| caption = A preparation of plov, the national dish of Uzbekistan
| caption = A preparation of plov, the national dish of Uzbekistan
| alternate_name = Plov, Osh, Palov
| alternate_name = Plov, Osh, Palov
| country =[[Uzbekistan]]<ref>{{Cite web |date=2024-02-22 |title=Plov: Uzbekistan’s rice dish with ‘sexual power’ |url=https://www.bbc.com/travel/article/20240222-plov-uzbekistans-rice-dish-with-sexual-power |access-date=2025-11-15 |website=www.bbc.com |language=en-GB}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Plov {{!}} Traditional Rice Dish From Uzbekistan {{!}} TasteAtlas |url=https://www.tasteatlas.com/plov |access-date=2025-11-15 |website=www.tasteatlas.com}}</ref>
| country =[[Uzbekistan]]{{sfnp|Schultze|2000|pp=65–66}}{{sfnp|Marks|2010|pp=196–200|loc=[https://books.google.com/books?id=gFK_yx7Ps7cC&pg=PT196 “Borscht”]}}
| region = Central Asia
| region = Central Asia
| associated_cuisine = [[Uzbek cuisine]]
| associated_cuisine = [[Uzbek cuisine]]
}}
}}
”’Borscht”’ ({{IPAc-en|lang|pron|audio=en-us-borscht.ogg|ˈ|b|ɔːr|ʃ|t}}) is a [[sour soup]], made with meat [[Stock (food)|stock]], vegetables and seasonings, common in [[Eastern Europe]] and [[Northern Asia]]. In English, the word ”borscht” is most often associated with the soup’s variant of [[Ukraine|Ukrainian]] origin, made with red [[beetroot]]s as one of the main ingredients, which give the dish its distinctive red color. The same name, however, is also used for a wide selection of sour-tasting soups without beetroots, such as [[sorrel]]-based [[Sorrel soup|green borscht]], [[rye]]-based [[Sour rye soup|white borscht]], and [[cabbage]] borscht.
Borscht derives from an ancient soup originally cooked from pickled stems, leaves and [[umbel]]s of [[Heracleum sphondylium|common hogweed]] (”Heracleum sphondylium”), an [[herbaceous plant]] growing in damp meadows, which lent the dish its [[Slavic languages|Slavic]] name. With time, it evolved into a diverse array of tart soups, among which the Ukrainian beet-based red borscht has become the most popular. It is typically made by combining meat or bone [[Stock (food)|stock]] with [[Sautéing|sautéed]] vegetables, which—as well as beetroots—usually include cabbage, carrots, onions, potatoes, and tomatoes. Depending on the recipe, borscht may include meat or fish, or be purely vegetarian; it may be served either hot or cold, and it may range from a hearty one-pot meal to a clear broth or a smooth drink. It is often served with [[Smetana (dairy product)|smetana]] or [[sour cream]], hard-boiled eggs or potatoes, but there exists an ample choice of more involved [[Garnish (food)|garnishes]] and side dishes, such as {{lang|pl|[[uszka]]}} or {{lang|uk|[[pampushky]]}}, that can be served with the soup.
Its popularity has spread throughout [[Eastern Europe]] and—by way of migration away from the [[Russian Empire]]—to other continents. In [[North America]], borscht is often linked with either Jews or [[Ethnic Mennonite|Mennonites]], the groups who first brought it there from [[Europe]]. Several ethnic groups claim borscht, in its various local implementations, as their own [[national dish]] consumed as part of ritual meals within [[Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church|Greek Catholic]], [[Latin Church|Roman Catholic]], and Jewish religious traditions.
Central Asian rice dish
 A preparation of plov, the national dish of Uzbekistan |
|
| Alternative names | Plov, Osh, Palov |
|---|---|
| Type | Rice dish |
| Place of origin | Uzbekistan[1][2] |
| Region or state | Central Asia |
| Associated cuisine | Uzbek cuisine |
| Serving temperature | Hot |
| Main ingredients | Rice, lamb or beef, carrots, onions |
| Ingredients generally used | Spices (cumin, coriander), garlic, oil |
| Variations | Fergana plov, Samarkand plov, Tashkent plov |
| Similar dishes | Pilaf, Biryani, Kabuli palaw |
.
New draft – sprained wrist
Medical condition
A sprained wrist (twisted wrist, pulled wrist, wrist strain, etc.) is an injury where one or more ligaments in the wrist are stretched or torn. It is a common sports injury, occuring in activities like basketball, skating, skateboarding, gymnastics, and baseball, but can affect anyone who experiences trauma to their wrist. Typical causes include falling down with an outstretched hand on hard surfaces and also repetitive twisting and overuse of the wrist.[3][4][5]
…
WP:ANI (Administrators’ Noticeboard/Incidents)
I don’t think their reverts are honest if their goal seems to be discouraging me from editing – they revert almost anything I do and then refuse to discuss it on the talk page. Whenever I ask what the issue is, they usually vaguely repeat that “sources don’t support” the edit, even tho that’s demonstrably untrue. The problem is that most people don’t take the minimal time to read the actual sources, and they take such statements at face value. This allow the reverting editor make their reverts appear legit when they’re not. It wasn’t until another editor, Aaron, took the minimum time to independently check sources and confirmed they do support the content then the other editor stopped responding. Afterward, they vaguely shifted to mentioning there was a “wording” issue but never clarified or continued with the discussion. I believe they’re fully aware that their initial claims were false or discredited, but they rely on others not verifying the sources. In my view, their real motive is simply WP:IDONTLIKEIT, while they misuse policy language to make it seem like their reverts are justified.
