This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I do not intend to get involved directly in this dispute. Since there's been a disagreement, I think we should discuss the issue on the Talk page before making further edits to this particular piece of wording. Horse Eye's Back changed the terminology of Taiwan from a "Qing prefecture" to a "Qing colony". [1] Morrisonjohn022 changed the terminology back to a "Qing prefecture". [2] Jargo Nautilus ( talk) 22:34, 16 November 2021 (UTC) Comment: If we're going off of the official name of Taiwan under Qing rule, I think we need to investigate the official name of Taiwan under Japanese rule as well. It does seem that there's a bit of a gaping hole on Wikipedia with regard to this issue... There doesn't seem to be any definitive info about what Japan actually called Taiwan under their administration. Did Japan really call their administration of Taiwan "Taiwan Colony, Empire of Japan"? That seems unlikely to me. Jargo Nautilus ( talk) 22:41, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
Partial revert of some recent edits with explanations below.
DrIdiot ( talk) 03:38, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
More (generally, lots of POV and OR issues with recent edits):
DrIdiot ( talk) 03:51, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
Further comment on (9), the COVID/distance stuff is irrelevant since the article is clear it's e-commerce , and I think readers can do the math. DrIdiot ( talk) 03:57, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
Closing remarks: most reverts have to do with POV pushing (usually via WP:OR or stretching the claims of references). There's no need to downplay or up-play the relationship; just state the facts. There's a strange fixation on the language used to describe the TRO, which is pretty well established by RS: it's a de facto embassy and/or a representative office. Excess weight on "trade and cultural" is unwarranted, or on grammatical features not present in English are not warranted. I expect the IP user to discuss here before continuing that line of edits. DrIdiot ( talk) 06:34, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
* 12. Removed claim in body that PRC did not recognize Soviet occupation. Very well may be true, but need a reference in any language. Found an imperfect reference for the ROC (opinion piece, but in what seems to be RS). Do not add back to lede without discussion.
DrIdiot (
talk) 06:44, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
Made other changes unrelated to the above reverts.
* Removed the reference to Qing prefecture. Not relevant to this article, since this predates ROC. Do not need a full discussion of history of Taiwan.
Comment: it's a little weird to consider ROC relations from 1912, discontinuous from present day, as Taiwan relations. Merits a discussion certainly, but I'm not sure how appropriate it is to foreground in the lede. Haven't chagned anything re: this.
DrIdiot ( talk) 07:11, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
Retracted first point DrIdiot ( talk) 07:21, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
I feel some of the edits suggested were not warranted and I edited them while leaving the additions by last editor's POV broadly in place. For example, the Taiwanese "cat warrior" diplomat in the US announcing something on her official Twitter is same as "Taiwan" announcing it; she has no disclaimer saying her Twitter expresses personal and not official opinions. Furthermore, she quoted official Taiwanese data, and the report was picked up by mainstream English-language international media. Comparison with overall trade figure should stay in place - I do not buy arguments such as "Wikipedians are smart enough to compare"; we must make it easy for them to, and if we trust wisdom of Wikipedians, maybe we should unban Global Times from being referenced on Wikipedia too?
I will review the changes again later today and see if anything of particular importance has been removed by the previous editor. 139.47.34.245 ( talk) 12:54, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
Wikipedia works by consensus WP:CON. You are required to work our disagreements on talk. I have put in significant time and effort in going through your changes. DrIdiot ( talk) 13:34, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
For the record, the reference the IP user has provided ( [5]) does not justify the removal of the cn tag in this edit: [6]. DrIdiot ( talk) 14:14, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
Happy to note that the other editor and I seem to be reaching a consensus on a few issues which were contentious at first: 1. The non-diplomatic status of the TRO in Vilnius. 2. Necessity to include background to understand Chinese reaction to opening TRO in Vilnius (I would venture to include that Lithuania veered away from international practice of calling TRO that of Taipei and not of the Taiwanese people, but I'll leave that for another day). 3. Necessity to include Lithuanian distinction in wording TRO title. Otherwise we would be pretending that Lithuania somehow defines things on its territory in the English language, which would be odd. Overall a better article than it was. Still not perfect but it's getting there. 139.47.34.245 ( talk) 14:16, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
4. Taiwanese credit card spending statistics.
I suggest we drill down into the reference. 15min is part of western investigative networks covering key issues of the day - from Mossac Fonseca to other major cases of international corruption. No wonder they paid attention to the Taiwanese announcement - extremely odd in the context which they did not detail but I would guess may include:
But those are purely my own opinions. The reference stands on its own merits. 139.47.34.245 ( talk) 14:33, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
Issues already discussed above. Since there is active discussion of these issues do not revert until consensus is reached.
