Talk:Geography of Taiwan

message: I've added a "main" link to this article in the section on "Geography" in the Taiwan article.  Would an editor more interested in the subject than me (I've just wandered in here because of a content dispute that I may or may not actually be helping with) please (a) move a lot of the information in the "Geography" section of that article to this (while there is some overlap, there isn't that much); and (b) then sharply reduce the amount of text in that article pertaining to geography - the section in that article should become just a summary of what's in the main article about Taiwan's geography.  Thanks!  John Broughton  |  Talk 02:24, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Information in [[Taiwan]] that should go into this article 

message: Is it volcanic? Information about how this island came to be (and when) would be good to add. Badagnani (talk) 07:02, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Volcanic? 

message: "Their ancestors arrived in Taiwan by sea from the mainland"
This is a glib and poorly sourced sentence that essentially claims to know the origins of all polynesian/austronesian peoples, which, while perhaps the position of ROC, would be contested by many, including the Wiki article on these same aborigines.  This remains very much a subject of debate. Wikibearwithme (talk) 04:03, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that the said sentence is questionable. I had added template  to ask for the exact text from the reference. If no one provides the text to prove it after several days, we may remove the sentence. --Matt Smith (talk) 04:23, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: The sentence is certainly not poorly sourced.  It is cited to a 4-page survey of recent work on the issue in a directly relevant scholarly work, and it is an accurate summary of the consensus in the field represented in that survey.  (It also says nothing about Polynesians, and Wiki articles are not reliable sources.)  One could, perhaps, qualify it a bit:   Kanguole 16:02, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: It is not poorly sourced, but is poorly written. According to what you explained at here, there is no decisive evidence to prove that their ancestors came from the mainland, and it is just a survey concludes that perhaps their ancestors came from the mainland. In my opinion, the wording of the current sentence is very inappropriate because it misleads readers into believing what it says is a truth. The sentence needs to be rewrite or be removed. Wikipedia is not a place to publish uncertain and indefinite things. --Matt Smith (talk) 01:43, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I have suggested a revised wording.  Wikipedia is the place to report the scholarly consensus, and scientific statements often have a greater of lesser degree of uncertainty.  Kanguole 05:45, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Could you please provide an intact quote (by using the quote parameter) in the reference? --Matt Smith (talk) 07:29, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: The sentence is an faithful summary of a 4-page literature survey.  I don't propose to quote it all.  Kanguole 10:25, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  indiginous aborigines came from where? 

message: :Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *Support or *Oppose, then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.
* Support. This geographical entity is the actual Taiwan. However, "Taiwan" being used as the informal nickname of political entity the Republic of China has been causing confusions between it and the actual Taiwan for a long time. The confusion needs to go away. --Matt Smith (talk) 03:39, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: There is currently a proposal for redirect of Taiwan to Republic of China. So this article's title can simply be "Taiwan". --Matt Smith (talk) 06:02, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Taiwan which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RMCD bot 22:30, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Move discussion in progress

message: This article currently has no wikilink to Taiwan. Should it? Batternut (talk) 08:47, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: It does. It was hidden behind the redirect as Republic of China so I’ve changed it to a direct link, and hopefully clarified that the island’s name is the same as the common name of the Republic of China.--JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 08:50, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

text: That's why I don't like to use "Taiwan" to call the "Republic of China" because it can only confuse readers. After all, the true owner of word "Taiwan" is the island. --Matt Smith (talk) 08:58, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

text: These changes are improvements. I remain of the opinion that the first occurrence of "Taiwan" should be linked though, per MOS:BUILD, and as at the comparable Geography of Madagascar. Batternut (talk) 09:30, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: They are not the same thing though. This article is on the island of Taiwan. The state called Taiwan is a different entity, formally called the Republic of China. I think it’s important to make the distinction between them in this case, as two quite different things, and do not coincide exactly. It’s similar e.g. to the UK, where the island is Great Britain, but the country, the United Kingdom, is often called "Britain".--JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 09:44, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I think they are very similar - the Republic of Madagascar, commonly just called Madagascar and similarly redirected, consists of the island of Madagascar and some other "smaller peripheral islands". Batternut (talk) 09:51, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know much about Madagascar so I cannot comment on it for now. But in this article, Taiwan is an island, and an island should not be linked to a regime. --Matt Smith (talk) 10:15, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

