Talk:Ministry of Education (Taiwan)

Requested move (2008)

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. 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The result of the proposal was withdrawn (based on nominator opposing own proposed move). JPG-GR (talk) 05:58, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Since some Wikipedians try to unify the naming of the ROC ministries, this ministry should also be requested to move.--Neo-Jay (talk) 08:43, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

• neutral. For me, either way is fine. --Neo-Jay (talk) 08:43, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

• Support. Despite the fact that the ministry was established in mainland China, it is more often connected with Taiwan (1,130) than the Republic of China (996). This also follows WP:UCN.--Jerrch 16:00, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

• Oppose. After reading Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Chinese)#Republic of China, Taiwan, and variations thereof, I changed my mind. It says: "When giving the names of official state organs (eg. Republic of China Navy)", Republic of China should be used. I think that we should follow the naming convention. If these ministries be moved to Taiwan, will President of the Republic of China also be moved to President of Taiwan? And, all these ministries were established before 1949. If their names should be changed to Taiwan, will separated articles be established for their ROC mainland period? And, 1,130 v. 996 seems not very significantly different. --Neo-Jay (talk) 16:37, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

The conventions state that "Republic of China" should be used only in official titles. The Republic of China Army and the President of the Republic of China contain ROC because it is part of their official titles. The ministries of Taiwan do not have titles that contain ROC. Since these articles refer to the ministries currently located in Taiwan, it would be less confusing to use Taiwan.--Jerrch 17:43, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

At the Ministry 's official website, it is presented as Ministry of Education, Republic of China (Taiwan). It is not accurate to say that ROC is not a part of its official title. And, more importantly, it is irrelevant whether ROC is really a part of the official title. The convention requires that ROC should be used "when giving the names of official state organs". It does not require that the ROC can be used only when it is a part of the official title. As long as it is a official state organ, ROC should be used. --Neo-Jay (talk) 18:02, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Ministry of Education, Republic of China (Taiwan) is also fine by me. The main reason why I did not want it to be "Ministry of Education (Republic of China)" is because it would be easily confused with Ministry of Education of the People's Republic of China. If (Taiwan) can be added to the new name, it would be fine.--Jerrch 20:13, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

I can understand your concern. However, President of the Republic of China may also be confused with President of the People's Republic of China, but it has not be moved to President of the Republic of China (Taiwan). The naming convention is clear: Republic of China, not Taiwan, should be used for the official state organs. Therefore these ROC ministry articles should be moved to XX Ministry (Republic of China).--Neo-Jay (talk) 20:41, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Again, President of the Republic of China and President of the PRC are official titles. The official titles of the ministries are simply Ministry of XX without ROC or Taiwan. This is a state organ, but Ministry of Education, Republic of China (Taiwan) is definitely a good compromise.--Jerrch 20:46, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

There should not be a private compromise between you and me. The question is the naming convention. If you like to challenge the naming convention, you may initiate a new discussion at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (Chinese). But, for now, we can only apply the current convention, i.e., Republic of China, not Taiwan or Republic of China (Taiwan), should be used for the official state organ.--Neo-Jay (talk) 20:54, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

The proposal of the new name is not a private compromise. We are still awaiting other users to take part in this discussion.

I do want to point out: although there are naming conventions that we should follow, any consensus established on any article could override those conventions. This discussion only talks about the ministry articles, so to speak.--Jerrch 23:37, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

I don't think that consensus established on one article could override the conventions. On the contrary, discussion on specific articles should follow the conventions. I have no interest in participating in the making or changing of the ROC/Taiwan articles' naming conventions. I am just a rules follower. If we do not have disputes on the meaning of the convention, then our discussion does not need to continue. All you need to do is to challenge the convention in an appropriate place, obviously not here. Convention making or changing needs wider participation. Here, this talk page, is of course not a good place for such a deep discussion. If you just want to raise argument on convention-making, not on convention-interpretation, your argument will be irrelevant for this discussion, and I will move the ministry articles to ROC title. After you successfully change the convention, then you can feel free to move them per new convention. Thanks for your understanding. --Neo-Jay (talk) 00:17, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

• Oppose Taiwan is a Province, Republic of China signifies national application. 70.55.84.42 (talk) 04:19, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

That is not the reason, I believe, why Neo-Jay opposed the move. We are simply following the naming conventions. By the way, Taiwan is also the common name for the ROC--Jerrch 13:50, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

• Question What happened to the ministry categories? I saw them disappear recently being speedied as "housekeeping", leaving various people effectively uncategorised (unless you count "Living people" and "nnnn births"). cab (talk) 01:57, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Are you talking about categories like Category:Ministry of National Defense of the Republic of China? I don't know why it was deleted, but it was not replaced by something like Category:Ministry of National Defense of Taiwan. Probably it was deleted because its scope is too small. It seems to me that its (their) deletion is irrelevant to this moving request.--Neo-Jay (talk) 10:08, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. 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.

Requested move 3 July 2015

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: Move. Clear consensus that "Taiwan" is the common name for the state, including areas outside the island of Taiwan. Cúchullain ^t/c 14:41, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

---

Ministry of Education (Republic of China) → Ministry of Education (Taiwan) – Per Talk:Ministry of Economic Affairs (Taiwan) two years ago and common name, Taiwan. George Ho (talk) 00:54, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

• Oppose – The ministry serves all territories controlled by the Republic of China, not merely the island of Taiwan. RGloucester — ☎ 04:25, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Comment: In this context, Taiwan refers to the whole of the Republic of China, so this is a non-issue. Sovereign Sentinel (talk) 17:15, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

No, it doesn't. Clearly the term "Taiwan" cannot refer to Matsu. RGloucester — ☎ 21:08, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

• Support per nom. Sovereign Sentinel (talk) 17:15, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

• Although most of Taiwan's ministries still carry a "Republic of China" disambiguator (see Category:Government ministries of the Republic of China), I support a move per User:Jerrch's comments in the section above. "Republic of China" is not part of the article title; the parenthetical is merely a Wikipedia dismabiguator and intended to most clearly and succinctly disambiguate the article from others of the same name. Since it matches the parent article Taiwan, "Taiwan" fits that bill. —  AjaxSmack  00:19, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

If the Ministry does not serve Taiwan, but the Republic of China, how can the main article be "Taiwan"? RGloucester — ☎ 02:13, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

The ministry does serve Taiwan. —  AjaxSmack  04:08, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

• Support. The parent article is at Taiwan; no reason for this to be at ROC. Calidum T|C 01:16, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
• Rename per the main article Taiwan which covers the whole state and not just the island after a lengthy and contentious RM some years ago. "Republic of China" is a much worse disambiguation as the name for the present day entity is largely unknown in English. We shouldn't have to keep on going over the same old ground all the time. Timrollpickering (talk) 16:34, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
• Support to match parent article. It's pretty ridiculous that several years on from that conclusive RM we still seem to have go through this rigamarole for every ROC→Taiwan article. Jenks24 (talk) 15:49, 10 July 2015 (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.