New issues:
DrIdiot ( talk) 06:18, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
I can see a case for inclusion of the 3rd point re: the Hsiao tweet. However, it has to be properly attributed. It's not an official announcement, it is the US ambassador tweeting about a local newspaper article. Furthermore, the wording regarding the Lithuanian news article has to better reflect the balance of the content. For "people" vs. "nation" I would request the IP user translate and explain the relevant sections per policy Wikipedia:Verifiability#Non-English_sources. DrIdiot ( talk) 08:18, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
I am sorry but I will be reverting the edits you have done unilaterally and without seeking consensus. That is not how Wikipedia works. I also take issue to how you are editing this article - full revert, then partial backtrack. Are you doing this on purpose so that reversal of your unilateral edits would be more difficult to accomplish? Not accusing, just asking. 195.235.52.102 ( talk) 19:51, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
1. Please see Wikipedia article on diplomatic missions to clarify which types of missions Wikipedia considers “official†and which not. It does not consider representative offices to be diplomatic missions.
2. Please refrain from edit-warring unilaterally, without reaching consensus and reverting large blocks of text, partially un-reverting and thus making the article difficult to edit (this is borderline vandalism on its own without even taking into account your actual editorial choices).
3. Some of the incremental data you added is questionable - are you sure Lithuania’s independence in 1918 was from Russia? And even if partly true, which Russia? I doubt you have much knowledge of the subject.
4. Once again it seems to me you are pushing a biased, doubly politically partisan, Democratic Progressive Party line on the subject consisting of the following ingredients:
This is very odd. Lithuania has one of the freest media ( Press Freedom Index, Freedom of the Press (report)) in the European Union. Google Translate speaks perfect Lithuanian. The subject of this article has been reportsd by the media almost daily in the last few months. There is no excuse for you to continue editorializing and twisting facts.
If you continue with your one-sided trigger-reverts I may want to dig into my bookmarks on the bilateral relations and find out whether the former representative of the Legislative Yuan in the Baltics (and thus Lithuania) has really had business ties to Taiwan’s (and possibly Asia’s) largest pornographer - or not (I remember it being reported in an English-language business publication and illustrated with clear photography). I’m still unsure though whether this topic should be considered for Lithuania-Taiwan relations or for the “crypto congressman’s†own Wikipedia page. What do you think?
Also, should we include the fact that TRO indirectly led to downfall of the MFA of Lithuania (the most unpopular politician in the most unpopular government of the last 31 years - poll data)? It seems to be exactly the standard of causal relationship that you are using for editorializing around the 15min article, only stronger (i.e. it is more or less correct instead of being certainly wrong). 195.235.52.102 ( talk) 20:28, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
I will provide here references on the subject with quotations in English OR, if in Lithuanian, accompanied with unedited Google Translate output in English.
Matas Maldeikis, one of the architects of TRO in Lithuania who led delegation of Lithuanian parliamentarians to Taiwan in late November 2021, in Delfi.lt:
Maldeikis: Lietuva nepažeidžia „vienos Kinijos“ principo
Seimo Europos reikalų komiteto narys Matas Maldeikis, kalbÄ—damas apie Kinijos galimus sprendimus akcentavo, kad autoritariniai režimai visada turi idÄ—jų. „Mes negalÄ—jome pagalvoti dÄ—l migrantų – kas galÄ—jo pagalvoti, kad turÄ—sime krizÄ™ su tÅ«kstanÄiais migrantų, iÅ¡ kažkur atÄ—jusių prie Baltarusijos sienos? Kinija mato, kad tas ekonominis spaudimas veikia ne taip, kaip jie galvojo. Nepaspaus taip smarkiai, kaip kad jie tikÄ—josi. Jie neturi labai didelių svertų spausti ekonomiÅ¡kai, nes verslas turi kelius ateiti, o jų investicijos Lietuvoje yra labai mažos“, – pastebÄ—jo politikas. Vis dÄ—lto, jo nuomone, didesnÄ™ grÄ—smÄ™ galime turÄ—ti iÅ¡ nekonvencinių Pekino sprendimų, pavyzdžiui, kibernetinių atakų. „Tai prognozuoti žymiai sunkiau. (…) ÄŒia jau specialiųjų tarnybų pasiruoÅ¡imas – kaip jie projektuoja grÄ—smes, kurios gali kilti iÅ¡ Kinijos, kažkokios dezinformacijos kampanijos. Reikia suprasti, kad kokia bebÅ«tų mÅ«sų politinÄ— pozicija ar valia atstovybÄ—s klausimu, mes su tuo galÄ—tume susidurti bet kada ir tam visada reikia bÅ«ti pasiruoÅ¡us“, – akcentavo M. Maldeikis. Seimo narys teigÄ—, kad visiÅ¡kas diplomatinių santykių