This category is within the scope of WikiProject Taiwan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Taiwan on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TaiwanWikipedia:WikiProject TaiwanTemplate:WikiProject TaiwanTaiwan articles
This category is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
This category does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
This is very problematic. What about Koxinga and other pre-ROC people who were influential in Taiwan? I created Category:People in Taiwan originally to carefully circumvent this problem, but apparently some smart-alec reorganized it -- very short-termistic. And Yuan T. Lee is hardly a politician. -- Kaihsu 22:49, 2004 Jul 4 (UTC)
I made my objection at Category talk:People in Taiwan and waited more than a week before I removed that tag. There was about 9 days 2 hrs to comment and 8 days and 1 hour to object and no one said anything. For the NPOV around this, we cannot call people like Chiang Kai-shek "Taiwanese" and saying that they're "in Taiwan" sounds rather unprofessional and awkward. The Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Chinese) recommends using ROC when it is more accurate and it is better in my opinion to separate history from the current ambiguous political entity. Koxinga belongs in Category:Taiwanese historical figures, Category:Taiwanese history or the like. Categories tag should be more specific than "People in Taiwan" and I took that into account before removing that tag. They would have to be removed anyways under wikipedia convention.
I added Yuan T. Lee by mistake.--Jiang 23:20, 4 Jul 2004 (UTC)
(I apologize in advance for the semi-argumentative nature of my comments, which is not usually a good thing for a RfC, but I think given the situation here, an advocacy for a proposal is necessary. Also, I realize it's relatively unusual for category names/inclusion to become subject matters of RfC, but again, given the situation here, I think it is appropriate rather than for me to just unilaterally carry out a reorganization.)
Apparently, in 2007 a semi-consensus (I hate to call it an actual consensus given that apparently no one discussed it, although that was not the user's fault) was formed that this category would include politicians of pre-1949 ROC politicians, while Category:Taiwanese politicians would include Taiwanese politicians of all periods, including ROC politicians after 1949. This might have appeared as a good idea at that time, but since then, I think it's partly due to this division that both categories have become a major mess, with intersectional subcategories that really shouldn't be subcategories of either.
I am requesting comments on a new proposal I am making to reorganize — in which I'm believe trying to take in the concern of the neutrality needed on the Taiwan status question while trying to make the category names more accurate and more logical:
Category:Taiwanese politicians will include all Taiwanese politicians, during the ROC period and before (Japanese rule, Republic of Taiwan, Qing Dynasty, Ming Dynasty).
I believe this more logically and accurately characterizes the politicians involved. Due to the potentially contentious nature of this, however, I am asking for comments and potentially, alternative proposals. --Nlu (talk) 01:15, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hearing no objections over a course of nearly three weeks, I think I'm going to start implementing this setup. (Except for the part of "Most of the current subcategories of Category:Taiwanese politicians will become subcategories of this category" part; that part has turned out to be not quite true based on what I am looking at with the two overlapping categories' subcategories.) --Nlu (talk) 02:41, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
In addition, due to the size of the membership of the categories, I believe I will also diffuse by geographic origin. --Nlu (talk) 02:50, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
