Talk:Taiwan Voyage Tips and guide

Much of the article contains general information that seems good for a Wikipedia entry, but I don't see how the information fits in a travel guide. For example: "It should be noted that the Taiwanese (who make up 84% of the Taiwan's population and are culturally Chinese) are to a large extent the descendents of immigrants from the mainland in recent centuries who intermarried with indigenous people. As a result, the genetic makeup of the Taiwanese is noticeably different from that of the mainlanders. In recent years there are also Vietnamese, Indonesian and Filipino migrant workers living harmoniously with other Asian minorities as well as Mainland Chinese immigrants. As for the 14 millions post 1949 immigrants, they come from every province and consist of many non-Han residents." It's not easy to see how that information is of particular use to travellers. I'm new to Wikivoyage (saw it on Slashdot); is there some standard for deciding what goes in the article and what doesn't? I read the Policies page and about all it said for content was that we write what's best for the traveller. If a traveller is dedicated enough to learn all the background about a place, they can go to Wikipedia. I would think that on this site they would want information that is focussed on what they should expect as a traveller. Readin (talk) 04:59, 17 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

It isn't unusual for this kind of background to appear in some guides, but I'm sure this text can be made less encylopedic. --Inas (talk) 05:06, 17 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

I have move the background information out of the lead paragraph. Remember that Wikivoyage is the travel guide that you can edit. If you make the changes, then you don't have to wait 11 years for someone else to do them. Ground Zero (talk) 19:04, 26 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

It's been the practice on this site to list missions in the guide for the city where the missions are, not the country level. So I believe all the listings for foreign missions belong in Taipei#Cope, a section which currently doesn't exist. Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:03, 24 June 2015 (UTC)Reply

You're right. I wish I'd known before I doubled the number of foreign missions listed here. Simon Peter Hughes (talk) 02:53, 26 June 2015 (UTC)Reply

I have moved the list of foreign mission to the new Cope section in the taipei guide. Simon Peter Hughes (talk) 09:33, 2 July 2015 (UTC)Reply

Is it just me, or do you also see the pagebanner ending about 4 cm to the left of the right margin, with blank white space taking up the rest of the width? Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:28, 24 June 2015 (UTC)Reply

The banner image c:File:DaZhongZhiZheng banner.jpg is only 1280px wide, which is shorter than the recommended minimum of 2100px. -- Ryan • (talk) • 13:47, 24 June 2015 (UTC)Reply

So this banner needs to be widened or replaced. Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:12, 24 June 2015 (UTC)Reply

I tried to restore the default banner and wasn't able to get it to work in preview mode. Could someone please either restore the default banner, or better yet, insert a custom banner of suitable size and appearance? Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:39, 29 June 2015 (UTC)Reply

Can someone please help? ויקיג'אנקי, do you happen to have a pagebanner for Taiwan? Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:00, 13 August 2015 (UTC)Reply

Searching for a CC image of Taiwan is unnusually distracting. Anyhow I found the following panoramic view of the same building. Pity the building to each side are cut off, but what do you think? --Andrewssi2 (talk) 01:15, 13 August 2015 (UTC)Reply

It's quite nice, even so. Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:04, 13 August 2015 (UTC)Reply

I made an alternative banner in which the sides of both buildings aren't cut off... ויקיג'אנקי (talk) 13:52, 13 August 2015 (UTC)Reply

Thanks, ויקיג'אנקי. In this instance, I actually prefer the banner with the cut off buildings, because I don't like what the modern buildings on both sides do to the composition. But I think that if the banner could be cut off just past the sides of the National Theater and Concert Hall (which look traditional) without cutting off their tops, that would probably be even better. Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:04, 13 August 2015 (UTC)Reply

How about this version? We keep a little bit of the plaza with only the very tops of the spires cut (Previous version here) Andrewssi2 (talk) 23:25, 13 August 2015 (UTC)Reply

I'm feeling differently now. The cutoffs are bothering me, and I'm now preferring ויקיג'אנקי's version. But if there were some way to crop the right and left sides of ויקיג'אנקי's version, or even the left side, which bothers me more (the right side has more forms, so it's more interesting to move the eye around it), that would really be best. Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:37, 14 August 2015 (UTC)Reply

Another alternative banner... ויקיג'אנקי (talk) 14:17, 15 August 2015 (UTC)Reply

Thanks. Is this a possible view? Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:31, 15 August 2015 (UTC)Reply

