Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Tibet/Archive1

SetUp

Thanks User:Sylvain1972 for setting this up. For my part, I've been wrestling with the Svatantrika/prasangika articles -- thoug not specifically Tibetan. I was also trying to get the Nyingma Tantras articles in better shape, particularly the three divisions of Atiyoga. Also Jigme Lingpa, Garab Dorje. I'll try to get a better list together. Zero sharp 23:54, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

Svatrantika/prasangika _is_ a specifically tibetan distinction. No indian author ever uses those terms - theyre simply madyamaka then. It is refering in a large extent to indian authors, but they were classified as svatrantika or prasangika much later, by tibetans. And also, gelug prasangika is quite specific, different from what most other schools consider prasangika (and sometimes even contradictory with chandrakirti) - if pressed with that question, gelugpas would admit that; this difference of its presentation is why Je Tsonkhapas connection with manjusri is so essential for gelugpas (and all schools consider prasangika highest - check Berzin explanation for eg). there are numerous mistakes on buddhist (especially tibetan) related pages on wiki, i was thinking of spending some time trying to help out--Aryah 01:25, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Ayrah, welcome, help is always needed. I'm not sure that I agree that no indian author ever uses the terms Svatrantika/Prasangika - they are sanskrit terms after all, and as such would not have been invented by Tibetans. And Indians such as Bhavaviveka and Buddhapalita and their respective lineages of Madhyamaka were very much in active disagreement with one another. Sylvain1972 15:05, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Yes, sorry, you are right the terms were used (for a system, but not as unique schools), but still, there was a reason I thought this difference is overstated, and it really was not as important In india - so I dug it up.See this discussion on e-sangha - its hardly NPOV, but quite detailed : http://www.lioncity.net/buddhism/index.php?showtopic=24832&view=findpost&p=346171

Prior to Tsongkhapa, in general, Tibetans considered the difference between Svatantra and Prasanga to be pedagogical. Moreover, it was considered that Svatantra was more effective at debating non-Buddhists, while Prasanga was best for debating the realists among the Buddhists.

Indians it seems also did not distinguish the two systems on any thing other than pedagogical grounds, and as far as I have been able to determine, the distinction between Prasanga and Svatantra as unique schools of thought was introduced by Patsab or his immediate followers in reponse to attacks on Candrakiriti's texts by the committed Svantantrika master, Phyva pa of Sangphu.

Jnanagarbha does not refer to the followers of Candrakiriti by anything other than a passage in his Two Truths where he refers to "some who are notorious for their bad arguments."

So while the Svatantrika/Prasangika debate existed in India the sense there was a criticism of Buddhapalita's treatment of arising from self by Bhava, and a response to this crticism by Candra; the entire scope of the argument around whether one should use autonomous inferences or consequences to demonstrate emptiness to an opponent is strictly confined to an argument about paragraph long in Buddhapalita's Madhyamakavritti concerning the refutation of sprouts arising from themselves.

It is not the case that this is the only place where Candrakirti faults Bhava-- he also gives Bhavaviveka a hard time over how he etmologizes dependent origination [pratiityasamutpadaa] and so on-- but argument over svatantra and prasanga really is confined to just a passage in the Madhyamakavritti of Buddhapalita. Other than that, Chandrakirti does not distingiush svatantra and prasanga in the rest of the Prasannapada. --Aryah 18:33, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Idea for something to spend a little time on

It occurred to me that it might be a good idea to start making a series of dab pages for common Tibetan names. Tibetans seem to re-use the same elements in names quite a lot, and, since the names themselves are unfamiliar to most English speakers, this can be confusing. The disambiguation pages would list various notable persons who have used that word as part of their names. For instance, Gyatso would link to the list of Dalai Lamas, to Chogyam Trungpa, and to Chödrak Gyatso; Gedhun would link to Gedun Drub, Gendun Gyatso, and Gedhun Choekyi Nyima; Chökyi would link to Chogyam Trungpa, Gedhun Choekyi Nyima, Qoigyijabu, Lobsang Trinley Lhündrub Chökyi Gyaltsen, Chökyi Gyaltsen the 1st Tai Situpa, Thubten Choekyi Nyima, etc. The page would also list variant spellings, of which there are often many, for the name and provide other miscellaneous information. I think this would be helpful to largely-uninformed google researchers.

