Retrocession Day (English Wikipedia)

Analysis of information sources in references of the Wikipedia article "Retrocession Day" in English language version.

refsWebsite
Global rank English rank
1st place
1st place
1,398th place
881st place
302nd place
4,819th place
6,266th place
4,133rd place
367th place
243rd place
low place
low place
low place
low place
89th place
147th place
696th place
428th place
3rd place
3rd place
5,366th place
low place
1,045th place
746th place
154th place
2,010th place
2,224th place
1,900th place
505th place
410th place
70th place
63rd place
low place
9,471st place
27th place
51st place
946th place
low place
low place
low place
2nd place
2nd place
26th place
20th place
11th place
8th place

appledaily.com.tw

books.google.com

  • Maurer, Ely. "Legal Problems Regarding Formosa and the Offshore Islands", Department of State Bulletin, Vol. 39, pp. 1005–1011 (December 22, 1958)(transcript of speech on November 20, 1958)("Neither this agreement [of April 28, 1952] nor any other agreement thereafter has purported to transfer the sovereignty of Formosa to [the Republic of] China....The situation is, then, one where the Allied Powers still have to come to some agreement or treaty with respect to the status of Formosa. Any action, therefore, of the Chinese Communist regime to seize Formosa constitutes an attempt to seize by force territory which does not belong to it.").

chinapost.com.tw

  • "Taiwan's retrocession procedurally clear: Ma". The China Post. CNA. 26 October 2010. Archived from the original on 24 September 2015. Retrieved 28 May 2014.
  • Hung, Joe (7 December 2009). "Chen's shadow is getting eclipsed". The China Post. Archived from the original on 13 April 2014. Retrieved 8 December 2009.

cia.gov

foia.cia.gov

  • CIA (1949-03-14). "Probable Developments in Taiwan" (PDF). pp. 1–3. Archived from the original (PDF) on 30 September 2015. Retrieved 8 March 2015. From the legal standpoint, Taiwan is not part of the Republic of China. Pending a Japanese peace treaty, the island remains occupied territory......neither the US, or any other power, has formally recognized the annexation by China of Taiwan

doi.org

ethz.ch

mercury.ethz.ch

fas.org

  • Shirley A. Kan; Wayne M. Morrison (2014-12-11). "U.S.-Taiwan Relationship: Overview of Policy Issues" (PDF). Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service. p. 4. Archived (PDF) from the original on 2015-06-28. The United States has its own "one China" policy (vs. the PRC's "one China" principle) and position on Taiwan's status. Not recognizing the PRC's claim over Taiwan nor Taiwan as a sovereign state, U.S. policy has considered Taiwan's status as unsettled.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)

hartford-hwp.com

jstor.org

justia.com

law.justia.com

loc.gov

lccn.loc.gov

ltn.com.tw

talk.ltn.com.tw

news.ltn.com.tw

mofa.gov.tw

en.mofa.gov.tw

ndl.go.jp

kokkai.ndl.go.jp

  • 参議院会議録情報 第038回国会 予算委員会 第15号. 昭和36年3月15日. p. 19. . 小坂善太郎:「ポツダム宣言には、カイロ宣言の条項は履行せらるべしということが書いてある。そうしてわれわれは降伏文書によって、ポツダム宣言の受諾を宣言したのであります。しかし、これは降伏文書というものは、休戦協定の性格を有するものでありまして、領土的処理を行ない得ない性質のものであるということを申し上げたのであります。」

parliament.uk

api.parliament.uk

peoplenews.tw

semanticscholar.org

api.semanticscholar.org

taipeitimes.com

taiwanbasic.com

web.archive.org

wikipedia.org

en.wikipedia.org

  • 参議院会議録情報 第038回国会 予算委員会 第15号. 昭和36年3月15日. p. 19. . 小坂善太郎:「ポツダム宣言には、カイロ宣言の条項は履行せらるべしということが書いてある。そうしてわれわれは降伏文書によって、ポツダム宣言の受諾を宣言したのであります。しかし、これは降伏文書というものは、休戦協定の性格を有するものでありまして、領土的処理を行ない得ない性質のものであるということを申し上げたのであります。」

zh.wikipedia.org

wikisource.org

en.wikisource.org

  • Joint Chiefs of Staff (1945). General Order No. 1  – via Wikisource. The above indicated commanders are the only representatives of the Allied Powers empowered to accept surrenders and all surrenders of Japanese Forces shall be made only to them or to their representatives.

wisc.edu

digicoll.library.wisc.edu