I am hoping to get the fontsize smaller. Can someone help me with that? Mababa 06:03, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)
I am hoping to put all the sub categories into this template in the future for easy reference, too. Mababa 06:04, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Hmmm, the template belongs to no categories, but the discussion page does. Hmmm. (I was looking for a way to find similar templates.) Jidanni 00:37, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2007-08-31T00:37:00.000Z","author":"Jidanni","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Jidanni-2007-08-31T00:37:00.000Z-categories","replies":[]}}-->
Please refer to Template_talk:Politics_of_the_Republic_of_China--pyl (talk) 08:12, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2008-09-27T08:12:00.000Z","author":"Pyl","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Pyl-2008-09-27T08:12:00.000Z-Adding_(Taiwan)_to_the_ROC","replies":[]}}-->
Most of contents in this Template describe as Taiwan in chief~ not only politic! This is just a web-encyclopedia,The main purpose should made readers to be clear about the matter for this subject. we should stand an angle of vision for readers who might disunderstand, not only to edit by your own position,but also have misgiving about other readers.--ILVTW (talk) 06:20, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2008-10-16T06:20:00.000Z","author":"ILVTW","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-ILVTW-2008-10-16T06:20:00.000Z-Adding_(Taiwan)_to_the_ROC","replies":[]}}-->
The template should focus on the ROC, not on Taiwan. The ROC is the government. The "Administration" section should stay. The ROC as a government had a history in China before moving to Taiwan, so a "History" section should be present. Most of what is in the Society, Culture, Economy and Geography sections should be in Template:Taiwan topics rather than here. Readin (talk) 17:06, 3 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2009-09-03T17:06:00.000Z","author":"Readin","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Readin-2009-09-03T17:06:00.000Z-template_has_too_much","replies":["c-Rjanag-2009-09-03T23:32:00.000Z-Readin-2009-09-03T17:06:00.000Z"]}}-->
These two templates have a fairly significant amount of duplication. With the country article now located at Taiwan, I believe Template:Taiwan topics should be the main country template and the majority of this template's content should be there (and much of it already is). However, once the country-related links are stripped, there's basically only the administration section left in this template. Do people think there's enough content related to the Republic of China (the government, as distinct from the country of Taiwan) to justify it keeping a separate template, or should the government items be merged into Template:Taiwan topics and have that serve as the main template for both purposes? Personally I'm in favour of the latter. – NULL ‹talk›‹edits› 22:21, 22 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2012-03-22T22:21:00.000Z","author":"NULL","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-NULL-2012-03-22T22:21:00.000Z-Content_duplication_with_Template:Taiwan_topics","replies":["c-John_Smith's-2012-03-23T08:12:00.000Z-NULL-2012-03-22T22:21:00.000Z","c-Jpech95-2012-03-23T20:30:00.000Z-NULL-2012-03-22T22:21:00.000Z","c-Jeffrey_Fitzpatrick-2012-03-23T22:37:00.000Z-NULL-2012-03-22T22:21:00.000Z"]}}-->
The result of the move request was: talk page moved and merged -- JHunterJ (talk) 16:37, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2012-04-16T16:37:00.000Z","author":"JHunterJ","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-JHunterJ-2012-04-16T16:37:00.000Z-Requested_move_of_talk_page","replies":[]}}-->
Template talk:Republic of China (Taiwan) topics → Template talk:Taiwan topics – to match the template. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:20, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2012-04-07T21:20:00.000Z","author":"Koavf","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Koavf-2012-04-07T21:20:00.000Z-Requested_move_of_talk_page","replies":["c-Kauffner-2012-04-08T00:09:00.000Z-Koavf-2012-04-07T21:20:00.000Z","c-Jeffrey_Fitzpatrick-2012-04-08T02:12:00.000Z-Koavf-2012-04-07T21:20:00.000Z","c-NULL-2012-04-08T06:07:00.000Z-Koavf-2012-04-07T21:20:00.000Z","c-Chipmunkdavis-2012-04-08T13:36:00.000Z-Koavf-2012-04-07T21:20:00.000Z","c-Jeffrey_Fitzpatrick-2012-04-11T00:48:00.000Z-Koavf-2012-04-07T21:20:00.000Z","c-Readin-2012-04-11T02:31:00.000Z-Koavf-2012-04-07T21:20:00.000Z","c-Readin-2012-04-11T02:31:00.000Z-Koavf-2012-04-07T21:20:00.000Z-1","c-Chipmunkdavis-2012-04-11T07:20:00.000Z-Koavf-2012-04-07T21:20:00.000Z","c-Jeremy_Hopkins-2012-04-13T10:13:00.000Z-Koavf-2012-04-07T21:20:00.000Z","c-Kanguole-2012-04-14T07:55:00.000Z-Koavf-2012-04-07T21:20:00.000Z"],"displayName":"Justin (koavf)"}}-->
Do Hsinhai Revolution, Warlord era and Nanking decade belong to this navbox? (Btw I've relocated Taiwan independence from the governance section to the politics section.) Jeffrey (talk) 10:50, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2012-04-08T10:50:00.000Z","author":"Jeffrey Fitzpatrick","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Jeffrey_Fitzpatrick-2012-04-08T10:50:00.000Z-History_section","replies":[],"displayName":"Jeffrey"}}-->
Should ROC-specific topics be demerged from this navbox? They are not actually relevant to Taiwan. Jeffrey (talk) 21:29, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2012-04-13T21:29:00.000Z","author":"Jeffrey Fitzpatrick","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Jeffrey_Fitzpatrick-2012-04-13T21:29:00.000Z-De-merging","replies":[],"displayName":"Jeffrey"}}-->
This one keeps reverting since Taiwan is a "sovereign state". It's technically the Republic of China (founded in 1912) which they have Taiwan since 1945. However, I am proposing is to create separate ROC infobox or move some ROC history to the China topics. ---Wrestlingring (talk) 14:28, 15 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2017-10-15T14:28:00.000Z","author":"Wrestlingring","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Wrestlingring-2017-10-15T14:28:00.000Z-Proposal:_Anyone_want_to_create_separate_ROC_infobox_or_move_some_ROC_history_to","replies":["c-Matt_Smith-2017-10-15T14:31:00.000Z-Wrestlingring-2017-10-15T14:28:00.000Z"]}}-->
My last change was reverted with the rationale "WP:NOTBROKEN". But that is not a valid rationale to keep redirects in this case, as infoboxes are an exception to that guideline - see WP:BRINT. The reason is so whenever the navigation box appears in an article listed in the box, the link is replaced with bold unlinked text, emphasising the connection between the template and the page, and stopping anyone clicking on the link for no reason. It is normal therefore to remove redirects from navigation boxes like this one.
They can still be piped, to stop repeating obvious classifiers such as the name of the topic (Taiwan/Republic of China), or to disambiguate between similar and related entities, such as a city and a county. But the piped link should be a direct one, not a redirect.--JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 14:21, 19 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2017-10-19T14:21:00.000Z","author":"JohnBlackburne","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-JohnBlackburne-2017-10-19T14:21:00.000Z-'Not_Broken'","replies":[]}}-->
Lokasi Pengunjung: 3.139.88.22