What do you mean ? ויקיג'אנקי (talk) 21:19, 15 August 2015 (UTC)Reply

I'm wondering if the image was distorted in some way, since the other views show those two buildings more nearly parallel to each other. Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:22, 15 August 2015 (UTC)Reply

It 'looks' distorted to me, as in some kind of panoramic technique. Looking at the original image it would only make sense if the parade through the middle got narrower in real life, and the Wikipedia article would suggest it doesn't. w:National_Theater_and_Concert_Hall,_Taipei Andrewssi2 (talk) 00:21, 16 August 2015 (UTC)Reply

It is 'real' (no Photoshop tricks), just probably taken from a closer spot with a different lens. I like it better. ויקיג'אנקי (talk) 03:44, 16 August 2015 (UTC)Reply

If it is indeed a real view, I do find the composition best in this last banner, even though it, too, cuts off the buildings. However, this photo, which Andrewssi2 linked, gives me pause. You're really sure this is a possible view? Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:35, 16 August 2015 (UTC)Reply

It can't be determine (from the image and its metadata) whether is was photoshop or a lens that made that effect, although I personally would hold that even if it was a lens then the effect nevertheless results in an 'altered' image that would not be seen in the same way by a real life visitor. Andrewssi2 (talk) 10:32, 16 August 2015 (UTC)Reply

I really don't see that the problem is. It's a different perspective from the previous banners, shot from nearby, on the square itself rather than from an elevation further away. Yes, it's probably a wide-angle lens, but I don't see how that's problematic. If you stand in the position of the photographer, all that you see on the image is visible. It's a more striking image and thus for the purpose of a banner here I like the last one best. We constantly use image that will not be seen in the exact same way by a real life visitor, since eyes and lenses don't compare and we often cut out just the parts we like best. I think it's not about an exact view; it's about avoiding images that don't exist. However, this is a lot of discussion about pretty similar banners hehe.. so I'm good with whatever comes out. JuliasTravels (talk) 10:46, 16 August 2015 (UTC)Reply

I just don't agree that 'striking' is a more important attribute than 'how it will actually be seen' when informing travellers about a destination. All images are of course affected by the lens that the camera is using, however in this case it seems to me a stronger effect than usual. There are however no rules in WV on 'relative realism' in banners and so it is only my opinion.

On that basis alone I would chose ויקיג'אנקי's first banner over his second. Andrewssi2 (talk) 11:21, 16 August 2015 (UTC)Reply

Just playing with banners tonight, and saw this great picture on Flickr. Now this banner is also distorted by a lens, but I think the result is somewhat striking. Any thoughts? Andrewssi2 (talk) 12:40, 19 August 2015 (UTC)Reply

Here's a situation in which I see three beautiful buildings in the other images, but as a picture, this one is superior. Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:20, 20 August 2015 (UTC)Reply

Shall we go ahead and change? Andrewssi2 (talk) 23:35, 22 August 2015 (UTC)Reply

No-one has objected in 2 days. Unless someone does in the interim, I'd say go ahead. Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:39, 22 August 2015 (UTC)Reply

Done, thanks Andrewssi2 (talk) 01:05, 23 August 2015 (UTC)Reply

Swept in from the pub

In one article, Taiwan the notation of the Taiwan currency is TWD is given in the Quickbar and 6 other places. NTD is used 6 times. NT$ is used 22 times. Just $ is used 24 times. Should this be standardized to one notation only, or is the present situation no problem? --FredTC (talk) 14:48, 4 March 2017 (UTC)Reply

WV:$ says "Prices should be generally listed with the currency notation that travellers will encounter when they arrive at the destination in question. Travellers should be able to assume that symbols used for multiple currencies (like $ or £ or ¥) apply to the local currency." So we should use "$", or "NT$" if clarification is needed. There would be no reason to use TWD or NTD. Ground Zero (talk) 16:34, 4 March 2017 (UTC)Reply

Is The bare peso symbol really the locally common way of designating it? If yes, that should be used (unless there is need to avoid ambiguity) if not, whatever is locally prevalent should be used. Hobbitschuster (talk) 19:19, 4 March 2017 (UTC)Reply