This project is something that anyone who is familiar with some Tibetan names can work on for a few minutes now and then. - Nat Krause^(Talk!) 22:01, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Sounds like a good idea. Sylvain1972 13:41, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

---

Done:

• Gendün
• Gyatso

To Do:

• Lobsang
• Chökyi
• Thubten
• Tenzin
• Norbu
• Nyima
• Yeshe
• Trinley

Scope of "Tibet" stub types

Please take note of this discussion on the scope of the current {{tibet-stub}}, and the proposed {{tibet-geo-stub}}. Comments welcome. Alai 06:13, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Help needed with problematic article (Phende)

I stumbled across this by accident and found it to be very problematic with regards to sourcing, POV, grammar, etc. I made a few attempts to fix some obvious problems but a great deal remains. It's even possible this article may need to be deleted; I just don't know enough about Buddhism. My edits were purely from the viewpoint of what appeared to violate Wikipedia rules and guidelines. I also noticed that the article's author had a history of submitting other problematic material (for instance American Buddha Online Library).

This article needs a review by someone familiar with the topic. I have left some additional comments on the article's talk page
Thanks,
--A. B. 14:38, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

FYI, I just noticed another article, Ngor, linked to the Phende article that seems to share the same style and the same problems.--A. B. 18:42, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

"People" Articles

I added a few things to the 'People' section for article construction, trying to list the basic elements a page on a person should contain -- I'm sure there are other standards for this elsewhere in Wiki we could leverage Zero sharp 21:56, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Lerab Ling and related articles

I am crossposting this to WikiProject Buddhism. I was looking at random articles today and came across Lerab Ling, whose text struck me as something that could have been lifted directly from a promotional brochure. Following the links, I discovered Sogyal Rinpoche and The Tibetan Book of Living and Dying, both of which are even more promotional. The Tibetan Book of Living and Dying is exceptionally bad; the first words of the article describe the book as "an acclaimed spiritual masterpiece," and glowing celebrity reviews are interspersed with statements like, "This jewel of Tibetan wisdom is the definitive spiritual classic for our time." In his article, Sogyal Rinpoche is described as "one of the most renowned teachers of our time" and "the author of the highly-acclaimed and ground breaking book, The Tibetan Book of Living and Dying. I have no idea how much influence Lerab Ling, Sogyal Rinpoche, and his book really have in Tibetan Buddhism, so I was hoping that someone more familiar with the topic could take a look at these articles and evaluate the truth of these glowing statements. In the meantime, I've marked all three with {{advert}} tags. Thanks. - AdelaMae ^{(talk - contribs)} 18:25, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Category:Religious leaders

The current organization there is abit muddled, and needs some discussing how to deal with. A general proposal for cleaning it up is posted at Category talk:Religious leaders#Organization proposal, and more input would be great. It doesn't address the issue of Religious leaders/religious workers/religious figures, but that is another issue that exists. Badbilltucker 21:56, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia Day Awards

Hello, all. It was initially my hope to try to have this done as part of Esperanza's proposal for an appreciation week to end on Wikipedia Day, January 15. However, several people have once again proposed the entirety of Esperanza for deletion, so that might not work. It was the intention of the Appreciation Week proposal to set aside a given time when the various individuals who have made significant, valuable contributions to the encyclopedia would be recognized and honored. I believe that, with some effort, this could still be done. My proposal is to, with luck, try to organize the various WikiProjects and other entities of wikipedia to take part in a larger celebrartion of its contributors to take place in January, probably beginning January 15, 2007. I have created yet another new subpage for myself (a weakness of mine, I'm afraid) at User talk:Badbilltucker/Appreciation Week where I would greatly appreciate any indications from the members of this project as to whether and how they might be willing and/or able to assist in recognizing the contributions of our editors. Thank you for your attention. Badbilltucker 18:21, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject Religion

