Talk:Republic of China (1912–1949)/Archive 2

Proposed solution; split
Proposed solution to infobox issue and other issues over single party state, etc: split article into Republic of China (1912–1927), Nationalist China (1927-1949), and Communist China (1927-1949)

An important note for resolving issues here. I have skimmed through some discussion points, so I may be mistaken, but I believe the issues of POV bias, the major difference between the democratic and even somewhat pro-Soviet-leaning Republic of China of Sun Yat-sen from 1912 to 1927, mainland China under the rule of Chiang Kai-Shek and Kuomintang single-party state rule from 1927 to 1949, Communist controlled areas of China led by Mao Zedong during the Chinese Civil War from 1927 to 1949, can be solved by creating or revising the following articles: Republic of China (1912–1927), Nationalist China (1927-1949), and Communist China (1927-1949. "Nationalist China" is the common English language term used to describe the Republic of China from 1927 to 1949 when mainland China was under Kuomintang (Nationalist) single-party rule from 1927 to 1949. Communist China (1927-1949) accounts for the existence of ongoing Communist Party control over territories of China during the Chinese Civil War - I suggest that the article Chinese Soviet Republic be merged into Communist China (1927-1949). For the period after 1927 "Nationalist China" and "Communist China" accurately reflect the fact of the ongoing civil war over China. An alternative for the name "Nationalist China (1927-1949)" could be Republic of China (1927–1949), an alternative name for "Communist China (1927–1949)" should the issue of the dominant sovereignty of the Republic of China from 1927 to 1949 be an issue, it could be named Communist-controlled China (1927–1949). I strongly suggest this split up into the three proposed articles I have described in order to address the issue of the major changes in China upon the outbreak of the Chinese Civil War.--R-41 (talk) 01:36, 26 January 2012 (UTC)


 * I stand by the proposal to have this article turned into a disambiguation page leading to Beiyang Government and Nationalist Government. You can make the argument that those articles should in turn be called Republic of China (1912-1929) and Republic of China (1927-1949), or as you propose, Nationalist China (1927-1949).


 * The problem with "Communist China (1927-1949)" is that it would be a neologism and Wikipedia is opposed to neologisms. Nationalist China is running close too, since the term was not widely used until it was needed to distinguish it from Communist China after 1949.


 * There is no need to "split" this article as almost all the text here has been copied and pasted from elsewhere, and is already duplicated elsewhere.--Jiang (talk) 01:42, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Alright, I will support your proposal to turn this page into a disambiguation page. I support that be a disambiguation to three articles titled the following:


 * Republic of China (1912–1927) (the article now called Beiyang Government with Provisional Government of the Republic of China (1912) merged into it. In the infobox, Qing Dynasty will be listed as its predacessor, Republic of China (1927–1949) and Communist-controlled China (1927–1949) will be listed as its successors when the Chinese Civil War erupted between the Communists and the Nationalists).
 * Republic of China (1927–1949) (the article now called Nationalist Government. In the infobox, Republic of China (1912–1927) will be listed as its predacessor and Republic of China will be listed as its successor. A separate article will exist for Communist-controlled China since the outbreak of the Chinese Civil War, and thus the People's Republic of China does not need to be listed as a successor to this article).
 * Communist-controlled China (1927–1949) (a new article to describe territories controlled by the Communist Party of China during the Chinese Civil War with Chinese Soviet Republic merged into it. This article will be good because it can account for various Communist controlled territories during the Civil War as well as the gradual takeover of mainland China by the Communists from 1945 to 1949. In the infobox, Republic of China (1912–1927) will be listed as its predacessor and People's Republic of China will be listed as its successor.)
 * I think changing this article into a disambiguation to these three articles will resolve many of the POV bias issues.--R-41 (talk) 01:58, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Support! Changing this article into a disambiguation page is a good idea. However, my opinion is that we should not merge the current Beiyang Government and 1912 Provisional Government articles into one, as in these two articles are dealing with separate regimes. In addition, the names of the articles in question (Provisional Government/Beiyang/Nationalist) are fine as they are since that is the commonly accepted name of the regimes (not the State; which is still the ROC), adding more "ROC (year ABCD-WXYZ)" articles to me is going to cause more confusion to users. I do not oppose referring the PRC as a "successor", but we should put it into the right context. Maybe we could just annotate that as e.g. "(on mainland)". Raiolu (talk) 15:37, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
 * The problem is that the 1912 Provisional Government article is a stub - it was the Republic of China, it used the same symbolism as the ROC from 1912 to 1928, I think it's better to merge it. As for the issue of succession involving the People's Republic of China (PRC), the PRC will be designated as the successor of Communist-controlled China (1927–1949) and not the ROC of 1927 to 1949 - as the Communist Party of China did not accept the legitimacy of the ROC from 1927 onward and took control of territory in China to form an alternate government - attempted from 1931 to 1937 as the Chinese Soviet Republic, but the Chinese Communists continued to control territory in China afterwards that expanded until the revolution of 1949 when the PRC was formed on mainland China. The problem that another user addressed of calling the one article "Nationalist China" is that it is a neologism that Wikipedia generally disproves of, I think Republic of China (1927–1949) is fine to describe the Nationalist period of control by the then-widely internationally recognized sovereign government of the ROC over most of mainland China. Plus the term "Beiyang Government" is a negative neologism referring to warlord-rule, it is fine to mention it in the intro as a neologism for the state, but to name the article that may be as offensive as naming the United States from 1776 to 1861 as "White supremacist slavery government of the United States".--R-41 (talk) 18:50, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I noticed that the Nationalist Government article was moved to Republic of China (1927–1949). However, since a consensus has not been established yet, please refrain from making a unilateral action before getting support. Raiolu (talk) 19:45, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I would disagree with splitting this article and I’d disagree with this being simply a dab page.
 * From the point of view of someone with a rough, but not an extensive, knowledge of the subject this page and title is valuable as an overview of the period from 1912 to 1949, which (like it or not) is seen from a distance as a single period, a time of massive change in a huge and complicated country. Breaking it up, particularly if it’s to satisfy a lot of special pleading, would be a bad move altogether. It would be far better to have, here, summaries of the various aspects of the period, with main article links onward. And, (a previous bug-bear) there is little here about the country as it was then (social changes, economy, education, industry, technology) and the changes that occurred (which were considerable).
 * We already have a flock of articles on the period; what we need (won’t have, if we break this up) is an over-arching page to tie them all together. Xyl 54 (talk) 22:16, 15 February 2012 (UTC)


 * (PS I've trimmed the section title; there was no room in the edit summary to say anything. Xyl 54 (talk) 22:21, 15 February 2012 (UTC))


 * This is essentially a condensed and abridged version of the history of the Republic of China article. What purpose does it serve? (I suppose it makes more sense to discuss the future of this article if the Taiwan move proposal goes through, but I don't see why this article must exist. WP:CONCEPTDAB mandates that Republic of China (without parenthesis afterwards) must exist as an article, and that article can be written in a way to tie everything together, as WP:CONCEPTDAB requires.) --Jiang (talk) 02:29, 16 February 2012 (UTC)


 * It is best to let the talk:Republic of China discussion finish first before continuing here. Depending on how that discussion goes, this article may not exist. Benjwong (talk) 02:39, 16 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Agreed. Let us settle one thing at a time. The most important thing now is to find a consensus on the article title of the sovereign state officially known as the Republic of China, then we shall then proceed onto the other ROC-related articles. Raiolu (talk) 16:05, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I am not Chinese and no expert on Chinese history, so forgive me if I am mistaken, but from what I've read on the Chinese Civil War, 1927 was a major breaking point for the Republic of China. In that year, the Communist Party that did and still does officially support the legacy of Sun Yat-sen rejected the Nationalist-led government and civil war broke out with the Communists wanting to topple the Nationalist government. From 1927, it seems that the Republic of China broke into the two entities that more or less exist today: the Nationalist-led Republic of China versus communist-controlled China. In 1949, the Communists seized control of the mainland, and the Nationalists went to exile in Taiwan. So it seems that 1927 is a major breaking point - it is then that the Beiyang Government gave way to the Nationalist Government and where the Communist Party broke away from supporting the Republic and creating its own soviet republics. Thus the 1912-1927, 1927-1949 split in history seems logical to me - the Communist Party of China sees its government in China as the successor of Sun Yat-sen's Republic but rejects Chiang Kai-shek's Nationalist Republic.--R-41 (talk) 01:13, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

