Talk:Wang Jingwei regime

message: These massive edits smell like copyvio, but I haven't found it.  Anyone else have an idea?  Wikibofh 05:16, 8 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Not direct copying, I'd say. Charles Matthews 11:21, 8 May 2005 (UTC)

text: I'd agree with you.  It looks like something like a babelfish from a native language to english to me.  Wikibofh 15:03, 8 May 2005 (UTC)

text: No, not that. I don't know why everyone keeps suggesting that - it is quite an ignorant thing to say. The contributor is a Spanish speaker, doing his best. Charles Matthews 15:09, 8 May 2005 (UTC)

text: The bigger picture is at User:Charles Matthews/Imperial Japan. Charles Matthews 15:59, 8 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Copyvio?

message: I've brought this up before, and I hate to do it again, but I can't find a single reference to the Wang Jingwei government as "Cochinchina" anywhere on the web or in print, except as a copy of a Wikipedia page.  The Japanese and Chinese articles both call it the "Wang Jingwei regime".  I find lots of hits on the web for "Wang Jingwei regime", "Nanjing regime" and related structures.
I'd really like to see a bibliographic reference to the use of this name.  It certainly isn't the most common name in English, Chinese or Japanese for the occupation regime.  I think this article should be moved to "Wang Jingwei government" to fit what seems to be the most common maniker for it.  If there really are people who call it Cochinchina, the article should say so.  But, giving the article an obscure title that is neither what it called itself, nor what other people called or currently call it, just doesn't make sense.
--Diderot 2 July 2005 12:22 (UTC)
:Should this article be called Nanjing National Government (1937-1945)? --Hello World! 03:19, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Cochinchina is 交趾支那 in Chinese, but I also never heard of Cochchina used to describe places in China. It is definitely a place in southern Vietnam. --Hello World! 03:19, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article title 

message: Ah,como dije en una ocasion,en las discusiones hay de
todo,a veces es bueno,otras veces no.
yo podria escribir en ingles,pero he preferido
hacerlo en mi idioma nativo,y el de mi conocido
que ya se fue,el Español:
lamentablemente,no soy el autor de este articulo
soy unicamente un amigo y humilde ayudante que
colaboro prestando la PC para escribir y enviar
la informacion relacionada.el autor como no
esta presente,entonces yo tomare la palabra
en su defensa.
Miren,sobre la verdaderamente dudosa cuestion del 
nombre del"estado" que administro el lider chino-
projapones de Wang Chingwei,llamado "Cochinchina" 
dire algunas cosas,que ojala mi amigo hubiera
podido haber dicho,en mas detalle:
este nombre, conozco perfectamente que es muy
similar a una region del sur de indochina,y yo
antes pensaba que Japon habia organizado algun
"estado" con ese nombre en esa region.pues resulta
al parecer que bajo esta denominacion en varias
fuentes de informacion(Libros,enciclopedias) se
referian al estado creado por los Japoneses en
Nanking y areas cercanas,o sea la efimera "nacion"
dirigida por Wang Chingwei.por ejemplo en un libro
de aviacion "Combat Aircraft of World War Two"
(Arm & Armour Press,London) se menciona que en
el apartado de Japon que este pais durante la
guerra,proporciono aviones a las Fuerzas aereas
aliadas de Manchukuo,Thailandia(Siam) y Cochinchina
,no precisamente el sector de Indochina,se referian
al una Arma Aerea titere organizada por Japon
en el estado de Wang Chingwei,en otro libro sobre
Japon,en un articulo llamado "East Asia and Second
World War"(P.93-103)" en la seccion "Social and
Economical Transformations"(P.94-96) se menciona
que Japon compraba a muy bajo costo el arroz
de Siam,Birmania y Cochinchina,o sea que el estado
de nuestro estimado amigo Wang Chingwei aparece
de nuevo,pero en los aspectos economicos de Japon.
Otro recuerdo que tengo y posee relacion con
este asunto,es que mis abuelos me relataron
que durante las decadas de los 30s y 40s
,tenian amistad con una familia de pescadores
Japoneses.entre las cosas que mis abuelos
decian es que lo mas lejos estaba en la
"Cochinchina" y cuando pregunte me dijeron:
"los amigos japoneses ,les comentaron que
Japon tenia una nacion amiga llamada asi".
por tanto esto es otra mencion adicional del 
estado Pro-Japones de Wang Chingwei.
y asi he encontrado varias otras fuentes militares
y politicas o economicas que hacen referencia
al estado Por-Japones de Nanking bajo este
nombre "oscuro" de Cochinchina,por tanto
deduzco que esa ha sido alguna denominacion
alternativa ademas de la conocida de "Estado
Pro-Japones de Nanking" y otras que aparecen
en el articulo de mi amigo.
es una verdadera lastima que mi amigo,el
japones-peruano no haya podido contestarle,
como el habia profundizado mas en esta
materia,el pudo haberle dado mayores expli
caciones acerca de esta "oscura" cuestion.
para mi basta con darles estas menciones
historicas,pero reitero,existen otra mas
en otras fuentes,que como no tengo
a mano en casa no puedo citarlas.
Pedro Gonzales
Un filo-japones convencido en
Latinoamerica.
: Anyone have any idea what he's going on about? I don't speak Spanish (kind of silly, leaving comments in Spanish on the English Wikipedia...) Noel (talk) 04:14, 4 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cierta Respuesta a Article title 

message: I gave my shot at improving the focus and flow of the introduction, front-loading the five w's. There is an ambiguity I may have compounded into error - in some wiki references, March 29 establishes the government, March 30 establishes the new head of state - could it be one date for both? Duncan Delp 07:09, 3 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Introduction cleanup 

