Talk:Kaohsiung Incident

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Kaohsiung Incident 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

A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on December 10, 2010, December 10, 2015, December 10, 2017, December 10, 2019, and December 10, 2021.

Politics Low‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics 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.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Taiwan High‑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
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Page move

This page should not be moved to "Formosa Incident" because "Kaohsiung Incident" is the most common name in English. According to google [1], "Kaohsiung Incident" gets 14,800 results while "Formosa Incident" only gets 737. --Ji ang 20:47, 7 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

For the sake of objectivity based on the number of hits, perhaps the article should be left as it is. I however am under the impression that this translation is misrepresentative with respect to the original language, as the phrase 美麗島事件 is used far more often in Taiwan, both in my experience and according to Google. In fact, the Chinese Wikipedia article [2] uses 美麗島事件 as the main entry, and the phrase is best translated as "Formosa Incident". It is curious there is such an apparent discrepancy in usage between English and Mandarin. There also appears to be a lack of consistency in the translations by government branches in Taiwan, as some elect to use the English word "Kaohsiung" [3] while others use "Formosa" [4]. One potential issue with using "Kaohsiung" is that it emphasizes the city, whereas the word "Formosa" would emphasize Taiwan, and the incident is generally agreed to have significantly impacted the entire island on many levels. What does everyone think? Shawnc 22:16, 7 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I think the current policy clearly favors "Kaohsiung Incident" because it is the most common name in English. The fact that "Kaohsiung Incident" is still used in Chinese (despite being much less common than "Formosa Incident") suggests that the name is still accepted. Whether we want to emphasize it as an island-wide even or a local event is up to POV. It is really not up to us to decide there. When there is a dispute like this one, with both forms showing up, I think google is objective way to resolve it. --Ji ang 01:39, 8 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Let's use "Kaohsiung Incident" as the title for the English Wikipedia but add a remark in the article regarding the usage in the two languages for improved clarity. Shawnc 10:54, 8 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. --Ji ang 10:56, 8 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Misinterpretation

Paragraph 5 might be misinterpreted if it immediately follows paragraph 4. Currently, it might read as though the politicians in paragraph 5 were accused of the murder in paragraph 4. It might be only me that got confused, but I had to read it again to figure out the meaning. I added in "Kaohsiung Incident" to clarify. If there's a problem, please feel free to removed it if necessary. ^_^ Jumping cheese ^Contact 11:36, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

POV

Anything that relates to DPP-KMT relations will be controversial; this article has no reliable sources except Google and "I" and "we" statements. Urgently needs attention. Seektruthfromfacts 08:19, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

artemis268

I did what I could to edit this page to remove mistakes and violations of neutrality, and also make it flow much more better than before. Hope it's okay! 16 September 2007 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Artemis268 (talk • contribs) 07:50, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Confused by the chronology

The date of the Kaohsiung incident is given as December 10 1979, yet the Background section describes what I presume is a catalyst event - that occurs 15 days later, and leads to another event months earlier:

December 25, 1979 Huang Hsin-chieh recommended during a press conference the creation of a group to promote "democratic activities" consisting of Hsu Hsin-liang (許信良), Chang Chun-hung (張俊宏), Yao Chia-wen (姚嘉文), Lin Yi-hsiung (林義雄), and Shih Ming-teh (施明德). On August 16, 1979, the 1st edition was published...

Another problem: when I went to references for clarification, I saw only dead links, so this section needs sources!

Zahzuhzaz (talk) 08:57, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

References 1 and 16 are the same

References 1 and 16 are the same and Reference 12 should look like that: International Committee for Human Rights in Taiwan (1984). Taiwanese opposition leaders on hunger strike. Taiwan Communique http://www.taiwandc.org/twcom/tc15-int.pdf

84.63.255.34 (talk) 23:32, 10 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]