This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
National Anthem of the Republic of China article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Added some of the current politics of the TPP.
Also changed a lot of the wording. The interpretation at this point is not merely the interpretation of the KMT but rather also the official ROC government interpretation which at this point is not controlled by the KMT.
The term world peace has a special signficance. --Roadrunner
Where do you get that the ROC Anthem is called "Three Principles of the People"? It it called the ROC National Anthem in all official government Publications! --User
Still wondering where you got that anthem's name is "san min chu i". --User
Guess no one cares.
Yeah it's not called "San Min Chu I" in Chinese. And I've never heard the title called "Three Principles of the People" in English, it's always "ROC National Anthem."
Sign your comments if you want anyone to reply. It's called Sanmin Zhuyi because it's its opening line. Lots of songs are named that way. eg. Das Horst Wessel Lied is also Die Fahne Hoch from its opening line.
Anyway, would an editor please find a mp3 file of the song? - Hmib 05:36, 3 August 2005 (UTC)
Can somebody delete the traditional chinese fonts and use simplified chinese fonts please?
Image:ROC National Anthem inst.ogg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot ( talk) 03:55, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
I don't recall seeing any law that ban this song in China. Moreover, even if someone sings it in China, I doubt people would actually know this song since it was abolished by China since 1949.
I reverted the edit concerning the status of the song in Hong Kong and Macau. User:210.17.198.70 made an edit saying that this song is not encouraged in Hong Kong and Macau, however, it does not say it is not encouraged by whom. Moreover, I don't see any verifiable evidence that the song is not encouraged by the government, people in general, or any particular organisation in Hong Kong. What I am sure and factual is that it is rare to hear this song in Hong Kong and Macau. So to say that this song is disencouraged there is just a POV sentence. Thus I reverted the edit. Salt ( talk) 04:58, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
I doubt if it is necessary to provide a Xiao'erjing transliteration in English Wikipedia. Xiao'erjing is mainly used by Dungan people and was not an official transliteration system accepted by the government of Republic of China. There're many Chinese romanizations and in my opinion in this article we should use Zhuyin Fuhao, Wade-Giles and Hanyu Pinyin (after 2008 in Taiwan) as they were used by the ROC government. -- Ericmetro ( talk) 10:33, 3 November 2012 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Speedy Close. WP:POINT. Jiang ( talk) 20:19, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
– The so-called consensus was to equate the ROC and Taiwan, and standardise all titles, etc., with Taiwan. The existing of these few articles makes it way too inconsistent, confusing, difficult to follow and counterproductive to navigation. Let's get the standardisation done no matter what. The so-called community consensus ruled that history, accuracy, politics, etc., are all irrelevant. For the sake of consistency all these articles should be considered together. Therefore, line-item veto shouldn't be considered. 202.64.189.90 ( talk) 19:26, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
Regarding the concerns raised above, some of these articles, such as Vice President, Premier, list of premiers, list of diplomatic missions, law, armed forces, supreme court, central bank, list of political parties, national day, constitution, etc., are more descriptive rather than official titles. And regarding Jiang's closing remarks, I don't agree this is WP:POINT. I've explained why the move request has to be bundled. If you think any particular article isn't relevant, single that particular article out. Or else it's strawman argument. 202.64.189.90 ( talk) 01:05, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:National Anthem of Bolivia which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. — RMCD bot 18:59, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
I dont think there is any debate on the subject but apparently there is. In the inbox for the page National Anthem of the Republic of China should the flag/description be
Republic of China or
Republic of China (Taiwan)? The President of the Republic of China (aka the President of Taiwan) said this in an interview with the BBC yesterday "we call ourselves the Republic of China (Taiwan)”
[1] you cant question that. Also
TaerkastUA I would appreciate either a retraction of your assertion that my single revert of your edit broke
WP:3RR or evidence that I did as you contend. Tagging
Mr. James Dimsey.
