Talk:Taiwanese indigenous peoples/Archive 2010

BBC News: Taiwan seeks to save indigenous languages

• BBC News: Taiwan seeks to save indigenous languages • Ling.Nut 03:13, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Please help

• Need someone to get a copy of this book and verify that two images in this article are in it. If the book is in your library, please check it out and contact me:
• (Tanxian taiwan: niaoju longcang de Taiwan renleixue zhi lu 探險台灣: 鳥居龍藏的台灣人類學之旅 (Taiwan Expedition: Tori’i Ryuzo’s Travel of Anthropology in Taiwan). Translated by Yang Nanjun 楊南郡. Taipei: Yuanliu 遠流.) • Ling.Nut 00:44, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

Qing cannibalism: will delete in one day

First, and most importantly, I am not getting an overpowering feeling of reliability from Davidson as a source. If the Chinese actually ate human meat, wouldn't it be documented elsewhere??? Cannibalism is not documented among the Han, AFAIK, so this source is extremely suspect. Verify with more sources, or I will delete in one week two days. • Ling.Nut 01:54, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

• I'm still gonna delete it tomorrow. I don't care if the source can be verified; I question the source's reliability back in its inception. There are no accounts of Qing cannibalism elsewhere – none! – making this extremely hoax-ish. Find more sources that say the same thing, or will delete tomorrow. • Ling.Nut 03:44, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Ethnic Groups in China Category

We are having a disagreement about whether or not to add the Aborginal page to the 'Ethnic Groups in China' category. This is not a POV issue, this is more of a technicality issue. 'Ethnic Groups in China' category is for categorising the ethnicities of China. However you interpert 'China' as is up to your own descretion, whether it be the PRC, ROC, or both, whatever way you may interpret it, but the category should still go. If you interpret it as ROC or both, I don't need to explain anything, it's pretty self-evident. If you only interpret it as PRC however, then here would be my explanation. There is no POV issue associated with this categorising. This is categorisation, not dealing with the article itself. This is a technicality, in order for this page to show in the category page, the category must be listed on this page, that's how the categories are made. The PRC as said before recognises the Aborginals as one of their ethnic groups under the name Gaoshan. Since most of you lads interpret 'China' as the PRC, then it would make the most sense to include this article under that category. To not do so would not only be a hindering in the 'effectiveness' of wikipedia as you are denying an article into a category for a perfect reason. Even if you want to make this a POV issue, then I will have to again pull the NPOV policy which states that all significant sides of the POV should be noted. In this case, the POV that the Aborginal or 'Gaoshan' is a 'Chinese Ethnicity' is a 'significant POV'. I don't want to make this a POV issue, but if it be, then it be the case.

And as the lad who was criticising my logic, that's not correct at all. When I put the categorisation back up, I specifically stated my reasons as one being a technicality and of the other being that the PRC officially recognises the Aborginals as their 'Gaoshan' group. Now, let us take the first technicality logic. If you take a look at the category page, you'll see that the category lists only those ethnicities that are of 'origination' in China (don't start bull****ing me with what's China and what's not, you know what I mean in this context). For those that are not, the groups are 'localised', eg. 'Pakistanis in China' and 'Russians in China'. So based on that logic, no, that does not mean catogorisation of every nation for the Han group. Based on that logic, it should be 'Ethnic Han in WHATEVERNATION' articles be categorised into the 'Ethnic groups of WHATEVERNATION'.

Now on to my second explanation, I said that the PRC officially recognises the Aborginals as their Gaoshan group. Based on this logic, the Han Ethnicity article should be categorised only into those nations which officially recognises the Han as one of their ethnic groups. Now, how many nations recognises the Han ethnicity as one of their ethnic groups? My logic is well founded and thought out over and over again over the years, do not take lightly of them. Liu Tao (talk) 00:26, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

I for one don't have a problem with a simple category, so long as POV-based additions aren't made to the text of the article. • Ling.Nut 01:05, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

If you are being strictly technical, then the fact that there are a couple of thousand Taiwanese aborigines in mainland China(PRC) and obviously hundreds of thousands in Taiwan then it seems they could be listed as an Ethnic group in China if you define China as being the PRC or China being both the PRC and Taiwan. But since they are such a minimally small group on the mainland, I don't think they should be included in this category because it only makes sense if you define China as being both the PRC and Taiwan, which is a POV. Apexinsignia (talk) 04:57, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

I do not take your words lightly, and I respect your views. The PRC also "officially" recognizes Taiwan to be a part of its territory, but we don't just take their word for it; this is Wikipedia. Yes, we take into account all "significant" POVs, but there's a reason why Taiwan is not categorized under "Provinces of the People's Republic of China", but rather "Territorial disputes of the PRC/ROC". You mentioned that if "China" refers to the PRC, then it should not be a problem categorizing the article as such. I will have to disagree with you here; it is fine to list and link to this article from the "List of ethnic groups in China" page (and vice versa) because it's strictly informational - it's how the governments define it. However, the reality (from neither side's POV) is different. Simple put, Taiwanese aborigines originated on the island of Taiwan, which is not under the control the control of the PRC (i.e. China). I take it (in this case) that you take "China" to mean the PRC, because you are justifying the article's inclusion based on a PRC-produced list. If the PRC had not included it on the list, then we probably would not be having this conversation. Take another example, if we're talking about categorizing ethnic groups as where they originate, I would not include Han Chinese in the "List of ethnic groups in Taiwan" since they simply did not originate there (FYI, it's not included). The government can choose to say it's so, but that doesn't make it so. The "effectiveness" of Wikipedia does not hinge upon categorizing something based solely on a list a government puts out; it's about looking at the facts and different viewpoints.

When I reverted your edit, I was pointing out that you were choosing to include the article in the category because some aborigines had migrated over to mainland China. Based on your logic above, shouldn't they be categorized instead under "Taiwanese aborigines in China" or "Gaoshan in China" rather than "Ethnic groups in China"? A large number of Japanese live in China (>120,000), but they aren't included simply because they originated in Japan.

I think the main point we need to work out here is: What exactly does "Ethnic groups in China" refer to (the political entities (PRC/ROC), the cultural entity, etc.)? In my opinion, when we refer to "China", it's almost always referring to the PRC rather than mainland China & Taiwan as a whole (i.e. the cultural entity). Pages are fine to discuss differing viewpoints - that's what they are for, but categorizing something should be based on solid fact. I see your point, and I respect it, but I have to disagree on the categorization. -Multivariable (talk) 06:04, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Change the category name to Category:Ethnic groups officially recognized by China. • Ling.Nut 07:49, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Is this really even an issue? I thought the PRC governing the mainland claims Taiwan and the ROC governing Taiwan claims the mainland. Lambanog (talk) 01:45, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

• Absolutely everything is an issue to someone or other on Wikipedia. Just let this thread die so we can archive it. • Ling.Nut 01:50, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Demographic tables

I'm hoping to transfer the tables from Demographics_of_Taiwan#Aborigine to this article, but I'd like to get a consensus from everyone else before I do this, since this is a featured article. The tables are highly helpful to those who'd like to learn the Chinese pronunciations and demographics of the aboriginal tribes, and I think they'd be a great asset. — Stevey7788 (talk) 05:37, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

Anyways, I've just added the tables. If anyone has any objections please voice them here. — Stevey7788 (talk) 05:42, 28 October 2010 (UTC)