I haven't been to Taiwan yet, but Wikipedi says: "The currency code is TWD, and its common abbreviation is NT$." Taiwan Tourism Bureau uses NT$. So does the China Post newspaper from Taipei. Ground Zero (talk) 19:47, 4 March 2017 (UTC)Reply

c:Category:Price tags in Taiwan shows both "NT$" and "$" alone. Powers ^(talk) 00:59, 5 March 2017 (UTC)Reply

A walk-through of Taipei Taoyuan Airport showed NT$ in about 70% of the shops, NT as the second most common, followed by $. The vending machines use 元. I did not see NTD or TWD anywhere. Ground Zero (talk) 23:55, 28 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

You cannot get around Taiwan by metro, only around 3 metropolitan areas. I don't think this section should be in this article. If you disagree, please explain why. Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:38, 11 June 2017 (UTC)Reply

The map for THSR speaks of stations "planned for 2012-2015". I know that this is a problem over at commons, but if one of our editors knows more on the issue, maybe someone else could help (re)drawing the map? Hobbitschuster (talk) 12:23, 4 October 2017 (UTC)Reply

In the "Stay healthy/Water" section:

"However, it is advised that drinking water be boiled in order to eliminate residual chlorine and bacteria."

I didn't think that boiling water eliminated chlorine. Does it? Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:53, 13 December 2017 (UTC)Reply

To my knowledge, it gets rid of some of the chlorine, but you do have to boil it for quite a while. The dog2 (talk) 18:20, 15 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

I noticed that someone put New Taipei in the city list. Although it is administratively separate, New Taipei is for all intents and purposes part of the Taipei metropolitan area. Therefore, I actually think we should not list it as a separate city, and instead treat it as suburban Taipei. In its place, I suggest we add Taichung, which is a major city in Taiwan that is currently not on the list. The dog2 (talk) 18:17, 15 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

IIRC New Taipei is currently treated as its own city with its own districts by WV. I think this might be an area to look into to make the hierarchy easier and more voyager friendly... Hobbitschuster (talk) 19:45, 15 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

Regardless, I still think that Taichung is more important to list than New Taipei. Regardless of administrative divisions, from a practical perspective, New Taipei is suburban Taipei, while Taichung is a separate major city. The dog2 (talk) 22:44, 15 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

I haven't seen a response, so if there are no objections in 24 hours, I'll make the switch. The dog2 (talk) 23:17, 18 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

I support adding Taichung instead. Gizza ^(roam) 01:11, 19 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

It seems there is some inconsistency in the 'Regions' section of this page. There are administrative districts interspersed with national parks and sites of interest. I suggest these be rationalised to include only the administrative districts and leave the sites of note to the subsection below. For example, I don't feel 'Sun Moon Lake' should be explicitly mentioned under Central Taiwan. This is already present in the subsection below. What does everybody else think? Kdm852 (talk) 15:40, 17 June 2019 (UTC)Reply

Good point there. I agree that it can be deleted, and we can just mention the counties and cities without mentioning Taroko Gorge or Sun Moon Lake since they will be listed under the specific counties, and we already list them under "Other Destinations". Speaking of which, I noticed Jiufen in the city list. While I have been there and it is a beautiful place to visit, I don't think it belongs in the city list since it really is a small town. I was thinking of listing Taitung instead. We only have one city that is not on the west coast, so I think it will be good to have another east coast city other than Hualien, of which Taitung will be the natural option. The dog2 (talk) 04:14, 25 June 2019 (UTC)Reply

Agreed about Jiufen. I think it's an interesting enough place to be mentioned in "Other Destinations", but it's definitely not a city, in my experience. I also agree that Taitung should be on the city list; it's quite small, but also fairly unique in Taiwan, and feels enough like a 'city' to qualify (by my reckoning). If we wanted to deliberately put more east-coast cities, we could consider Yilan. Maybe also Magong if we wanted to include the outlying islands? Kdm852 (talk) 07:24, 25 June 2019 (UTC)Reply

Quick word of caution: Just because a place is judged to be too small a city or town to be listed in “Cities”, that doesn’t make it an “Other destination”. The answer to “other than what?” is “other than cities”, and in Wikivoyage classification, towns and villages are “cities”, whereas parks, islands and mountains are not. Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:34, 25 June 2019 (UTC)Reply

