Talk:Two Chinas

message: This is written poorly: "...and the Kuomintang remain control of Taiwan." It probably should be, "...and the Kuomintang remained in control of Taiwan." Just a thought. In fact there are many more similar errors in this release. I would gladly edit it without adding or subtracting any information if you would let me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by NedWinter (talk • contribs) 22:19, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You can edit this page without someone there to "let" you do it. This is Wikipedia. Don't be shy. Äþelwulf <Small>Talk to me.</Small> 08:37, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Not really, the internationally accepted interpretation, for example used by the UN, of international law holds that the PRC has succeeded the ROC to the sovereignty of China, including Taiwan. Hence, de jure there is only "one China" by the most commonly accepted view of the laaw. Thus, there are only "two Chinas" on a de facto basis. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 23:54, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I didn't change the statement to say that their are two China's de jure because, as you say, a lot of people will say that there is only 1 China de jure.  However, that doesn't imply that there are 2 China's de facto.  A possibility is that there is 1 China and 1 Taiwan de facto.  You'll find that whatever the claim, there are planty of people and plenty of reasons to dispute it, so I think we either need to leave it out or write up the opinions of all sides.Readin 00:22, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

text:  Agreed. I have edited the bottom sections to clear up some errors - but the first titled section still needs to be edited - I don't like the definitive conclusion that "thus there are Two Chinas", for example. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 06:11, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

text:  I think we can just get rid of the sentence "Hence there "Two Chinas"".  The beginning of the article says that the "Two Chinas" are the PRC and the ROC.  Does it need to be restated?  As a minor rewording, I would take the sentences before that and turn them into past tense because they is in a section labeled 1912 to 1949.  "The People's Republic of China refused to recognise the government of Republic of China in Taiwan, and claimed that the ROC ceased to exist after 1949. However, the government in Taiwan continued to call itself the "Republic of China" and refused to recognize the People's Republic of China."  The next section can describe the current situation regarding recognition, as it does in its first sentence.  What do you think?Readin 07:57, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Sounds good. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 09:27, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I undid the edit that created this line: "People's Republic of China (PRC) - established in 1949, currently controlling mainland China. Hong Kong and Macau also nominally belong to PRC but entitled to high degree of [[Autonomous entity|antonomy]" (emphasic added).  I thought I should explain why. The word "nominally" seems to push a POV.  It seems pretty obvious that HK and Macau are firmly under Beijing's control, despite them having greater autonomy than other parts of China.  The word "entitled" also seems out of place, perhaps only because I've seen "granted" or "given" more commonly used.  Perhaps "entitled" is a better word. The biggest reason though, is that the sentence about HK and Macau having a higher degree of autonomy compared to the rest of China, is that it doesn't do anything to explain the meaning of "Two Chinas", which is the topic of the article.Readin (talk) 22:56, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why I Yanked Phrase About HK and Macau's Autonomy 

message: Current article says
Republic of China (ROC) - established in 1912, currently controlling Taiwan Province and part of Fujian Province.
Previously, it was changed to 
Republic of China (ROC) - established in 1912, currently controlling Taiwan and several small islands and island groups.
But then it was changed back.
The current wording is controversial, incomplete, and misleading.   First, it is controversial because the term "Taiwan Province" is offensive to many people who consider Taiwan not a province, but a nation.  "Taiwan Province" is often used by people to assert their claim that Taiwan is part of China.  The wording is incomplete, because ROC actually controls more than just "Taiwan Province" and part of "Fujian Province".  For example, Taipei is not considered part of "Taiwan Province" by the ROC.  Finally, it is misleading because the amount of "Fujian Province" controlled by the ROC is very tiny.  
I believe the other wording is better because it uses common terms for the areas controlled by the ROC, just as common terms are used by for the areas controlled by the PRC.  The areas controlled by the PRC are described as "currently controlling mainland China, Hong Kong and Macau."  Each province is not listed individually, and administrative division names are not used for non-provincial areas controlled by the PRC (for example, it says "Hong Kong", not "Hong Kong Special Administrative Region").  The previous wording listing Taiwan and other islands simply describes the territories without making judgments or granting legitimacy to any particular POV.  For these reasons I will restore the previous wording.Readin (talk) 23:17, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Description of Areas Controlled by ROC 

message: I've had it up to *here* with idiots who want poorly written drivel instead of researched, nuanced, and grammatically correct material. If you want crap, go right ahead and eat it. Yes, I'm talking about you, User:Da Vynci. 
If you seriously think, for even a second, that the current version is better than the one you've reverted away (diff), then there is absolutely no point for me to put in any effort here at all. Wikipedia is probably the only encyclopaedia on earth that (1) doesn't know how to spell encyclopaedia and (2) lets idiots rule the earth. Goodbye. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 07:11, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  That's it 