I'd instead propose to move part of this article to History of the Republic of China (1912–1949), and to merge the rest into Republic of China. We don't have such articles for countries that still exist. The current title suggests that there is another Republic of China at some other time, and therefore the years of existence is used as part of the title for disambiguation. Jeffrey (talk) 11:31, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I would rather move all these to the History of the Republic of China, since there is no point of creating another History article for the 1912-1949 period, which would again give the same impression as you have said above. In addition, where's the revamped Republic of China article as promised by the move proposal? Raiolu (talk) 15:54, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Please join the discussion at Talk:Republic of China. I've started a draft.--Jiang (talk) 16:45, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Requested move: Republic of China (1912–1949) → Republic of China

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: article not moved Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talk about my edits? 11:11, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Republic of China (1912–1949) → Republic of China – The lemma Republic of China is currently a redirect to Taiwan, unfinished business left over from the ROC-to-Taiwan move. Googling shows mainly partial title matches, especially for "People's Republic of China." So there is no reason to believe that readers identify this term with Taiwan. Anyone who has studied Chinese history is familiar with dynasty charts, or at least the organization of history by dynasty. You can see examples here and here. Wiki's version of this chart is at Template:History of China. Such charts generally present the Republic of China as a dynasty that lasted from 1912 to 1949. I argue that this is the most natural and familiar use of the term. When it is used to refer to Taiwan, explanation is required. The current format of this title is irregular under our guidelines. The use of a disambiguator implies the existence of more than one of the base item. The current title is analogous to "United States (1776 - present)". Kauffner (talk) 10:49, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Survey

 * Oppose. The move proposal called for a new article modeled on Kingdom of the Netherlands and French Fifth Republic. The move decision states "An article narrowly formulated about the government of Taiwan and its history can be created at Republic of China." I thought we already agreed to this as we drafted the move proposal. Please join the ongoing discussion at Talk:Republic of China. I have begun Talk:Republic of China/draft which is to be implemented once it has sufficient text. WP:CONTENTFORK and WP:CONCEPTDAB means that we cannot have the scope of the Republic of China page be just about the years 1912 to 1949; WP:DUE means that we must represent both the PRC view that the ROC is no longer legitimate after 1949 and the ROC view and the view of the majority of Western scholars that the ROC continues to exist (and even then, the question is about legitimacy, not existence). Writing the article according to one side's POV would amount to a POV fork. That said, I'm not opposed to moving merely to preserve the page history, or to emphasize history in the new Republic of China article, but to have the Republic of China article's discussion end at 1912 would run counter to existing policies and what we already promised to do in moving Republic of China to Taiwan.--Jiang (talk) 17:16, 1 April 2012 (UTC)
 * A the moment, your proposed Talk:Republic of China/draft is a content fork of Taiwan and Republic of China (1912–1949). —  AjaxSmack   01:32, 6 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Oppose move and support drafting a comprehensive/summarizing article on the political entity "Republic of China" under this title, as it has been part of the initial ROC->Taiwan move proposal


 * Oppose making "Republic of China" a set index or disambiguation page would be better. Even better would be an overview article at ROC. 70.24.244.198 (talk) 01:37, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
 * "Republic of China" cannot be a disambiguation page per WP:CONCEPTDAB. Disambiguation pages are for mutually exclusive or unrelated topics.--Jiang (talk) 01:50, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
 * It's about two serially related articles, and we have dab pages for those things. (ie. people named X, where one is the son of the other, in line, in one family) There is ROC that existed 1912-1949, and there is the thing that calls itself ROC 1949 and later, which is a successor state. 70.24.244.198 (talk) 11:02, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
 * One sufficient point of view is that the ROC has existed as a continuous entity since 1912. NPOV calls for treating all opposing conceptual viewpoints in the same article.--Jiang (talk) 17:22, 3 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment. The Fifth French Republic article is entered on the "History of France" template as a period of French history. The History of China template already treats "Republic of China" as the era or "dynasty" name for 1912-1949. This RM would acknowledge that usage in the article title. The entry for "Republic of China" in Dictionary of Chinese history focuses on the 1912-1949 period. The massive Cambridge History of China has a volume entitled "Republican China, 1912-1949". Their chapter on the post-1949 ROC is in their PRC volume and is entitled "Taiwan under Nationalist rule, 1949-1982." The reason historians do it this way is not because of any POV on the Beijing vs Taipei issue. It is because the term ROC is likely to confuse readers when it is applied to the post-1949 period. Even back when Soong May-ling was the apple of America's eye, Americans did not refer to her country as "the ROC", but rather as "Nationalist China." I see this as a "status quo move," if such a thing is not a contradiction in terms. The idea is to head off the recreation of an ROC article that focuses on present-day Taiwan, which IMO is effectively an in-universe nomenclature. Several post-1949 issues, including the issue of UN recognition, are important to the ROC story. They can be dealt with in an "afterward" or "legacy" section. Kauffner (talk) 08:33, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
 * I do not see evidence that "Republic of China" refers exclusively to its history prior to 1949. The Republic of China before 1949 and the Republic of China after 1949 are sufficiently related and not mutually exclusive. References point both to the former and the latter (incidentally, for reasons you state, more commonly the latter when this term is specifically used). The article History of the Republic of China already serves as part of the History of China series.--Jiang (talk) 17:52, 2 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Oppose. Please stick to the original move proposal. Moving this already flawed article to the original ROC article would give readers the impression that the ROC had been abolished in 1949. Raiolu (talk) 13:03, 2 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Oppose per above. This article should be split to History of the Republic of China (1912-1949) and the remainder be merged into Republic of China. Jeffrey (talk) 15:24, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
 * This article is mostly a copy/paste job, so there is no need to start History of the Republic of China (1912-1949) unless History of the Republic of China gets too long.--Jiang (talk) 17:52, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Could you elaborate a little bit? Where did it copy from? Jeffrey (talk) 19:31, 5 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Oppose since the Republic of China still exists and is alive and well, even if it doesn't control much more of its claimed territory than Taiwan. Republic of China (1912–1949) could be moved to China (1912–1949) if a move is necessary, since that was the only Chinese state at the time and the 'Republic of ' part is really just necessary to distinguish this China from the other one, the 'People's Republic of '. Pinut (talk) 16:17, 4 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Oppose the proposal per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, i.e., the 1912-1949 incarnation is not. Also, oppose the current Talk:Republic of China/draft as a content fork of Taiwan and Republic of China (1912–1949).  Strongly support the creation of summary/DAB article at Republic of China as advocated in the earlier ROC→Taiwan move discussion.  —  AjaxSmack   01:32, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Oppose -- I have been supporting the move of articles concerning the present "Republic of China" to Taiwan. This is because RoC is ambiguous referring to the mainland 1912-49 and Taiwan c.1945-present.  The move of articles concerning the current polity to Taiwan does not remove that ambiguity.  I agree that Republic of China should be a dab article.  It is currently a redirect to Taiwan, but the present Republic of China (disambiguation) ought to be moved there.  Peterkingiron (talk) 10:37, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Recent edits
The hat note belongs on the primary topic article, and the primary topic for Republic of China is Taiwan. So the hat note does not belong here. See WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. This is the article about the "ROC" as a period of Chinese history, so the opening should not focus on Taiwan. There is certainly no reason to mention "Taiwan" twice in the opening sentence. Dictionary of Chinese History is a good example of how mainstream history deals the ROC. It's almost all 1912-49, with Taiwan barely mentioned. Here is another example.
 * BTW, the name "Nationalist China" has nothing to with the communists or the civil war. Sun Yat-sen used the title "President of Nationalist China" beginning in 1917. It was already being used to refer to the KMT state in Guangzhou in early 1927. Kauffner (talk) 06:50, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Quite apart from what the guidelines say, is it likely that readers are coming to an article entitled Republic of China (1912-1949) thinking that it is about Taiwan? If somehow they miss the large-type "1912-1949," they will not notice a small-type hat note. This hat note is about a pointy agenda, not reader needs. Kauffner (talk) 10:18, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Okay, I've removed it. I believe WP:NAMB is an applicable guideline. CMD (talk) 10:31, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Nationalist China
The fact that the KMT government was called "Nationalist China" should be mentioned prominently in the article. The term is common, self-explanatory, and useful for distinguishing among the KMT, Beiyang, Communist and other Chinese governments of this period. The Nationalist Era in China, 1927-1949 (1991) uses it many times. In contemporary use, the term distinguished the Beijing and Canton governments in the 1920s, as you can see here and here. In the civil war period, news accounts commonly referred to "Nationalist China" and "Communist China". Here is an example: "Chiang Orders Nationalist China Placed On War Footing" (Oct. 10, 1946). Kauffner (talk) 03:14, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Shouldn't it be a redirect to Nationalist Government? Because from 1912 to 1928, the ROC was ruled by the Beiyang Government, and was not known as "Nationalist China". Nationalist China only makes up half of the topic of the article, and a bit more than half of the timeline of the ROC on the mainland. Though, arguing that we should use it prominently here is something I don't find entirely convincing; back during the times of the Qing Dynasty, British and American newspapers called the Manchus "Chinese Tartars". Does that mean that we should use the term extensively on Wikipedia? The phrase "Nationalist China" is an old term from an old era; a few mentions is reasonable, however using it prominently is not, in my opinion. Wikipedia is a contemporary reference. --  李博杰  &#124; —Talk contribs email 10:56, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I assume you mean a modern reference. Isn't a book published in 1991 modern? Cambridge History of China (1986) also uses the term quite a bit. "Nationalist Government" is not English-language idiom, but a literal translation of a phrase used in the Organic Law of 1928. It refers to the governmental structure created by this law, which was in force from 1928 to 1948. "Nationalist China" was used to refer to Taiwan in the 1950s and 1960s, but that is not a reason to avoid the phrase in this article. Kauffner (talk) 12:23, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Regarding File:Republic of China (orthographic projection).svg
I see that some users are having disagreements over this image, because it marks the Free Area of the Republic of China, which wasn't something that existed before 1949. I suggest that if this is a major issue, someone should recreate an SVG vector image without the dark green colour over Taiwan, and reupload it as a WP:FORK image under a different name. (Do not simply overwrite the existing file, as many other interwikis still use the image: see the Wikimedia Commons policy on overwriting images and creating forks for more information.) I am against using File:1914 map of Asia.jpg because it does not help readers at all - it is unclear, difficult to read, and does not tell me anything until I click on it to enlarge it. I'm sure most readers would want simple, easy to digest information, and not have to enlarge an old map to figure out what is going on. --  李博杰  &#124; —Talk contribs email 04:29, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Another issue I read from the previous set of edit summaries is that the map has modern borders. That's a bit harder to fix, as it would require a new orthographic projection from scratch, unless a similarly existing orthographic map exists. The only good one I can find, File:Japanese Empire (orthographic projection).svg, isn't centred on China (it's simple enough to delete the internal divisions in China, if that's desired). CMD (talk) 08:15, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm thinking, if we create a fork of the orthographic projection file, should we have Taiwan in light green (same colour as mainland China) or grey? During 1912-1945, did the ROC actively claim the Japanese colony of Taiwan? --  李博杰  &#124; —Talk contribs email 22:12, 10 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Absolutely. Taiwan didn't just fall into Jiang's hands, who said "lol, ok" after Japan's defeat. During World War II, alternate proposals among the allies to Chinese sovereignty on Taiwan - such as an international condominium, a la Jerusalem - were only rejected because of strong ROC opposition.


