Talk:Republic of China (1912–1949)#rfc 873C0C4

{{atopr

| result = Read a bit of the previous discussion on this page. Remsense ‥ 论 05:49, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

}}

I noticed that the English version of the Wikipedia article on the “Republic of China” includes an end date of 1949, but the Chinese version doesn’t mention this. Since Wikipedia is a collaborative platform, it might help if people who notice these inconsistencies contribute to updating the articles. 刚刚还是今生今世 (talk) 08:34, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

:You are incorrect: the article for the Republic of China is Taiwan. This article is for the period of Chinese history where the ROC controlled the mainland. As importantly: we are not editorially dependent on what another language Wikipedia says, and vice versa. Please refrain from making changes to articles unless they are informed by our own consensus and content policies. Remsense ‥ 论 08:37, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

:The zh.wp version of this article, :zh:中華民國大陸時期, mentions the 1949 date in the short description, hatnote, opening sentence, and infobox. Folly Mox (talk) 17:50, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

:This article does not say that this sovereign state ended in 1949, just that since 1949 it has only controlled Taiwan. ALIQ2 (talk) 05:47, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{ping|Remsense}} Oops apols. Keith-264 (talk) 14:42, 6 February 2025 (UTC)

:No problem! I don't blame anyone who doesn't realize potential edge cases with that functionality. Remsense ‥ 论 14:59, 6 February 2025 (UTC)

The current text confuses the "provisional president" selected among the revolution parties during the 1912 war for the provisional government as the actual first official president voted by the first national assembly of each provinces after the regime change in 1913. The data has been clearly explained and defined in the articles of Chinese Wikipedia, but the incorrect synthesis of published material with original research is misleading the general public with false conclusion as propaganda for the orthodox Kuomintang (Chinese Nationalist Party) in the English Wikipedia. Please note the internal link text for example:

{{tq|The 1913 Chinese presidential election were the election held on 6 and 7 October 1913 in Beijing for the first formal President and Vice President of China. The incumbent Yuan Shikai and Li Yuanhong were elected by two houses of the National Assembly.}}

1. {{cite book |title=Social Transformation in Modern China: The State and Local Elites in Henan, 1900-1937 |last=Xin |first=Zhang |page=118 |year=2000 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |isbn=0521642892 |location=Cambridge, United Kingdom]]}}
2. {{Cite book |title=中國近代史 |trans-title=Modern Chinese History |first=Shi-qu |last=Zheng |publisher=Beijing Normal University Press |language=zh-hans |location=Nanjing, China |year=2018 |edition=4 |isbn=978-7303197552}}

Please kindly fix the misleading texts. ~~ Mickie-Mickie (talk) 20:43, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

This article about the Republic of China history in 1912–1949 incorrectly presents three Kuomintang (KMT) presidents only with inaccurate information and its biased Dangguo (Party-state) views as follows:

1. Sun Yat-sen ( being chosen by the revolution factions during the war as "provisional" president, without a legitimate election by parliament or national assembly yet, then stayed on seat for only 69 days before stepping down in 1912, but being mis-described here as the first president),
2. Chiang Kai-shek, the arch-warlord and then a dictator, twice being forced to resign during his reign in 1928–1948, but not noted with his replacers here), and
3. Yan Xishan, the premier of Executive Yuan only in name during the Civil war, then being incorrectly described here as the "Acting" president in the article but actually was just temporarily filled in the honorary title again with no real control power, after the real "Acting" president Li Zongren fled to Hong Kong then the United States and refused to return and yet not listed here);

The above arrangement of Chiang and his allies completely ignored the first formal president elected by the National Assembly in 1913 and all the other non-KMT six presidents and eight acting presidents between 1912–1927 of the ROC goverment. The historical facts should not be omitted to pretend nothing happened.

Please note that the so-called Beiyang Government was literally the official state represented by the National Assembly with elections originally until the later years of its collapse, and was recognized internationally with official ambassies dispatched to each countries around the world, including to present China to the first general assembly of League of Nations since 1920.

At the same time, KMT's regimes including Guangzhou Government, Marshal Stronghold and Nationalist Government never had a general election, and were also full of continuous internal turmoil of power struggles with its own radical ideologies, corruptions, and civil wars among local KMT warlords, hence was not accepted by the international society as the legitimate Chinese government representative either until the Nanjing decade in 1927.

The current selection of listing is solely based on the unilateral view of KMT afterwards, whereas not in accordance with the standard of Neutrality, Due weight and Balance Wikipedia policy. Please kindly correct the mis-presentation to avoid leading to misunderstanding bias for non-native readers. Mickie-Mickie (talk) 01:52, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

:If you are talking about the leaders listed in the infobox, which you massively expanded [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Republic_of_China_(1912%E2%80%931949)&diff=prev&oldid=1281338583] before that was reverted by Remsense. The infobox cannot list all political leaders of the ROC – that would be bloat. I admit that He Yingqin, for instance, is not the best representation of the Premier position, but we have to make a selection of some kind to prevent the infobox from becoming too huge.

:I have no objections to you expanding the rest of the article if you can cite reliable sources for your changes. Toadspike [Talk] 09:26, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

The Republic of China which was founded in 1912, has maintained its legal and constitutional status to the present day. Following the Chinese Civil War, the ROC government relocated to Taiwan in 1949, but it did not dissolve or collapse — it continued to exist, govern, and operate under its 1947 Constitution. The current political entity governing Taiwan is and always has been the same exact entity that retreated from the mainland after the war, loss of territory doesn't equal loss of identity. Making it the same state, not a successor or a separate entity. This is not just a semantic or political point; it has concrete implications in constitutional law.