The group indicated above was recently revitalized for, among other things, the purpose of working on those articles whose content is such that the article does not fall within the scope of any particular denomination. To most effectively do this, however, we would benefit greatly if there were at least one member from this Project working on those articles. On that basis, I would encourage and welcome any member of this Project willing to work on those articles to join the Religion WikiProject. Thank you. Badbilltucker 14:46, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

expansion proposal

It has been a couple of months since there was movement at this project, would it be out of line to propose the expansion of this project into Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Tibet to make it more accessible to a wider interest base to those of us who are interested in Tibet itself? Chris 08:05, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Tibet

Hi I am fascinated in Tibet and Tibetan Buddhism and have adde dmany new articles on buddhist monasteries such as Ramoche Temple and Shalu Monastery. Would it be possible to merge your project into WikiProject Tibet -after all much of the traditional culture and biographies etc are Tibetan buddhism anyway, I feel it could create abetter coordination . PLease see the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject China. If it became WikiiPorject Tibet the Tibetan Buddhism would be an intergral part of it of course . What do you think? ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"I've been expecting you"} 18:04, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

You may also be interested to know that I have added a gallery of Dalai Lamas !! ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"I've been expecting you"} 18:06, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

In fact it could be moved to Wikipedia:WikiProject Tibet/Tibetan Buddhism so it would be a suborganization of Tibet? ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"I've been expecting you"} 18:09, 12 March 2007 (UTC) THis way your project can remain as a religious one but also be part of the Tibet project which will also covers villages/towns etc ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"I've been expecting you"} 18:10, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Tibet discussion from Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals

Description

expansion or sister project to the now inactive WikiProject Tibetan Buddhism

Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)

1. Chris 07:29, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
2. Nat Krause, but without, I'm afraid, much enthusiasm. 17:00, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
3. Sir Blofeld Then I'll make up for any lack of enthusiasm I love!!!! Tibet ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"I've been expecting you"} 12:55, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Comments

With the proliferation of national WikiProjects, even one for Austria-Hungary, 90 years gone, would there be enough interest to justify such a project as this? Chris 07:29, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

You might want to check with the Wikipedia:WikiProject Central Asia to see if they would be willing to set one up as a task force/work group of their project. Badbilltucker 15:38, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

I am thinking about setting up WikiProject Tibet to focus and cordinate Tibetan article more efficiently. Please see the discussion on the main wikiproject China talk page. I have sent this message to the Tibetan Buddhism project:

Hi I am fascinated in Tibet and Tibetan Buddhism and have adde dmany new articles on buddhist monasteries such as Ramoche Temple and Shalu Monastery. Would it be possible to merge your project into WikiProject Tibet -after all much of the traditional culture and biographies etc are Tibetan buddhism anyway, I feel it could create abetter coordination . PLease see the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject China. If it became WikiiPorject Tibet the Tibetan Buddhism would be an intergral part of it of course . What do you think? ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"I've been expecting you"} 18:04, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

You may also be interested to know that I have added a gallery of Dalai Lamas !! ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"I've been expecting you"} 18:06, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

In fact it could be moved to Wikipedia:WikiProject Tibet/Tibetan Buddhism so it would be a suborganization of Tibet? ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"I've been expecting you"} 18:09, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

THis way your project can remain as a religious one but also be part of the Tibet project which will also covers villages/towns etc ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"I've been expecting you"} 18:10, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

What do you think? ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"I've been expecting you"} 18:13, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

part of WP China?

This project does not outwardly seem to be a subproject of WP China, is it so? If it is its own project, it needs its own tags and templates. I have created {{WikiProject Tibet}} for this purpose. Chris 08:29, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Making it a part of WP China is a political statement of the kind we shouldn't be making on Wikipedia. Not making it a part of WP China is also a political statement, but a weaker and more vague one, since the noninclusion could be due to many reasons. deeptrivia (talk) 22:38, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

language request template

Is there a Tibetan language request template, similar to {{Burmese}}? Chris 01:52, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

