Talk:Kaohsiung

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Name origin[edit]

The city grew up from a small village called in the 17th century Dagou (打狗), which was the name of a local tribe or "bamboo forest" in the local tribe's language.

The village was certainly not called "Dagou", which is Mandarin. The Southern Min pronounciation is Táⁿ-káu, which sounded like "Taka-o" to the Japanese, who then wrote it as 高 (taka-) 雄 (o).

i.e. {Austronesian word that sounded like Takao} -> written as 打狗 in Southern Min -> re-written as 高雄 in Japanese -> 高雄 pronounced Ko-hiông in Taiwanese/Kao-hsiung in Mandarin

A-giau 04:32, 11 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I don't see the point here. The village was originally named in the local language that lacks a common romanization scheme, and sinosized into "Dagou". Since both "Dagou" and "Táⁿ-káu" are both transliterations into other language (Mandarin and Souther Min respectively), I don't see why Southern Min should be prefered over Mandarin, which has been the official language for all the governments that has ruled Kaohsiung. Uly 18:16, 11 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Mandarin might have been the official language during the Ching dynasty and the ROC era but Southern Min was the language generally spoken by most of the early immigrants. I don't think it's unreasonable to use the Southern Min pronounciation under that context. Consider 九龍 in Hong Kong which is pronounced using the Cantonese pronounciation "Kowloon" rather the Mandarin "Jiǔlóng". -Loren 21:56, 11 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I see what you're saying. It does make a good case for using Southern Min, but I'm still not convinced that it should be used in exclusion to the Mandarin transliteration. I suppose I can live with the current version. The situation is different from Hong Kong, however, since the British government did adopted many of the Cantonese transliteration as official names. Uly 15:43, 12 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

World's Largest Container Ports[edit]

An anonymous editor recently removed the statement that Kaohsiung was the world's third-largest container port, noting that the third-largest is actually Pusan. I thought I would add a reference. According to [1], the largest container ports in 2002, in order, are: Hong Kong, Singapore, Pusan, Shanghai, Kaohsiung, and Shenzhen. [2] asserts that Shanghai and Shenzhen are third- and fourth- largest ports as of 2003.

But the order of top ports changes drastically dpending on whether one is ranking their traffic by tonnage or by container traffic volume. According to a data file available from the American Association of Port Authorities, the top six by volume are as noted above, but the top six by gross tonnage are Singapore, Rotterdam, Shanghai, South Louisiana, Hong Kong, and Houston. Ranked by tonnage, Kaohsiung was no higher than 10th. Note that South Louisiana ranks very high by tonnage but not by container volume because it handles a lot of bulk cargo.

I hope this information is helpful to someone. -- Dominus 14:45, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Sister cities[edit]

Just in case you were wondering about a reference to my addition: [3]--Zereshk 23:40, 5 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Photo[edit]

I don't think this is a good photo. It looks like it was taken inside a car, so it's kind of blurry.--Jerrypp772000 23:08, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Opening date of Metro[edit]

There is a discrepency is the opening date of the metro (2006 or 2007). From what I know, the line is not yet open... however I'm not sure. Can someone clarify? --the MOLIU gecko 14:35, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's open, but only the Red Line is. Proof here from someone who took pictures: http://www.flickr.com/photos/hao520/sets/72157594361519405/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.32.146.95 (talk) 18:56, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Compared with the lengths of the entries of English and Chinese of five Special municipalities of Taiwan[edit]

The lengths of the entries of Chinese :

The lengths of the entries of English :

The length of the entry of Chinese of Kaohsiung City is almost reach to 100,000 bytes, but the length of the entry of English of Kaohsiung City is only has （105,446 bytes）,It is need to be added.--Jackac (talk) 23:29, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Good observation, Jackac. Could you add or translate any sections you think are relevant to the English entries? Thanks, cmɢʟee☺τaʟκ 00:06, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed that holds true for many of the articles on locations in China, be it the mainland, the two SARs, or Taiwan. To me, translation is the easiest method of expansion, as you don't always have to find materials online, which massively consumes time. —HXL's Roundtable and Record 00:21, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Kaohsiung City seal new.svg Nominated for speedy Deletion[edit]

An image used in this article, File:Kaohsiung City seal new.svg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: Wikipedia files with no non-free use rationale as of 21 November 2011

What should I do?

Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used.
  • If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 15:02, 21 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request on 22 July 2012[edit]

I would like to upload a panorama picture of Kaohsiung, taken by me Kaoshiung panorama.jpg|1440px|view of Kaohshiung from the light house en Cijin Island Rubendene (talk) 00:03, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. Great addition to this article. GotR Talk 00:27, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection[edit]

Semi-protected the article for a few days to hopefully bring an end to the slow-moving edit war over whether the infobox and lead should mention ROC or just Taiwan. The protection is not an endorsement of the current version - it was just the most recent one when the protection was applied.

I have no view on which option is preferable. But I suggest all those involved bring the discussion here and seek consensus, rather than endlessly reverting each other. Euryalus (talk) 07:33, 23 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved. Xoloz (talk) 21:16, 6 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


– All these articles are about official cities or counties which are named with the City/Country word. Therefore, it is more appropriate to use the correct names. This is especially true for Kaohsiung City, Tainan City and Taichung City, which are large areas that include large portions of rural areas. They are quite different from just Kaohsiung or Tainan, which people use to refer to the downtown areas. Also, Taipei is usually referred to the city that includes portions or all of New Taipei City. Szqecs (talk) 20:52, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


This is not necessary. people do not say Taipei City, they say Taipei only. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.140.53.10 (talk) 23:49, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Actually people do. Just as people call New York City just New York as well. It may be common but not precise, and precision matters. --Szqecs (talk) 09:23, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support - except for Taipei, which never uses a "city" name status. ApprenticeFan work 01:57, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral - But oppose the move of Taipei. -- [[ axg // ✉ ]] 23:24, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose tentatively per WP:NC-ZH#Place names. OP has no sources to establish common usage, so this move request, is unnecessary, and like most others, a waste of time. GotR Talk 23:44, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Mild oppose as proposed - this seems like an important thing? What happens to the base titles? I'm confused. Red Slash 21:23, 1 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. This is a solution looking for a problem. There is no ambiguity in most of these cases and these cities are not typically appended with "City" in English. And, as User:Red Slash wonders, what will happen to the base titles? Will there be no article or a new article about, say, Matsu Islands? —  AjaxSmack  07:39, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Unnecessary and contrary to common usage. Kanguole 09:30, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, not what these places are commonly called, no reason to disambiguate. —Kusma (t·c) 16:40, 6 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Names are well known as they stand. A move would go against WP:CONCISE. ► Philg88 ◄ talk 17:33, 6 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Kaohsiung. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 11:11, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Kaohsiung. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:05, 2 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Kaohsiung. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:00, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Photos unexplained[edit]

The montage of photos from locations in the city currently has no explanations. Can anyone add labels for what these pictures are, preferably with links to those locations' Wikipedia pages? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.74.122.103 (talk) 09:58, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Updating lead to re-include Kaohsiung's population & rank[edit]

Since there was some opposition to mentioning population rank over at Taichung (see discussion), I thought I'd run this by here first.

There was a considerable amount of recent news coverage about Taichung's population exceeding that of Kaohsiung's, pushing Kaohsiung's rank to 3rd in Taiwan. [4] [5] [6] [7] These reports cite newly-released figures from the Ministry of the Interior 內政部 (MOI). [8] As far as I know, no sources or authorities have refuted the MOI figures. I think it would be helpful to include mention of Kaohiung's population (2.77 million) and rank (3rd) in the lead, as a summary of demographic info and as is standard with other 2nd (e.g. Yokohama, Busan) and 3rd (e.g. Osaka, Incheon) most populous cities in other countries. Thoughts? Multivariable (talk) 00:26, 14 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

On second thought, it might be better to wait until the Taichung dispute is resolved first before making changes here. Multivariable (talk) 00:46, 14 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Apparently, Kaohsiung's population and rank were already in the article and were only recently removed [9] for unspecified reasons. Seems like adding that info back is pretty straightforward then. If anyone has any comments, feel free to join us over on the Taichung discussion page. Thanks! Multivariable (talk) 23:00, 18 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Szqecs: Please do not try to remove the population rank from the lead without discussing here first. Phlar (talk) 13:02, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Kaohsiung. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:54, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:38, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Kaohsiung&oldid=1212067026"