Talk:Taiwanization

message: The article concentrates too much on things as they stand in the early 21st century.  Significant oppositions to the movement existed from 1989 to 1992 and much of the Taiwan localization movement and indeed independence movement is deliberately moving in the "British constitutional evolution model" or "boiling frog recipe" by its proponents in the sense that it is building one step at a time and gradually towards the concept of the Republic of Taiwan.  For instance, there was a big uproar in the mid 1990s over the proposal by Tu Cheng-sheng, then a research fellow at the Academia Sinica, of his proposal to teach history in concentric circles in senior high school (Taiwanese history first year, Chinese history second).  Most people opposed at the time and it was set aside.  A decade later, Tu is now the Minister of Education and he pushes a more radical proposal that only Taiwanese history is regarded as local history and merging Chinese and international history, and this time not even the deepest pan-blue supporter makes any noise for fear of backlesh among the current Taiwanese populatgion.  If you recall the policies pushed by the 2007 pan-Green politicians during the early post-martial law years, they sounded exactly like what Ma Yeng-jou proposes today and which the same pan-Green politicians will bash for being too "China-centric".  So I think there is a shift in goal posts in a time span over the past 20 years and we need to add more of them here. --203.152.114.104 20:09, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Need Perspectives on Early History 

message: There's a lot of speculation and original research in this article, especially in the Support and opposition section. Things like "I know the PRC says they're not opposed, but they are opposed 'in truth'" need to be supported by reliable sources. Have added "unreferenced" tag. --PalaceGuard008 03:06, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The problem is there is no real collated and neutral souce on the whole topic.  I only found fragments of newspaper editorials scattered throughout the Chinese-speaking world, and even references from the official Chinese Communist authorities are lacking.  So I'm afraid demanding "reliable source" may well disappoint you. --JNZ 02:26, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Speculation 

message: The below sections are the discussion that took place on the talkpage of the pre-merged Taiwan's desinicization campaign article:
=== Taiwan desinicized in the 1950s? ===
The article says the desinicization campaign in Taiwan dates back to the 1950s.  At that time Taiwan was deep in the heart of the KMT's sinicization campaign.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Readin (talk • contribs) 
=== Propoganda peice? ===
"this article addresses the perspective of those who likely support the reunification of all of Greater China under a single political entity."  Since when do we have articles that address only one perspective?—Preceding unsigned comment added by Readin (talk • contribs) 
=== Rename proposal ===
Like other topics, I think this article should be renamed to Desinicization in Taiwan.--Jerrch 00:00, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Would that be better than calling it "Localization in Taiwan"?  What do the people actualling doing it call it?Readin (talk) 03:38, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The DPP never called it "desinicization," they called it "Name Rectification Campaign" (正名運動).--Jerrch 13:39, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

text: Based on my limited knowledge I think it would be.  If you think it would be and no one else responds, go for it.  But if someone else objects don't make this vote the tiebreaker.  I'll want to read the two articles more carefully before making a real vote.Readin (talk) 03:26, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Desinicization discussion 

message: Like other topics, I think this article should be renamed to Desinicization in Taiwan.--Jerrch 00:00, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Would that be better than calling it "Localization in Taiwan"?  What do the people actualling doing it call it?Readin (talk) 03:38, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The DPP never called it "desinicization," they called it "Name Rectification Campaign" (正名運動).--Jerrch 13:39, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

text: Based on my limited knowledge I think it would be.  If you think it would be and no one else responds, go for it.  But if someone else objects don't make this vote the tiebreaker.  I'll want to read the two articles more carefully before making a real vote.Readin (talk) 03:26, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rename proposal 

message: I've learned recently, I guess I kind of new part of it anyway, that many of the names in Taiwan were put in place by the KMT as part of a Sinicization plan.  For example, many of the streets in Taipei had their original Japanese names replace with Chinese names by the  newly arriving KMT.  Anyone know where one can find sources for this information?  Would this article be a good place to talk about this as background?  Or perhaps would it be more appropriate information for the Taiwan and History of Taiwan articles? Readin (talk)
It should be in all of these articles. Since this is an undeniable fact, I don't think a cite would be necessary in this case. Not everything needs a cite. Feel free to take the liberty to add the information as you wish. I was very disturbed the first time I visited Taiwan by these street names. Many Taiwanese are also bothered by it and sought to rectify the street names.--Certified.Gangsta (talk) 03:55, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  sinicization 

message: I think the article Taiwan Name Rectification Campaign should be merged into this article, because that article is only a stub, and the same material is covered in this one.Ngchen (talk) 19:05, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Merge - Agree, it's just a content fork and can easily be covered in Taiwanization. --Joowwww (talk) 19:13, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

text: Merge - Agree --Mistakefinder (talk) 09:26, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger proposal 

message: There is no indcation in the following speech of Chen that he meant anything in regards to culture or eticity. He only voiced support for a separate political entity:
Iraq and Kuwait are both arab, and both separate countries. Calling Chen's speech desinicization is original research, especially since he himself said that he regarded himself as chinese and that his hometown was in china.
http://articles.cnn.com/2002-03-31/world/taiwan.nukes_1_nuclear-weapons-nuclear-posture-review-nuclear-threat?_s=PM:asiapcf
http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/taiwan/archives/2006/07/02/2003316835
Many DPP leaders have visited their ancestral hometowns in Fujian in the mainland
http://www.chinapost.com.tw/print/91760.htm
Chen was in fact subjected to a stinging criticism by a "de sinicization" advocate, Li Thian-hok over here
http://www.taiwandc.org/twcom/101-no4.htm
Rajmaan (talk) 20:51, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chen Shuibian's quotes do not belong in this article 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Taiwanization. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070929143951/http://www.libertytimes.com.tw/2004/new/may/15/today-fo2.htm to http://www.libertytimes.com.tw/2004/new/may/15/today-fo2.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:46, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified