The following discussion is an archived 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: no consensus. -- tariqabjotu 16:19, 23 June 2013 (UTC) reply

List of political parties in the Republic of China → List of political parties in Taiwan – WP:Common Name Uaat ( talk) 06:45, 15 June 2013 (UTC) reply

• Split some of this page should exist in a list for pre-1950 China (when the ROC was still on the mainland) -- 65.94.79.6 ( talk) 08:17, 15 June 2013 (UTC) reply
• Oppose: The Tongmenghui has nothing to do with the 1895-1945 Japanese colony of Taiwan. --  李博杰  | — Talk contribs email 09:03, 15 June 2013 (UTC) reply
• Support the move, and split the historical paragraphs to List of historical parties in China, see also List of historical parties in Turkey. Fizikanauk ( talk) 11:54, 15 June 2013 (UTC) reply
• Support. List of political parties in Taiwan already redirects here. I suppose the article will have to be readjusted a bit, but that doesn't mean we need to leave it at this title. Kauffner ( talk) 14:59, 15 June 2013 (UTC) reply
• Support per WP:COMMONNAME and Taiwan. Split off the historical parties where necessary. Timrollpickering ( talk) 16:37, 15 June 2013 (UTC) reply
• Oppose: Taiwan is WP:Common Name for Republic of China. But this includes historical parties. I think that it is better to take current parties up with historical parties. So the name 'List of political parties in the Republic of China' is appropriate for that. Sawol ( talk) 11:46, 17 June 2013 (UTC) reply
• Oppose per Sawol and Benlisquare. GotR ^Talk 17:26, 17 June 2013 (UTC) reply
• Support per WP:COMMONNAME and the main article Taiwan. 188.123.148.2 ( talk) 05:15, 19 June 2013 (UTC) reply
  • Single purpose IP. -- PalaceGuard008 ( Talk) 20:25, 20 June 2013 (UTC) reply
• Oppose split of this article. There is no material here to split. The Kuomintang is a continuous political entity from the time it rules Mainland China to its move to Taiwan. It makes no editorial sense to split this article. Those advocating a split of this article have not read this article as there is no coverage of so-called "historical parties" that existed prior to 1929.-- Jiang ( talk) 06:40, 19 June 2013 (UTC) reply
  • Comment 1929? China didn't reacquire Taiwan until after WWII. -- 65.94.79.6 ( talk) 04:36, 21 June 2013 (UTC) reply
    • see Northern Expedition. 1929 is when the KMT unified the country and imposed a party-state. Of course there are parties that participated in the 1913 elections, as well as parties that operated on a limited basis during the warlord era, but those parties are not given any coverage in this article. As far as the existence of political parties in the Republic of China is concerned, 1949 serves no dividing line whatsoever, not in the way 1913 or 1929 does, so the proposal that this article be split at 1949 is plainly ridiculous. -- Jiang ( talk)
• Oppose move and split. Move is imprecise and inaccurate given scope of article, and split is non-NPOV as it implies some kind of conceptual break, which is not true - several of the parties in the ROC in 1940 were still there in 1945 and still there in 1949 and still there in 1950 and still there in 1951 and still there in 1981 and still there in 2000. There is no conceptually appropriate line for splitting. It is not appropriate for Wikipedia to pander to certain political viewpoints by distorting historical fact. -- PalaceGuard008 ( Talk) 20:22, 20 June 2013 (UTC) reply

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.

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: Moved. There is a consensus that the proposed title is a better fit, for consistency with the article on the country itself. Furthermore, there is consensus that the sections pertaining to pre-1949 can be split out to either a separate new article, or merged into Republic of China (1912–49). I'll leave that to interested parties to carry out, once the move is done.  —  Amakuru ( talk) 10:29, 15 June 2017 (UTC) reply

List of political parties in the Republic of China → List of political parties in Taiwan – Is it better to rename/move this page to "Taiwan"? The section needs to include political parties when it was under Japanese rule. Supreme Dragon ( talk) 18:46, 24 May 2017 (UTC) reply

Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.

• Support, since the referenced topic is at Taiwan, not at Republic of China. -- В²C ☎ 20:31, 24 May 2017 (UTC) reply

• Oppose - since the article includes historical political parties before 1949, when the ROC ruled mainland China, it should keep the current name. - Zanhe ( talk) 02:40, 26 May 2017 (UTC) reply

• Support per nom but I share User:Zanhe's concerns. The "Mainland China" section should be split off into another article ( List of political parties in the Republic of China (1912–49)) or, better yet in its current state, merged into Republic of China (1912–49) or one of its sub-articles. —  AjaxSmack  03:29, 27 May 2017 (UTC) reply

• Support Taiwan is the common name of the state. The name of ROC is so rarely used that it causes confusion to readers. Create a new article for List of political parties in the Republic of China (1912–49).-- Coco977 ( talk) 03:07, 30 May 2017 (UTC) reply
• Oppose - The article still has historical context, and splitting the article into two doesn't help matters, especially since two editors at #Split opposed the split, originally proposed by Coco977. -- George Ho ( talk) 05:03, 2 June 2017 (UTC) reply

• Support move per WP:COMMONNAME and support splitting the 1912–49 content to History of political parties in China. This should be the ideal article for those contents to locate. Fizikanauk ( talk) 19:49, 2 June 2017 (UTC) reply
• Support move with same rationale as Fizikanauk above. Also support the creation of a new article on ROC parties (1912–49). Taiwantaffy ( talk) 08:09, 8 June 2017 (UTC) reply
• Support move per WP:COMMONNAME. There should be List of political parties in Taiwan and List of political parties in the Republic of China (1912-1949), since the political situations are drastically different between the two entities. Lysimachi ( talk) 17:52, 8 June 2017 (UTC) reply
• Support as described by Fizikanauk above. -- Khajidha ( talk) 12:12, 12 June 2017 (UTC) reply
• support – the country is known as Taiwan, the main political parties, where they have taken the name of the country, use Taiwan. The political parties from before 1949, which were active in China primarily not Taiwan, don’t belong. I don’t think they need their own article, they could be included in Republic of China (1912–49). But that is an editorial matter which can be addressed later. The best title for this is "List of political parties in Taiwan".-- JohnBlackburne ^words _deeds 00:27, 15 June 2017 (UTC) reply

Discussion

Any additional comments:

How about List of political parties in Taiwan/ROC? Szqecs ( talk) 15:25, 6 June 2017 (UTC) reply

Um... just... no. Just... no. (I don't want to say further.) -- George Ho ( talk) 16:47, 6 June 2017 (UTC) reply

To those favoring the name change and the split, did you also mean WP:CONSISTENCY, i.e. consistent with Taiwan? -- George Ho ( talk) 02:40, 10 June 2017 (UTC) reply

• To closer: This is a split proposal rather than a mere title discussion. Somehow, the RM procedure was used instead. -- George Ho ( talk) 01:39, 15 June 2017 (UTC) reply

No, it is a move proposal – we are trying to determine the best title for this article. As I noted above how it should cover political parties before 1949 is an editorial/content matter which can be addressed without a formal discussion at a later date.-- JohnBlackburne ^words _deeds 09:51, 15 June 2017 (UTC) reply

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.