 * Recovering Taiwan - a part of ethnographic China proper, whose occupation by a foreign power seriously damaged the Qing's legitimacy - was a central, fundamental goal of Chinese nationalism from the time of Sun Yat-sen, who often visited the island and recruited from it for his uprisings. Despite persecution from the Japanese, there were annexationist parties in Taiwan (台湾革命同盟会), a Taiwan branch of the Kuomintang, and an anti-Japanese Taiwan volunteer corps commanded from Fujian. There was also an organization within the ROC government designed to take power in Taiwan before the war's end (台湾调查委员会).


 * Formally, Jiang Jieshi announced on August 1, 1938 at a party congress his action plan to recover Taiwan. On December 9, 1941, when the ROC formally declared war on Japan, it declared the Treaty of Maguan null and void; the government explicitly told the press that this meant the retrocession of Taiwan. The Cairo Declaration of 1943, formulated in part by Jiang, also specifically demanded the return of Taiwan, and this document was an annex to the terms of Japan's surrender. Shrigley (talk) 18:33, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
 * From that it sounds like it was only officially claimed after 1941. What was the content of the 1938 action plan? CMD (talk) 11:23, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

On a somewhat less related note, this recent edit isn't good either; people want to know where the ROC is located, in relation to its general position in the world, and a map of administrative divisions doesn't do that. --  李博杰  &#124; —Talk contribs email 22:12, 10 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Location maps are the standard. We could just keep the current map colours, and just fix the borders, without even the need for a fork. The caption can then say the dark green is territories gained after the Second World War, or as current territories, as Taiwan is all you can see. I haven't heard that the ROC claimed Taiwan before 1945. CMD (talk) 09:48, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Given that several users above have pointed out that the orthographic projection map has many errors, it should be "corrected" before it is presented to the actual article. It is absolutely "unacceptable" to have a map that we know contains factual errors and still be using it. I'm not objecting using this map, but these mistakes should be corrected before putting it on such prominent position in the article. For now, I replaced it with this is (File:ROC Claims blank.svg), before theses errors are fixed.--Febetsh23 (talk) 00:07, 15 October 2012 (UTC)


 * New image now at File:Republic of China (orthographic projection, historical).svg. --  李博杰  &#124; —Talk contribs email 05:41, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Reference to Sun Jian?
Notes 25 to 32 are to "Sun Jian," but no further information on what this is. Does anyone know? If not, I'll remove them. ch (talk) 04:55, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

Article Title should be renamed from "Republic of China (1912-1949)" to "Republic of China on Mainland China (1912-1949)"
The current title is potentially misleading in that it suggests the government has ceased to exists. TrueAnnal (talk) 06:15, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

Pinyin anachronistic but preferable
Editor benlisquare in the comment of September 2011 makes a valid point, as usual, but in this case it is not Wikipedia policy. WP:NC-CHINA calls for the use of pinyin, regardless of the romanization in use at the time covered in the article. This is reasonable, since, for instance, otherwise it would be a problem to romanize "Tang Dynasty" and other such topics. So I would have to disagree with editor Guerrilla of the Renmin that pinyin should be changed to Postal Romanization since most of the terms in the article are already in pinyin -- in the first paragraph of the lede alone there we see "Qing," "Song Jiaoren" and "Yuan Shikai." That said, it is also policy to allow such romanizations as Chiang Kai-shek, Sun Yat-sen, etc. In any case, I have corrected "Chunghwa" to "Chunghua" since it is Wade-Giles. The place names of the provinces and cities in the section below seem reasonable in Postal Romanization with pinyin in parentheses. ch (talk) 05:18, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

flag in infobox
I believe it's preferable to only have the current ROC flag in the infobox. Having the Beiyang flag just confuses people, because by all means and purposes, the current ROC flag has been the dominant representation of the ROC since 1928, whether through important eras such as WWII or the founding of the UN. The Beiyang flag can be shown in the history section. Same reason one wouldn't show all the different iterations of the American flag or the South African flag in their infoboxes. Blueshirts (talk) 15:38, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
 * This article covers a defined historical period, unlike the United States or South African articles, which cover the present time. Due to this historical perspective, it makes sense to me to show both national symbols used during this period. An appropriate caption should clear up any confusion. CMD (talk) 16:52, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
 * As a compromise I have captions stating that the flag has been adopted since 1928 below the flags and standards. I think it would be extraneous have the Beiyang flag for historical reasons since its usage was mostly confined to WWI, in which China played a very minor role, and the warlord era, in which there were several competing movements concurrently. It is expected that most readers searching for "Nationalist China" are searching for the entity that played major roles in WWII and the Chinese Civil War, and that means it's the post-1928 Nanjing ROC they're most likely looking for. Blueshirts (talk) 17:48, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
 * We can't determine what users are looking for. We can however work with what the subject of this article is. You seem to be arguing that we're dealing with a different entity at different dates, while our article deals with a single entity stretching from 1912-1949. CMD (talk) 20:06, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Taiwan was not a part of ROC untill 1945
Hey you guys study history again. 33years of your(new section)Republic of China (1912–49) Taiwan was a part of Japan,before 1945.

