan. 
Also, from the imaginary map on the "PRC Taiwan Office"(), "PRC" claims Kinmen and Matsu as parts of "Taiwan Province" instead of viewing them as parts of Fukien Province and acknowledges the border of Taichung City, Tainan City and Kaohsiung City when they became special municipalities. --Jabo-er (talk) 11:13, 6 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Administrative map is wrong 

message: The Taiwan Affairs Office seems to recognize the existing (post-2010) local boundaries. It seems that all the content in the Taiwan Province, People's Republic of China#Divisions section is pure speculation. Does the PRC even have laws regulating the local administrative divisions of Taiwan? If not, than that section has to be deleted. If that section is deleted, then I think this could easily be merged with the Taiwan Province article.--Jiang (talk) 02:24, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Well the official PRC government website does not recognize Taipei, Kaohsiung, Taichung, Tainan and, New Taipei as Municipalities it only recognize Taiwan as a province. Also notice how part of the Fujian Province, Republic of China is also shown in the same map and label as part of the map of Taiwan from the Taiwan Affairs Office. I am going to hide that section for now until more information is available. — [[User: ASDFGH|ASDFGH =] ]] talk? 18:58, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Looking at government websites and concluding that what is displayed there must be the official borders of Taiwan Province of the People's Republic of China is synthesis. --Jiang (talk) 01:47, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Divisions? 

message: The section "Politically Designated Names," while very interesting in its own right, doesn't seem to really belong to this article.  It doesn't deal with the PRC government of Taiwan Province, but rather with Cross-strait relations, or perhaps the Taiwan Affairs Office.  I cleaned up the English and clarified a few points as much as I could, but I didn't want to move this to another article on my own without asking first.  WEvanTh (talk) 05:38, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move section "Names Used for Taiwanese Officials" / "Politically Designated Names" to another article? 

message: Does the PRC recognize New Taipei City as a separate city? If so, it'd be the largest city. If not, Kaohsiung would be the largest city. Either way, Taipei would not be the largest city. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 01:47, 15 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Largest city 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Taiwan Province, People's Republic of China. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120809165954/http://english.gov.cn/official/2005-07/27/content_17613.htm to http://english.gov.cn/official/2005-07/27/content_17613.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 12:53, 16 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I have corrected the list of epithets used by the PRC for officials and government bodies. An examination of the sources will show that these epithets are intended as descriptions, rather than invented, substituted names. They are used uncapitalised. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 15:39, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Names" for officials / bodies etc 

message: The side panel contains almost no useful information, except perhaps for the various pronunciations (which can be found in the Taiwan Province article anyway), and the area of the province as claimed (which cannot). I suggest the panel can be deleted in its entirety, if the area is worth keeping, it can be inserted into the section discussing boundaries. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 15:42, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Side panel 

message: I added a few images to the sidebar, which were copied from the article about the ROC's Taiwan Province. User:Horse Eye's Back swiftly reverted the edits, and we had this discussion. What do you all think of adding images to the sidebar? Félix An (talk) 14:40, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Are you asking what people think about adding images or what people think about adding images copied from an unrelated article with a similar name or what people think about the specific images you’ve copied over? Horse Eye's Back (talk) 14:42, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I would say option 1 and 3. Félix An (talk) 14:55, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: You can only ask one at a time. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 14:56, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Alright, I guess I'll start with #3. Aren't all the images within the PRC's claimed region? Félix An (talk) 15:02, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: For the benefit of other users in this discussion, I will paste the images that are the subject of this discussion on the talk page:  Félix An (talk) 15:05, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Why these images specifically? Horse Eye's Back (talk) 15:09, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I mean, these are all famous places located with the PRC's claim, and they are coincidentally also located in the territory that the ROC currently controls, so I don't see why not. Félix An (talk) 15:15, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I tried a different image this time. Take a look! Do you like this image better? Félix An (talk) 15:23, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't understand the purpose of such images. They seem at best decorative, at worst misleading. If there must be a photo, and I'm not sure there must, a photo of the province's representation in the NPC would make far more sense. CMD (talk) 15:34, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