History of Tibet

Having had a cursory glance over the History of Tibet page, much of it seems very biased. In addition, there are sections that seem out of sequence, it is very poorly written at various points, and some of it just reads like an advert for the PRC Government view of Tibet. I was just wondering if the page could be included in the projects core priorities (if that is in order?) and also looked at to try and make it as much as possible a NPOV article. Thanks ♦Tangerines BFC ♦·Talk 23:52, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

merger of WikiProject Tibet and WikiProject Tibetan Buddhism

I tend to think this was not a good idea. "Tibetan Buddhism" is not a phenomenon limited to Tibet itself. It has been the national religion of Mongolia, Buryatia, and Kalmykia for centuries, and, in modern times, it is now found throughout the world. It would make more sense for Tibetan Buddhism to become a subproject of WikiProject Buddhism; not all Tibetan Buddhists are Tibetan, but they are all Buddhists.—Nat Krause^{(Talk!·What have I done?)} 20:07, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

So, are there any objections at this point if we get started on moving the Tibetan Buddhism project over to Wikipedia:WikiProject Buddhism.—Nat Krause^{(Talk!·What have I done?)} 20:12, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

I don't think Tibetan Buddhism belongs here at all. Secretlondon 03:23, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. TB is also the traditional religion of much of northern Nepal, Lahoul & Spiti in H.P., Ladakh in Jamu & Kashmir, much of Sikkim, several districts of Arunachal Pradesh, Bhutan, and many parts of China which the Chinese do not consider "Tibet" (ie outside the TAR). Not to speak of the TB groups around the world. Also many of the most significant TB figures live outside of Tibet and have done so for more than 50 years. Chris Fynn (talk) 10:19, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, I think that "WikiProject Tibet" includes Tibetan regions outside of the TAR and the Tibetan diaspora in India &c. Whether or not it also includes the various other Himalayan regions that speak a language descended from classical Tibetan (Ladakh, Bhutan, Mustang, etc.), is a question I don't know the answer to. However, the point stands that not all Tibetan Buddhists are Tibetans. I had been going to separate the two projects back in April of last year, but I realised that a) I don't know how to do that; and b) at the time, apparently, nobody else cared.—Nat Krause^{(Talk!·What have I done?)} 15:37, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

I agree it makes more sense for Tibetan Buddhism to be under the Buddhism project. Does anyone know how to actually do that? I guess we should also have a discussion at Project Buddhism first Dakinijones (talk) 13:40, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

I also think that it makes more sense for Tibet and Tibetan Buddhism should be two seprate projects, ideally with Tibetan Buddhism being under Buddhism. No to the merge.--Keithonearth (talk) 07:42, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

South Tibet

Please help with the article on South Tibet and have a look at its talk page. —Babelfisch 03:36, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Move of List of Tibet-related topics

Hello. The article List of Tibet-related topics was recently nominated for deletion here. The closing decision was to delete some lists and projectify those with corresponding WikiProjects. For that reason, I am moving the article to a subpage of this project: Wikipedia:WikiProject Tibet/List of Tibet-related topics. -- Black Falcon ^(Talk) 17:01, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Explanation of reverts on article Tibet

This is a duplicate of my message on the talk page of the above article as I thought I should also explain on this project why I reverted these edits and then to ask a question.

"Further to the six edits on the article by the anonymous User:128.91.41.29 which were reverted by User:CredoFromStart, I have reverted a further three edits by the same anonymous user, 128.91.41.29, as even though it is clear that they were at least in part trying to perhaps replace some words that might appear to be POV from a Tibetan POV, they only replaced those words with similar POV words just from a different POV. In addition, changing the name Francis Younghusband to Francis Youngwife was clearly vandalism. Unfortunately I have reverted three times as I forgot to do it in one go, but this was to revert clear POV and vandalism edits. For the user who did these edits though, there is no point, in editing the article and replacing what you believe to be POV by simply replacing those words with others that are just as much, if not more so, a POV."

Now my question, it appears that a number of anonymous users are vandalising this article as has happened a few times today, including changing Francis Younghusbands name to Youngwife plus another anonymous user who changed part of the article to read, "Tibetans call their homeland The fucking place". It always seems to be unregistered users who vandalise the article, add nonsense etc. Would it be an idea to restrict editing even if for a short period, so that unregistered and newly registered users can't then vandalise the article? I have no wish to prevent anyone from editing the article fairly, however surely if someone feels so strongly about it then they would register anyway.♦Tangerines BFC ♦·Talk 20:58, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Help please with the Tibet article