we dont care the relation of ROC and PRC take Taiwan from the map of ROC if you want keep this map,you need to set the section 1945-1949 only. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.240.63.28 (talk) 04:21, 1 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Read the infobox carefully, it says "Claimed territory, actual control was tenuous" (主張領土、事実の支配は希薄な). The territory of the ROC from 1912 onwards was fluid and dynamic to begin with, and was never a static, never-changing mass of land. For example, Outer Mongolia was occupied by the ROC between 1919 and 1921; after that, the Mongolian People's Republic remained independent; the western frontier was constantly changing due to a number of border wars against the Soviet Union, and control over Tibet was dynamic as well, not to mention ambiguous in terms of de facto and de jure (for instance, the United Nations did not recognise an independent Tibet, and considered it ROC territory, as did the majority of western nations, despite it being relatively independent in reality). Furthermore, no central government of the ROC, Beiyang or Kuomintang, ever had complete 100% control over China, since during this time China was ruled by local warlords who constantly fought against one another, whilst at the same time from 1928 onwards, the KMT was constantly fighting against communist insurgency during the Chinese Civil War. Not to mention, Manchukuo became a Japanese client state from 1931 onwards, and much of the eastern coast of China was under Empire of Japan occupation from 1937 onwards. Taiwan was always a part of Japan up until 1945; from then onwards, it was administered by the ROC. This article deals with a generic topic which is non-static, and was constantly changing during its timeline from 1912 to 1949. -- benlisquare T•C•E 05:22, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Mongolia a successor state?
Mongolia declared its independence in 1911. To me, the "successor" designation implies that someone might write a history of Mongolia that portrays it as a successor state to the ROC. Too many of the these boxes treat countries as pieces of property -- and in this case the ROC claim is questionable even at the property dispute level. The Clever Boy (talk) 03:31, 3 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Mongolia is a bit of a complex issue: It was occupied by the ROC from 1919 to 1921 following an invasion planned by Duan Qirui and lasting until the Mongolian Revolution of 1921, but all other times was completely independent. Even up to 1949, the ROC claimed, but never actually controlled Mongolia. One could say that for a period of time in ROC history, the ROC did militarily occupy Mongolia, however for the majority of the time, Mongolia was an independent state. -- benlisquare T•C•E 03:56, 3 March 2014 (UTC)


 * You should be cleared that most of other provinces of Qing Dinasty also declared their independences in 1911, just like Mongolia did. And all of those provinces that declared independence, including Mongolia, later formed the ROC. -113.108.133.49 (talk) 03:55, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Merge into Republic of China article?
Shouldn't this just be part the Republic of China (Taiwan) article? Or just be part of the History of Republic of China? Mistakefinder (talk) 01:26, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
 * No, the above articles you mention already include some information about the subject of this article for what I hope are obvious reasons. The topic however is not the same. The Republic of China, occupying the mainland from 1912-1949 is in some important ways a distinct topic from the topic discussed at Taiwan, the ROC we know today. That the ROC Is now commonly known as Taiwan should give you a clue that the topics while closely related are not one and the same. - Metal lunchbox (talk) 05:45, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
 * No. This article covers the last period in history when what we now think of as China and Taiwan were one state. So it is part of the history of both, not just of Taiwan/the modern day ROC. As I noted on my talk page the fact that 'Republic of China' is both the title of this article and the formal name of Taiwan is not an accident but was a political decision made by the leaders of Taiwan to try and make it look as if they were still in charge of China, or should be. But that ploy rightfully failed once [the Communist Party of] China staked its claim to be the true leaders of the territory occupied by the Republic of China before 1949. Taiwan is now Taiwan (or sometimes Chinese Taipei) accordingly.-- JohnBlackburne wordsdeeds 06:27, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Well, of course I am very familiar with the reason why it may be considered different from ROC on Taiwan, and why Taiwan is now an alias for ROC. However, ROC IS the same state that continued its existence. Are there other cases where a state gets separated into different articles just due to major shifts in territory? For example Poland? I have not yet checked but I doubt it. Also I see that the Taiwan/ROC article includes history of Taiwan from prehistory all the way through now. Those would not be applicable to the ROC, therefore sort of misleading for an average reader quickly glancing the table of contents without reading details may think the ROC relates to all of that history, when it only doe relate to Taiwan since 1945. It seems the more appropriate thing is to separate the ROC content from the rest of Taiwan history. In other words, "Taiwan" as an article name with meaning of a state polity should be a redirect to Republic of China because it is just a common name. The current Taiwan Island which redirects to Geography of Taiwan should include all of the (brief) history and states that ruled it, and not redirect to "Geography of ..." anymore. Thoughts? Btw, I will add the merge tags on top of Taiwan and ROC(1912-1949) now. Mistakefinder (talk) 09:58, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm not going to pretend that this is a simple issue and that you are looking at it all wrong, but let my try to explain why things are organized this way. We aren't obligated to simplify the history of Taiwan or the Republic of China into a coherent singular thread. The fact is the the Republic of China didn't just shift its territory a little. They lost all of the territory they used to control and moved to a territory they weren't previously controlling. That's an oversimplifcation but you get the point. They made a whole new government in a new place ruling over a new population with a similar, but different culture, that's also an oversimplification since that new government had a lot of structural continuity with the old one, include the name. The point is that since both the current PRC and the ROC, commonly known as Taiwan, have logical and rightful claims to ROC 1912-1949 as their immediate historical precedent it's important to have a separate article for reasons of neutrality in addition to the above mentioned distinctions. This is all more complicated than people writing an encyclopedia would like but it's all explained in great detail in the body of the articles. Furthermore, the name Taiwan was chosen for the article about the current ROC because that is the common name. You say it's "just the common name" but that is the standard used on Wikipedia for article names. see WP:COMMON. The matter of what to name that article was discussed at length and a consensus eventually emerged that the article should be called Taiwan because that is the common name for the topic, but further discussion of the name of that article should happen at Talk:Taiwan or not at all. Finally, I would like to add that it's okay to have some discussion covering the same topic in more than one place. It's not a problem if Taiwan and this article both discuss the same historical events. - Metal lunchbox (talk) 10:50, 13 August 2014 (UTC)


 * On this article I refer you again to the above arguments and the reply on my talk page. The fate of the other articles was all hashed out when Taiwan was moved. See Talk:Taiwan/Archive 20. Taiwan is at the correct place, per that discussion and our policies. Republic of China correctly redirects to it. The island Taiwan, as distinct from the state, is covered by Geography of Taiwan, hence the redirect for Taiwan Island.
 * This article wasn't included in those discussions so the fate of it is separate. To move Taiwan, change Taiwan Island etc. would require another discussion, as substantive as that at Talk:Taiwan/Archive 20 to overturn that consensus. I think that would be very unlikely to exceed; it's hard to change consensus based on the discussions so many editors, unless facts have changed and they haven't – nothing has changed about the status of Taiwan in the months and years since.-- JohnBlackburne wordsdeeds 10:54, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Yes I did start a discussion on Talk:Taiwan at the same time you were replying to this. If we get some consensus on this merge, the whole thing can redirect to Taiwan, which I think makes sense because the whole ROC relocated there, which in essence is what a redirect is, just like mail forwarding when you move... Mistakefinder (talk) 11:36, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
 * (I will read your comments above after this post while it's still fresh on my mind). So I need to point out the two key errors: 1)the way the article name and the info box stating "Republic of China(1912-1949) indicates the state ENDED, which is not true, and 2)the map showing Taiwan as part of ROC is correct only for 4 yrs, 1945-49. This is also why I proposed the merge. Two key things are not factually correct. To have an article with this title indicates a succession of states of ROC(1912-1949)-->ROC and -->PRC, which is incorrect. It is ROC-->ROC and PRC. With a merged ROC article, three maps can be shown in each main period (1912-1945), 1945-49, 1949-present, that show the dramatic difference of territorial change. And the merged article can just do without the geography section of mainland, and refer to PRC article. I think it's easier for readers to see the entire history of ROC in brief (with the maps), then they may be drawn to read the detailed history which then relate to the complex political status of Taiwan. Mistakefinder (talk) 11:24, 13 August 2014 (UTC)