nutraukimas yra vienas iÅ¡ instrumentų, kuriuos Kinija gali panaudoti, taÄiau, pasak jo, tam nÄ—ra priežasÄių. „Mes žiÅ«rÄ—tume į tai keistai, nes reikia suprasti vienÄ… dalykÄ…, kad Lietuva tikrai nepažeidžia „vienos Kinijos“ principo“, – tvirtino M. Maldeikis. Jo teigimu, „vienos Kinijos“ principas bÅ«tų pažeistas, jei Lietuva pripažintų TaivanÄ… kaip nepriklausomÄ… valstybÄ™. „Apie tai kalbos nÄ—ra. Visi kiti žingsniai yra tam tikras spaudimas, bandant paspausti vieÅ¡Ä…jÄ… nuomonÄ™, primesti jai tam tikrÄ… naratyvÄ…. LR VyriausybÄ— nepripažįsta Taivano ir mes laikomÄ—s „vienos Kinijos“ politikos – tai niekaip nesikeiÄia“, – akcentavo M. Maldeikis. Matas Maldeikis© DELFI / Andrius Ufartas Tai, pasak parlamentaro, įrodo ir atstovybÄ—s pavadinimas – taivanieÄių, o ne Taivano. Visgi kitose valstybÄ—se panaÅ¡ios atstovybÄ—s pavadintos TaipÄ—jaus vardu. „Taivanas yra sala, kurioje gyvena taivanieÄiai. Mes užfiksuojame tai, kas yra – Taivano saloje gyvena taivanieÄiai. Tai niekaip nepažeidžia „vienos Kinijos“ Taivano nepripažinimo principo. Mes nepripažįstame Taivano nepriklausomybÄ—s, to Å¡iuo atveju ir jis pats nesiekia“, – pažymÄ—jo M. Maldeikis. 195.235.52.102 ( talk) 20:42, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
Google Translate output (emphasis mine):
Malikis: Lithuania is without prejudice to the principle of "Vienna, the Seimas European Affairs Committee Malikis, talking about China's potential decisions highlighted that authoritarian regimes always have ideas. "We could not think about migrants - who could think that we have a crisis with thousands of migrants, from somewhere came to the Belarusian border? China sees that the economic pressure is not the way they thought. Won't get the same as they expected. They do not have very high levers to press economically, because the business has the road to come, and their investment in Lithuania is very small, "- noted the politician. However, in his opinion, we can have a greater threat from the non-convoluted Beijing solutions such as cyber attacks. "It's predicted much more difficult. (...) Here are the preparation of special services - as they design threats that may arise from China, some disinformation campaigns. It should be understood that whatever our political position or will in the matter of representation, we can face at any time and always need to be prepared, "- emphasized Malikis. The member of the Seimas stated that the total termination of diplomatic relations is one of the instruments that China can use, but according to him, there are no reasons. "We look for this weird because it is necessary to understand one thing that Lithuania really does not violate the" one Chinese "principle," Malegeikis said. According to him, the principle of "one Chinese would be violated if Lithuania recognizes Taiwan as an independent state. "There is no language about it. All other steps are certain pressure, trying to press the public opinion, impose a particular narrative. The Government of the Republic of Lithuania does not recognize Taiwan and we comply with the "one Chinese" policy - this is not changed in any way ", - emphasized Malikis. Mat Malikis © Delfi / Andrius Ufart This, according to the parliament, proves the name of the Representation - Taiwan rather than Taiwan. However, in other countries, similar representations are named in the name of Taipei. "Taiwan is an island living in Taiwannians. We are capturing what is - Taiwanese island. This is without prejudice to the principle of "Vienna in China" Taiwan. We do not recognize the independence of Taiwan, in this case, and he is not for him, "- Malegeikis noted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.235.52.102 ( talk) 20:48, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
I excluded the last paragraph of this text where Maldeikis says he’s interested in Taiwan for trade and ideological reasons only (consistent with what he already said, so irrelevant). 195.235.52.102 ( talk) 21:18, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
Prime Minister Ingrida Å imonytÄ— in Kauno diena:
I. Å imonytÄ— nesutinka su Kinijos kaltinimais: mes laikomÄ—s sutarties 2021-11-25 14:33:00 Benas Brunalas, ELTA
PremjerÄ— Ingrida Å imonytÄ— pažymi, kad prieÅ¡ingai nei teigia diplomatinį ir ekonominį spaudimÄ… Lietuvai taikanti Kinija, Vilnius, net ir atidarÄ™s TaivanieÄių atstovybÄ™, toliau laikosi susitarimo dÄ—l „vienos Kinijos“ principo. „Mes manome, kad mes laikomÄ—s sutarties. Sutartis galioja, niekas nekeiÄia pozicijos dÄ—l sutarties“, – ketvirtadienį Seime žurnalistams sakÄ— premjerÄ—. Kinija treÄiadienį paskelbÄ—, kad Vilniuje atidarytos TaivanieÄių atstovybÄ—s pavadinimas yra klaida, kuriÄ… Lietuva turÄ—tų iÅ¡taisyti. Kaip treÄiadienį teigÄ— Kinijos ambasados Lietuvoje laikinasis reikalų patikÄ—tinis Qu Baihua, atidarius atstovybÄ™ TaivanieÄių pavadinimu buvo pažeistas „vienos Kinijos“ principas.