text: Not really seeing the improvement. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 21:45, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adding images to sidebar 

message: Names used for ROC government, officials, and institutions
Since the PRC does not recognise the ROC as legitimate, PRC government and media refers to some ROC government offices and institutions using generic description which does not imply endorsement of the ROC's claim to be a legitimate government of either Taiwan or China. The precise replacements used are not officially designated, so the politically designated names for Taiwan have small variations across different source from within the PRC.
Since 21 July 2021, RTHK in Hong Kong has also imposed the same restrictions on its staff to prevent them from implying Taiwan as an independent state.
For some cases, where the name does not significantly imply sovereignty, the name remains the same, such as for the Mainland Affairs Council, County and Mayor.
=== ROC government bodies ===
* Government as the Taiwan authorities 
* Presidential Office Building as the Taiwan leader's office building
* Executive Yuan as the executive body
* Legislative Yuan as the legislative body
* Ministry of Economic Affairs as the economic affairs authority
* Ministry of Health and Welfare as the health and welfare authority
* Ministry of the Interior as the interior authority
* Ministry of Justice as the justice authority
* Ministry of Transportation and Communications as the transportation and communications authority
* Central Election Commission as the election commission
* Central Weather Bureau as the weather and earthquake monitoring agency
=== ROC government officials ===
* President of the Republic of China as the leader of the Taiwan Area ()
* Vice President as the deputy leader ()
* Premier (or President of the Executive Yuan) as the executive chief () 
* Minister of Foreign Affairs as the chief official in charge of foreign exchange
* Minister of Health and Welfare as the chief of health and welfare authority
* Minister of the Mainland Affairs Council as the mainland affairs chief
* Minister of National Defense as the military chief
* Minister of Transportation and Communications as the chief of transportation and communications authority
=== ROC institutions===
* National Taipei University as the Taipei University
* National Taiwan University as the Taiwan University
* National Taiwan Normal University as the Taiwan Normal University
=== ROC events===
* Republic of China Presidential Election as the leadership elections in the Taiwan area
Also, this section is 99% WP:OR DrIdiot (talk) 13:04, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed this section since it has nothing to do with the PRC administrative division itself 

message: * Republic of China Presidential Election as the leadership elections in the Taiwan area
Also, this section is 99% WP:OR DrIdiot (talk) 13:04, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  ROC events

message: it's acceptable to use the constitution as a primary source for what the constitution says, even in an article that isn't about the constitution. The constitution clearly does make this claim. Elli (talk | contribs) 00:41, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree its okay for the second sentence, but not the first. I appended the tag on the second sentence because it seems to me that it is being used to support the claim in the first sentence too. The PRC's constitution isn't a good source to support the claim, in the voice of Wikipedia, that Taiwan is a province of China. IntrepidContributor (talk) 01:38, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