message: We've been having an edit war recently with a large background section being added and removed.  The new background section clearly has information that doesn't need to be here.  For example "Yuan Shikai and the Beiyang clique, using their influences with the former imperial court and armed forces, controlled the new government in Beijing. Disillusioned followers of Sun Yat-sen formed a separate government in Guangzhou in 1917. Other autonomous enclaves included Chang Tso-lin's Manchuria (Fengtian clique) and the Ma clique of the Northwest." makes for difficult, off-putting, reading without adding significantly to the understanding of "Two Chinas".  This information clearly belongs in an article more dedicated to either the history of China or the history of the Chinese Civil War.  It doesn't belong in this article.
The new additions, if they are to be kept, need to be modified to be sure everything directly relates to the "Two Chinas" topic.
If you're looking to expand this article, it needs more details on how diplomacy has been handled in the presence of "Two Chinas".  How do third countries decide which one to recognize?  How do they handle relations with the one they don't recognize?  Does having "Two Chinas" cause confusion and how is such confusion dealt with?  Some of these issues are dealt with in the article, but more detail could be provided, particularly about how things have changed over time. 
There is a section called "other uses". Right now it uses weasal words: there are other situations in history that may be seen by some as "Two Chinas".  More details, and especially citations, are needed here.
There are plenty of ways to improve and expand this article, but a repeat of the early history of the Chinese Civil War, long before the exile of the KMT, isn't the way to go.  It may be useful to briefly mention the fall of the Qing and the rise of the KMT and CCP as separate parties, but a detailed history is best left for another article.Readin (talk) 14:03, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Background section 

message: The current History section reads
The Republic of China was founded in 1912, ruled by the Kuomintang as a single-party state. In 1921, the Communist Party of China was founded in Shanghai.
After the Chinese Civil War, the communist party took control of Mainland China and founded the People's Republic of China on October 1, 1949. The Kuomintang (and the Republic of China) retreated to Taiwan. Until the 1990s, both governments contended to be the sole legitimate government of China. Most foreign governments recognised the Republic of China as the legitimate government before the 1970s, and most switched recognition to the People's Republic of China after the 1970s.
Since the 1990s, however, a rising movement of Taiwanese independence has made the political status of Taiwan the dominant issue, replacing the debate about the legitimate government of China. One significant opinion in Taiwan is that the Republic of China and the People's Republic of China are both sovereign, thus forming "two Chinas", or "one China, one Taiwan". The current administration of Republic of China President Chen Shui-bian subscribes to this theory, and accordingly has largely abandoned the campaign for the Republic of China to be recognised as the sole legitimate government of China. Instead, it is campaigning for the Republic of China to join the United Nations as representative of its effective territory - Taiwan and nearby islands - only.
How about 
The Xinhai Revolution of 1911 led to the abdication in 1912 of Puyi, the last emperor of China in favour of the new Republic of China, governed as a single-party state by the Kuomintang.  The Communist Party of China was founded in Shanghai in 1921, and soon grew to become a potent political force.  An era of warlordism and almost continuous civil war followed.
As the Chinese Civil War ended, the communist party took control of Mainland China and founded the People's Republic of China on October 1, 1949. The Kuomintang (and the Republic of China) retreated to Taiwan. 
Though fighting, including the invasion of several coastal islands by the Communists (with both successes and failures), the bombing of Shanghai and other coastal cities by the Republic of China Air Force, as well as a guerilla campaign waged by remaining Kuomintang forces in southwest China, would continue for the next several years, by the time of the Korean War the lines of control were sharply drawn: the Communist-led People's Republic of China government in Beijing controlled most of mainland China, while the Kuomintang-led Republic of China government, now in Taipei, controlled the island of Taiwan, some surrounding islands, and a number of islands off the coast of Fujian. This stale-mate was enforced with the assistance of the United States government, which, after the start of the Korean War, changed from a policy of abandoning Chiang Kai-shek's Kuomintang regime to the Communists, to protecting Taiwan against an invasion from the mainland, in the First Taiwan Strait Crisis.
Until the 1990s, both governments contended to be the sole legitimate government of China. With the fighting largely over, the major battleground became the diplomatic. Before the 1970s, few foreign governments recognised the People's Republic of China. The first governments to recognise it as the government of China were Soviet bloc countries, members of the non-aligned movement, and the United Kingdom (1950). The catalyst to change came in 1971, when the United Nations General Assembly expelled representatives of the Chiang Kai-shek by refusing to recognise their accreditations as representatives of China. Recognition for the People's Republic of China soon followed from most other governments, including the United States. The Republic of China continued to complete with the People's Republic of China to be recognised as the legitimate government of China.
Since the 1990s, however, a rising movement of for formal recognition of Taiwanese independence has made the political status of Taiwan the dominant issue, replacing the debate about the legitimate government of China. One significant opinion in Taiwan is that the Republic of China and the People's Republic of China are both sovereign, thus forming "two Chinas", or "one China, one Taiwan". The current administration of Republic of China President Chen Shui-bian subscribes to this theory, and accordingly has largely abandoned the campaign for the Republic of China to be recognised as the sole legitimate government of China. Instead, it is campaigning for the Republic of China to join the United Nations as representative of its effective territory - Taiwan and nearby islands - only.
Readin (talk) 14:24, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  History 

message: Bhutan is the wrong colour in "The map shows the One-China policy in practice" which appears to incorrectly show that Bhutan recognised the PRC. This is not the case because both the ROC & the PRC claim territory controlled by Bhutan. Consequently, Bhutan has refused to recognise either the ROC or the PRC.
1.127.104.203 (talk) 14:56, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bhutan Wrong Colour on Map 

message: I removed the following.  While it's a nice writeup, it's very much WP:OR and WP:SYNTH. DrIdiot (talk) 05:06, 8 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed section on "similar situations"