 * No. There are continuities, but they are vastly outweighed by the differences.  The history of Taiwan is covered at History of Taiwan.  Although the ROC administers a small amount of land in addition to the island, a separate "Island of Taiwan" would overlap almost entirely with existing articles.  We should avoid the pointless duplication, as we do for Iceland, Cuba, Madagasgar, Sri Lanka, Tasmania and Greenland.  Kanguole 11:39, 13 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Also Mongolia became independent in 1924, so this also wasn't mentioned and the info box graphic is also incorrect. Is this article supposed to be purely an history article? If so, then I suppose it's ok to leave it here. However, then what's bolded as entry title needs to be corrected, along with missing info on Mongolia, and shown an additional map aside from the ones I mentioned above, with the ROC missing Mongolia. Basically each major territory loss needs to be reflected. Mistakefinder (talk) 13:11, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Quoting the infobox: "Location and maximum extent". Nowhere is it claimed that it is a year-specific map. See also Empire of Japan (year specific map for 1942), Russian Empire (maximum extent map). -- benlisquare T•C•E 13:16, 13 August 2014 (UTC)


 * oppose it'd hopelessly muddle ROC and mainland issues with Taiwan. As for merging with the history article, I'd prefer it the way it is. -- 65.94.169.222 (talk) 07:26, 14 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Oppose per the arguments of User:JohnBlackburne and User:Metal.lunchbox above. —  AjaxSmack   03:09, 15 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Oppose for the same reason that we don't merge Qing dynasty into China and also for the same reason we don't merge this article into China as well. Wikipedia has articles that deal with distinct sections of a nations history. The existence of this article does not preclude either the Taiwan article or the China article giving an overview/summary of this history too. Having this article separate allows a more in depth study of that time period which is a notable period of history in its own right. Rincewind42 (talk) 15:01, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Oppose but as a practical matter, not one of principle. It would have fit better with publications in the field that "The Republic of China (1912-49)" article cover more or less what it does now, but that "The History of the ROC" have been called "Republican China." This would have been anomalous in terms of the dynastic articles, but the period is anomalous in that the there was no power that defined the period in the way that the dynastic governments did. The disambig page Republic of China (disambiguation) lists only a few of the things happening 1912-49 which don't really fit into "Republic of China" and would have been better under "Republican China." But -- again as a practical matter -- my point is a quibble and it's more important to be consistent. In any event it's too large to tidy things up without major rewrites. Welcome to Wikipedia! ch (talk) 20:00, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Oppose. This article is about the 1912-1949 era of Chinese history. The History of China template divides Chinese history into various eras with the ROC given as one of these eras. If the template linked to an article on Taiwan, that would definitely confuse a lot of readers. Clodhopper Deluxe (talk) 05:41, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Hi (talk) and everyone, if this article is indeed only an article on this period of history, then for sure the single map need to split into three maps. The map as shown is only valid for 1945-1949, when both mainland and Taiwan is under one government. 22:09, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Pictures
http://books.google.com/books?id=edFAAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA316#v=onepage&q&f=false

Rajmaan (talk) 20:29, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

the national flag
As we know,from 1912 to 1928,the national flag of the ROC isn't the " Blue Sky, White Sun, and a Wholly Red Earth "(青天白日滿地紅旗) but the five colour flag(五色旗).So I think that only listing out the " Blue Sky, White Sun, and a Wholly Red Earth " in the infobox isn't very proper.--   パンツァー VI-II  ❂Fu7ラジオ❂In the Republic of China 103rd.民國103年 06:32, 30 August 2014 (UTC)


 * I've added it - the infobox supports two flags so it was straightforward, though I could not add a second caption.-- JohnBlackburne wordsdeeds 17:01, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

ROC and Taiwan
There is a glaring factual error in the opening paragraph: The Republic of China (traditional Chinese: 中華民國; simplified Chinese: 中华民国; pinyin: Zhōnghuá Mínguó; Wade–Giles: Chung1-hua2 Min2-kuo2) was an East Asian state that occupied the current territories of China and Taiwan between 1912 and 1949.

Taiwan was a part of Japan between 1895 and 1945 (technically even until the San Fransisco Peace Treaty was signed, but let's leave that aside), which means that it had precisely nothing to do with the ROC until 1945.

As to whether the ROC "is" or "was" a state is discussed elsewhere so I'll leave that aside too, although I can't resist saying that since I live in the ROC, I am quite convinced that it does exist.

I'm not going to correct the article since I don't normally participate in the editing or creation of Wikipedia articles, but I was hoping that someone who regularly deals with these things could correct the error.

Perry

61.218.68.178 (talk) 11:36, 16 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your comment. How does the current state of the page seem now? I've reworded the opening a bit so that it's a bit more clearer that the occupation of the mainland and of Taiwan occurred at differing times, so that it doesn't imply that they were both always controlled by the ROC. -- benlisquare T•C•E 11:55, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

It is a bit better now, but why not simply say "... that occupied the present-day territories of China between 1912 and 1949 and Taiwan since 1945 until the present day." I don't understand the need for ambiguity. Perry 83.250.245.241 (talk) 18:18, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

JohnBlackbourne's revert, any sense?
User_talk:JohnBlackburne reverted my edit saying the ROC is not a present day state. This is not correct, and I gave the reasons how so on his talk page. Do you guys agree? Mistakefinder (talk) 01:19, 12 August 2014 (UTC)


 * I do think that ROC is a state. Dadapotato (talk) 12:06, 25 September 2014 (UTC)Dadapotato


 * Agree with Dadapotato, JohnBlackbourne has an extremely strong point of view biased towards the PRC, moderators should take a look. Philipxd (talk) 01:00, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Infobox
Could someone please modify the infobox to include the Twelve Symbols national emblem as well? Thank you. Gryffindor (talk) 16:09, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

"Was" a state?
I'm not sure if this is the right term, as currently the "ROC" of Taiwan is still the same "ROC" that once resides in the mainland with the same principles, constitution militaries etc. All thats different is that today it governs an smaller area. "Was"..? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Philipxd (talk • contribs) 14:47, 2 October 2014 (UTC)


 * No it's not. The government of Taiwan took the name ROC but that does not mean it's the same state as this. The territory controlled by this state is now controlled by Taiwan, China and Mongolia. Taiwan and China both claim to be the rightful successors to the whole of their joint territories. Right now most of the world sides with China on this issue. So no, Taiwan, the current ROC, is not the same state as the ROC between 1912-49. To say so is to support Taiwan's claim and so is POV and not correct.-- JohnBlackburne wordsdeeds 15:40, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
 * For you to support (PR) China's claim is POV and not correct. Just because "most of the world sides with China" doesn't make it NPOV. And what you said above "the territory controlled by this state... by Taiwan, China, and Mongolia" is incorrect, it is "by "Republic of China, People's Republic of China, and Mongolia." Mistakefinder (talk) 04:57, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
 * When did Taiwan "take the name" ROC? 216.8.172.35 (talk) 19:51, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

A shrinkened size of territory doesnt mean it isnt the same country. And my edit has nothing to do with its claim of mainland china so stop your reverting. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Philipxd (talk • contribs) 00:51, 3 October 2014 (UTC)


