Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of diplomatic missions of Taiwan/archive1

< Wikipedia:Featured list candidates
The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by PresN via FACBot (talk) 00:26, 31 December 2020 (UTC) [1].[reply]

List of diplomatic missions of Taiwan

edit

List of diplomatic missions of Taiwan (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): MSG17 (talk) 16:32, 25 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Taiwan, or the Republic of China, is a de-facto state in East Asia which occupies an odd position in international affairs due to its limited recognition. This has been reflected in the country's diplomacy, with a small network of official diplomatic missions complemented by an unusually large amount of unofficial "representative offices". This article aims not only to provide a full list of all these missions, their status and any other relevant information about them, but also to inform readers about the political context behind them.

After considerable work adding references and developing a lead, as well as a completed peer review to discuss this list being the first of it's kind (as far as I know) to be a FLC, I believe it is ready to be evaluated. Thank you all in advance for your comments and reviews! MSG17 (talk) 16:32, 25 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Reywas92
  • I don't see any yellow in the top map, so it shouldn't be in the key.
    • Commented out
  • The map only has Macedonia in purple, but there are lots of other countries which formerly had official missions. It seems that's because the rest are served by another one now, but that should be clearer here.
    • Added more detail. There are actually a few other countries (Panama, El Salvador and Sao Tome and Principe) that are purple, Macedonia is just the most obvious one.
  • You should state that the unofficial offices go by Economic and Cultural Representative Office rather than hiding it in a piped link.
    • Not all offices use the same nomenclature. As noted in the article, some offices forego one or two of these adjectives Although I could comb through all the offices' names and see which one most of them use, I think it would be easier to keep "representative offices" as a simple, all-encompassing term.
  • The two sentences about Hong Kong and Macau could be combined to for conciseness, also because it unnecessarily duplicates "In Macau".
    • Combined, also used the opportunity to eliminate more redundancies
  • Most of the 'Also serves' makes sense, but I really want to know why the one in the Czech Republic also serves Cape Verde. Idk if you know if how it'd fit in the list (since there's no article on the office) but that's interesting.
    • Upon further research and link-digging, it looks like the Bureau of Consular Affairs mistakenly listed Cape Verde as being under the office in Prague instead of Portugal on the main page. Fixed
  • Since there's an office in Guam, do you know why Palau also serves Guam?
    • Mistake on my part. Fixed
  • Taipei Economic and Cultural Representative Office is already linked and should not be in the see also
    • Removed
That's all I have for now. Thanks for the unique topic! Reywas92Talk 22:33, 25 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for reviewing this! I have now responded to all of your comments. MSG17 (talk) 01:12, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Seems good to me! Reywas92Talk 19:25, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Comments from Sdkb