- I have been busy in the past weeks on something that required my full focus. But I am almost free now to focus on this after my main burdens are done with.
Overview of territorial disputes involving Republic of China
This article is about territorial disputes of the Republic of China (ROC). A territorial dispute is a disagreement over the possession or control of land between two or more political entities. Many of Republic of China’s territorial disputes result from the historical consequences of colonialism in Asia and the lack of clear historical boundary demarcations. Many of these disputes are almost identical to those that the People’s Republic of China (PRC), has with other countries. Therefore, many of the subsequent resolved disputes made by the PRC after 1949 with other governments may not be recognized by the ROC.[6]
The Republic of China (ROC) Constitution includes all of mainland China as part of its claimed territory, and the ROC has historically claimed sovereignty over both Taiwan and the mainland in opposition to the People’s Republic of China (PRC).[7][8] Additionally, the ROC maintains claims over several disputed territories, including the Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands (disputed with Japan), the Spratly Islands (where it currently controls Taiping/Itu Aba Island), and the Paracel Islands (disputed with Vietnam). These claims are largely identical to those of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) and reflect the ROC’s constitutional and legal assertions of sovereignty beyond the areas it currently controls.
Subsection –
(Idea – may need also a necessary section that explains why ROC is unable to defend terrority claims – as there cannot be two Chinas hence Phillipines invited only PRC to the arbitration and not ROC – despite having identical claims on South seas – ROC isn’t deemed a legal state of China by Phillipines and UN courts don’t recognise ROC.)
Background (or Issues?)
[edit]
The Republic of China (ROC), originally the government of modern China established in 1912, relocated to Taiwan after losing the Chinese Civil War to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) in 1949. Since then, both the ROC and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) have claimed to represent “one China,” with neither accepting a two-state solution. The ROC continues to constitutionally claim to be the legitimate government of China, including both the mainland and Taiwan, and does not recognize the PRC as its de jure successor. This conflicts with the PRC’s claims, which consider both the mainland and Taiwan as part of “their” China.
The question of Taiwan (ROC) formally asserting independence is legally significant. The Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law (MPEPIL) notes that, based on “effectiveness,” Taiwan appears to meet the criteria for statehood. However, because it has not “unequivocally asserted a separate legal status as a state,” it cannot be deemed a state under international law. Due to its status as a non-state political entity, Taiwan’s recognition in municipal courts is limited.[9]
Prior to 1971, the ROC represented China in international courts and could dispute other claimants over territory. Since losing its United Nations seat, and with the PRC largely recognized as the sole government of China by most countries, Taiwan has been limited in defending its territorial claims in many municipal and international courts. For example, in the South China Sea arbitration case in 2016, as the Philippines doesn’t recognise ROC as the legal representative of China, Taiwan was not invited to participate while the PRC was invited to represent “China” instead, despite both the ROC and PRC having largely the same territorial claims in the South China sea.
https://opil.ouplaw.com/display/10.1093/law:epil/9780199231690/law-9780199231690-e1362
Despite this, both the PRC and ROC claims on the Spratly and Senkaku Islands issue, overlap and agree they belong to “China”. Outside these islands however, the PRC and ROC have a De Jure sovereignty dispute over who is the government of China which includes both the mainland and Taiwan island.
Chinese mainland and Taiwan/Dispute with PRC
[edit]
There is a territorial dispute between the People’s Republic of China (PRC) and the Republic of China (ROC), as both governments claim the mainland and Taiwan as being integral parts of “their” China.
The ROC, was originally the government of modern China and established on the mainland in 1912. It lost control of the mainland and fled to Taiwan after their defeat in the Chinese Civil War to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) in 1949. Following this, the CCP established the PRC while the ROC’s control has since been limited to Taiwan and nearby islands. Since then, both the ROC and PRC have claimed to represent one China with neither accepting a two-state solution. The PRC’s claim is based on the basis of state succession, under which it regards itself as the legitimate successor to the pre-1949 ROC and therefore denies the the authority of the ROC as a legal government of China, under its “one China principle”. Conversely, the ROC has never recognized the PRC as its De Jure successor, and continued to claim all of China and have held the “China” seat in the UN until 1971, when it lost that seat to the PRC, and was expelled from the UN.
In the 1990s, the ROC amended its Constitution and included recognition of the PRC as the de facto governing authority of the mainland. While this strengthened Taiwan’s practical separation from the mainland, the Constitution still regards the mainland as part of the same state rather than as foreign territory. There have been discussions on whether to legally separate from the mainland and declare formal independence but to do so, it first requires high procedural standards, including a supermajority vote (75%) in the Legislative Yuan and a referendum.