 * While I haven't been able to look at and consider this particular point carefully since noticing it, I would like to address Philipxd, and advise him to not edit war while a discussion concerning a particular edit is taking place.Zmflavius (talk) 03:36, 3 October 2014 (UTC)


 * No, it's not the same country. Right now most of the world recognises the PRC as the rightful inheritors of the sovereignty of the pre-1949 ROC. Most of the world doesn't recognise Taiwan as a country. It can hardly be the same thing if it's not even a country. What is it? Well, whole articles have been written on that. See e.g. Political status of Taiwan. Taiwan today has little in common with the military state that was the ROC then. It only shares a name. Not by coincidence, but as the leaders of Taiwan wanted the rest of the world to think they were the rightful rulers of China. That didn't last long though; in 1971 the PRC replaced the ROC as China's representative at the UN, and arguably the PRC has the much stronger claim to be the successor to the pre-1949 ROC.-- JohnBlackburne wordsdeeds 04:22, 3 October 2014 (UTC)


 * I don't know where you're from, but obviously you know nothing about the Republic of China or nothing true about it. "Military state"?? Yeah it was occupied by warlords during the 1910-20s but before it was drove out by the communists your so called military state is officially called the China during the World War 2. It doesn't matter who doesn't recognize it as a country if it is it is. I don't think you're a human but if you are you are and what I said wouldn't change anything except me denialing the truth. My passport reads the Republic of China and I can travel to over 150 countries in the world visa free with no problem and no need of any additional booklet given by the communists. Our soldier's highest commander in chief is the president of the Republic of China not Xijinping. It's not governed by any other authorities accept the government of the Republic of China itself. No Taiwanese president claim that they own China after the 1980s, and it is just a case of two Chinas like north and south Korea, both claiming to be Korea when there was only 1 during the past 1000 years. The PRC replaced ROC as the representative of China IN THE UN but that doesnt mean ANY thing. It did not state and no laws can ever state that the Republic of China isn't a country anymore because the UN kicked it out. ROC today isn't wat "successor" of the ROC of the Mainland, IT IS the same ROC that has always governed Taiwan since Japanese handed the island over to the Republic of China since 1945, and the PRC is just the successor of the govenment ruling Mainland China. Philipxd (talk) 06:34, 3 October 2014 (UTC)


 * My gosh, I just read your "statement" above saying that the Republic of China is not called Republic of China by accident and wat shit. Do you realize what the Republic of China represents?? Even the Pro independence president Chen didn't change the country's name. ITS NOT BECAUSE ANY PRESIDENT CLAIMING THEY STILL RULE CHINA (ARE U OUT OF UR MIND??) THAT WAS 40 YEARS AGO. The ROC represents an honorable political identity. It is the founding nation of modern China, it is the only China with freedom and democracy, and after the Cultural Revolution, it is the only China with true Chinese culture in people's life. How the hell did you think of all those shts..?? PhilipXD 07:13, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Philipxd, You need to look at Civility and reconsider how you approach this dispute. Your personal attacks on other editors are totally unwelcome here and do nothing to promote your argument. - Metal lunchbox (talk) 07:55, 3 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Ok Im sorry and I apologize, but it just makes people mad when someone discriminates your country like so. Republic of China not the Republic of China today? Yes territory wise, but what else. PhilipXD 14:05, 3 October 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Philipxd (talk • contribs)

The proper way to have NPOV is then to say neither "is" nor "was" a country. To unilaterally state that it's not the same state isn't neutral, either. Saying that more countries officially side with PRC doesn't mean that we shouldn't point to the fact that recognition is split between PRC and ROC. If both "China" and "Taiwan" claim heritage to the historical ROC then we should state so. Abstractematics (talk) 23:38, 25 October 2014 (UTC)


 * To state the FACTS is NPOV, but to say "was" due to the majority of countries having diplomatic relations with PRC and ignore the 22 countries that recognizes ROC is POV. To use the article title "Republic of China (1912–49)" is to refer to a period in history, not the name of the state. The proper way to address this is to characterize the article as history rather than the political status of Republic of China. I will make that change. Mistakefinder (talk) 20:38, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
 * It's nothing to do with diplomatic relations. If it were then one would ignore Taiwan altogether as not recognised by any major power or international organisation, and just treat it as a renegade province of China. Rather it's to do with the facts of history. That period of history ended with the Chinese civil war. The communists won but not absolutely; the Kuomintang were still able to hold onto Taiwan. So the country was split in two, into China and Taiwan, a situation that persists to today.
 * The government of Taiwan calls their state the Republic of China to stake a claim to the whole of China. But that does not change the facts on the ground and today no other country recognises that claim. So it's POV to equate Republic of China (1912–49) with Taiwan, and support Taiwan's claim. Not only does it disagree with international recognition but it's at odds with the history of China, of which this is a a part.-- JohnBlackburne wordsdeeds 21:29, 15 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Again, JohnBlackburne, the government of the Republic of China today hasn't been claiming mainland China as a part of it, and it really doesn't matter if they claim so or not, you are extremely biased towards the view points of the PRC from every word you said, the Republic of China still governs territories that it had during the mainland period, this is a FACT, the Republic of China still exists but the entire intro makes it sound like it is doesn't, which is completely POV and insulting to the country and its people, just because you are reverting everyone's edit.  PhilipxD   10:35, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
 * No, I am only seeking to make it neutral and accurate. The fact is the Chinese Civil War ended with this China divided into two states, the modern day China and the modern day Taiwan. Neither is exactly the same as the China before the war ended. This is both accurate and neutral as it would be POV to identify the Republic of China and the Republic of China (1912–49), just as it would be POV to identify the People’s Republic of China and the Republic of China (1912–49). Both have a claim. Arguably the PRC's is much stronger, as the winners in the war, who ended up occupying the capital and main centres, and the more internationally recognised. And most countries do not recognise Taiwan as a country, implicitly accepting China's claim.
 * But it would be POV to accept China's claim, just as it would be POV to accept Taiwan's. There are two states, largely the same as there were at the end of the Chinese Civil War. It is therefore neutral to have neither the same state as China pre-1950.-- JohnBlackburne wordsdeeds 12:14, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
 * As much as I disagree with the fact that it states "Was" as the Republic of China still exists today, but then again with the same logic one could argue that we should rename this article to "Taiwan (1920-49)" and rename all references to the "Chinese empire" as "Taiwanese empire", but now I'm getting carried away, to bring a comparison the article for the French Fourth Republic also states "was" and so do all the different constitutional states in South-Korea (the Wikipedia articles of-course).
 * Sincerely, --Namlong618 (talk) 13:27, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
 * JohnBlackburne reverted my edit again, claiming it was POV. However, what he reverted to is POV in that it is not stating a FACT vs PR China's claim, and since just because a majority of countries side with China due to its threat doesn't make it a fact. It is not correct that "Taiwan just took the name". It not like Taiwan had its own governing authority in 1945 and just decided to take the ROC name. It's the KMT who brought ROC with them to govern Taiwan. This article should not be titled this, but should be "History of Republic of China (1912-1945)" since Taiwan was not administered by ROC until 1945. Mistakefinder (talk) 04:50, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Delete or merge into History of the Republic of China
The article title implies a country name called "Republic of China (1912-1949) with the intro description referring to ROC "was" a state that JohnBlackburne kept insisting on, without proof. This is POV statement, and not true. Either the article should be deleted or just merged into History of the Republic of China. It was OK when I described it as a period of history of the ROC rather than "was a state". Please discuss at Talk:History_of_the_Republic_of_China. Mistakefinder (talk) 05:41, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Or just revert back to [|this version] by Philipxd which seems perfectly fine to me (at least the opening paragraph). Mistakefinder (talk) 06:50, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Claimed map
Hi. I think Claimed map is un-suitted this article for Wikipedia policies. Should have de-facto map.--MongolWiki (talk) 04:52, 11 August 2015 (UTC)


 * De facto map for the year 1919 would still have Outer Mongolia inside the Republic of China.Rajmaan (talk) 17:05, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Republic of China (1912–49). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090514111301/http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ho/time/ip/88116.htm to http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ho/time/ip/88116.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 03:26, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