User Zakuragi today made the same (good faith) edit on three Tibet related pages - Tibet, Geography of Tibet and the TAR. On each page they have added a map of the TAR, specifically in the geography section. Whilst I agree that it is relevant to the TAR article, and I am assuming them to be good faith edits, the map is not relevant to the other two articles in my opinion. I therefore reverted the two edits on Tibet and Geography of Tibet. The initial edit Zakuragi made on the Tibet article, they removed the previous neutral map which is perfectly relevant and is of course neutral. When I then reverted it to the original neutral map, they added it again, but this time in addition to the original map rather than instead of it, meaning there were two maps on the article - which is pointless and serves no purpose. I reverted it for a second time as it is clearly a POV map when taken into the context of the specific article, and two maps are not needed, especially a clearly POV map. But Zakuragi has added it back in again, saying that it is still a map of Tibet - when it clearly is not, as it is a map of the TAR. Revertng it again is clearly not the way forward, so I decided to bring this here to see what the members of this project think? I can understand why the map would be included on the TAR article, it is perfectly relevant on there. But the initial edit on the Tibet article could be deemed to be a POV edit as the original, neutral map was removed and replaced with a map of the TAR rather than the Tibetan plateau. As I said, I assume good faith, but removing a neutral map and replacing it with what in the context of the article is a highly POV map could be taken as being POV. Now the article has two maps which makes no sense, and a previous image has been removed. thanks ♦Tangerines BFC ♦·Talk 21:27, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

What is Tibet? As you can see from this map, there is no single definition. It can be the TAR; it can be the so-called "Greater Tibet"; it can also include areas like "South Tibet". There is clearly no single Tibet, or a single way to define it. So, in my opinion, the map I put in the article is very relevant. Sure, the map states that it is specifically about the TAR but we have to remember that the TAR is practically the same thing as Tibet, and therefore it should belong to the article. It is also very detailed, as you could see if you clicked the link, and thus a good and informative addition, which shows the casual browser that Tibet can be defined in many ways.

Also, I don't understand why Tangerines thinks it is "pointless" to have two maps in the article; it would be so if both the images resembled each other more or less closely, but since both are clearly different, it makes a lot of sense to have them there. As for the removal of the other map, just take a look at its details and you can clearly see that it's tagged as POV and has several inaccuracies (e.g. some of the borders are way off or not there and traditional characters are used instead of the simplified ones). --ざくら木 22:26, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

• I strongly contest the notion that the TAR and Tibet are "practically the same thing." It is not only outrageous and highly inflammatory, it's also incorrect. The TAR is an administrative region with China, with a name given to it by the Chinese after they took control of that country. The Government of Tibet in Exile doesn't recognize that control as legitimate, nor do they see it as autonomous. Placing that map in that article, either as an addition or a substition to current maps is as useless as it is biased. As I've said before, it's fine for explaining the boundaries of the TAR within the article about the TAR because it elaborates on the concepts presented in that article and pertains closely to the subject matter of the same. It does not and can not fill the same role in the article about historical and cultural Tibet because it simply doesn't add to anything in that article and can be viewed by many people as POV. If you were truly concerned about expanding the level of detail on the existing maps, remove all references to the TAR from the map and reupload it for consideration. Cumulus Clouds 01:31, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

New proposal for Tibetan naming conventions

Please see the new proposal I've proposed at Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Tibetan)/proposal 2 and discuss at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (Tibetan)/proposal 2. I also added a brief introduction here —Nat Krause^{(Talk!·What have I done?)} 20:54, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Bayi/Bayo

An article for "Bayi" was recently added to Wikitravel as the capital of Nyingchi Prefecture. This appears to correspond to the Chinese 八一, but the Nyingchi Pref article refers to "Bayo Town". Is this a typo or the actual Tibetan name? 8.1. (八一) is the founding day of the PLA, so was the town actually founded by the Chinese, or just renamed? Jpatokal 11:41, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Aha -- there appears to be a (minimal) article for it after all under the name Bayizhen, or "Bayi Town". Jpatokal 11:48, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Questions