text: I would suggest a more neutral wording, like "Taiwan Province is an administrative division defined by the PRC constitution as part of the of the People's Republic of China's territory". It would be better if we used a secondary source for the claim and contextualised it with the current reality. IntrepidContributor (talk) 01:46, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: That's a far less neutral wording than what we currently use. Elli (talk | contribs) 04:42, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: How is that less neutral? We can't put a disputed claim sourced from the PRC's constitution in the voice of Wikipedia. IntrepidContributor (talk) 10:44, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: It is not disputed that China claims Taiwan. We can say in Wikivoice that China does, as almost certainly every source on the matter will say the same. CMD (talk) 12:22, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I didn't say the claim itself is disputed. I said its a disputed claim. IntrepidContributor (talk) 12:25, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Most things described as claims are, but I don't see how that is relevant here. CMD (talk) 12:31, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: When a claimed entity is just that, it must be properly attributed, citing secondary sources. IntrepidContributor (talk) 13:08, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: The Taiwanese government literally has its own lists of times China has made such statements. Out of the thousands of possible sources on google, what requirements are you not finding? CMD (talk) 13:17, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: The Taiwanese government is another WP:PRIMARY source. Do you understand the requirement for secondary sourcing on this topic, especially when it comes to describing disputed self-proclaimed entities? IntrepidContributor (talk) 13:18, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: To be clear, you are claiming you are unable to find a secondary source noting China considers Taiwan a province? CMD (talk) 13:24, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: No, I am asking you to provide a secondary source that calls "Taiwan Province" an "administrative region" of the "People Republic of China", as is claimed in our article in WP:WIKIVOICE. I've looked, and I can't find anything of the sort. IntrepidContributor (talk) 13:38, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Top google scholar search for Taiwan Province notes the claim . The rest is just simple English words. CMD (talk) 13:56, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Can you quote where the source claims "Taiwan Province" is an "administrative region" of the "People Republic of China" as is claimed in the article? Have you ever read Wikipedia:Citing sources#In-text attribution to know how disputed claims are to be described on Wikipedia? IntrepidContributor (talk) 13:59, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: None of this is disputed. Everyone agrees that China considers Taiwan a province. I really don't understand what you're trying to say, but the claim is perhaps universally understood. CMD (talk) 14:09, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: That China considers Taiwan a province is not disputed, but that this entity is indeed an "administrative region" of the "People Republic of China", as claimed, is disputed and unsupported by reliable sources. Have you read Wikipedia:Citing sources#In-text attribution and do you understand this distinction? IntrepidContributor (talk) 14:10, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Administrative region is a really generic phrase to avoid writing "Taiwan province is a province". If there's a dispute that provinces are administrative regions, I'd like to see them. The repeated request for in-text attribution continues to not make sense here, as there is nothing remotely meriting attribution. 14:15, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Exactly. The "administrative region" phrase is being used to avoid a neutral description of the disputed claim. I don't think it is unreasonable to base everything in the lead sentence on secondary sources and not our own reading of a primary source. IntrepidContributor (talk) 14:24, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: The phrase is being used to not repeat the same word twice. It is entirely equivalent in neutrality, and remains entirely faithful to the source provided above as well as thousands of other easily accessible sources. CMD (talk) 14:30, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: The Chinese constitution is just not an acceptable source for this subject. If France claimed New York State as a Region of France (and put it into the Constitution of France), we would not describe it as such unless secondary sources do. IntrepidContributor (talk) 14:37, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: This has been covered above, so to repeat one last time, there are myriad sources noting China claims Taiwan as a province. You are free to pick what you want. France has literally claimed Mayotte as a Region of France, in the face of international opposition, and we describe that they have done so where relevant. This article, including the lead, and including the first sentence, is explicitly clear as to the purely legal nature of this topic, in line with every reliable secondary source that covers it. CMD (talk) 14:49, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: At risk of repeating myself, can you show which secondary source says the entity we call "Taiwan Province" is indeed an "administrative region" of the "People Republic of China"? I see all the phrases in Mayotte are very clearly defined and sourced, and refrains from MOS:WEASEL phrases like the "administrative region" we have in this article. IntrepidContributor (talk) 14:55, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Administrative region is not a weasel phrase. As noted above, it is a 1:1 synonym for province. It is a really generic description for any sort of administrative division, I can't imagine what it might weasel into. CMD (talk) 15:24, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I haven't seen "Taiwan Province" described as an "administrative division" of the PRC in any reliable secondary source. Such a claim needs to be attributed, especially if you want to rely on a primary source. IntrepidContributor (talk) 15:34, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: You have, in every source that notes it is a claimed province. CMD (talk) 15:45, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: So you agree it should be described as claimed province or some other form of entity like "administrative division" as described in sources and as I suggested at the start of this discussion? IntrepidContributor (talk) 15:51, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: It already is described as such. CMD (talk) 15:54, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: No, the article claims it is an administrative division of the PRC, without any attribution as to the source of the claim. This is starting to look like Sealioning. IntrepidContributor (talk) 15:58, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: It does, as does every source discussing the Chinese claim. CMD (talk) 16:03, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: At the risk of repeating myself (again): Please quote the text from the source. IntrepidContributor (talk) 16:06, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I provided one above, again you can just search for yourself. This is very basic information. CMD (talk) 16:11, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: For the third time, I ask that you quote the text from the source supporting the sentence as its stands. IntrepidContributor (talk) 16:13, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Primary sources