The ROC have not declared formal independence, partly out of fear it may spark war with the PRC who would regard it as separatism. In a 2025 survey by My Formosa, 52.2% of Taiwanese questioned, have shown to be unwilling to go to war “to protect Taiwan’s status and prevent reunification with the Chinese mainland”, while 40.8% were willing. Due to the current legal framework, the ROC constitution has not been amended to recognise formal independence but officially consider both the mainland and Taiwan as part of “their” China, and consequently creates a de jure sovereignty dispute with the PRC who also claims the same territories.
Paracel Islands/Historic Dispute with France and currently with Vietnam
[edit]
- Vietnam was once under French control, so France acted on behalf of Vietnamese sovereignty claims. The French colonial authorities claimed sovereignty over the Paracels.
- After World War II, the ROC government claimed the South China Sea archipelagos including the Paracels.
- In 2009, Taiwan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs reaffirmed the ROC had “unquestionable” sovereignty over the Paracel and other archipelagos.
Taiwan’s de jure status
Proposed text #1;
While Taiwan today functions as a de facto independent entity, it is not regarded as a sovereign state under international law. The Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law (Ahl, 2020) notes that Taiwan meets many objective criteria of statehood, including a permanent population, defined territory, an effective government, and the capacity to enter into relations. However, Taiwan has not unequivocally asserted a legal claim to independence, which is decisive for recognition as a de jure state. Taiwan’s Constitution continues to claim all of China, and most countries recognize the PRC as the legitimate government while conducting relations with Taiwan through unofficial or semi-official channels. (Saul, 2022).
Proposed text #2;
Both the People’s Republic of China (PRC) and the Republic of China (ROC) have historically claimed that Taiwan is part of “China.” The PRC continues to uphold the “one China” principle, despite never having governed Taiwan, while the ROC formally claims all of China under its Constitution, even after losing control of the mainland in 1949 and being expelled from the United Nations in 1971.
Since the 1990s, ROC have pragmatically acknowledged that the mainland is governed by the People’s Republic of China (PRC). Taiwan has not formally declared itself a new, legally independent state, partly to avoid provoking a military response. Under international law, an entity cannot be considered an independent state if it does not itself assert a separate legal status; Taiwan has not made such a claim.
There is ongoing debate within the ROC about whether to pursue formal (de jure) independence or unify with the PRC. Opinion polls indicate that the majority of the population favors maintaining the current status quo.
Proposed Text #3;
Taiwan has been under Chinese administration since the Qing dynasty, except for the 50 years of Japanese colonial rule (1895–1945). Following Japan’s surrender in World War II, the Republic of China (ROC) assumed administrative control of Taiwan. The ROC, established after the fall of the Qing dynasty, was internationally recognized as the government of China until 1949, when the People’s Republic of China (PRC) was founded. In 1971, the PRC replaced the ROC as the recognized government of China in the United Nations and most international organizations.
The PRC claims sovereignty over Taiwan as the successor state to the ROC, while the ROC constitution continues to claim sovereignty over all of China, including the mainland. As the ROC has not formally declared independence or asserted a separate legal status distinct from “China”, Taiwan is not considered de jure independent under international law, despite functioning as a de facto self-governing state.
1. Max Planck Encyclopaedia of Public International Law (Ahl, 2020) – Confirms that Taiwan cannot be considered a sovereign state under international law without asserting statehood.
2. The Conversation (Saul, 2022)
– Confirms ROC formally claims all of China under its Constitution, even after losing control of the mainland in 1949 and being expelled from the United Nations in 1971.
Proposed new subheading in wikitext #1;
Taiwanese independence
[edit]
Legal arguments establishing that Taiwan is not de jure independent or sovereign
[edit]
Taiwan was administered by Qing dynasty from 1683 until it was ceded to Japan in 1895, remaining under Japanese rule for next fifty years. Following Japan’s surrender in World War II, the Republic of China (ROC) assumed administrative control of Taiwan. The ROC, established after the fall of the Qing dynasty, was internationally recognized as the government of China until 1949, when the People’s Republic of China (PRC) was founded. In 1971, the PRC replaced the ROC as the recognized government of China in the United Nations and most international organizations.
Both the PRC and the ROC have historically maintained that Taiwan is part of “China”. The PRC claims sovereignty over Taiwan as the successor state to the ROC, while the ROC constitution continues to claim sovereignty over all of China, including the mainland. Although Taiwan functions as a de facto self-governing state, it has not formally declared independence or asserted a separate legal identity distinct from “China”. Under international law, the absence of a clear and unequivocal declaration of independence is decisive in determining de jure statehood.
The Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law (Ahl, 2020; Oxford University Press) notes that Taiwan satisfies several objective criteria for statehood ; – such as a permanent population, defined territory, and effective government, but has not met the subjective requirement of asserting a legal claim to independence. Likewise, most states recognize the PRC as the legit government of China and maintain only unofficial relations with Taiwan. As a result, Taiwan is not regarded as de jure independent nor as a state under international law, even though it operates as a de facto self governing polity.