Fair point, but I do think we should tweak the city list a little in the name of regional balance. Keelung, Jiufen and Taipei are all in the Taipei metropolitan area, and the former two are commonly visited as day trips from Taipei. There's probably a good reason why we don't list Yokohama in the city list of the Japan article even though it is technically Japan's second largest city after Tokyo (and I will be starting a discussion about tweaking that list too at some point in the near future). As for the outlying islands, I would prefer a city on Kinmen or Matsu, but I don't think Jincheng, Beigan or Nangan there are of the importance of Magong. Unfortunately, I've never been to those areas, so I'll need someone who has been there to comment. The dog2 (talk) 15:15, 25 June 2019 (UTC)Reply

So to move this forward, should I just swap Keelung (or Jiufen) for Taitung? Both Keelung and Jiufen are easy day trips from Taipei, and I think they are best listed in the Taipei article under "Go next". This will help with regional balance, since having 3 towns/cities in the Taipei metropolitan area is overkill in my opinion. The dog2 (talk) 18:03, 5 July 2019 (UTC)Reply

I'm not getting any response, so if nobody objects in the next 24 hours, I'll swap Keelung for Taitung. The dog2 (talk) 17:34, 11 July 2019 (UTC)Reply

I'm puzzled by Taiwan#ATMs. It says "Taiwan has abundant 24-hour ATMs to withdraw cash using the Plus or Cirrus systems." but then "However, it seems ATMs do not consequently give out cash." What is this supposed to mean? Is "consequently" an error for "consistently"? —Granger (talk · contribs) 23:57, 19 October 2019 (UTC)Reply

@Ceever: You just edited the section, so maybe you can help. Is the point that ATMs often run out of cash and therefore aren't a reliable way to get money? Or does the sentence with "consequently" mean something else? —Granger (talk · contribs) 23:13, 23 October 2019 (UTC)Reply

As far as I remember, there are more then enough ATMs around ... also looking at OSM. However, not all of them are consequently equipped with money. Both facts kind of correlate in my opinion. The more ATMs, the harder to maintain. Hence, you might have to try a few before finding one with cash, since everyone is doing the same thing, which leads to the nearby machines to be empty as well. This then can be a problem, when you head to remote regions where there is not many ATMs in general and only fee-charging 7-eleven ones. I reckon also, Taiwanese more rely on electronic pay than cash, so they are not so much concerned about empty ATMs. Right? Cheers Ceever (talk) 06:05, 24 October 2019 (UTC)Reply

Thanks, that helps. I'll try to rephrase the section more clearly. —Granger (talk · contribs) 15:43, 24 October 2019 (UTC)Reply

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

• NT$1000 obverse.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 12:52, 5 May 2020 (UTC)Reply

I wonder if we should mention in the article that Lithuania has just become the first country to formally recognise Taiwan independence. I think this is significant because the other countries that maintain diplomatic relations with Taiwan do so by recognising the Taiwanese government as the sole legitimate government of China, but Lithuania is the first one to actually declare that Taiwan is an independent country separate from China. The dog2 (talk) 20:25, 12 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

Seems trivial for a travel guide, so I'd say no. Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:31, 12 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

I'm not motivated enough to analyze the whole thing, but I'm not sure this is accurate anyway. w:Foreign relations of Taiwan. Nelson Ricardo 2500 (talk) 21:02, 12 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

I agree with Ikan Kekek. Ground Zero (talk) 21:24, 12 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

Perhaps this should go under respect instead of understand, but my understanding is that many Taiwanese (at least the pro-DPP ones) hold the view that the "comfort women" were volunteers who chose to do so out of patriotism to Japan. I actually saw a DPP supporter go on camera and make that declaration in the Taiwanese news. Taiwan is certainly unique in that Japanese colonial rule is largely seen as a positive thing (though the Hakkas and indigenous people tend to be exceptions to this rule, and are accordingly KMT strongholds). For instance, while China, South Korea and even Singapore generally object to Japanese politicians visiting the Yasukuni Shrine, Taiwanese politicians from the DPP would often visit the Yasukuni Shrine themselves to offer prayers. The dog2 (talk) 22:53, 23 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

w:Comfort women does not report on this, so either there is no reliable source to support this, or it is a very fringe view. How important is addressing very fringe views for travellers? Ground Zero (talk) 23:27, 23 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

Sorry, it's in Chinese, but here's the news clip of the Taiwanese student saying that his great grandmother volunteered to be a "comfort woman": [1]. The dog2 (talk) 23:42, 23 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