I. Šimonyte disagrees with the Chinese accusations: we follow the contract 2021-11-25 14:33:00 Ben Brunal, ELTA Text Size: Print I. Shimonyte disagrees with the Chinese accusations: We follow the Treaty Paul Peleckio / "BNS photo". Prime Minister Ingrida Šimonytė notes that, contrary to the diplomatic and economic pressure on Lithuania, Vilnius, even after the Taiwanese Representation, continues to comply with the "Vienna Chinese" principle. "We believe that we follow the contract. The contract is valid, no one changes the position on the contract, "said Prime Minister for journalists on Thursday. China announced that the name of the Taiwanese Representation opened in Vilnius is a mistake that Lithuania should remedy. As Wednesday said the Chinese Embassy in Lithuania Temporary Affairs Trustee Qu Baihua, opening the representation of Taiwanese name was violated by the principle of "one Chinese. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.235.52.102 ( talk)
There are a few more references I could provide in an instant if the above are insufficiently clear. 195.235.52.102 ( talk) 21:18, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
President of Lithuania Gitanas Nausėda comment and official MFA press release in Verslo žinios: https://www.vz.lt/verslo-aplinka/2021/08/10/kinija-del-taivano-atstovybes-atsaukia-savo-ambasadoriu-lietuvos-reikalaujapadaryti-ta-pati
Lietuva laikosi „vienos Kinijos“ politikos
Å alies vadovas teigia, kad „vienos Kinijos“ politikos Lietuva laikosi nuo 1991 metų, kai buvo užmegzti diplomatiniai santykiai su Kinijos Liaudies Respublika. „TikimÄ—s, kad Kinija dar kartÄ… permÄ…stys ir pakeis savo sprendimÄ…. Matome perspektyvÄ… plÄ—toti su Kinija politinius, ekonominius ir kultÅ«rinius santykius, taÄiau tai neturÄ—tų bÅ«ti „eismas viena kryptimi“, – pridÅ«rÄ— jis.
Lietuvos užsienio reikalų ministerija (URM) išplatintame komentare teigia apgailestaujanti dėl tokio Kinijos žingsnio ir dar kartą pabrėžianti, kad, gerbdama vienos Kinijos principą, yra nusiteikusi plėtoti abipusiai naudingus ryšius su Taivanu, kaip ir daugelis kitų Europos Sąjungos ir pasaulio valstybių.
Google Translate output:
Lithuania adheres to one Chinese policy
The President of the country claims that Lithuania is in Lithuania since 1991, when diplomatic relations with the People's Republic of China have been established. "We hope that China will oversee again and change its decision. We see the perspective to develop political, economic and cultural relations with China, but it should not be "traffic in one direction", - he added.
The Lithuanian Ministry of Foreign Affairs (URM) says the comment says regreting the step of China and reiterates that, while respecting one Chinese principle, there is a mutually beneficial relationship with Taiwan, like many other European Union and the world.
Since Google had trouble with the President’s sentence, I’ll help manually here:
Šalies vadovas teigia, kad „vienos Kinijos“ politikos Lietuva laikosi nuo 1991 metų, kai buvo užmegzti diplomatiniai santykiai su Kinijos Liaudies Respublika.
My translation: Head of the state says, that Lithuania adheres to “one China†policy since 1991, when diplomatic relations with People’s Republic of China were established 195.235.52.102 ( talk) 21:47, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
I have doubts regarding copyright of the photo used to illustrate this article. What is its copyright status? 195.235.52.102 ( talk) 21:22, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
Would you kindly drill into the texts of the SCMP article (plus one additional article, as requested above) and the 15min article (Google Translate works a breeze as you’ll see elsewhere here on Talk) backing your previous points? 195.235.52.102 ( talk) 21:52, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
What Wikipedia has to say on 15min, for context:
“15min is known for its explanatory journalism and investigative journalism and was an official partner of the Panama Papers investigation team.
In March 2019, in conjunction with the Sarajevo-based Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project, 15min broke a story regarding a nearly $9 billion global money laundering scheme allegedly constructed by Sberbank CIB (formerly known as "Troika Dialog").[2] The scheme is known as ŪkioLeaks or Troika Laundromat.†195.235.52.102 ( talk) 22:54, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
References
To all users involved; please stop bludgeoning this article. It's getting ridiculous. There are so many new sections on this talk page that consist of discussions between just two users (one registered user, DrIdiot, as well as one person operating multiple IP accounts, it seems). Jargo Nautilus ( talk) 05:18, 12 December 2021 (UTC)
Items already under discussion above I have reverted since there's been no consensus on them. Additional items:
— DrIdiot ( talk) 07:46, 12 December 2021 (UTC)
The colours seemed to have been switched on the map. Can someone please fix this? Thank you. - Therealscorp1an ( talk) 02:21, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I do not intend to get involved directly in this dispute. Since there's been a disagreement, I think we should discuss the issue on the Talk page before making further edits to this particular piece of wording. Horse Eye's Back changed the terminology of Taiwan from a "Qing prefecture" to a "Qing colony". [1] Morrisonjohn022 changed the terminology back to a "Qing prefecture". [2] Jargo Nautilus ( talk) 22:34, 16 November 2021 (UTC) Comment: If we're going off of the official name of Taiwan under Qing rule, I think we need to investigate the official name of Taiwan under Japanese rule as well. It does seem that there's a bit of a gaping hole on Wikipedia with regard to this issue... There doesn't seem to be any definitive info about what Japan actually called Taiwan under their administration. Did Japan really call their administration of Taiwan "Taiwan Colony, Empire of Japan"? That seems unlikely to me. Jargo Nautilus ( talk) 22:41, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
Partial revert of some recent edits with explanations below.