"1949 disestablishments"
Can the ROC really be said to have been "disestablished" in 1949?--Prisencolin (talk) 19:29, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
 * The PRC was established then so yes, the Republic of China that existed up to 1949, i.e. the post-imperial state of China, was disestablished.-- JohnBlackburne words<sub style="margin-left:-2.0ex;">deeds 21:58, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
 * ❌, the RoC has never been disestablished; it still existing as is since its foundation in 1912. This article is about the history of the RoC at a specific period (since its foundation until the Communist Party of China founded the PRC). In order to be disestablished, the Communist Party should be entered in war with the Kuomintang and invaded Taipei, but it has never be ocurred (The PRC is still claiming that Taiwan as a province of them, but the Communist Party has not yet taken actual sovereignty over the territories governed by the RoC/Kuomintang —Taiwan, Penghu, and other islands–, but no war or serious conflicts ocurred between the Nationalists and the Communists). The "both" Chinas claimed the disputed territories as own, but the RoC (the Kuomintang) has never been disapeared, disestablished, or abolished, even, the Kuomintang was who represented "China" until 1971, until the International community decided that "China" is represented by the Communist Party, and considering Taiwan as a provice of the PRC). --Amitie 10g (talk) 02:20, 3 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Do you have reliable sources (one not affiliated with the CCP) that says the ROC was disestablished in 1949? Because there are quite a few that indicate the ROC is active and continues to hold Taiwan, Kinmen, Penghu, and Matsu, and continued an active conflict on the mainland into the 1960's. Kiralexis (talk) 23:46, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

Recent edits
I have again undone the edits by, and thought it better to start a discussion here as clearly a fuller discussion is needed. There are numerous problems with that version, first being that it is not good writing. According to the first paragraph the Republic of China fell in 1949 but still survives today. Most of that paragraph is contained in one very long sentence, which despite its length does not contain a clear statement of what the topic is, which is what the first sentence should normally do: see WP:BEGIN. More importantly it does not agree with the rest of the article, and includes a source which is entirely irrelevant (a handbook on the modern Taiwan military is not a good source for the Republic of China from 1912 to 1949).-- JohnBlackburne words<sub style="margin-left:-2.0ex;">deeds 06:24, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Merger Discussion

 * Outcome is clear .-- Moxy (talk) 05:05, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

Request received to merge articles: Republic of China (1912–49) into Taiwan; dated: December 2016. Proposer's Rationale: ROC controlled the Mainland until 1949 and this article needs to be merged with Taiwan. Discuss here. Wrestlingring (talk) 04:53, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Oppose This article is about the state that ruled the mainland of China before the civil war. Taiwan is about the Island on which the Republic of China currently rules. The Taiwan article contains extensive information on the Island, its history (Including the Japanese period), its inhabitants, etc. To merge information on pre-1949 China into that article would dilute that information and probably the usefulness of that article.
 * If a merger between the information on Pre and Post 1949 ROC is desired I'd like to suggest it be done in a revised Republic of China article with Taiwan reduced slightly to only contain information on that Island. Kiore (talk) 08:15, 11 December 2016 (UTC)


 * oppose. Not a valid rationale to merge. This is about the state that occupied the territories of modern China and Taiwan between 1912 and 1949. Whether you consider it a part of Taiwanese history, a part of Chinese history, a combination of these, or something else, it is best served by having a separate article, in part so the competing claims and interpretations are covered in an article, but mostly as there is enough material to justify it.-- JohnBlackburne words<sub style="margin-left:-2.0ex;">deeds 12:41, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Oppose per JohnBlackburne's arguments. --T*U (talk) 16:11, 13 December 2016 (UTC
 * Oppose per JohnBlackburne's arguments. --Khajidha (talk) 14:41, 17 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Oppose per JohnBlackburne's argument. Comment I agree tha the articles in the area of modern China are unusually chaotic in their relation to each other and uneven in their content, but the proposed merge does not address these issuesch (talk) 16:59, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

Federal or Unitary state
This edit changed the type of state in the info box from Unitary to Federal. Neither the old value nor the new cited a source and I can't find anything in either the 1912 Provisional Constitution of the Republic of China or the 1947 Constitution of the Republic of China articles. The other obvious places to look would be the missing pages 1923 Constitution of the Republic of China and Provisional Constitution of the Political Tutelage Period(1931). Does anyone feel like providing an answer? Kiore (talk) 01:59, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
 * In the interim another IP editor came along and changed it to the obviously erroneous Federated state. I've changed it back to Unitary state. Kiore (talk) 06:28, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

Republic of China (1912-71)?
According to the Chinese Wikipedia article, the Republic of China continued to represent China until 1971 when it lost its UN seat. However, if that's almost correct, the ROC held its UN seat even though they fled to Taiwan.The rough translation translated from Google: "The Republic of China was a republican country in East Asia, widely represented in China from 1912 to 1971, and today is often referred to as Taiwan because of its actual territorial and political factors [19] [20] [21]. At the beginning of the founding of the Republic of China to inherit the rule of the Qing Dynasty, including Xinjiang, Mongolia, Tibet, China in 1945 from Japan to receive Taiwan and other places, a total area of ​​about 11.41 million square kilometers. However, after losing most of the territorial power in 1949, the total area under the jurisdiction of the present-day Taiwan is 36,197 square kilometers, including Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen, Mazu, Ochu, Islands, Taiping Island and other islands. The capital and the central government are located in Taipei City [22] and the largest city is Xinbei [4]. The total population is about 23.5 million [4], mainly composed of Han and Taiwanese aborigines," Any questions? Wrestlingring (talk) 01:28, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
 * The articles in English wikipedia say that too. What has that got to do with this article? CMD (talk) 01:59, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
 * There's a problem with articles on China as a whole. There's the territory and cultural groupings that is China and Chinese and then there are the political entities that have ruled it. Before 1912, the Qing was the government of China, nobody really argues that point. Between 1912 and the late 1920s (except for couple of brief restorations) there was a republic with different factions claiming to be its legitimate government. Then there was the Chinese Civil War from late 1927 to 1949 which was the KMT and the CPC fighting to be the government of China; in the middle of that, the Japanese were grabbing chunks of China and setting up puppet governments. Before 1927 the Republic of China was a good name for mainland China. After 1949, the People's Republic of China was a good name for mainland China, but over 67 years later there is still a rump government on Taiwan for the Republic of China. Referring to the government that largely ruled the mainland until 1949 as Republic of China (1912-49) seems a good compromise. Kiore (talk) 03:46, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

Requested move 14 April 2017
<div class="boilerplate" style="background-color: #efe; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px dotted #aaa;">
 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: Not moved &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 07:45, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Republic of China (1912–49) → Republic of China (1912–1949) – To make it clearer, we don't need to move it later in 2049. Hddty. (talk) 06:28, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
 * This is a contested technical request (permalink). Anthony Appleyard (talk) 08:55, 14 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Oppose Why not? Let's move it in 2049. Timmyshin (talk) 07:27, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
 * queried move request Anthony Appleyard (talk) 08:55, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Oppose Current title is WP:precise enough.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  11:01, 14 April 2017 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested move 30 April 2017
<div class="boilerplate" style="background-color: #efe; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px dotted #aaa;">
 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: Not moved.Snow consensus against the proposed move. (non-admin closure) Winged Blades Godric 16:49, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

Republic of China (1912–49) → Republic of China (1912–71) – Although this article covers the period of 1912 to 1949, maybe expanding the article to include the 1949 to 1971 period in exile on Taiwan can cover. Supreme Dragon (talk) 18:23, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

Survey

 * Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with  or  , 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.