Why would you even think of mentioning this in a travel guide? It's fine to state that many Taiwanese people are pro-Japanese and have positive opinions about the period of Japanese rule, but why on Earth would you mention that they whitewash sex slavery, or that their politicians visit the Yasukuni Shrine? You think there's a travel angle on that? As for someone's great-grandmother "volunteering", is that something he's proud of? I would have to question what that word means in this context, anyway - sure, I'll "volunteer" to be a sex slave at gunpoint. Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:45, 23 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Ikan Kekek: I'm not saying that I agree with that view. But "volunteer" is exactly what you think it means. I'm translating from Chinese here, but he claimed that his great grandmother was not forced, but instead willingly served as a "comfort woman" out of her patriotism for Japan. The dog2 (talk) 02:23, 24 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

How important is addressing very fringe this one guy's views for travellers? He's just one of 23.57 million people. The Canada article does not warn people about things I'm offended by, and I'm offended by a lot of things. It would be a long section. I'll go add that in now.... Ground Zero (talk) 02:33, 24 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

Would like to gather comments on this. I think w:Taiwan Railway Bento should be featured as a culinary specialty rather than as a side note in train travel. It's significant enough to warrant pride among Taiwanese people, is a unique culinary icon for Taiwan and there's even a "Formosa Railroad Bento Festival".Cyali (talk) 20:36, 20 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

Go ahead. Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:52, 20 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

I wonder if we should start branching off a separate article now, or is the content still compact enough for keeping it in the main article? The dog2 (talk) 13:38, 22 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

As we know, the Chinese are now carrying out live firing exercises in Taiwanese waters, and they have even gone as far as launching missiles over Taiwan (though they haven't actually hit anything in Taiwan yet). Singapore Airlines has reported that they had to cancel flights because of the live firing exercises, so I wonder if we should have a warning box about the flight disruptions as a result of this. The Chinese have basically blockaded all of Taiwan's ports, so getting in by sea is not possible either. The dog2 (talk) 19:01, 5 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

Since it's affecting travel to and from the island, yes. I have to wonder whether the Taiwanese would attack the Chinese Navy if they continue a blockade. Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:03, 5 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

I agree the article could use a warningbox or a cautionbox. --Ypsilon (talk) 19:08, 5 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

I've added a cautionbox. —Granger (talk · contribs) 21:06, 5 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

I was in fact thinking of adding a cautionbox yesterday. Thanks for adding it, Granger. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 21:27, 5 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

Swept in from the pub

Title. For example, literally every restaurant listed in Hsinchu is closed, and there hasn't been a auditorium near the East Gate for years. Same could be said about many of the hotel listings in general, of which many are either defunct, or in poor quality when newer, better alternatives are present. Ernest Macomb (talk) 15:54, 25 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

Do you want to help us make it better? —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 16:10, 25 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Ernest Macomb: it is unfortunate: unless we have someone who lives in Taiwan update a place, the information becomes stale, especially for restaurant listings. When I'm planning a trip somewhere, I update information as I do my research. I hope you will help out by removing listings for places that have closed, even if it means leaving the article without restaurant listings. Ground Zero (talk) 17:44, 25 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

Ernest Macomb, this is the travel guide everyone can edit. It's fairly pointless to complain about the state of an article when you have the knowledge to improve it. So I hope you plunge forward. Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:38, 25 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Koavf, Ground Zero, Ikan Kekek: I'm updating them right now! Ernest Macomb (talk) 23:36, 14 December 2022 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for the updates, Earnest Macomb! Much appreciated :-). SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 23:46, 14 December 2022 (UTC)Reply

You're welcome! Ernest Macomb (talk) 00:38, 15 December 2022 (UTC)Reply

Thank you! Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:57, 15 December 2022 (UTC)Reply

Swept in from the pub

Hi, everyone. Because of a change in Taiwanese law to prohibit the commercial use of photos of publicly-displayed statues and so forth, thousands of photos of Taiwan are being nominated for deletion on Wikimedia Commons. Quite a few of them are or maybe should be on our pages. We need help with uploading them locally to Wikivoyage, as we have fair-use policies that Commons does not use because we are using the images as part of a travel guide, whereas images and documentation about them are all Commons has. I've been looking at some of the files linked by Community Tech bot and posting remarks to the relevant talk pages, and I have also locally uploaded a couple of photos, but the nominations are too fast and too numerous for me to keep track of them all, especially as I'm behind with my own very time-consuming "real-life" work. So please help! Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:45, 22 February 2023 (UTC)Reply

how do you discover the photos that are nominated and used on WV? -- andree 17:06, 22 February 2023 (UTC)Reply

There is a bot adding a note on talk pages. You might want to check Special:Contributions/‎Community Tech bot. How to find images we might want to use is harder, but some might show up in the same RFDs.