text: "The island of Taiwan in East Asia, formerly known as Formosa, constitutes 99% of the territory of the Republic of China (commonly also known as "Taiwan"). It is located some 180 kilometres ..."
Perhaps most contentious change here is from "Taiwan ... is an island ..." to "The island of Taiwan ...". Since Taiwan has "Taiwan ... is a state in East Asia.". I think the fact that Taiwan commands the primary topic means we can't be too rigid about Taiwan meaning the island and not the state. Batternut (talk) 11:13, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

text: I oppose the change. "Taiwan" is exactly the island's name. It has been confusingly used to refer to the Republic of China for too long. We don't need further confusion. --Matt Smith (talk) 11:28, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia just reflects common usage, and plenty of references to Taiwan mean the RoC, not just the island, eg the CIA. Without denying that such usage may reflect biased views, we strive to show balance and avoid righting great wrongs. Batternut (talk) 11:52, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  No article link to Taiwan 

message: Why should this article be limited to the main island (as some have asserted above)?  Should it not be like every other "Geography of X" sub-article of an article on country X, describing the geography of the country, per Wikipedia:WikiProject Countries#Structure and guidelines?  That would be consistent with articles on every other country, including others named after an island that comprises almost all of their territory, like Madagascar (and Iceland, Sri Lanka and Jamaica).  Kanguole 10:58, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see Geography of Iceland talking about other islands. Batternut (talk) 11:18, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: It's a sketchy article, and after all the other bits are very minor, but some can be spotted in the Statistics section.  Kanguole 11:31, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

text: I think as the island and polity, where they are different, are very different. It’s not like the islands other than this one are considered part of it, by being part of the same geological formation. Penghu is in the middle of the Taiwan Strait, Kinmen, Wuchiu and Matsu are geographically part of mainland China. So it makes sense to consider (the island of) Taiwan on its own, geographically.--JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 12:21, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  Penghu is in the Taiwan Strait, but I wouldn't say in the middle.  Kanguole 12:32, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

text: This should be an article about the geography of the country. --Khajidha (talk) 14:20, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Nope. As the lede says, this article is about Formosa, presently known as Taiwan (island). Its scope should only focus on the island itself. --Matt Smith (talk) 14:27, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: You do realize that the proposal that this should be the article about the geography of the country would mean the removal of that sentence? Whatever this article is and whatever it says, is not the question being asked. --Khajidha (talk) 14:31, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Whatever the proposal is, it's just a proposal at the moment. Anyway, this article talks about Formosa. If you want it to include other islands, you need to change the nature of this article first. Before that, including other islands is being off-topic. --Matt Smith (talk) 17:15, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you even understand English? The question is "what SHOULD the focus be", not "what is". The ENTIRE POINT of this discussion is about the nature of this article.--Khajidha (talk) 17:34, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

text: It's lead btw, not lede, (MOS:LEAD). Batternut (talk) 15:04, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Interesting. I have seen editors using both. I want to know which one is correct. --Matt Smith (talk) 17:15, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Technically, lead is correct at wikipedia. Explained at MOS comparison to news lead. On talk pages both spellings are used interchangeably where I also see lede used regularly. Fyunck(click) (talk) 18:05, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. I will go with "lead" then. --Matt Smith (talk) 01:16, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

text: Eh, technically, both are still correct at Wikipedia. Your link only explains that Wikipedia ledes shouldn't generally be written in the same style as newspaper ledes, as they serve different purposes for different audiences. It is an Americanism, though, so a sumpsimus might opt to avoid using it in reference to British articles. — LlywelynII 02:43, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

text: Gee, that "long discussion" was epic. Inevitable I suppose. Somehow it resolved the fate of Taiwan, but it hardly discussed Geography of Taiwan as far as I can see. The old Taiwan article was moved to Taiwan (island), which was then merged back in to Taiwan with a small section ending up here. I have not yet seen the scope of this article debated yet. Batternut (talk) 15:51, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: If this is the geography-of-the-island article, then we need to have a separate geography-of-the-country article. Which would be this article plus a few bits. What would be the point of that? This article should be made into the geography-of-the-country article. --Khajidha (talk) 16:16, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: The point is that each article is more focused. The Chinese Wikipedia has been like that and it has been working fine. --Matt Smith (talk) 17:15, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, cause there's no way the CHINESE Wikipedia could possibly be hijacked by delusional POV warriors. <end sarcasm>--Khajidha (talk) 17:34, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