 * oppose. This proposal makes no sense. The article is about the state that existed between 1912 and 1949. After that it split into two states, Taiwan and China. Up to 1912 China was ruled by successive dynasties. There are many ways to think of this period of history but it is clearly a distinct period of Chinese history which needs its own article. 1971 was after this state broke up, and is not even a major date in Taiwan’s history. See Articles for deletion/Republic of China (1949–71), which is also one of many recent discussions on this and related articles. Perhaps if this also ends up as pointless and futile we need a moratorium on future move proposals and name changes.-- JohnBlackburne words<sub style="margin-left:-2.0ex;">deeds 19:09, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Oppose This isn't the UN wiki, WP:NPOV. Is UN recognition (lost in 1971) more important than an area of ~10 million sq.km. with hundreds of million people (lost in 1949)? No way. Timmyshin (talk) 19:23, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Oppose Taiwan was the same state before and after 1971, but RoC was not the same state before and after 1949. 1949 is the logical break, nor 1971. --T*U (talk) 21:22, 30 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Oppose. Exactly what problem is this supposed to address?  — <span style="border:1px solid #000073;background:#4D4DA6;padding:2px;color:#F9FFFF;text-shadow:black 0.2em 0.2em 0.3em"> AjaxSmack   00:49, 2 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Support. The change in the extent of territory of the ROC does not somehow end the ROC. States change their borders regularly and do not become a new entity. The ROC today is the same legal and historical entity as the ROC in 1912. It would be better to merge with Taiwan as single item on "Republic of China". Vincevincevince (talk) 09:03, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
 * What you suggest has been discussed (and rejected) several times in different disguises quite recently, see for example Talk:Republic of China (1912–49)/Archive 2 and Talk:Taiwan/Archive 25. But that is not what we are discussing here. The suggestion here is to change the name of this article from "Republic of China (1912–49)" to "Republic of China (1912–71)". Do you also support that? --T*U (talk) 12:26, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

Discussion

 * The ROC retained UN recognition until 1971 when the PRC replaced the ROC in the UN. Supreme Dragon (talk) 18:24, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
 * See discussion dating back to 2015 when User:Mistakefinder proposed it. It could be taken on context. Supreme Dragon (talk) 02:26, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
 * But that discussion was about something completely different, actually about removing this article by merging it into "History of the Republic of China". So where is the relevance? Just another example of seemingly endless conflicting and confusing merge-, move- and renaming-debates in the China/Taiwan area. Could we please stick to the current issue? And then hopefully not have a new one tomorrow. --T*U (talk) 06:31, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
 * T*U, how did you determine that in 1949 ROC is a different state from before? The "end" of the Civil War? The ROC's current constitution was implemented in 1947, and it can be argued that a new republic started then; but though yes 1949 was a significant year in ROC losing most of its original territory, there was no change in constitution or government structure, which came in 1991 with major constitutional amendments. As for 1971's loss of UN representation, again it IS a major change in terms of its world status, but it didn't change the state itself. Mistakefinder (talk) 08:40, 7 May 2017 (UTC)


 * I'd still propose renaming the article to "History of Republic of China (1912-49)", as it really is an article about history of the state during that time, not the state itself. There used to be a separate article simply called "China" that the PRC article now occupies, that described the whole cultural and political history in brief and pointed out the concurrent existence of Two Chinas. Reinstating that article can help resolve this merge issue too by having content in it about ROC history that links to detailed articles of the major events (Chinese Civil War, PRC, etc.) and the current two states. Mistakefinder (talk) 08:40, 7 May 2017 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested move to "History of China (1912-49)"
The current article describes various government extremely different in nature (the Beiyang, warlord era, KMT) as "the same state", which all had extremely different constitutions and structures of government than the current Republic of China which maintains the same constitution as it did in 1947 which falls within this period. Territorial changes don't indicate a change of government (the Louisiana purchase greatly changed the way those United States of America both looked and functioned, but we don't consider those U.S.A. up until that point to be "a separate historical state"), and the wording + title of this article wrongfully indicate that this state no longer exists as if written by either Taiwanese Independence Advocates or Communist (see: WP:NPOV), as a continuing Republic of China state would de-legitimise both their claims. Anyhow from any historic point of view calling this period not only a single government, but an obsolete government is simply false. So I suggest naming it after a pre-Socialist period of China called "the Republic of China" (with the notable exception of Yuan Shikai's brief Empire of China), rather than keeping the article with it's current name.

--1.55.196.214 (talk) 14:55, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
 * It is a period of Chinese history, yes. But it was called the Republic of China, just as the period before was called the Qing dynasty, the one before that the Ming dynasty and so on. It makes sense to use the name it was known by, as it will aid recognition and help people find the article. The dates are needed for disambiguation, and also help clarify it is the historic Republic of China. Very few people will confuse it with Taiwan which as a modern state has only existed since 1949, and is normally known as "Taiwan". But if anyone is confused they can read the article.-- JohnBlackburne words<sub style="margin-left:-2.0ex;">deeds 16:41, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
 * As 1.55.196.214 said above, the ROC has a new constitution as of 1947 so it can be considered a new state then, so if people insides this article to be kept, then the title should end the range with 1947. And Taiwan as it is now is not a state yet since "Taiwan" is in essence a nickname for ROC, so perhaps a better way is to change the title of "Taiwan" to back to "Republic of China", and create a new redirect "Taiwan (country)" to ROC, to keep it distinct from "Taiwan" meaning the island, whose article is now at "Geography of Taiwan" (this article was created back in about 2012 when "Taiwan" describing the island got moved to this name.)Mistakefinder (talk) 00:14, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
 * No, we had that discussion long ago, and the consensus was to call the county Taiwan. Consensus can change, but if anything the consensus over time is even more for it being called Taiwan, as the name Republic of China becomes ever more historic, used primarily for the historical state and less and less for Taiwan-- JohnBlackburne words<sub style="margin-left:-2.0ex;">deeds 16:45, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

This article is inaccurate and needs to be corrected. Diplomatic status does not determine whether a government exists or not.
Several comments in this discussion have used the argument that the Republic of China came to an end in 1949 when it was superseded in Mainland China by the People's Republic of China and that the current government in Taiwan can't be considered to be "legitimately" in existence because most countries officially recognize the People's Republic of China as the sole legitimate government of China (including Taiwan).

However, diplomatic status is not, in itself, a determinant of reality. The absence of diplomatic recognition of the Republic of China (on Taiwan), made necessary by the People's Republic of China as a prerequisite to establishing diplomatic relations with same, does not change fact that Taiwan is not governed by the People's Republic of China, but by a separate, distinct government that calls itself the "Republic of China" and which is a direct, uninterrupted continuation (albeit considerably evolved over the course of its existence) of the government of the same name established in 1912 that is the subject of this Wikipedia article.

Therefore, the title of this article, as well as the content, should be edited to bring it back into compliance with reality. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nathanieldahl (talk • contribs) 07:24, 4 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Then what do you think the title should be ? The article is about the period from 1912 to 1949 when the country was known as the Republic of China. It was also, perhaps more commonly, known just as China, but it makes sense to use the distinct name of this period, just as for previous periods of China’s history, such as the Qing dynasty etc.. The dates are needed to disambiguate it from the modern Republic of China, i.e.Taiwan. The name is logical and clear.-- JohnBlackburne words<sub style="margin-left:-2.0ex;">deeds 08:01, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

If as you say this article is about the Republic of China only during the period from 1912 to 1949, then there should be another article titled, "Republic of China (1949 - present)." Just having this one article on the Republic of China, and no other, implies that the Republic of China doesn't currently exist. Having an article on Taiwan is not a solution - the Republic of China did not become "Taiwan" in 1949, and has never changed it's name. Taiwan is a territory, not a country - the Republic of China currently includes Taiwan and other islands, such as Peng Hu, Quemoy, and Matsu. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nathanieldahl (talk • contribs) 08:24, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
 * the article on the current ROC does exist, at Republic of China. Or more accurately at Taiwan, where it was moved after a long discussion. All of this was discussed then, and has nothing to do with this article. If you want to move Taiwan then you need to raise it at that article’s talk page. But you would need very good arguments, much better than the above which is just repeating the same arguments as before.-- JohnBlackburne words<sub style="margin-left:-2.0ex;">deeds 12:22, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

Wrong flags, wrong emblems, wrong links - Fixed!
The links to the flags were wrong, and the primary flags and emblems were also wrong. No matter what your personal opinion is, please respect historical facts and refrain from changing Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aceman626 (talk • contribs) 07:03, 6 February 2018 (UTC)