Therefore, treating the "Republic of China (1912–1949)" and the 'Republic of China' as entirely separate entities is just factually incorrect. That's without mentioning the fact that the ROC being called Taiwan on a wikipedia page is like calling the UK 'Britain'. The Republic of Korea was not renamed 'Busan' or 'Jeju' just because they had lost most of their territory momentarily, mainland China's policy on Taiwan is irrelevant because it's factual that the ROC today and the ROC before the civil war is the same entity and the ROC being colloquially called “Taiwan” to please the mainland doesn’t change its legal status. We can even see that here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_presidents_of_the_Republic_of_China there is no distinction between the ROC in Taiwan and the ROC in the mainland or mention of the name 'Taiwan'. JetLowly (talk) 21:34, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

:That article would be far too large, and the ROC being called Taiwan is not pleasing to the mainland at all. CMD (talk) 01:24, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

:It's not really a good idea to structure the encyclopedia around legal technicalities. The current setup is in line with what people expect to find. We don't want to WP:ASTONISH readers. You made a lot of arguments, so let me address them one-by-one.

:*The ROC on the mainland and the ROC on Taiwan are generally seen as different states by the public-at-large, even if legally they're not. I doubt most people are even aware that Taiwan is the ROC.

:*The modern ROC is almost universally referred to as Taiwan outside of certain legal, political, and historical contexts. The general public knows it by no other name. That's without mentioning that Britain is a commonly-accepted name for the UK, so your comparison doesn't really work.

:*By now, the ROC has existed only on Taiwan and its surrounding islands for many times longer than the Korean War lasted. It's not a temporary occupation of the mainland anymore, it's the status quo.

:*There are many other examples of political entities having multiple articles for different stages of their history. The UK was legally founded in 1801, yet its history before Irish independence is documented on the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland article. Modern Germany and West Germany are legally the same state, yet they too have separate articles.

:*Even the Taiwanese themselves don't generally see themselves as Chinese, including the government. Even the Kuomintang have softened their position over the years. Barring a hostile takeover by the PRC, it's clear to me that Taiwan will continue drifting farther away from China, not closer to it. And from that perspective, it really is just a legal technicality that the modern state that controls Taiwan used to control all of China (or at least actively claim it).

:TheLegendofGanon (talk) 08:58, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

::1. The public at large has generally no idea that 'Taiwan' and the ROC are the same thing, which is what Wikipedia should be for, education.

::2. Yes Taiwan is an accepted colloquial name for the ROC but Britain would not be an acceptable name for the UK's Wikipedia name, because the UK is in fact not just Britain, as is the ROC not just Taiwan.

::3. This is difficult because the UK is a union and when a union changes it is no longer the same union. The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland is not the same thing as the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, it's a different union of states.

::4.That may be, but until the ROC restructures itself into 'Taiwan' or anything of the sort, the state is still the same state.

::Most of the history of the island Taiwan which is currently under the history tab of the ROC should be made into a history heading of Taiwan, and subsequently the history heading of the ROC should feature what is on this page JetLowly (talk) 21:58, 21 April 2025 (UTC)

:Even if there were no ontological issues whatsoever, it would be a completely egregious deletion of what is certainly content worth having on an encyclopedia. Remsense ‥ 论 09:26, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

::It wouldn't be deleted, it would be merged since the history of the ROC in Taiwan is the same history of the ROC on the mainland. JetLowly (talk) 11:37, 22 April 2025 (UTC)

:::Significant content would be deleted. The articles are individually already quite long. CMD (talk) 14:19, 22 April 2025 (UTC)

::::This is an idea of what it could look like: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Republic_of_China#

::::All the history of the Taiwanese island can be moved to Taiwan JetLowly (talk) 18:58, 22 April 2025 (UTC)

:::::That seems to be mostly a mirror of this article? Anyway, it's not just history, merging all the other sections wouldn't make sense either. CMD (talk) 00:24, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

:There are several cases in Wikipedia that maintain separate articles for countries with significant change of territory or political status. Despite the latter one being considered a legal continuation of the original state of the same name.

:Roman Empire -> Byzantine Empire

:Silla -> Unified Silla

:Liao Dynasty -> Kara Khitan

:Yuan Dynasty -> Northern Yuan

:Papal state-> Vatican City 2407:4D00:7C02:1B5A:A9BD:8CB4:E58:3829 (talk) 03:34, 19 April 2025 (UTC)

::1. The byzantine and Roman empire are most definitely not the same entity and there is some debate on if the Byzantine empire can even be considered the Roman Empire because the Roman Empire as it was was split in 2 and the 2 states did not maintain the same governing model that the Roman Empire itself had. Also there are 3 possible dates for the end of the Roman empire on the Wikipedia page.

::2. On the talk page of Unified Silla there is talk of merging it with Silla, which I agree with.

::3. Pretty sure Liao was usurped so they changed their name and were in fact not Liao anymore but really I don't know enough about these two to comment.

::4. Two wrongs don't make a right, you're right that it's the same here from what I've read.

::5. The Papal state did not exist from 1871 up until Mussolini allowed the creation of a Vatican city state, new name, new capital, new land. Not the same because the ROC never had a period of nonexistence. JetLowly (talk) 21:41, 21 April 2025 (UTC)