DrIdiot ( talk) 03:38, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
More (generally, lots of POV and OR issues with recent edits):
DrIdiot ( talk) 03:51, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
Further comment on (9), the COVID/distance stuff is irrelevant since the article is clear it's e-commerce , and I think readers can do the math. DrIdiot ( talk) 03:57, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
Closing remarks: most reverts have to do with POV pushing (usually via WP:OR or stretching the claims of references). There's no need to downplay or up-play the relationship; just state the facts. There's a strange fixation on the language used to describe the TRO, which is pretty well established by RS: it's a de facto embassy and/or a representative office. Excess weight on "trade and cultural" is unwarranted, or on grammatical features not present in English are not warranted. I expect the IP user to discuss here before continuing that line of edits. DrIdiot ( talk) 06:34, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
* 12. Removed claim in body that PRC did not recognize Soviet occupation. Very well may be true, but need a reference in any language. Found an imperfect reference for the ROC (opinion piece, but in what seems to be RS). Do not add back to lede without discussion.
DrIdiot (
talk) 06:44, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
Made other changes unrelated to the above reverts.
* Removed the reference to Qing prefecture. Not relevant to this article, since this predates ROC. Do not need a full discussion of history of Taiwan.
Comment: it's a little weird to consider ROC relations from 1912, discontinuous from present day, as Taiwan relations. Merits a discussion certainly, but I'm not sure how appropriate it is to foreground in the lede. Haven't chagned anything re: this.
DrIdiot ( talk) 07:11, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
Retracted first point DrIdiot ( talk) 07:21, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
I feel some of the edits suggested were not warranted and I edited them while leaving the additions by last editor's POV broadly in place. For example, the Taiwanese "cat warrior" diplomat in the US announcing something on her official Twitter is same as "Taiwan" announcing it; she has no disclaimer saying her Twitter expresses personal and not official opinions. Furthermore, she quoted official Taiwanese data, and the report was picked up by mainstream English-language international media. Comparison with overall trade figure should stay in place - I do not buy arguments such as "Wikipedians are smart enough to compare"; we must make it easy for them to, and if we trust wisdom of Wikipedians, maybe we should unban Global Times from being referenced on Wikipedia too?
I will review the changes again later today and see if anything of particular importance has been removed by the previous editor. 139.47.34.245 ( talk) 12:54, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
Wikipedia works by consensus WP:CON. You are required to work our disagreements on talk. I have put in significant time and effort in going through your changes. DrIdiot ( talk) 13:34, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
For the record, the reference the IP user has provided ( [5]) does not justify the removal of the cn tag in this edit: [6]. DrIdiot ( talk) 14:14, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
Happy to note that the other editor and I seem to be reaching a consensus on a few issues which were contentious at first: 1. The non-diplomatic status of the TRO in Vilnius. 2. Necessity to include background to understand Chinese reaction to opening TRO in Vilnius (I would venture to include that Lithuania veered away from international practice of calling TRO that of Taipei and not of the Taiwanese people, but I'll leave that for another day). 3. Necessity to include Lithuanian distinction in wording TRO title. Otherwise we would be pretending that Lithuania somehow defines things on its territory in the English language, which would be odd. Overall a better article than it was. Still not perfect but it's getting there. 139.47.34.245 ( talk) 14:16, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
4. Taiwanese credit card spending statistics.
I suggest we drill down into the reference. 15min is part of western investigative networks covering key issues of the day - from Mossac Fonseca to other major cases of international corruption. No wonder they paid attention to the Taiwanese announcement - extremely odd in the context which they did not detail but I would guess may include:
But those are purely my own opinions. The reference stands on its own merits. 139.47.34.245 ( talk) 14:33, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
Issues already discussed above. Since there is active discussion of these issues do not revert until consensus is reached.
