Wikipedia contributions by Sheherherhers

[[WP:AES|←]]Redirected page to [[Vice President of the Republic of China]]

succinct and coherent

- follow the example of [[Ireland (disambiguation)]]

- reverting to longstanding version before the new edits with minor revisions

Undid revision [[Special:Diff/1355123512|1355123512]] by [[Special:Contributions/Cfls|Cfls]] ([[User talk:Cfls|talk]])- I don’t exactly know which version defined by yourself as status quo, but I’m sure the current version is made by your new edits and you alone, no others. Again, discussions before change

-minor edit

Undid revision [[Special:Diff/1355028495|1355028495]] by [[Special:Contributions/Cfls|Cfls]] ([[User talk:Cfls|talk]])- the purpose of the ambiguous page is to clearly distinguish the similar topics with different meanings in between, bring the issue to the discussion if you want to change it

Undid revision [[Special:Diff/1354297645|1354297645]] by [[Special:Contributions/Brokeshotmet3r|Brokeshotmet3r]] ([[User talk:Brokeshotmet3r|talk]])- Taiwan has long been defined as country in the Wikipedia commons, see [[talk:Taiwan]]. Reaching consensus in discussions before chang

Undid revision [[Special:Diff/1350680196|1350680196]] by [[Special:Contributions/~2026-22370-52|~2026-22370-52]] ([[User talk:~2026-22370-52|talk]])- undo synonymous IP edits and the references given for the newly added content has no explicit mention of the keyword “middle power”

-Redirecting fixed

-switching position for coherence

wording fixed

Partly reverted- no they’re different. The ROC’s division is under actual control, the PRC’s claim is not

C/E

Undid 2 revisions from [[Special:Diff/1353635218|1353635218]] until [[Special:Diff/1353635393|1353635393]]- unexplained deletion of content by an anonymous IP

Undid revision [[Special:Diff/1352491942|1352491942]] by [[Special:Contributions/~2026-26132-90|~2026-26132-90]] ([[User talk:~2026-26132-90|talk]])- no reliale source is given for the new edits

Undid revision [[Special:Diff/1350036185|1350036185]] by [[Special:Contributions/Absolutiva|Absolutiva]] ([[User talk:Absolutiva|talk]])- doesn't make it any better, except what type of territories?

Undid revision [[Special:Diff/1350681414|1350681414]] by [[Special:Contributions/The Blue Rider|The Blue Rider]] ([[User talk:The Blue Rider|talk]])- how to define modern? As my reasons given by the previous edits are not the modern facts? You should bring it to talk page to reach consensus before making such a change

/* Regional powers */-Japan is still widely viewed as a great power for the following reasons; as crucial member of G7 and [[G4 nations]], the economies of scale (i.e GDP) and its scientific research strengths are amongst the five most largest nations in the world, economic and political influence in Asia-pacific. If the UK and Italy have been declined for decades and still viewed as sort of great powers, then certainly Japan is qualified for the same criteria

/* Regional powers */RV- is this a joke…? By the sole reason of having nuclear weapons doesn’t make it a regional hagemon

Undid 2 revisions from [[Special:Diff/1348308885|1348308885]] until [[Special:Diff/1348309033|1348309033]]- there is no defined law indicating Taipei as de jure capital, see the topic of [[Taipei]]

Sheherherhers moved page [[List of Chinese provincial-level divisions by Human Development Index]] to [[List of administrative divisions of Greater China by Human Development Index]] over redirect: Revert page-move vandalism ([[WP:MOVEVANDAL]]): Please read the main article for the reason why the article is named and have discussion with other editors before making such a move

Sheherherhers moved page [[List of Chinese provincial-level divisions by Human Development Index]] to [[List of administrative divisions of Greater China by Human Development Index]] over redirect: Revert page-move vandalism ([[WP:MOVEVANDAL]]): Please read the main article for the reason why the article is named and have discussion with other editors before making such a move

/* UNIDO high-income industrial economies */ - actually those countries can be allocated to one group, Americas are not larger than Asia

/* UNIDO high-income industrial economies */ - alphabetical order

-minor changes

-Term limitation specified

/* Removal from the TPP */-rewording

-Completed sentence

-Making more sense

/* Removal from the TPP */ - minor change

minor changes

-more precise and further detailed information, whether she is holding the sole Taiwanese citizenship which is still disputed, pending to judicial trials

RV- redundant revision

minor change

streaming

-spelling fixed

She is deprived from the TPP along with her membership in legislative Yuan https://tw.news.yahoo.com/李貞秀遭開除黨籍喪失立委資格-民眾黨：以辭職要求對價補償重創形象-084628838.html

RV-confirmed by who? the government has not confirmed that she has totally renounced the mainland citizenship and it’s still in dispute over her eligibility for nominating as legislator, even the legislature Yuan chair [[Han Kuo-you]] of KMT states to her candidacy pending to the judicial results

“dissident”? is this implied the ROC being regarded as the rebel side? read the history please

To integrate different perspectives into more neutral wording, partly adopted from the Chinese-language page

-Regarding the result issue, the longstanding edits were presented as “ROC successfully defended Kinmen”, which made no claim in favour of either side over the battle, but just a factual statement

-neutral wording

RV- reverting to long-standing version, no more reversion if the change is not reached a consensus

- simplified

Dispute section remarked

The IP did make a point and I have rewritten the text. As her citizenship dispute has not yet settled, we should not give definitive information about it before the issue resolved under the [[WP:NPOV]]

Partly reverted- the problem is, the provisions of theResolution did not explicitly specify neither "Taiwan" or "Republic of China" as the referring party but use the term "the representatives of [[Chiang Kai-shek]]" instead, this is the whole controversy is now disputed about. If Wikipedia ought to stand a neutral ground upon this issue, we should retain the original text of the decision instead of personal intepretations or descriptive wording to refraining from a presupposition over the issue

Deducting excessive details of proponents and opponents, the lede of the article suppose to be a summary of the topic regarding the subject itself, not an opinion forums for an excessive comparison of the US and China, which should be moved to the main body of the article instead of the lede.

wording

Actually the ROC constitution does not explicitly define the exact territorial boundaries, which only states "inherent territory" rather than giving ranges of “Mainland Area”, especially the Outer Mongolia, has been practically excluded from the definition.

