Talk:Taoyuan, Taiwan

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Taoyuan, Taiwan article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1: 30 days

Cities

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements 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.CitiesWikipedia:WikiProject CitiesTemplate:WikiProject CitiesWikiProject Cities

Taiwan Mid‑importance

	Taiwan portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Taiwan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Taiwan 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.TaiwanWikipedia:WikiProject TaiwanTemplate:WikiProject TaiwanTaiwan
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Taiwanese counties.

Requested move (November 2014, in anticipation of December 2014)

– (Note: these moves, if agreed to, should be effective December 25, 2014, the date when Taoyuan County is set to become a special municipality. But I did want to submit this request early so that, assuming there is any controversy, the controversy can be hopefully sorted out before that point and that the subsequent moves/edits can be done in a smooth and accurate manner.) As noted, Taoyuan County will become a special municipality in a little less than two months. With that being the case, I do believe that these moves are necessary and proper to be accurate (with a secondary consequence being that the Taoyuan County in Hunan no longer needs to be disambiguated. An additional move that should be considered (but which I did not include in the request because it's not as clear to me) is moving Tauyuan District to Taoyuan District, Kaohsiung and use Taoyuan District, Taoyuan for the current Taoyuan City, given that the Kaohsiung City government now appears to (inconsistently) be split between using Tongyong Pinyin ("Tauyuan") and Hanyu Pinyin ("Taoyuan") - as can be seen on the district's official Web site itself. Nlu (talk) 17:02, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Procedural close we should discuss this after the fact, not before. Discussing it before would require keeping something in a queue somewhere and not be forgotten, which isn't happening at Requested Moves, as there is no queue. -- 67.70.35.44 (talk) 04:41, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose With all the names being swapped around, they should not exist without disambiguators, as the former entities will keep being known by their old names for some time until people are used to their new ones, so there will be no primary topic after the renames occur. Thus "Taoyuan City" and "Taoyuan County" will not work for a while, and should be disambiguation pages or set indexes, or be redirected to Taoyuan. (so Taoyuan City, Taiwan will also redirect to the disambiguation page or set index) "Taoyuan District" should also be the same, due to the variant romanization methods, with teh current target "Tauyuan District" also being displaced and that title repointed to the dab or list article. -- 67.70.35.44 (talk) 04:41, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  - That is a completely different issue; hatnote tags can easily direct the the reader to the proper topic. In no way am I advocating not having sufficient links to send the reader to where they intend to go. As far as the comment that "there is no queue," I'd be happy to assume that responsibility myself, but I want to make sure that these moves are not creating controversy. --Nlu (talk) 05:26, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    - Well, the answer is going to be that editors will want to discuss the moves when the time comes, and that discussion on the current request won't be sufficient to establish consensus for future changes (WP:CRYSTAL/WP:CCC). Most editors will oppose the changes in December as well unless it can be shown that the new names reflect common usage and not official names; see, for example, recent discussion at Talk:Bangalore. I am also inclined to do a procedural close on this request, as suggested by 67.70.35.44. Dekimasuよ! 21:56, 8 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      - The situation with Bangalore is inapposite; this is not a name change (or even a spelling change); this is a status change that was enacted a while back with known effective date. --Nlu (talk) 17:15, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
        In either event, there was no evidence presented, so although I'm sure you're well informed, there was nothing for editors to discuss here except for current usage. I'd still suggest bringing this back to RM after December 25. Dekimasuよ! 04:13, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
        
        For future reference, are there any English-language sources equivalent to this? Dekimasuよ! 04:15, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
        These ((official approval) and news articles [1] [2]) sufficient? --Nlu (talk) 15:20, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Very helpful. Dekimasuよ! 17:41, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Another thing that it strikes me would be helpful to do is to begin piping links to the current Taoyuan City (although they can't go through the district redirect that goes elsewhere) such that they won't point toward the moved county article if and when these moves take place. Dekimasuよ! 17:41, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Not yet (because until 12/25, the current status applies). But there will be a lot of work to do. A few years ago, when Taipei County became New Taipei, and Taichung, Tainan, and the current extent of Kaohsiung were created from city-county mergers, it took several weeks for everything to be done. I was hoping that we can get some of the logistics out of the way prior to the status change. --Nlu (talk) 02:32, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if you pipe them to something that currently points here, and can easily be redirected after the move, it should be possible to start now. Dekimasuよ! 03:13, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

- Is there more information you want from the current iteration of this request, now that it has run for its week? Dekimasuよ! 01:52, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  - It seems like there is no substantive opposition. With that being the case, I think I have some confidence on what to do once 12/25 comes around. And hopefully no dispute will erupt then. --Nlu (talk) 02:42, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Target for "Qing era"

@Xuanjing9978: The article said During the Qing era, a number of people from Fujian Province and Guangdong province..., which linked "Qing era" to Taiwan under Qing rule, an article specifically about that time and place. It was changed to target the more general Qing dynasty, which I reverted, since the original article is more specifically about Taiwan during that time (i.e. under Qing rule). Why are you edit-warring to use the less accurate link? —[AlanM1(talk)]— 11:21, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Emblem of Taoyuan City.svg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:42, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]