New issues:
DrIdiot ( talk) 06:18, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
I can see a case for inclusion of the 3rd point re: the Hsiao tweet. However, it has to be properly attributed. It's not an official announcement, it is the US ambassador tweeting about a local newspaper article. Furthermore, the wording regarding the Lithuanian news article has to better reflect the balance of the content. For "people" vs. "nation" I would request the IP user translate and explain the relevant sections per policy Wikipedia:Verifiability#Non-English_sources. DrIdiot ( talk) 08:18, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
I am sorry but I will be reverting the edits you have done unilaterally and without seeking consensus. That is not how Wikipedia works. I also take issue to how you are editing this article - full revert, then partial backtrack. Are you doing this on purpose so that reversal of your unilateral edits would be more difficult to accomplish? Not accusing, just asking. 195.235.52.102 ( talk) 19:51, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
1. Please see Wikipedia article on diplomatic missions to clarify which types of missions Wikipedia considers “official†and which not. It does not consider representative offices to be diplomatic missions.
2. Please refrain from edit-warring unilaterally, without reaching consensus and reverting large blocks of text, partially un-reverting and thus making the article difficult to edit (this is borderline vandalism on its own without even taking into account your actual editorial choices).
3. Some of the incremental data you added is questionable - are you sure Lithuania’s independence in 1918 was from Russia? And even if partly true, which Russia? I doubt you have much knowledge of the subject.
4. Once again it seems to me you are pushing a biased, doubly politically partisan, Democratic Progressive Party line on the subject consisting of the following ingredients:
This is very odd. Lithuania has one of the freest media ( Press Freedom Index, Freedom of the Press (report)) in the European Union. Google Translate speaks perfect Lithuanian. The subject of this article has been reportsd by the media almost daily in the last few months. There is no excuse for you to continue editorializing and twisting facts.
If you continue with your one-sided trigger-reverts I may want to dig into my bookmarks on the bilateral relations and find out whether the former representative of the Legislative Yuan in the Baltics (and thus Lithuania) has really had business ties to Taiwan’s (and possibly Asia’s) largest pornographer - or not (I remember it being reported in an English-language business publication and illustrated with clear photography). I’m still unsure though whether this topic should be considered for Lithuania-Taiwan relations or for the “crypto congressman’s†own Wikipedia page. What do you think?
Also, should we include the fact that TRO indirectly led to downfall of the MFA of Lithuania (the most unpopular politician in the most unpopular government of the last 31 years - poll data)? It seems to be exactly the standard of causal relationship that you are using for editorializing around the 15min article, only stronger (i.e. it is more or less correct instead of being certainly wrong). 195.235.52.102 ( talk) 20:28, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
I will provide here references on the subject with quotations in English OR, if in Lithuanian, accompanied with unedited Google Translate output in English.
Matas Maldeikis, one of the architects of TRO in Lithuania who led delegation of Lithuanian parliamentarians to Taiwan in late November 2021, in Delfi.lt:
Maldeikis: Lietuva nepažeidžia „vienos Kinijos“ principo
Seimo Europos reikalų komiteto narys Matas Maldeikis, kalbÄ—damas apie Kinijos galimus sprendimus akcentavo, kad autoritariniai režimai visada turi idÄ—jų. „Mes negalÄ—jome pagalvoti dÄ—l migrantų – kas galÄ—jo pagalvoti, kad turÄ—sime krizÄ™ su tÅ«kstanÄiais migrantų, iÅ¡ kažkur atÄ—jusių prie Baltarusijos sienos? Kinija mato, kad tas ekonominis spaudimas veikia ne taip, kaip jie galvojo. Nepaspaus taip smarkiai, kaip kad jie tikÄ—josi. Jie neturi labai didelių svertų spausti ekonomiÅ¡kai, nes verslas turi kelius ateiti, o jų investicijos Lietuvoje yra labai mažos“, – pastebÄ—jo politikas. Vis dÄ—lto, jo nuomone, didesnÄ™ grÄ—smÄ™ galime turÄ—ti iÅ¡ nekonvencinių Pekino sprendimų, pavyzdžiui, kibernetinių atakų. „Tai prognozuoti žymiai sunkiau. (…) ÄŒia jau specialiųjų tarnybų pasiruoÅ¡imas – kaip jie projektuoja grÄ—smes, kurios gali kilti iÅ¡ Kinijos, kažkokios dezinformacijos kampanijos. Reikia suprasti, kad kokia bebÅ«tų mÅ«sų politinÄ— pozicija ar valia atstovybÄ—s klausimu, mes su tuo galÄ—tume susidurti bet kada ir tam visada reikia bÅ«ti pasiruoÅ¡us“, – akcentavo M. Maldeikis. Seimo narys teigÄ—, kad visiÅ¡kas diplomatinių santykių