Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Free Area of the Republic of China

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was Keep, consensus is that this is a notable topic. Davewild (talk) 17:28, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Free Area of the Republic of China

Article centers around a phrase that is not notable in English. The phrase is a Chinese-exclusive phrase used to promote a political agenda. The phrase was translated literally. The content is not cited. The content of the article is covered by numerous other articles, most notably List of territorial disputes, Taiwan independence, and Political status of Taiwan. Interwikis all point to articles on "Taiwan region". Voidvector (talk) 07:15, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Taiwan-related deletion discussions. —Voidvector (talk) 07:24, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. —Voidvector (talk) 07:24, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. I'm not aware that notability is restricted by language. The English Wikipedia can well cite Chinese sources. --Ptcamn (talk) 17:24, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment the article also claims Taiwan Area as a synonym. 70.51.9.151 (talk) 09:42, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep (with augmentations, if needed). Somebody who reads about Taiwan always wonders: the R.O.C. government there claims (at least theoretically) jurisdiction over the entire China - which would imply, to an uninitiated reader, that they ought to consider everybody born and living in any of China's 20+ provinces as a R.O.C. citizen. So what is the legal framework they would use to, say, keep a million people from moving from Fujian or Sichuan Province to Taiwan Province tomorrow, or from deciding to vote in R.O.C. parliamentary elections? Apparently this "Free Area" thing is one of the concepts that allows them to reconcile the reality with the theory. This is certainly "notable". Vmenkov (talk) 05:44, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep This is a historically important subject. It is also important to Taiwanese legal and political theory. Any scholar studying 20th century Chinese history would need to be familiar with this term. Wikipedia should not be restricted to only topics that occur in English speaking countries. lk (talk) 06:07, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Important explication of a notable topic in Taiwanese history and politics. Badagnani (talk) 14:53, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Provisional keep - a quick search of scholarly and academic sources indicates the phrase is in use in English, but as has been pointed out, language is not a restriction on notability in any case. The topic of territorial claims of the ROC vs effective control is deserving of its own article independent of those mentioned in the nomination. Skomorokh 18:16, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Notable legal entity, well-sourced. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 18:53, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep It is really notable. The ROC does claim to rule Mainland China, just like PRC claims that it rules Taiwan. Since Taiwan Province, People's Republic of China was kept, so should this article. Lehoiberri (talk) 20:43, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.