103.190.179.16

RFC

Please read wp:rfc the most important thing is the question must be neutral, and editorialising should not be part of teh RFC itself, but rather a separate comment. Slatersteven (talk) 14:17, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

Really, you need to stop with this line immediately: if you actually have read or have internalized any of the talk page arguments you claim to have read first, you would know perfectly well why we don't do this. Remsense ‥ 论 14:23, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

Why? Because of polling? 103.190.179.16 (talk) 14:26, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

We call things what sources call them. You cannot read a single paragraph of discussion in the archives without someone stating this point. Sources do not generally call Taiwan a "de facto country". Remsense ‥ 论 14:27, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

We have no real dispute about if Taiwan is de facto a country (has an army, currency, navy, passport, internet TLD, telephone country code, etc.
I'm closing this RfC as finding consensus that it is best to refer to Taiwan as a "country" rather than as a "state".)

— WP:TWRFC

103.190.179.16 (talk) 14:32, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

We also have no real dispute that Taiwan is a sovereign state. But we do not call it that because our sources don't. Remsense ‥ 论 14:33, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

????? really???? what about ones who reliplied as coungtry? 103.190.179.16 (talk) 14:35, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

Not really sure what the confusion is, but I'll try to answer: things can have multiple correct descriptions, but we pick the one that is most widely attested in sources. We call Taipei a city, but there's no real dispute that it is also an urban settlement. Remsense ‥ 论 14:40, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

Let's discuss peacefully.

A consensus decision takes into account all of the proper concerns raised. Ideally, it arrives with an absence of objections, but often we must settle for as wide an agreement as can be reached. When there is no wide agreement, consensus-building involves adapting the proposal to bring in dissenters without losing those who accepted the initial proposal.

— WP:CONACHIEVE

We have no real dispute about if Taiwan is de facto a country while some disagree country or state. 103.190.179.16 (talk) 14:56, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

Again, we have no dispute about a lot of things: most things are de facto things, that's what de facto means. I am a de facto Wikipedia editor. You'd only specify if you want to draw attention to something in particular—our sources generally do not do this, so it would be unbalanced for us to do so, just as it would be to refer to Taiwan as a "country on Earth" or "country whose name begins with the letter T". Remsense ‥ 论 14:58, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

But there are huge disputes whether TW a country, state or sth. Just like what Slatersteven said, it is very complex. We should describe it in a less disputive way. Can't you get the point? 103.190.179.16 (talk) 15:03, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

That's exactly why we begin with merely "country", because anything more specific would be less representative of the sources. Remsense ‥ 论 15:08, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

Don't you understand the complexity of Taiwan? Is the example you cited relevant to this matter? 103.190.179.16 (talk) 15:04, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

These issues are discussed in the actual article. In the introduction, we articulate a summary that is as brief and representative as possible. If readers would like to know more, they would read the article. Remsense ‥ 论 15:09, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

Remsense is keeping me from doing so. and why... suddenly close and delete? I wish you could guide me. 103.190.179.16 (talk)

I will leave them to answer why they are doing it, but its not neutral wodred for a start. Slatersteven (talk) 14:31, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

I think you need to drop this and read wp:tenditious before you are blocked as a time sink. Slatersteven (talk) 15:15, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

???? 103.190.179.16 (talk) 15:44, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

There are huge disputes whether Taiwan a country but Wikipedia stand with "country" by describing it a country. I think its much more tenditious. You know, we won't say these when talking bout us, uk etc. 103.190.179.16 (talk) 15:51, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

I'll articulate it like this: we can't invent our own phraseology. Our sources mostly use "country", some do not and would dispute country. We can discuss that dispute, but what we cannot do is decide to introduce a new form "de facto country" that none of our sources use. WP:NPOV means presenting all the positions, not trying to find a new average position between them. Remsense ‥ 论 16:07, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

---