What do they have to do with each other?
Well, this was news to me a few days ago, but the article at [[Ireland]]
is restricted to the topic of the Republic of Ireland, and the article at
[[China]] is restricted to the topic of the PRC. The two articles (in
their current state) raise the issue of whether the names of ancient lands
and civilizations should be annexed to the dominant modern political
incarnations, to the exclusion of other, closely related states or
political entities. But this has nothing to do with *political* debates
over Northern Ireland or Taiwan, as I hope the following remarks will make
clear.
It's bizarre, but the issue developed in two totally different ways on
[[Talk:Ireland]] and on [[Talk:China]]. On the Ireland talk page, Scipius
was the only hold-out for the view that [[Ireland]] should be concerned
only with the Republic of Ireland. On the China talk page, Roadrunner was
apparently the only defender of the view that [[China]] should be about
all of China, not just the PRC.
A comment from Mav (whose judgment and hard work I admire virtually always
:-) ) suddenly turned a light on in my head (i.e., I had a sudden
realization). He said: "English speakers call it 'China' in overwhelming
numbers." I (just now--my China talk page comments are all brand new)
replied by saying the following:
Your pronoun contains the whole problem: English speakers call *what*
China in overwhelming numbers? They certainly use the word "China" in
overwhelming numbers, and it's safe to say that they use the word "China"
to mean "China" in overwhelming numbers. Even the following must also be
conceded: when referring to the vast modern state that rules over the
ancient land known as China, people still use the word "China" (rather
than "People's Republic of China"). But it seems that no one has noticed
that glib pronouncements such as "English speakers call it China" simply
do not entail that that is all that the word "China" means. The following
two statements are converses, and as they are universal affirmative
statements and as I just got done teaching intro logic, I'd like to point
out that they are not logically equivalent:
* Every time someone wants to refer to the PRC is a time they use the word
"China." (Not actually true, of course, but this is very often, even
usually the case.)
* Every time someone uses the word "China" is a time they want to refer to
the PRC. (Outrageously false. It totally depends on the context.
Chinese history isn't the history the PRC, for example.)
End of quote.
I think I understand now why Mav and some others were so seemingly (to me)
peremptory about the issue. It's because they are working on
[[WikiProject Countries]], and they take it to be in they brief to find
the appropriate short form name of every country on the list. I suspect
the people at work on this WikiProject see "People's Republic of China"
and say, quite reasonably, that people call the PRC "China"--that's the
popular name. Similarly for the case of "Republic of Ireland" and
"Ireland. But again, that doesn't mean that "China" always means the PRC,
or that "Ireland" always means the Republic. The PRC and the Republic
have been around for less than 100 years, and China per se and Ireland per
se are ancient and far greater and ultimately more important than the
modern states.
I think the biggest mistake here is failing to pay due attention to the
fact that the articles about nations and political entities and countries
are not limited to the list of names given in the CIA Factbook. In the
context of an encyclopedia, it seems pretty obvious that "China" should be
used to mean China--not just part of it--*all* of China, its whole
history, its many languages, its people (all of them), etc. This,
unfortunately or not, means that the article about the modern state, the
PRC, cannot dominate the page called [[China]]. Similarly, the article
about the modern state, the Republic of Ireland, cannot dominate the page
called [[Ireland]]. China and Ireland as topics are much bigger than
those states.
Larry
--
"We have now sunk to a depth at which the re-statement of the obvious is
the first duty of intelligent men." --George Orwell