{{#if: | {{#if: |

Domartang, Tibet

Tibetan name
Tibetan:	{{{t}}}
Wylie transliteration:	{{{w}}}
Tournadre Phonetic:	{{{to}}}
pronunciation in IPA:	[{{{ipa}}}]
official transcription (PRC):	{{{z}}}
THDL:	{{{thdl}}}
other transcriptions:	{{{e}}}
Chinese name
traditional:	{{{tc}}}
simplified:	{{{s}}}
Pinyin:	{{{p}}}
Location	30°53′N 94°49′E
Region	Tibet Autonomous Region, China
Prefecture-level division	Qamdo Prefecture
County-level divisions	Banbar County
Population Approx. in a 7 km radius	439
Major Nationalities	Tibetan
Regional dialect	Tibetan language
Area code
Postal Code

I want to raise a few questions about this future template.

• Title: What is a “Tibetan settlement”? A place inhabited by a majority of Tibetan people? Does it have to be in the Tibet Autonomous Region? Could it also be a place in Qinghai, Gansu, Sichuan or Yunnan, or even in Bhutan, Sikkim, Nepal or India? This raises political problems that could be pre-determined by a template in a way that is not desirable.
• External structure: How does this template fit in with other templates like Template:Infobox PRC province and/or Template:Tibetan-Chinese-box? It might also be useful to look for example at the box created in the article on Harbin (which is not a template!), and at other templates like Template:Infobox Indian Jurisdiction etc.
• The infobox in this form only makes sense if it follows official administrative divisions, otherwise it wouldn't make sense to refer to them, nor would it possible to get figures like area and population or postal codes etc.

A template of some kind would be good, but it has to be possible to integrate it with the rest of Wikipedia.

A few concrete questions about the proposal posted by Ernst Stavro Blofeld on my talk page (see copy on the right):

• Population: Why “Approx. in a 7 km radius”? There's no way to get reliable figures for such an arbitrary circle. The basis has to be the administrative division.
• “Tournadre Phonetic”: Is that really used anywhere else except in the English version of Tournadre's textbook? (I'd rather have the THDL Simplified Phonetic System.)
• The "official spelling (PRC)" has been adopted by the United Nations as well, so it has official character beyond China.
• Major Nationalities: Figures (proportions) would make sense.

Unfortunately, I'm no good at creating templates myself. —Babelfisch 02:34, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Wikinews Interview with the Dalai Lama's representative

I will be conducting an interview with the Dalai Lama's Representative to the Americas, Tashi Wangdi. If you have a question you would like me to consider asking, please leave it here: http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/User:David_Shankbone/Tibet --David Shankbone 19:19, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Chagdud Tulku Rinpoche needs your help

IMHO the article Chagdud Tulku Rinpoche is quite good but can be improved to "even better".

1) Article needs specific cites for various statements.

2) We could use stub articles for many redlinks relating to Tibetan Buddhism.

3) Article contains various "peacock terms" which need to be made NPOV.

4) Article contains several assertions of more-or-less miraculous events which need to be carefully cited and phrased in a NPOV style.

5) Article may be slightly more detailed than is necessary / appropriate for Wikipedia.

Thanks. -- Writtenonsand 00:10, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Empowerment in Tibetan Buddhism

I recently edited the article Chagdud Tulku Rinpoche and I see that we need an article on the concept of "empowerment" in Tibetan Buddhism. (E.g., "he received the Rinchen Tangyud empowerments", "Jangchub Dorje gave him empowerments for the Red Tara cycle".) I personally have no idea what this term means, and would like very much to know. The existing article Empowerment is no help at all. I don't even know what would be the best title for our new article. Can anybody start a stub on this? Thanks. -- Writtenonsand 13:57, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Wang (Tibetan Buddhism)??? -- Writtenonsand 01:03, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Good point, but is is a bit difficult subject as it is all about tantra. Equally, or more popular is the expression 'initiation'. The description should not only explain the purpose of an initiation in tantra (perhaps not simple), and perhaps also eg. the difference between a wang and a jenang etc. Big subject to cover, really. In very short, an initiation or empowerment is a permission from a guru to a disciple to do a certain practice. rudy (talk) 01:14, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

- "Big subject to cover, really." -- Well then IMHO we need to get started on it. -- Writtenonsand (talk) 13:10, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Problem in Mount Kailash