nutraukimas yra vienas iÅ¡ instrumentų, kuriuos Kinija gali panaudoti, taÄiau, pasak jo, tam nÄ—ra priežasÄių. „Mes žiÅ«rÄ—tume į tai keistai, nes reikia suprasti vienÄ… dalykÄ…, kad Lietuva tikrai nepažeidžia „vienos Kinijos“ principo“, – tvirtino M. Maldeikis. Jo teigimu, „vienos Kinijos“ principas bÅ«tų pažeistas, jei Lietuva pripažintų TaivanÄ… kaip nepriklausomÄ… valstybÄ™. „Apie tai kalbos nÄ—ra. Visi kiti žingsniai yra tam tikras spaudimas, bandant paspausti vieÅ¡Ä…jÄ… nuomonÄ™, primesti jai tam tikrÄ… naratyvÄ…. LR VyriausybÄ— nepripažįsta Taivano ir mes laikomÄ—s „vienos Kinijos“ politikos – tai niekaip nesikeiÄia“, – akcentavo M. Maldeikis. Matas Maldeikis© DELFI / Andrius Ufartas Tai, pasak parlamentaro, įrodo ir atstovybÄ—s pavadinimas – taivanieÄių, o ne Taivano. Visgi kitose valstybÄ—se panaÅ¡ios atstovybÄ—s pavadintos TaipÄ—jaus vardu. „Taivanas yra sala, kurioje gyvena taivanieÄiai. Mes užfiksuojame tai, kas yra – Taivano saloje gyvena taivanieÄiai. Tai niekaip nepažeidžia „vienos Kinijos“ Taivano nepripažinimo principo. Mes nepripažįstame Taivano nepriklausomybÄ—s, to Å¡iuo atveju ir jis pats nesiekia“, – pažymÄ—jo M. Maldeikis. 195.235.52.102 ( talk) 20:42, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
Google Translate output (emphasis mine):
Malikis: Lithuania is without prejudice to the principle of "Vienna, the Seimas European Affairs Committee Malikis, talking about China's potential decisions highlighted that authoritarian regimes always have ideas. "We could not think about migrants - who could think that we have a crisis with thousands of migrants, from somewhere came to the Belarusian border? China sees that the economic pressure is not the way they thought. Won't get the same as they expected. They do not have very high levers to press economically, because the business has the road to come, and their investment in Lithuania is very small, "- noted the politician. However, in his opinion, we can have a greater threat from the non-convoluted Beijing solutions such as cyber attacks. "It's predicted much more difficult. (...) Here are the preparation of special services - as they design threats that may arise from China, some disinformation campaigns. It should be understood that whatever our political position or will in the matter of representation, we can face at any time and always need to be prepared, "- emphasized Malikis. The member of the Seimas stated that the total termination of diplomatic relations is one of the instruments that China can use, but according to him, there are no reasons. "We look for this weird because it is necessary to understand one thing that Lithuania really does not violate the" one Chinese "principle," Malegeikis said. According to him, the principle of "one Chinese would be violated if Lithuania recognizes Taiwan as an independent state. "There is no language about it. All other steps are certain pressure, trying to press the public opinion, impose a particular narrative. The Government of the Republic of Lithuania does not recognize Taiwan and we comply with the "one Chinese" policy - this is not changed in any way ", - emphasized Malikis. Mat Malikis © Delfi / Andrius Ufart This, according to the parliament, proves the name of the Representation - Taiwan rather than Taiwan. However, in other countries, similar representations are named in the name of Taipei. "Taiwan is an island living in Taiwannians. We are capturing what is - Taiwanese island. This is without prejudice to the principle of "Vienna in China" Taiwan. We do not recognize the independence of Taiwan, in this case, and he is not for him, "- Malegeikis noted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.235.52.102 ( talk) 20:48, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
I excluded the last paragraph of this text where Maldeikis says he’s interested in Taiwan for trade and ideological reasons only (consistent with what he already said, so irrelevant). 195.235.52.102 ( talk) 21:18, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
Prime Minister Ingrida Å imonytÄ— in Kauno diena:
I. Å imonytÄ— nesutinka su Kinijos kaltinimais: mes laikomÄ—s sutarties 2021-11-25 14:33:00 Benas Brunalas, ELTA
PremjerÄ— Ingrida Å imonytÄ— pažymi, kad prieÅ¡ingai nei teigia diplomatinį ir ekonominį spaudimÄ… Lietuvai taikanti Kinija, Vilnius, net ir atidarÄ™s TaivanieÄių atstovybÄ™, toliau laikosi susitarimo dÄ—l „vienos Kinijos“ principo. „Mes manome, kad mes laikomÄ—s sutarties. Sutartis galioja, niekas nekeiÄia pozicijos dÄ—l sutarties“, – ketvirtadienį Seime žurnalistams sakÄ— premjerÄ—. Kinija treÄiadienį paskelbÄ—, kad Vilniuje atidarytos TaivanieÄių atstovybÄ—s pavadinimas yra klaida, kuriÄ… Lietuva turÄ—tų iÅ¡taisyti. Kaip treÄiadienį teigÄ— Kinijos ambasados Lietuvoje laikinasis reikalų patikÄ—tinis Qu Baihua, atidarius atstovybÄ™ TaivanieÄių pavadinimu buvo pažeistas „vienos Kinijos“ principas.