text: But on a more serious side, exactly how do you focus the "Taiwan-the-island" portion of the proposed "Taiwan-the-country" page in a different manner from the "Taiwan-the-island" page? --Khajidha (talk) 17:36, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: If you must do that, select important sentences for that section. --Matt Smith (talk) 01:16, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: This does not answer the question. --Khajidha (talk) 11:22, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Please explain exactly what  means. --Matt Smith (talk) 13:38, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: If this is the geography page for "Taiwan-the-island", then there is no page devoted to the geography of Taiwan-the-country as there is for any other country. --Khajidha (talk) 13:42, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I personally don't regard Taiwan as a country. So to me, it's perfect that there is no page devoted to the geography of Taiwan-the-country. --Matt Smith (talk) 13:50, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: But the parent article here DOES, so there should be. --Khajidha (talk) 13:57, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I personally don't regard that Republic of China article as the parent article of this article. --Matt Smith (talk) 14:01, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: You seem to be the only one. --Khajidha (talk) 14:07, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Even that article describes Taiwan as a state (polity) rather than a country. --Matt Smith (talk) 14:12, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Those are generally the same thing in English. --Khajidha (talk) 14:20, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: That Republic of China article also covers Kinmen, Matsu, etc. This article talks about Formosa. --Matt Smith (talk) 14:30, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: That article talks about them in terms of everything, not just geography. Where is the article on the geography of Formosa, Kinmen, Matsu, etc as a whole? --Khajidha (talk) 14:58, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: In my view, it is here, in the geography sub-article of the country article Taiwan.  Matt, of course, has a different view, as part of his rearguard campaign against the naming of the Taiwan article.  Kanguole 15:08, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: At least I'm not one of those who don't feel guilty about confusing innocent readers. --Matt Smith (talk) 15:25, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: What do you think people are confused about. --Khajidha (talk) 15:48, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: They are confused about "Republic of China" and "Taiwan (island)". Look at the Taiwan#History section. It's making people think that the Republic of China had underwent Japanese rule, and that's ludicrous. That's why the Chinese Wikipedia never mix these things together because we clearly understand the histories of these topics. --Matt Smith (talk) 16:24, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see any confusing text there. I see talk about the history of the territory of a polity before said polity existed. No more confusing than mentioning Spanish settlements in the history section of the United States article. --Khajidha (talk) 17:19, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think it is appropriate to mention so much about histories which have nothing to do with the Republic of China in the Republic of China article. Check the Chinese equivalent. --Matt Smith (talk) 01:04, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

text: In my opinion, it does not need to exist. It's pointless to put the geographies of islands which are far away from each other into one article. --Matt Smith (talk) 15:27, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: These islands make up a particular political entity, there is a quite a bit of sense in including that entire political entity in one article.--Khajidha (talk) 15:48, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: For now, if you really want to put them together, I suggest that you do it in a section of that Republic of China article. I don't suggest putting them into one article. --Matt Smith (talk) 16:24, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

text: The small islands account for less than 1% of the land area, and even less of the population, so with due weight one would expect them to take up a tiny part of the article.  The one paragraph they occupy now seems proportionate.  Kanguole 22:28, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Also the mention of "Kinmen National Park" lower down, but still proportionate. Hardly more extra text than that otherwise needed for disclaimers explaining island-only-scope. Batternut (talk) 22:43, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

text: History of Taiwan does not include Kinmen, Matsu, the Pratas and Taiping Island. --Matt Smith (talk) 01:16, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, yes generally so, although it has some coverage of Penghu. Lists adjusted. Batternut (talk) 08:03, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

text: Batternut's comment is exactly right. This article was moved from Formosa, which obviously and correctly only covered the main island, but the current  of this namespace must include the smaller territories administered by the Chinese republican government. If it's thought necessary to create a separate article just for the main island, it would need to be at Taiwan Island or Geography of Taiwan Island, since the main topic for that name in English is the Chinese polity based there. — LlywelynII 02:39, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Scope of article 

message: The article currently claims
:Taiwanese, especially the Min Nan speakers, often call themselves "children of the Sweet Potato"
which has a cite but is still rather dubious. The current cite is to the offline (and therefore difficult-to-even-check) Nationalist Social Sciences and the Fabrication of Subimperial Subjects in Taiwan, which seems to have nothing to do with the point being cited and to have been written by academics with very questionable qualifications to verify the point. Something like this should better be sourced to a major newspaper or government site, where it would be quickly noticed and called out by people if it were mistaken or overstated.
Aside from the fact that the island doesn't actually look like a sweet potato at all, in my experience it is ubiquitously compared to a tea leaf. That would be worth noting if sources have commented on the comparison's appearance in ads, songs, etc. but the Taiwanese still wouldn't consider themselves "children of the tea leaf". — LlywelynII 02:33, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Positions is an academic refereed journal, published by a major university. So it should be reliable. It says:  It's a passing remark made in the context of critiquing an essay by an academic Taiwanese nationalist. So this doesn't support what the article text claimed at all, and has nothing to do with the physical geography of the island. I've removed the dubious claim. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 08:07, 1 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sweet potato? 