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mount_Kailash#In_Buddhism has an account of Mount Kailash in Tibetan Buddhist mythology, followed by a note: "There appears to be some confusion in the account above between the stories of Milarepa (Great Tibetan Yogi) and Padmasambahava (also known as Guru Rinpoche, or Precious Guru by the Tibetans), who is said to have brought Tantric Buddhism to Tibet." --- (cf Padmasambhava) Can anybody sort this out? -- Writtenonsand (talk) 13:16, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

I have just done some work on this section and believe I have fixed the problem of confusion between Milarepa and Guru Rinpoche (Padmasambhava). Please do have a look at it though to see if you think it is O.K. and whether you think more needs to be done or can add anything to it. Cheers, John Hill (talk) 00:46, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Losar

Losar is currenting happening, how may I ensure that it is flagged as a current event? Is there a News Wiki article that this Wikipedia article can interwiki? How may I progress this? Is there anything else you recommend?
Blessings in the mindstream
B9 hummingbird hovering ^{(talk • contribs)} 06:27, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

New Guy

Hello I'm kinda new to wikipedia, but i know alot about Tibet and I would like to help out in your project. I'll help in the Tibetan Uprising articles, and I know alot about that since I found a bunch of old TIbetan newspaper articles on that. Also it was translated and for those who are interested it's on the March 10 official website here. Also I'm on almost all day so I can frequently check if the articles are being vandilized. If you guys want to contact me about this email me at samuraidude123@aol.com Samuraidude123 (talk) 05:38, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Monasteries

Are Sera Monastery, Ganden Monastery and Drepung Monastery proper nouns? Are the articles supposed to have capital "M"s or small "m"s? Another editor and I are curious and don't know the answer. Thanks! -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 07:31, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm nearly positive that they are proper nouns. I've never seen a lower-case "m" used and that's something that I would generally notice. --Gimme danger (talk) 07:07, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Tibetan script needed

Tibetan script needed at Gyuto Order. Badagnani (talk) 01:31, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Project Collaboration

Would anyone be interested in starting a WikiProject Tibet collaboration project? I think with a bit of devoted effort we could bring an article to Featured Article status once every two months or so. I would suggest that, given the current unrest in the region, that we start with a relatively non-controversial topic. I propose Trisong Detsen. Who's with me? --Gimme danger (talk) 06:13, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm up for it! ...anyone else? Dakinijones (talk) 13:41, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

3rd Party Sources for 1959 Tibetan uprising

Myself and some other users managed to fill this in with information from the CTA/Office of Tibet and some Chinese sources, but the article now needs information from 3rd party sources to more clearly establish notability and provide some 3rd party synthesis. I know that The Dragon in the Land of Snows provides quite a bit of detail on the events surrounding the March 10th uprising, but I've lost access to that particular book for the time being. Since the current unrest began on the anniversary of the 1959 uprising, it would be good to get this article filled out in a timely fashion. --Clay Collier (talk) 06:57, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Article Improvement

Is there any interest in an article improvement work-group for this wikiproject? Tibet-related articles are in a state of disrepair and our most important articles are sub-standard. Please express your interest here for some sort of collaboration or article improvement drive. --Gimme danger (talk) 19:55, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Namri Songtsen, 32th Emperor : NEW !

I create the article. Please review it !! 220.135.4.212 (talk) 13:18, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

I've left a few comments on the article talk page. Thank you for your contribution! --Gimme danger (talk) 17:10, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

dzo (yak-cattle hybrid)

I recently did some work on the dzo page, but currently there is at least one question left open: Does the designation "dzo" only apply to a calf from a yak bull and a domesticated cow, or did someone just confuse between cow and cattle? I.e. is there a different name when the calf is from a male piece of cattle (vocabulary?) and a female yak. I don't speak Tibetan, so I don't think I can figure this out on my own. Also it would be nice to have some real info on dzos as working animals, I just could not let that "like a mule" statement stay in the article. Yaan (talk) 19:03, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

China and PRC articles request to be renamed

User:SmuckyTheCat is requesting that China be renamed, and replaced by the People's Republic of China article at "China". 70.55.88.176 (talk) 07:50, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Serfdom in Tibet

This article needs a great deal of work and is in danger of being deleted. Amban (talk · contribs) and Cumulus Clouds (talk · contribs) are contesting the neutrality of the article and requesting its deletion as a fringe theory. Mainstream scholarly sources have been added to the article, but more are needed to make it incontestable. Please pitch in if you can! --Gimme danger (talk) 03:08, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

The deletion discussion can be found here--Gimme danger (talk) 16:11, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Changes to the WP:1.0 assessment scheme

As you may have heard, we at the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial Team recently made some changes to the assessment scale, including the addition of a new level. The new description is available at WP:ASSESS.

