As many as 20 aircraft from China either crossed the median line of the Taiwan Strait or breached the island country’s air defense identification zone.
A "median line" exists within the Taiwan ADIZ, an unofficial demarcation between People's Republic of China (China) and the Republic of China (Taiwan) airspace. The Taiwan ADIZ includes a large portion of the Chinese mainland.
Although the ADIZ covers parts of China's Fujian and Zhejiang provinces in its northwestern part, PLA flights in those areas are not reported as incursions unless they flew within the 12-mile territory limit or median line between the outer islands controlled by ROC forces and mainland China.
Here's the source on Taiwanese ADIZ, as well as what parts of Taiwanese ADIZ are accepted by the US (and thus, what the US will report on): https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://digital-commons.usnwc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi%3Farticle%3D2939%26context%3Dils&ved=2ahUKEwiGoKKS3PqAAxXDD0QIHYVzDg0QFnoECBAQAQ&usg=AOvVaw0FmfTWzQ9XNfwfTL-qwUs5
Notably, Taiwan's ADIZ that crosses over mainland China is not recognized by the US, BUT, US recognition of Taiwan's ADIZ is neither at the median line nor at Taiwan's 12-mile territory limit. This is clearly visible in the middle and northwestern corners of where the US recognizes Taiwan's ADIZ, which, as you will note, are not at the median point between the two bodies.
Wikipedia is a source unless you're writing an academic paper or for Wikipedia. It's far more accurate than most news sites and for the most part immune to political bias, as the only way it can be biased is to exclude things but if you do then someone else will just add them in
I just showed that the source given went directly against what was being said in the comment
Except, it's really not. Your quote from the Wikipedia article is unsubstantiated conjecture with no source that supports the claim.
There's a reason Wikipedia isn't acceptable for academic papers: it's factually incorrect often enough to be a problem. It's specifically a problem for non-Western content because the vast majority of Wikipedia contributors speak English as their dominant (and often only) language and thus can only ever use English secondary or tertiary sources.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Defense_Identification_Zone_(Taiwan)
Although the ADIZ covers parts of China's Fujian and Zhejiang provinces in its northwestern part, PLA flights in those areas are not reported as incursions unless they flew within the 12-mile territory limit or median line between the outer islands controlled by ROC forces and mainland China.
Wikipedia is not a source.
[citation needed]
Here's the source on Taiwanese ADIZ, as well as what parts of Taiwanese ADIZ are accepted by the US (and thus, what the US will report on): https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://digital-commons.usnwc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi%3Farticle%3D2939%26context%3Dils&ved=2ahUKEwiGoKKS3PqAAxXDD0QIHYVzDg0QFnoECBAQAQ&usg=AOvVaw0FmfTWzQ9XNfwfTL-qwUs5
Notably, Taiwan's ADIZ that crosses over mainland China is not recognized by the US, BUT, US recognition of Taiwan's ADIZ is neither at the median line nor at Taiwan's 12-mile territory limit. This is clearly visible in the middle and northwestern corners of where the US recognizes Taiwan's ADIZ, which, as you will note, are not at the median point between the two bodies.
Wikipedia is a source unless you're writing an academic paper or for Wikipedia. It's far more accurate than most news sites and for the most part immune to political bias, as the only way it can be biased is to exclude things but if you do then someone else will just add them in
I just showed that the source given went directly against what was being said in the comment
Except, it's really not. Your quote from the Wikipedia article is unsubstantiated conjecture with no source that supports the claim.
There's a reason Wikipedia isn't acceptable for academic papers: it's factually incorrect often enough to be a problem. It's specifically a problem for non-Western content because the vast majority of Wikipedia contributors speak English as their dominant (and often only) language and thus can only ever use English secondary or tertiary sources.
There's a guy who has like 1/3 of the edits on Wikipedia who is an open anti-communist lol.
Nice necromancy you been practicing?
Went to your profile, saw something I disagree with, posted because autism. shrug