Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Taiwan Province, People's Republic of China


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was Speedy keep. PRC does claim sovereignty over Taiwan, but that does not mean it is an indication that Taiwan is under the sovereignty of PRC. Aquarius &#149; talk 17:58, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Taiwan Province, People's Republic of China
AfDs for this article: 
 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Twain is not a theoretical province of china. It is an established sovereign country. This article doesn't deserve a place on wikipedia. AMERICAN MIGHT (talk) 03:15, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep an obvious WP:POINT. The official US POV is the One China Policy. Taiwan is a province of "China", China has two national governments, one in Beijing, one in Taipei. The government in Taipei has effective control of one province, and a bit of another. Neither Beijing nor Taipei claims to be a sovereign not China country, both claim to be China. So Taiwan is not an established country, China is, but it has two governments. It might be just diplomatic fiction, but both Taipei and Beijing subscribe to it, as does Washington DC, and the UN 70.51.9.166 (talk) 04:47, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep 70 is spot on. 23 (I think) countries recognize ROC as a separate country. The rest see it as a part of PRC. Paragon12321 (talk) 05:23, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep They have a delegation of Taiwanese (those fled from the island having been involved with the communists) in Mainland China's parliament; there is even a legal party for those Taiwanese. The structure exists. Maps are printed that way. And there are Wikipedia articles and maps on political claims and disputes. This article is relevant. HkCaGu (talk) 05:45, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep Don't see any valid reasons for deletion have been made. Davewild (talk) 07:09, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep So long as this remains about the theory that Taiwan is a province of the PRoC. This theory is important in world politics, just like various other ludicrous theories the PRoC has about reality. Taiwan has never inarguably been a province of the PRoC, not in any history that resembles our own, but as a political concept the idea is notable.--T. Anthony (talk) 08:20, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete The title invites warring POVs and is not strictly speaking necessary. However this should be a redirect to Political status of Taiwan. That article can expand on the PRoC position without the POV title.--T. Anthony (talk) 13:26, 20 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep Conditionally If someone reads PRC propaganda for the first time, they might encounter "Taiwan Province, China" or "Taiwan Province, People's Republic of China" and wonder what that is. If they come looking for it, they should find an explanation.  So long as the explanation is up front about how the PRC doesn't actually control Taiwan, this article should stay.  Right now it is good.  Earlier it wasn't as clear as it needed to be.  If changes are made to remove the up front explanations of how PRC doesn't really control Taiwan and the province is theoretical, then it would be better to delete the article.Readin (talk) 12:14, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep, as long as it includes the explanation about how the PRC doesn't actually control Taiwan. --Eleassar my talk 12:49, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Isn't the problem here that Taiwan is a province of China rather than a province of the People's Republic of China? Ron B. Thomson (talk) 15:22, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep, but try to get the POV under control. Mandsford (talk) 21:23, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep per Eleassar and others.Biophys (talk) 20:16, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. Its important to state that this is not a 'theoretical province', it is a real existing part of the PRC administrative apparatus. The fact that the PRC doesn't actually control the island doesn't make this phony. This is not the only case in the world were there are overlapping territorial claims. Kosovo and Jerusalem are other cases were there are both a de facto local administration as well as competing administrative structures which lack de facto control. --Soman (talk) 07:48, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
 * The Israelis actually have troops and facilities in Jerusalem. Unless the PRoC army and Party is in Taiwan and I just missed it, well then it's not the same. Nor is it like Kosovo whose own government is recent. There has been a non-PRoC government in Taiwan for 50 years or more. I see you've also worked on a great many Communist party articles, which doesn't necessarily mean anything but makes me wonder. In any event thanks for helping me reconsider.--T. Anthony (talk) 13:23, 20 June 2008 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.