Template talk:Asia topic

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
edit·history·watch·refresh Stock post message.svg To-do list for Template:Asia topic:


Here are some tasks awaiting attention:


Template-protected edit request on 10 November 2018[edit]

Egypt is in the Asian Architecture section Lrichar (talk) 02:16, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

Not done. See the archives for the answer to this perennial topic. Part of Egypt is in Asia. – Jonesey95 (talk) 08:00, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

Two edit requests[edit]

  1. The template includes China (PRC) but not Taiwan (ROC).
  2. In Aadhaar and National Identity Card (Nepal), this template calls the DAB page National identity cards in China. User:DPL bot is complaining about the WP:INTDABLINK error and rightly so - the DAB page has entries for two different countries and for two different Special Administrative Regions of the PRC. Narky Blert (talk) 10:44, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
Narky Blert,
  1. Wrong. Taiwan is in the second section, "States with limited recognition".
  2. That looks like a problem with the articles, not the template. Created National identity cards in Taiwan as a redir to National Identification Card (Republic of China) and redirected National identity cards in China to Resident Identity Card. Problem sorted. Cabayi (talk) 11:22, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
@Cabayi: You failed to see it through completely. You wiped the information on the DAB page, and left a double redirect behind. Both problems now fixed, and there is now a {{redirect}} hatnote on Resident Identity Card. Narky Blert (talk) 11:35, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
And {{Copied}} placed on both talk pages to fix the c&p move. Cabayi (talk) 12:49, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

Links to a DAB page[edit]

In Communism in Korea, Communism in the Philippines and Communism in Vietnam, this template is calling the DAB page Communism in India. User:DPL bot is complaining about the WP:INTDABLINK errors. Narky Blert (talk) 09:17, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 17 January 2019[edit]

There is a rough consensus against adding Prostitution in Tibet to Template:Asia topic.

Cunard (talk) 23:45, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Prostitution in Tibet (btw Tibet is NOT a sovereign state) should be in this template as well. Tony85poon (talk) 23:11, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit template-protected}} template. Like you said Tony85poon, Tibet is NOT a sovereign state. Cabayi (talk) 08:37, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

Should Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region and Tibet Autonomous Region both be added to the Template:Asia topic? RfC relisted by Cunard (talk) at 01:46, 11 March 2019 (UTC). Tony85poon (talk) 16:00, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

  • Oppose: In addition to not being sovereign states, they are not "states with limited recognition" or "dependencies and other territories", so they don't fit in any of the existing boxes in the template. There are loads of autonomous administrative divisions in the world, and I don't see a case for exception here. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 08:51, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
  • Support There is an interesting parallel with Ukraine and Europe. Template:Europe_topic contains Ukraine. Ukraine, like Tibet, has a history as an independent country, but a portion of it has been subsumed within another political entity. This however doesn't affect its geographical location. Ukraine is still in Europe. Practically, Tibet is a known entity which is located in Asia. Yes, there is presently, like Ukraine, a disagreement about who controls it, but it's still in Asia. I think it should be included because people are going to be wanting to answer the question "Is Tibet in Asia?". Some won't know anything at all about the political situation so won't think to look up China to find the answer. Morgan Leigh | Talk 06:59, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
What does that have to do with any of this? Ukraine is a sovereign country, not an autonomous region, a part of which is occupied by a foreign power. A comparable situation would be that this template includes Syria, even though Israel occupies the Golan. Whether an entity is an autonomous region or a sovereign country part of which is occupied is a totally different thing. Furthermore, for the question "Is Tibet in Asia?" people should read the encyclopedia article Tibet, not look for this template at say, at the bottom of Agriculture in Oman#References
But more importantly, why are we entertaining an RFC that was started by a blocked sock without any prior discussion? – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 15:01, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose They are autonomous regions within a country and they're not currently recognized as independent states by other nations either (Tibet even has the following reference in its article: Tibet, although enjoying independence at certain periods of its history, had never been recognised by any single foreign power as an independent state.). So they don't fit in the first two template boxes. They're also not dependencies nor special administrative regions unlike Hong Kong and Macau which have their own executive, legislative, and judicial branches, so they don't fit into the last box. There are also several other autonomous regions that would need to be added in a new box, but it doesn't seem to be the right addition to this template. — MarkH21 (talk) 18:53, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose I'm not even sure why this is a discussion. Whether you agree with it or not, these are both part of China. Having lived in Asia for 15 years, the arguments presented in support (religious and ethnic diversity, past history as a separate state) could be applied with far greater justification to Thailand (southern provinces), Malaysia (Pennisular v Borneo), Indonesia (Aceh, Bali, Irian Jaya, Moluccas), the Philippines (Mindanao), Myanmar (Kachin, Karen, Karenni, Shan etc etc).Robinvp11 (talk) 10:03, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Template-protected edit request on 8 April 2019[edit]

I wanted to add the Kurdistan region to the States with limited relations.Thenabster126 (talk) 05:24, 8 April 2019 (UTC) Thenabster126 (talk) 05:24, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

So what does it count as? Is it autonomous?Thenabster126 (talk) 13:27, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

If you mean Iraqi Kurdistan, then yes they are autonomous. If you mean Syrian Kurdistan (Rojava) then that is functionally autonomous, but not officially and is not explicitly a Kurdish polity. CMD (talk) 13:34, 8 April 2019 (UTC)