I am surprised that this seems not to have caused any big discussion on Commons. The thread related to the change in Commons:Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Taiwan#Freedom of panorama had just four participants, although many more were pinged, and it was just one screenful (in my quite narrow browser window).

–LPfi (talk) 18:11, 22 February 2023 (UTC)Reply

The Community Tech bot posts to Wikivoyage link the filenames. If you click "Recent changes" in the menu on the left side of every page, you can do a search for "Community Tech" and see its posts among the changes, then click them. You can then look at the article(s) in question to see whether the photos nominated for deletion are visible (many are just used on Wikidata) or whether there's room for them and you'd like to upload them locally and insert them. Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:19, 22 February 2023 (UTC)Reply

Recent changes shows just so many edits, so the contributions page covers more days. One could (right) click the filenames mentioned in the nominations, to get to see them. That would cover also some that aren't used here because none of us found them yet. –LPfi (talk) 20:21, 22 February 2023 (UTC)Reply

I have recent changes set for 1,000 edits. The part of the recent changes URL that says "limit=" can be limited to any number of edits (I've even limited it to 10,000 at times when I was offline for a while). Similarly, I have "days=" limited to 30. It's easy to search using Ctrl-F on a PC or Command-F on a Mac to find "Community Tech" among the edits. If you're using a cellphone, all bets are off. I don't know how to search within files or Wikivoyage search results effectively on a cellphone. Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:26, 22 February 2023 (UTC)Reply

Your idea of looking at Community Tech bot's contributions is a great one, though. Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:28, 22 February 2023 (UTC)Reply

I thought I once (or multiple times) had reached some quite low limit on how many edits RC would show, which I assumed was due to a table of limited size in the server. Either I remember wrongly or the limit has been significantly increased. Both are possible. –LPfi (talk) 20:37, 22 February 2023 (UTC)Reply

Because of the complicated political situation of Taiwan, Wikivoyage appropriately has a disclaimer box regarding the status of Taiwan. As a travel guide, Wikivoyage need not take a position on the status of the island group. At the same time, the disclaimer box is not important for travellers. It is important for Wikivoyage. Consequently, I don't think it has to be in the lead paragraph. It is completely sufficient for it to be in Understand. The lead paragraph should explain why a reader would want to travel to Taiwan, and not focus on the political status of the island group. The dog2 disagrees, and undid my edit here. As The dog2 and I have a long-standing disagreement about whether Wikivoyage should go in to depth about political and historical issues, I think it would be useful to have other opinions on this. Ground Zero (talk) 01:40, 27 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

On the face of it, your viewpoint on this seems sensible. Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:03, 27 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

I completely agree that we shouldn't go into depth and over explain every single subject. For example, a detailed history of the modern Taiwanese state should be in Wikipedia and not Wikivoyage. I would say, however, that putting a short disclaimer at the head of the page probably helps puts off some partisan edits from happening Andrewssi2 (talk) 04:23, 27 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

The "Sunflower Movement" was a major event in recent Taiwanese political history, and decisively shifted the Taiwanese political landscape in the DPP's favour. It was to Taiwan what the "Umbrella Movement" was to Hong Kong, or what Euromaidan was to Ukraine, so I think the name of the movement should be mentioned (and incidentally, all three happened in the same year). Before the protests, the youth vote in Taiwan was also nearly evenly split between the KMT and the DPP just like with the older generation, but since the protests the youth vote in Taiwan overwhelmingly goes to the DPP.

As for the disclaimer box, we can't and don't go into too much detail, but I think it belongs at the top of the page for precisely the reason Andrewssi2 said. The content of the disclaimer box right now is as detailed as it needs to be in my view. The dog2 (talk) 10:27, 27 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

On the face of it

• Kosovo, Northern Cyprus, Somaliland, Transnistria and Western Sahara have a disclaimer box at the top.
• Abkhazia, Palestine have a disclaimerbox in "Understand".
• South Ossetia has no disclaimer box.

