Template talk:Anthems of Asia

This template was considered for deletion on 2007 April 29. The result of the discussion was "keep".

Songs Template‑class

This template is within the scope of WikiProject Songs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of songs 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.SongsWikipedia:WikiProject SongsTemplate:WikiProject Songssong articles Template This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Asia Template‑class

This template is within the scope of WikiProject Asia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Asia 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.AsiaWikipedia:WikiProject AsiaTemplate:WikiProject AsiaAsia articles Template This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

I don't think it should be included. It's currently part of the Russian Federation and not an independent state. -- Clevelander 21:53, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It is as much of a nation as Puerto Rico or Scotland, though those nations' foreign affairs are controlled by larger governments. We should be as inclusive as possible. Tuva has a distinct culture and has been considered a distinct nation and nationality for hundreds if not thousands of years. It was once independent but is now part of the Russian Federation and not independent largely due to its poverty. Like Scotland, it is autonomous in many regards. Badagnani 21:56, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but it is not recognized internationally as a seperate state. Scotland isn't either as it is internationally recognized as part of the United Kingdom. -- Clevelander 21:58, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, I think I see the issue. On the Europe national anthem template, Scotland is listed. As it is internationally recognized as part of the United Kingdom, it should not be included. These templates really do need a lot of clean-up. -- Clevelander 22:00, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I do not agree with you that nations such as Scotland or Tuva should not be listed in the templates. We are here to serve users, not prevent them from finding information. There are varying degrees of sovereignty, which you have already indicated for three micro-states in this template. Please try to think in a pluralistic way on this issue, in order to provide as much information to our users as possible. Thank you. Badagnani 22:03, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would agree with you if Scotland and Tuva had national anthem pages, let alone national anthems. -- Clevelander 22:15, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't seem a good thing that you edit in favor of the various tiny Eastern European nations you seem to favor, but denigrate other nations' statehood and anthems, such as The Flower of Scotland or Tooruktug Dolgaï Tangdym. Badagnani 22:20, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for creating "regional anthems" subsection; this seems a good way to list these. Other regions can be evaluated in the future on a per-case basis (there are a lot of similar ones, as for example in Russia, like Mari, Kalmykh, Bashkiria, etc.). But the question could be whether it was historically considered a "nation," and whether many inhabitants today consider it that way. The U.S. states (except Hawaii) wouldn't qualify but places such as Scotland, Wales, or Basque Country or Catalonia, Spain would count as "nations within nations." Badagnani 19:18, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I moved Tibetan National Anthem to Gyallu, and fixed the double redirects. If you object, contact the Bibliotheque Official Complaints Cabal (BOCC) ruled by Bibliotheque (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log):) 06:01, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Item was removed, therefore, I replaced it. --Rédacteur Tibet (talk) 15:47, 25 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

isn't it part of Africa? Why is it here? This does not include the template. I don't think it should be included here. 174.117.233.162 (talk) 14:24, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As there is some disagreement over this it’s worth I think discussing. I have restored the names of the countries to their common names, "China" and "Taiwan". This is consistent with their articles, China and Taiwan, by far their most recognised names, and consistent with the rest of the template. Bahrain is formally the "Kingdom of Bahrain", but the template just uses "Bahrain". Many countries have one or more longer formal names, but are known overwhelmingly by their common names. In particular a template like this where space is a premium should use short common names, as long as they are not ambiguous. Calling it "China, Republic of" is especially confusing as it’s likely to be confused with China. Adding "(Taiwan)" to disambiguate it just highlights how that is the name its known by.--JohnBlackburne^words_deeds 12:47, 13 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nonono, there's a misunderstanding for you in the reason.

"Taiwan" is NEVER a name for Republic of China. No matter in the law of Rep. China, or PR China, USA, or United Nations. What's more, in fact, most people in Taiwan who wanna "get the independence of Taiwan" are anxious to get rid of the "CHINA" in its name. It's obvious that you can never mistake "Rep. China" and "Taiwan"... The only reason to write "People's Republic of" and "Republic of" here is to distinguish the two gov't from each other, just like Congo and DR Congo. In many sites, just like a quiz site [sporcle.com], even if you only type the name "Congo" for the Republic of Congo, the site will not recognize it. Many Westerners like you focus most of attention on Western world, so the understanding of matters and conflicts in Eastern countries like China. You can see Chinese version of the template to know more. Do not revert it anymore, Thanks;)Ulysses Faye Ohkiph (talk) 15:57, 13 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The country is known as Taiwan in English. That’s why the article is at Taiwan, and has been for years. It’s nothing to do with the Taiwan independence movement, or any of the other points you raise. "Taiwan" is the name overwhelmingly used for the country in English. As such it’s clear, unambiguous, and highly unlikely to be confused with China. As for what the Chinese (or any other) version of the template uses, it is irrelevant; usage may well be different in Chinese, and policies may be different on the Chinese WP. It’s what makes sense in English, on the English WP, that’s at issue here. And in English the countries are known as China and Taiwan.--JohnBlackburne^words_deeds 16:18, 13 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No. Republic of China is not Taiwan, once it was the ONLY gov't of China. Before the gov't retreated to Taiwan, people who have Chinese nationality all use this song as anthem. Relation between Taiwan and China is not like that of Nagorno-Karabakh and Azerbaijan, the Koreas and the Germanies, but more like the Vietnams. So, this song has the anthem status of the whole China. What's more, use the article name of Taiwan is meaningless. That's because if you only use "Rep. China", the name is ambiguous. "Rep. China" refers to:

1. Warlord gov't under Yuan Shikai's Control who archived the dissolution the Qing dynasty;(1912-27)

2. The unified Chinese gov't who took part in the WWII, which included Kuomintang, Communists, and warlords above;(1937-46)

3. Kuomintang's fascist-like gov't who still control the whole China, still not retreat to Taiwan;(1927-36, 46-49)

4. A separating gov't founded by 19th army of Kuomintang in Fujian province;(1933-34)

5. Taiwan.(1949-)

0. (Initially, Mao Zedong and Zhou Enlai wanted to use "Rep. China" to name their new state in 1949. Thanks to Situ Meitang of Hung Society and other anti-Kuomintangists, you can not see the article name like "China (Beijing)" and "China (Taipei)" in Wikipedia now.)

Mainland and overseas Chinese people are more likely to regard the "Republic of China" as the meaning 2 & 3.

So to let people know the current status of "Rep. China" most quickly, the most proper name of the article which is the description of the territory which Rep. China gov't controls, is Taiwan. But this name is not so proper for cultural use, and extremely not proper for the national symbol. Only you insist in the name of the "country", actually I have a suspicion that if you are a Taiwan DPP member who pretends to be a Westerner.

I think I'm too friendly now. After all, you ought to look these things up, for the editors have to take the responsibility of the editing behavior in Wikipedia. Actually it's not my duty to tell you about so many things:) Ulysses Faye Ohkiph (talk) 07:39, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You have just made my point for me. Yes, Republic of China is ambiguous. So it is not appropriate to use it. Instead better to use the common name, Taiwan. As the common name that is all that is needed to clearly identify the country. Anything else is unnecessary and just confusing in this context, which is a list of countries referred to by their common names (as many others have formal names). The same is true of China: all you need to identify it is "China", Not its full formal name, especially not written out of order as you have. So I will restore the common names, to match the rest of the template and normal Wikipedia usage.--JohnBlackburne^words_deeds 17:55, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A "COMMON NAME" IS FIRSTLY A NAME. YOU SHOULD NOT USE A CALLING WHICH IS NOT EVEN A NAME IN A SERIOUS PASSAGE. HAVE I SAID IT CLEAR?

FOR MOST OF OVERSEAS CHINESE LIKE ME, REPUBLIC OF CHINA TAKES THE 2 & 3 MEANING. TO ADD THE SMALL TAG "TAIWAN" IS ONLY FOR WESTERNERS TO LET THEM KNOW THE TERRITORY THAT THE ROC GOV'T CONTROLS NOWADAYS. GOT IT? I THINK THE MINORITY OF TAIWAN INDEPENDENT ACTIVISTS LIKE YOU SEEMS LIKE TO ABANDON THE STATUS OF THE CURRENT ANTHEM! SO DON'T ADD YOUR OWN POV! Ulysses Faye Ohkiph (talk) 18:38, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I completely agree with JohnBlackburne. The template is a navigational aid, not reference material, and as such should make navigation - not referencing - easier. Considering the country is known internationally (and hence to English speakers) as "Taiwan", listing it by any other name would be misleading to readers attempting to use the template for its intended purpose. Article names reflect this reasoning too: the DPRK is known as "North Korea", the Kingdom of Spain is known simply as "Spain", and the Republic of Côte d'Ivoire as the "Ivory Coast". I see no reason to steer from this convention this time. François Robere (talk) 16:04, 16 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you François Robere for looking at this. As this means there is [limited] consensus for the shorter forms of the names I have restored them.--JohnBlackburne^words_deeds 17:11, 16 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

lol. Mr. Robere (François Robere), don't you know that North Korea and Korea DPR, Ivory Coast and Cote Divoire, is completely same things with two names? The lands they represent are no difference, even 1 square centimeter. For Taiwan, what do Kinmen people think? what do Matsu and Lianjiang people think? Taiwan is subordinate of ROC. To the narrowest sense, just discuss the current condition, the synonym of "Rep. of China" is "Chinese Taipei", "Taiwan, Province of China"(only in UN-related organizations, NOT "TAIWAN PROVINCE", "Taiwan Province" equals to the simple Taiwan), and the most detailed and exact name, "The Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu used by WTO. I think you Westerner should learn more if you cannot understand a concept. Do not be a racist, huh? I don't think Chinese people is low-leveled people! You should fix your wrong understanding of all questions, and do not force us to accept your Westerner's POV! Does the colonial period ends now?

For the song itself, the "Song of San Min Chu-i" is belong to all Chinese people who admire Sun Yat-sen, not only in Taiwan island, but also for other people in Kinmen, Matsu, People's Republic of China, even all over the world.

As for the example like "the Kingdom of Spain", COULD YOU PLEASE READ WHAT I WROTE ABOVE FIRST? DO YOU REALLY HAVE THE ATTITUDE TO COMMUNICATE? I can only read the arrogance and attitude of colonist in what you wrote above. YOU WESTERNER! Ulysses Faye Ohkiph (talk) 06:51, 17 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Here from AN/I. Ulysses Faye Ohkiph has been indefinitely blocked, and appears unaware of policy in this area to use common names in English, so I have reverted their last group of edits. Yngvadottir (talk) 18:20, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]