Talk:Paracel Islands

message: This cleanup edit by  caught my eye. Thanks for that. Looking at it, I wonder whether the word transcribed, changed there from transcripted, ought to be transliterated.
That word I wondered about appears in a bit of content reading "[...] (our national language, Chữ Quốc ngữ), not transcribed from Chinese language (differently, Spratly Islands, or Quần đảo Trường Sa is Chinese language).  [...]). Two things about that: (1) there appears to be a closing paren char missing there, (2) just who is the us in "our national language" there? 
I would have tried to fix those problems but I am not familiar with the pertinent details here and it looks too complicated for me to disentangle. I see that this appeared in differing form in this unsupported July 10 insertion by . That editor has added quite a bit of content to this article, much of it unsupported and some of it causing rendering problems from the inserted wikitext. Wtmitchell  (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 03:02, 9 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup, and original research 

message: This edit caught my eye. II haven't been able to access the cited supporting source and without seeing that have no dispute with the edit, but either I am especially dense this morning or the edited paragraph is confusing. That [aragraph now reads:
I don't see how treaties with China would give the French "effective control" of an area "nominally ruled" by Vietnam.  I've added a  tag;. Maybe something like "but effectively controlled by China" needs to be added and perhaps "nominally ruled" needs clarification. Wtmitchell  (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 09:52, 4 June 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Lying to you, since when did China control the Paracels??? Hoang Sa has been the territory of Vietnam since before the Nguyen Dynasty. Where are the historical evidences along with the relics of China's exercise of sovereignty over the sea and islands??? When the French invaded and occupied Dai Nam they managed it very well and controlled it very effectively, They built research stations, lighthouses and many things on the island, the French flag was planted on the island in 1933, France annexed the whole island. the Paracel Islands into French Territory, and during the Qing Dynasty, the southernmost island was Hainan Island, the Franco-Qing treaty did not mention China's rights and claims to the Paracels, the Republic of China had take advantage of this overthrew Japan to monopolize the East Sea and created an illegal 11-dash line in the South China Sea in 1947, After the People's Republic of China came to power, they didn't realize this and they blatantly fabricated it to create the 9th line after 50 years PhamHoangThạch (talk) 02:30, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

text: In October 1956, the Republic of China Navy captured Itu Aba Island. Taking advantage of the opportunity, the People's Republic of China immediately jumped in to occupy Woody Island. until 1974 by invasive measures, they annexed the eastern Paracel Islands until war between South Vietnam and China occurred due to Chinese aggression, Before 1956, China had no de facto control over the Paracels and your claim that China controlled effectively is a lie whereas the Paracels were part of the State of Vietnam when it was a French colony and in fact Vietnam and France ruled the Paracels effectively, not nominally https://www.camau.gov.vn/wps/portal/?1dmy&page=trangchitiet&urile=wcm%3Apath%3A/camaulibrary/camauofsite/gioithieu/chuyende/biendaoquehuong/tulieuvanban/sdfgaetwet PhamHoangThạch (talk) 03:15, 12 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  China, France, Vietnam and treaties 

message: North Vietnam never highly appreciated the South Vietnamese troops, this is complete nonsense 37.54.230.242 (talk) 13:29, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Huh? What specific part of the article does this refer to? Can you cite supporting sources, or is this your unsupported opinion? Wtmitchell  (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 14:20, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  North Vietnam never highly appreciated the South Vietnamese troops, this is complete nonsense 

message: The current version of the lede gives the name most widely used in western countries (Paracel Islands) as well as native names used by participants in the sovereignty dispute (PRC, ROC, Vietnam). I see that some editors are trying to change this; please kindly discuss any changes and rationale here in order to avoid WP:EDITWAR. AristippusSer (talk) 19:58, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Names in other languages in the lede 

message: Here, I have reverted what I assume to be a good faith edit by . The edit would have reworded an article from
to
citing a source containiing the following
I understand the meaning of that snippet from the cited source to be that (1) Japan was at war with China at the time, (2) Japan invaded the islands (3) Japan explained this invasion in some way that the source does not describe by stating that it was their official position that the islands were the territory of a country with which they were at war. The source then goes on to say that Japan declared the islands a Japanese protectorate after the invasion.
The problem I have with the wording, "invaded the islands and declared them a Chinese territory" is that it can be read that Japan (1) invaded the islands and (2 -- sometime after the invasion) declared them to be Chinese territory. That is contrary to my reading of the source, which is that Japan saw the islands as Chinese territory prior to the invasion, then invaded the islands and wrested control of them from China, then declared them to be a Japanese protectorate. I think that the previous wording that I have restored better expresses that understanding.
Discussion? Wtmitchell  (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 23:16, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Japan in 1939