I'm not ardent where we put the disclaimer box, but I would like to have some consistency. As 5 of the 9 states with limited recognition have their boxes on top, I prefer top (also to tread carefully on a very sensitive topic) – but I'm not wedded to any idea so anything consistent works, really. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 11:49, 27 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

I think all these cases the disclaimer box should be in the lede, and South Ossetia should certainly get one as well. The dog2 (talk) 13:03, 27 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

As the center of IT in Taiwan and so a place that attracts numerous business people, I would suggest that Hsinchu replaces Miaoli on the list. While neither city are tourist centers, as stated, Hsinchu is a major business hub, whereas Miaoli has no business credentials and is rarely visited even by Taiwanese. As for the claim that is the center of Hakka culture, there are many places that have a high number of people of Hakka origin, such as Taoyuan, and, in reality, other than certain cuisine variations, there is absolutely nothing to distinguish a city populated by Hakka people and the majority of Taiwanese of Fujian origin. —The preceding comment was added by 119.2.104.58 (talk • contribs)

I don't think business travellers will find the Cities list as useful as tourists, though. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 12:34, 27 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

Maybe not, but Miaoli is not a tourist destination in any sense of the word, and Hsinchu is at least a jumping off place for a number of rural attractions. Personally, I couldn't give a monkey's whether Miaoli or Hsinchu are on the list and am not going to argue the point. However, I will leave the discussion with the point that Hsinchu has far more visitors than Miaoli, though mostly business related, and as the oldest city in Northern Taiwan, has more far historical features. —The preceding comment was added by 119.2.104.58 (talk • contribs)

Yeah, fair enough. The reason I didn't say either yes or no to the proposal was because I know very little about Taiwan. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 12:44, 27 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

The Miaoli dialect is widely considered to be the prestige dialect of Hakka in Taiwan. Taiwanese people have told me that Taoyuan, Hsinchu and Miaoli have the highest concentration of Hakka people, but Miaoli is generally considered the main center of Hakka culture. What I've been trying to do is reflect the diversity of what Taiwan has to offer to tourists with our city lists, which includes reflecting places where you can to to experience the different cultures within Taiwan. The dog2 (talk) 13:01, 27 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

Yes, but Hakka culture is almost identical to the Fujian culture that is dominant in Taiwan, and anyone who visits Miaoli will not notice anything in the town's architecture or customs that distinguishes it from any other town of its size in Taiwan. Yes, some people will speak in Hakka rather than in Mandarin or Taiwanese, but few tourists will be able to distinguish the dialect and, even if they do, is that reason enough to visit a town that while pleasant enough to live has no tourist attractions of any note or commercial or industrial credentials to attract international business people. Even among Taiwanese, the vast majority will have never visited Mioli because there is absolutely no reason to do so unless they have friends or relatives living there. As a city with a high business profile and a relatively large ex-pat community, I still contend that Hsinchu should be on the list of introductory cities, but, as I said, I'm not going to argue the point into ground, and I rest my case and will not comment further in the matter. Thank you. —The preceding comment was added by 119.2.104.58 (talk • contribs)

I don't know where you get the idea that Hakka and Fujian culture are basically the same. Sure, they're all Han Chinese, and maybe Taiwan is different, but if you go to mainland China, the Hakkas in Fujian have distinctive cultural practices from the other Han Chinese in Fujian. And Hakka cuisine is considered to be its own thing, different from the other cuisines of Fujian. But anyway, here's a blog post by a Singaporean tourist who visited Miaoli so people have an idea on what I'm referring to when I say that Hakka cuisine is distinctive. The dog2 (talk) 00:16, 29 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

Please point out three, or even one thing that a traveler would notice in Miaoli than distinguishes from any town of similar size in Taiwan? Yes, as noted in the blog, there are certain dishes that are different from, say, native Taiwanese cuisine, but Taiwan is a mix of people from all regions of China, and so cuisine from all corners of mainland are available there, and, anyway, as Hakka people live throughout Taiwan, the dishes mentioned in the blog is available in Taipei and any large city in Taiwan. It is not restricted to Miaoli, and no-one need travel there to try it. Anyway, as you are convinced that Miaoli is more important to travelers than Hsinchu, please keep it on the list. It's not an important issue, and I'm sure that business people will be able to find Hsinchu without it being in the main page. Thank you. —The preceding comment was added by 119.2.104.58 (talk • contribs)