I think the IP meant that the same texts of alternative terms had been duplicated. I simplified the texts in a citing footnotes instead, mainly refraining from making a prolong lede by repeating the repetitive phrase, and making the article more succinct

Undid revision [[Special:Diff/1335052582|1335052582]] by [[Special:Contributions/~2026-57714-0|~2026-57714-0]] ([[User talk:~2026-57714-0|talk]]) -disruptive edits

Undid revision [[Special:Diff/1340483146|1340483146]] by [[Special:Contributions/~2026-12646-94|~2026-12646-94]] ([[User talk:~2026-12646-94|talk]]) -unexplained deletion of contents

/* See also */it still has no direct connection with the ongoing conflict

-“dissident”???

See the topic of [[Taiwan]] and read the first sentence for me

1927 instead of 1928 as Nanjing designated as the capital of the Nationalist government

CE

Not an improvement, ongoing stage rather than a historical era

quoted from the refering news: "Chen would bring his family to Taiwan before next summer... and possibly speak before Taiwan's legislative body, '''Lin said'''.."

Not exactly, most of western media called the legislation in Taiwan as “Parliament of Taiwan” as well, your reference also proves it. Legislative body is primarily used by Chinese state-owned media

That’s simply not a truth, for example, [[Huang Chin-tao]]

TW is not a territory or dependency, if you mean less recognised states, then why Kososvo or Palestine did not highlighted?

/* See also */ -How are those related?

Undid revision [[Special:Diff/1338380475|1338380475]] by [[Special:Contributions/~2026-97428-2|~2026-97428-2]] ([[User talk:~2026-97428-2|talk]]) -Redundant, there is no ''KMT-controlled Ministry of Foreign Affairs'' or other forms of the same organ in Taiwanese government at this time point, just like we would not say LDP-controlled government of Japan in this matter

partly rv, non-IMF members

biding by the ranking criteria which is insisted by some certain editors, I’m pretty sure these three economies are also non-members of the IMF. If you want to set the standard, then please do it consistently without giving exceptions

Undid revision [[Special:Diff/1333915562|1333915562]] by [[Special:Contributions/Seabhcan|Seabhcan]] ([[User talk:Seabhcan|talk]])- Has the established consensus changed?? please rebuild the consensus through the talk page instead of keep making unilateral moves

Undid 24 revisions from [[Special:Diff/1330292554|1330292554]] until [[Special:Diff/1330666299|1330666299]]- reverting back to steady version. New entries were given non relevant sources for the referring claims, or over-reliant on the [[WP:IDSPS|self-published sources ]]

/* List of middle powers */Number amendment

/* Government */-removing duplicated words

I think it’s better to refrain from giving additional brackets to cause misunderstanding, as some IP may regard that Wikipedia takes a position as China include Taiwan as a basic idea. I would simply point it out in the above “claiming” section

/* Government */-Correcting the error caused by the auto-correction made by the CP

/* Government */ -typo fixed

/* Government */

/* International reactions */ -how is this anything about to the response of Taiwan

/* Dispute */ -[[The Asahi Shimbun]] as the primary source of the information

neutral wording to balance respective viewpoints

/* United States */ -[[Shūkan Bunshun]] is not considered a reliable source when its claims mostly comes from many sandals with unnamed sources giving no evidence. Besides, officials of Japan and the US have denied that Trump had given any “advice”regarding how Japan act on political issues of Taiwan. See [[Shūkan Bunshun#controversy|controversy of Shūkan Bunshun]] for more details.

/* Dispute */ -the BBC’s translation regarding the original statement made by Sanae was not totally accurate. I have adopted the translation directly from a Japanese media regarding the original comment. Someone seems like to twist the meaning of original words

Undid 2 revisions from [[Special:Diff/1329151210|1329151210]] until [[Special:Diff/1329151675|1329151675]]- Not so sure what you really tried to do…

- reverting to the previous version, no reliable source is given for the claims

Undid revision [[Special:Diff/1325539751|1325539751]] by [[Special:Contributions/Qplb191|Qplb191]] ([[User talk:Qplb191|talk]])-your claims contradicts to your actions, which non-IMF memebers were exluded to the ranks beside Taiwan?

/* Dispute */ - typo fixed

/* Dispute */ - signifying the legislative basis of the referring situation

/* Dispute */

/* Dispute */ -add link

-unnecessary

minor changes

I'm not sure it's an improvemnt by making the same meaning into a prolong phrase. Succinct and clear should be the primary task on editing

/* Background */

/* Dispute */ - elaborating the panorama of the original comments made by Sanae

/* Dispute */

/* Dispute */ - the BBC’s translation regarding the original statement made by Sanae was not totally accurate. I have adopted the translation directly from a Japanese media regarding the original comment. The reference will be given a moment later

/* Background */ -more specific

/* Background */ -no plural