edit
  • The coloring in the map at top is fairly subtle; could we change the scheme to make it easier to read? {{u|Sdkb}} talk 21:25, 28 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Yeah, trying to find a coloring scheme for the map has been rough. I added orange and green to make it easier and also to make sure some countries aren't blending in.
  • I'm not sure that the "region" column should be linked, per MOS:OVERLINK. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 21:25, 28 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Unlinked
  • The date when each office opened might be useful. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 21:25, 28 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Sounds good to me. I started the work to add them. I'll reply again when this is done. With the talk about date related table columns, and considering that Taiwan/the ROC has a lot of former diplomatic missions, including in countries where it currently has them today (usually because of former official offices closing down and getting replaced after that country stops recognizing the ROC), it might even be better to split that into a separate page. What do you think?
      • A separate page might be a bit much. I think the date at which an official embassy got converted to a representative office might be useful, but I'm also not sure where to put it (notes column? a new column?) so I'm okay leaving it out and relegating it to the e.g. Belize–Taiwan relations pages. Speaking of which, it occurs to me that that might be a better link in the first column than just Belize. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 02:59, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
        • @Sdkb: Yeah, those sounds like good ideas. I started adding dates for the opening of offices and I will get going on changing the country links. For dates, I think I will stick with opening of the most recent office - not date a predecessor embassy or consulate was founded (due to relations gaps), nor date of last renaming.
  • Because "DFE" looks pretty similar to "DFC", it's hard to scan at a glance. Have you considered maybe just writing out e.g. "Representative mission; de-facto consulate" instead of putting that info in a footnote? {{u|Sdkb}} talk 21:25, 28 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • That would be too long for the column and thus would create unnecessary wraparounds. Would another column with the mission's status (de-jure or de-facto) work instead or is that too many columns? Or would it be better to designate unofficial ones with a footnote and list them all as embassies or consulates (basically reversing the info in the column and in the footnote)?
      • We're running fairly tight on column space. Reducing the width of the country column would help (only Saint Vincent would end up wrapping, which is a fair tradeoff), but beyond that I'm not sure. I think listing them as embassies or consulates with the footnotes could potentially work well, as de-jure vs. de-facto is already indicated by the coloring (except for Hong Kong/Macau?). {{u|Sdkb}} talk 02:59, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
        • @Sdkb: Because the status of diplomatic relations is already marked with a color and a symbol, I decided to just write "de facto" in parentheses next to its status and get rid of the footnotes and repeating "representative mission" for every entry. Because of Hong Kong and Macau's autonomy, I thought that many of the consulates were de-facto embassies, but after doing further research they are designated as consulates (although some, such as the US one, have their officers report directly to their foreign affairs department instead of the embassy in Beijing).
  • I think the gallery should have wikilinks to the offices that have pages. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 21:25, 28 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Linked
  • At 92 characters, the short description is more than twice as long as the target 40 characters, and mainly just repeats the title, which doesn't help with the disambiguatory purpose short descriptions are supposed to serve. I've seen many list pages just use "Wikipedia list article", which would probably be fine. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 21:25, 28 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Modified

Overall, this list looks quite close to being ready for FL status, and I look forward to supporting once the above issues are addressed. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 21:25, 28 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Sdkb:: Thanks for the comments. I have replied to all of them and would like your feedback. Also pinging @Reywas92: in case if they didn't see my comments. MSG17 (talk) 02:37, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Replied! {{u|Sdkb}} talk 02:59, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

Support from Aza24

edit

Support based on my read-through and comments at peer review. Aza24 (talk) 04:32, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Source review - Pass

edit

Will do soon. Aza24 (talk) 04:32, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Orbis (journal) has a link
    • Linked
  • ref 6 and 7 missing dates
    • Fixed
  • ref 10 seems to just go to the home page?
    • Changed ref to better one
  • ref 52 missing authors (there's two of them btw)
    • Fixed
  • ref 72 shouldn't be in all caps, convert it to title case (here's a converter to help)
    • Fixed
  • date for ref 73?
    • Added
  • ref 83 missing date
    • Added
  • Wei needs an identifier of somekind, worldcat has an OCLC
    • Added
  • Why does Brodsggard say "p. 290" in the biblio but uses other pages? Assuming this should be removed
    • Fixed, also modified link
  • location for the "Nordic Institute of Asian Studies" to match the other locations in the biblio?
    • Added
  • You may want to link publishers that have links in the biblio (e.g. Columbia University Press) since you do so in the references section.
    • Linked
  • Formatting is good otherwise
  • Found no reliabillity issues. Aza24 (talk) 08:31, 19 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support from Ab207

edit
  • Active missions also can be brought under a subheading, for easy navigation.
    • Done
  • Lausanne, a relatively unknown city is not blue linked.
    • Already blue linked in the former missions section. Do I have to link all occurrences of Lausanne?
      • Since that occurrence is earlier, I just linked it. Never mind
  • Instead of hover title, I feel that using a different colour code would be more convenient to the readers. As the */** is are just 1-2 characters, the area to hover is very minimal.
    • These rows are already shaded red. Besides, the hover-over symbols are also needed to account for colorblindness and people using screenreaders.
That's all from me. Good work overall! -- Ab207 (talk) 07:44, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Ab207: Thanks for looking at the page after I expanded the content more and made some changes to account for that. I have replied to your comments. MSG17 (talk) 00:30, 28 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Closing, promoted. --PresN 01:53, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through.
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates/List_of_diplomatic_missions_of_Taiwan/archive1&oldid=997325975"