message: that  seems like a non-sequitur as far as the lead sentence goes, and doesn't invalidate the wording island of Taiwan, which plenty of sources use (scroll or click past the first ten results). Is the subject of the article the island itself, or the geography of said island? If it's the former, then the article should probably be renamed . If it's the latter, i.e. just one aspect of the island, then Taiwan should not be in bold according to the Manual of Style. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 02:50, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Judging from the lede text and the , I think the subject of the article is the island itself. I'm fine with renaming the article as . --Matt Smith (talk) 02:57, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  Since such a move is likely to be controversial, I've opened a discussion below. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 03:19, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

text:   there's an apparent rough consensus that the article is properly about the geography (of the whole country), and not just about the island itself. I've  accordingly. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 22:35, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

text:   can you provide reliable sources in support of  rather than island of Taiwan? —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 01:20, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  Can you provide reliable sources that supports "Taiwan, officially the Republic of China (ROC), is a group of islands..."? As far as I can see, saying a political entity is a group of geographical entities is blatantly contradictory. --Matt Smith (talk) 01:27, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  That's just how these types of articles tend to be written. See  below. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 01:37, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lead sentence 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 07:06, 29 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion 

message: Hello! I saw your revert. What does "Taiwan archipelago" refer to? If it does not include the Matsu Islands, we need to change the map used in this box. Geographyinitiative (talk) 22:19, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that this is potential Original Research, the use of rollback here was inappropriate, if it was not a misclick. CaradhrasAiguo (leave language) 22:22, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

text: The deletion of  seems unjustified, since "Formosa" does indeed redirect here.  Kanguole 22:40, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  I've no opinion about whether to mention the "Taiwan archipelago". Your edit removed  which has been the subject of some controversial editing in the past. older ≠ wiser 22:45, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Taiwan archipelago 

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:China which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RMCD bot 09:16, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move discussion in progress 

message: Since this is a "geography of" subarticle to the country Republic of China,there should be a separate page documenting the island of Taiwan.Just because the ROC only controls one main island doesn't mean the two terms are indistinguishable  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Twa0726 (talk • contribs) 01:24, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: The terms are slightly different, but Wikipedia is not a dictionary. The topics have over 99% overlap, so having separate articles would create a lot of duplication. For similar reasons, Sri Lanka (island), Iceland (island), Madagascar (island), Cuba (island) and Jamaica (island) are all redirects. Kanguole 11:43, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  There should be an article called "Taiwan (island)" 

message: An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect :Formosa and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 July 4#Formosa until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  Vpab15 (talk) 21:21, 4 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Formosa" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: Why is there NO information on why and when Western governments and media made that change? When I was in 5th or 6th grade, Formosa, Quemoy, and Matsu were in the news. Would have to have been between Sept 1959 and Jan 1961, cz Ike was involved. 2602:306:BC65:5CA9:B44E:1014:B6CD:E818 (talk) 14:10, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: No Slatersteven (talk) 14:31, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name change from Formosa 

message: Quoting from the section "physical boundaries": 
"The total land area of Taiwan is 32,260 km2 [...]. Taiwan proper, the main island of the archipelago, was known in the West until after World War II as Formosa, [...]. It is 394 km long and 144 km wide, and has an area of 35,808 km2."
So, how is it possible that the area of the main island is larger than the total area? Much of the discussion above also tells me that the editors haven't come to a final decision about the exact boundaries of the geographical entity which is the subject of the article, and confusion remains. Hopefully you'll come to a conclusion, as the current numbers don't make sense to a common reader like me. Thanks.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.62.121.80 (talk) 10:07, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: The two figures came from different sources. Fixed now. Kanguole 11:03, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Area 

message: I think we should highlight, how densely forested is Taiwan. דולב חולב (talk) 00:31, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Forested  

message: I have again reverted this addition of territorial claims to the Terrain section. This is obviously not about terrain, and the relevant section on boundaries already mentions the outlying islands. Sprinkling random reminders through the article interferes with the focus of other sections. Kanguole 09:56, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Territorial claims in the Terrain section