message: If someone can rewrite this information so that it is intelligible, fine. Otherwise the heading and the gibberish that ensues should be deleted from the article.  RogerK 22:49, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Theories about Wang Chingwei's collaborations with the Japanese 

message: I know I risk ruining another article, but we have another article on the topic: Dadao government (Shanghai 1937-1940). As always, when Japanese-Chinese relations are discussed in Wikipedia, one article is from the Japanese side, and one from the Chinese side. Well, all the guys who love to improve our Latin friends articles, have fun with the merge. -- Mkill 01:21, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge

message: In the "Incidents" (battles) listed, Chinese armies are listed as being commanded by Japanese officers. Is this because (1) yes, they were commanded by Japanese officers, or (2) the material is cited from or by a Japanese source/editor who transliterated Chinese names using Japanese pronunciation, or (3) they are actually commanders of Japanese forces and not Chinese ones? 
This article needs a bit of work. --Sumple (Talk) 23:51, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chinese armies with Japanese commanders? 

message: I'm against the move from Wang Jingwei regime to ROC (Nanajing), because this can be confusing to many just by reading the topic name alone. First of all, ROC (Nanjing), is this the ROC ruled by the Kuomintang when it defeated the Beiyang warlords and moved the capital to Nanjing in 1928, as opposed to the collaborationist regime established in 1940? If you go on any library search engine and type ROC Nanjing, you won't find anything on the puppet regime, but you'll get plenty if you type in Wang Jingwei regime/puppet/collaborationist government. The title "Wang Jingwei regime" doesn't sound "formal" is not good enough a reason for such a move. Blueshirts (talk) 12:59, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I see what you mean. On a similar basis, Vichy France's official name was the French State, which can be slightly confusing, as it can also mean, literally, the French Republic. I rephrased the introduction a little bit. I think the official name should stay in the navigation template, though. Jean-Jacques Georges (talk) 13:15, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: In the navigation template we can see the flag is different, plus it's grouped with all other regimes, so it's okay. Blueshirts (talk) 00:41, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move 

message: Wang Jingwei died in 1944, however this state lasted more than him, so calling it "Wang Jingwei regime" or "Wang Jingwei Government" is surely uncorrect. We all know we couldn't name it Republic Of China: it was its real name, but it is confusing and will probably led to protests by chinese editors. Names such as Republic of China-Nanjing, Nanjing regime and Nanjing Nationalist Government are confusing too for obvious reason. So i propose: Reorganized National Government of China (which is the other official name of the state) or Collaborationist China. I prefer the first one, because its an official name. What do you think? --AndreaFox2 (talk) 19:28, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The correct name is "Reorganized National Government of the Republic of China", since ROC was still the official name. Gryffindor (talk) 15:59, 28 November 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I've undone the move by the now-blocked User:AndreaFox2 and restored the former title Wang Jingwei regime, as that's the most common name for the topic (Wang Jingwei government is the second most common). See Google Ngram. -Zanhe (talk) 00:06, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Dear -Zanhe, I believe the most neutral thing to do is that we stick to the official name, which is by the way the only name that pops up when I search the names at contemporary sources at newspapers.com. Regards,Jeff5102 (talk) 14:32, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  For article titles, we generally use WP:COMMONNAME, not official names. As the Ngram shows, "Wang Jingwei regime" is clearly the common name. And there's nothing non-neutral about it, as it's universally recognized as a puppet regime, not a sovereign government. BTW, for history articles, modern academic sources are much preferred over old newspapers, which generally reflect outdated perspectives and lack historical analyses. -Zanhe (talk) 03:13, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name change proposal 

message: During the Republican Era, the ROC used Postal Romanization, not Hanyu Pinyin, for romanization of location names for administrative purposes (e.g. Nanking, Foochow, Chungking, etc); hence the name of the ROC would be Chunghwa Minkuo, i.e. in parallel with Chunghwa Post, Chunghwa Telecom, etc. This also matches with the namesake of Manchukuo. The Hanyu Pinyin pronunciation is already present within the lede anyway, for those interested in how the characters should be pronounced in the modern day. -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs email 05:55, 24 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I changed the romanization to "ZhongHua Minguo" because 1) WP:Pinyin 2) A search for "Chunghwa Minkuo" finds only this article and Republic of China (1912–49). 3) The ROC (1912-1949)did indeed use Postal Romanization, but so did the Qing dynaasty, whose article Wikipedia does not call Tsing dynasty. ch (talk) 05:50, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Official country name romanization 

message: How do we change the caption link below the Coat of Arms to Blue Sky and White Sun? the link currently links to the PRC State Emblem.78.149.244.175 (talk) 12:29, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Coat of Arms link 

message: Isn't it a government, not a state, it is a government, I am proposing to redo the infobox.Linguiyi (talk) 19:56, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox 

message: It seems to me that a considerable amount of this information is either too overly specific to be of use, or information that would also be applicable to any other government that controlled the same territory. As it stands, this section feels like an extensive amount of filler. I would be interested in discussing the relevant tactical or strategic considerations these statistics brought to bear in official business, but otherwise would move to remove the section entirely. CompanionPrism (talk) 14:54, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is the Industry Statistics section currently a worthwhile addition to the article? 

message: Missing from this page seems to be any reference to the aftermath of the war and the later trials of collaborationists affiliated with the Regime by both the ROC and PRC. At least a small "Legacy" section could do wonders for increasing the usefulness of this page. CompanionPrism (talk) 14:57, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Postwar analysis 

message: Shouldn't the link of the word flag lead to Flags of the Reorganized National Government of China?
::It was because the common name of the country in the infobox was "Republic of China", so it linked to "Flag of Republic of China" by default. I changed the common name and also created a redirect to the article you mentioned, so it links to it now. Romanov loyalist (talk) 18:07, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Flag