Horse Eye Jack (
talk)
22:54, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
National Anthem of the Republic of China article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Added some of the current politics of the TPP.
Also changed a lot of the wording. The interpretation at this point is not merely the interpretation of the KMT but rather also the official ROC government interpretation which at this point is not controlled by the KMT.
The term world peace has a special signficance. --Roadrunner
Where do you get that the ROC Anthem is called "Three Principles of the People"? It it called the ROC National Anthem in all official government Publications! --User
Still wondering where you got that anthem's name is "san min chu i". --User
Guess no one cares.
Yeah it's not called "San Min Chu I" in Chinese. And I've never heard the title called "Three Principles of the People" in English, it's always "ROC National Anthem."
Sign your comments if you want anyone to reply. It's called Sanmin Zhuyi because it's its opening line. Lots of songs are named that way. eg. Das Horst Wessel Lied is also Die Fahne Hoch from its opening line.
Anyway, would an editor please find a mp3 file of the song? - Hmib 05:36, 3 August 2005 (UTC)
Can somebody delete the traditional chinese fonts and use simplified chinese fonts please?
Image:ROC National Anthem inst.ogg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot ( talk) 03:55, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
I don't recall seeing any law that ban this song in China. Moreover, even if someone sings it in China, I doubt people would actually know this song since it was abolished by China since 1949.
I reverted the edit concerning the status of the song in Hong Kong and Macau. User:210.17.198.70 made an edit saying that this song is not encouraged in Hong Kong and Macau, however, it does not say it is not encouraged by whom. Moreover, I don't see any verifiable evidence that the song is not encouraged by the government, people in general, or any particular organisation in Hong Kong. What I am sure and factual is that it is rare to hear this song in Hong Kong and Macau. So to say that this song is disencouraged there is just a POV sentence. Thus I reverted the edit. Salt ( talk) 04:58, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
I doubt if it is necessary to provide a Xiao'erjing transliteration in English Wikipedia. Xiao'erjing is mainly used by Dungan people and was not an official transliteration system accepted by the government of Republic of China. There're many Chinese romanizations and in my opinion in this article we should use Zhuyin Fuhao, Wade-Giles and Hanyu Pinyin (after 2008 in Taiwan) as they were used by the ROC government. -- Ericmetro ( talk) 10:33, 3 November 2012 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Speedy Close. WP:POINT. Jiang ( talk) 20:19, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
– The so-called consensus was to equate the ROC and Taiwan, and standardise all titles, etc., with Taiwan. The existing of these few articles makes it way too inconsistent, confusing, difficult to follow and counterproductive to navigation. Let's get the standardisation done no matter what. The so-called community consensus ruled that history, accuracy, politics, etc., are all irrelevant. For the sake of consistency all these articles should be considered together. Therefore, line-item veto shouldn't be considered. 202.64.189.90 ( talk) 19:26, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
Regarding the concerns raised above, some of these articles, such as Vice President, Premier, list of premiers, list of diplomatic missions, law, armed forces, supreme court, central bank, list of political parties, national day, constitution, etc., are more descriptive rather than official titles. And regarding Jiang's closing remarks, I don't agree this is WP:POINT. I've explained why the move request has to be bundled. If you think any particular article isn't relevant, single that particular article out. Or else it's strawman argument. 202.64.189.90 ( talk) 01:05, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:National Anthem of Bolivia which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. — RMCD bot 18:59, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
I dont think there is any debate on the subject but apparently there is. In the inbox for the page National Anthem of the Republic of China should the flag/description be
Republic of China or
Republic of China (Taiwan)? The President of the Republic of China (aka the President of Taiwan) said this in an interview with the BBC yesterday "we call ourselves the Republic of China (Taiwan)”
[1] you cant question that. Also
TaerkastUA I would appreciate either a retraction of your assertion that my single revert of your edit broke
WP:3RR or evidence that I did as you contend. Tagging
Mr. James Dimsey.
Horse Eye Jack (
talk)
22:54, 15 January 2020 (UTC)