I. Šimonyte disagrees with the Chinese accusations: we follow the contract 2021-11-25 14:33:00 Ben Brunal, ELTA Text Size: Print I. Shimonyte disagrees with the Chinese accusations: We follow the Treaty Paul Peleckio / "BNS photo". Prime Minister Ingrida Šimonytė notes that, contrary to the diplomatic and economic pressure on Lithuania, Vilnius, even after the Taiwanese Representation, continues to comply with the "Vienna Chinese" principle. "We believe that we follow the contract. The contract is valid, no one changes the position on the contract, "said Prime Minister for journalists on Thursday. China announced that the name of the Taiwanese Representation opened in Vilnius is a mistake that Lithuania should remedy. As Wednesday said the Chinese Embassy in Lithuania Temporary Affairs Trustee Qu Baihua, opening the representation of Taiwanese name was violated by the principle of "one Chinese. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.235.52.102 ( talk)
There are a few more references I could provide in an instant if the above are insufficiently clear. 195.235.52.102 ( talk) 21:18, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
President of Lithuania Gitanas Nausėda comment and official MFA press release in Verslo žinios: https://www.vz.lt/verslo-aplinka/2021/08/10/kinija-del-taivano-atstovybes-atsaukia-savo-ambasadoriu-lietuvos-reikalaujapadaryti-ta-pati
Lietuva laikosi „vienos Kinijos“ politikos
Å alies vadovas teigia, kad „vienos Kinijos“ politikos Lietuva laikosi nuo 1991 metų, kai buvo užmegzti diplomatiniai santykiai su Kinijos Liaudies Respublika. „TikimÄ—s, kad Kinija dar kartÄ… permÄ…stys ir pakeis savo sprendimÄ…. Matome perspektyvÄ… plÄ—toti su Kinija politinius, ekonominius ir kultÅ«rinius santykius, taÄiau tai neturÄ—tų bÅ«ti „eismas viena kryptimi“, – pridÅ«rÄ— jis.
Lietuvos užsienio reikalų ministerija (URM) išplatintame komentare teigia apgailestaujanti dėl tokio Kinijos žingsnio ir dar kartą pabrėžianti, kad, gerbdama vienos Kinijos principą, yra nusiteikusi plėtoti abipusiai naudingus ryšius su Taivanu, kaip ir daugelis kitų Europos Sąjungos ir pasaulio valstybių.
Google Translate output:
Lithuania adheres to one Chinese policy
The President of the country claims that Lithuania is in Lithuania since 1991, when diplomatic relations with the People's Republic of China have been established. "We hope that China will oversee again and change its decision. We see the perspective to develop political, economic and cultural relations with China, but it should not be "traffic in one direction", - he added.
The Lithuanian Ministry of Foreign Affairs (URM) says the comment says regreting the step of China and reiterates that, while respecting one Chinese principle, there is a mutually beneficial relationship with Taiwan, like many other European Union and the world.
Since Google had trouble with the President’s sentence, I’ll help manually here:
Šalies vadovas teigia, kad „vienos Kinijos“ politikos Lietuva laikosi nuo 1991 metų, kai buvo užmegzti diplomatiniai santykiai su Kinijos Liaudies Respublika.
My translation: Head of the state says, that Lithuania adheres to “one China†policy since 1991, when diplomatic relations with People’s Republic of China were established 195.235.52.102 ( talk) 21:47, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
I have doubts regarding copyright of the photo used to illustrate this article. What is its copyright status? 195.235.52.102 ( talk) 21:22, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
Would you kindly drill into the texts of the SCMP article (plus one additional article, as requested above) and the 15min article (Google Translate works a breeze as you’ll see elsewhere here on Talk) backing your previous points? 195.235.52.102 ( talk) 21:52, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
What Wikipedia has to say on 15min, for context:
“15min is known for its explanatory journalism and investigative journalism and was an official partner of the Panama Papers investigation team.
In March 2019, in conjunction with the Sarajevo-based Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project, 15min broke a story regarding a nearly $9 billion global money laundering scheme allegedly constructed by Sberbank CIB (formerly known as "Troika Dialog").[2] The scheme is known as ŪkioLeaks or Troika Laundromat.†195.235.52.102 ( talk) 22:54, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
References
To all users involved; please stop bludgeoning this article. It's getting ridiculous. There are so many new sections on this talk page that consist of discussions between just two users (one registered user, DrIdiot, as well as one person operating multiple IP accounts, it seems). Jargo Nautilus ( talk) 05:18, 12 December 2021 (UTC)
Items already under discussion above I have reverted since there's been no consensus on them. Additional items:
— DrIdiot ( talk) 07:46, 12 December 2021 (UTC)
The colours seemed to have been switched on the map. Can someone please fix this? Thank you. - Therealscorp1an ( talk) 02:21, 24 December 2021 (UTC)