![]() | This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Well, 2017 is ending. No updates for the whole year? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.83.103.209 ( talk) 03:36, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Timeline of the South China Sea dispute. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 07:06, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Timeline of the South China Sea dispute. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 05:41, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
So easy to take off Hague ruling.. If the regular WIKIPEDIA works around here, eplease reinsert these periodicals as footnote.. YSay is just new and didn't know much what he is to say in public.. He got booed all over the country then be had a moment of awakening.. Read his retraction... CHINA
http://www.rappler.com/nation/144089-philippines-black-sand-china-artificial-islands-dfa
http://www.rappler.com/newsbreak/iq/139252-cheat-sheet-compilation-philippines-china-case-hague
http://www.rappler.com/nation/140235-philippines-says-imminent-talks-over-china-sea-row-unlikely
http://www.rappler.com/nation/138305-dfa-secretary-yasay-philippines-afraid-china
http://www.rappler.com/newsbreak/iq/139252-cheat-sheet-compilation-philippines-china-case-hague
http://globalnation.inquirer.net/34369/scarborough-belongs-to-ph-old-maps-show
http://m.inquirer.net/globalnation/99689
http://www.rappler.com/nation/144089-philippines-black-sand-china-artificial-islands-dfa
http://www.rappler.com/newsbreak/iq/139252-cheat-sheet-compilation-philippines-china-case-hague
http://www.rappler.com/nation/140235-philippines-says-imminent-talks-over-china-sea-row-unlikely
http://www.rappler.com/nation/138305-dfa-secretary-yasay-philippines-afraid-china
http://www.rappler.com/newsbreak/iq/139252-cheat-sheet-compilation-philippines-china-case-hague
http://globalnation.inquirer.net/34369/scarborough-belongs-to-ph-old-maps-show
http://m.inquirer.net/globalnation/99689
Bebe0114 ( talk) 17:50, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 14:37, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
The article has claimed all the islands belongs to Vietnam as if that's a fact. But multiple countries including Taiwan, Indonesia, Philippines and China always disagreed. Where is the source that claims those islands officially belong to Vietnam and nobody else? It seems biased to take a dispute and make a bold unilateral claim like this. You can say it's associated but you can't claim it "belongs" to Vietnam. Nobody can actually say it belongs to any country as the dispute was never once firmly resolved for the past plus centuries. I have recently changed the wording from "belonging" into "associated by France". Because you can neutrally say those islands are "associated" with various entities and regions including a realm in Vietnam, but it's not neutral to claim it belongs to Vietnam, as there's no treaty or agreement that resolved this multi party dispute which is still ongoing. 49.186.227.219 ( talk) 00:38, 11 March 2024 (UTC)