• The new C-Class represents articles that are beyond the basic Start-Class, but which need additional references or cleanup to meet the standards for B-Class.
• The criteria for B-Class have been tightened up with the addition of a rubric, and are now more in line with the stricter standards already used at some projects.
• A-Class article reviews will now need more than one person, as described here.

Each WikiProject should already have a new C-Class category at Category:C-Class_articles. If your project elects not to use the new level, you can simply delete your WikiProject's C-Class category and clarify any amendments on your project's assessment/discussion pages. The bot is already finding and listing C-Class articles.

Please leave a message with us if you have any queries regarding the introduction of the revised scheme. This scheme should allow the team to start producing offline selections for your project and the wider community within the next year. Thanks for using the Wikipedia 1.0 scheme! For the 1.0 Editorial Team, §hepBot (Disable) 21:26, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Gö Lotsawa

The article on Gö Lotsawa needs urgent attention! Names and facts about two entirely different figures who lived centuries apart have been mixed together- and so it is pretty well useless, if not downright misleading! See my comments at Talk:Gö_Lotsawa. I don't have time to sort this out myself right now, though I've added some links to useful sources under Further Reading & External Links at the bottom of the article page which should be useful to anyone who wants to take it on. Chris Fynn (talk) 05:18, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Robina Courtin

...needs a free photograph. Thanks. Viriditas (talk) 10:03, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Tibetan Buddhism: Sources used for articles about living Lamas
(and their previous incarnations)

I've noticed some articles about living lamas on Wikipedia appear to rely almost entirely on quotes or references taken from the sites or publications of religious organizations or centers closely associated with the lama who is the subject of the article. This makes me wonder, in such cases do quotations from a Lama's home page or those of organizations effectively under that lamas control, or run by devoted disciples, amount to self-published sources? - Since we are told "Self-published sources should never be used as third-party sources about living persons". Some of these cases may not be obvious at first sight articles about living lamas may use material taken from such websites without giving any direct reference at all.

One could even go further: In the case of tulkus, can what the present "incarnation" (or his organization) says about previous incarnations be considered a neutral or unbiased source? Tibetan religious "biography" is almost always uncritical and reverential hagiography. The alleged spiritual or miraculous accomplishments of individual religious masters or their predecessors is often used as a means to try and establish the authenticity of a lineage — sometimes in order to attract followers or patrons. This may amount to advertising or promotion of a living person by making claims about their (supposed) former incarnations. Where such pious stories involve miracles etc. they are of course also unverifiable.

Chris Fynn (talk) 16:12, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

You are quite right. Some use of self-published materials is the norm in many articles about persons living and dead. However, this only extends to cases where the claims are not controversial. Otherwise, it always needs to be clarified that X states that Y is a fact. I would think any claims of supernatural events always qualify as controversial. Claims by current tülkus about the activities of their predecessors are particularly prone to problems both because of the point that you raise and because the current one might not really know that much about the events he is talking about; I don't think that most tülkus claim to have a detailed memory of their past lives, let alone a thorough understanding of the historical circumstances surrounding them.—Nat Krause^{(Talk!·What have I done?)} 02:12, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia 0.7 articles have been selected for Tibetan Buddhism

Wikipedia 0.7 is a collection of English Wikipedia articles due to be released on DVD, and available for free download, later this year. The Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team has made an automated selection of articles for Version 0.7.

We would like to ask you to review the articles selected from this project. These were chosen from the articles with this project's talk page tag, based on the rated importance and quality. If there are any specific articles that should be removed, please let us know at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.7. You can also nominate additional articles for release, following the procedure at Wikipedia:Release Version Nominations.

A list of selected articles with cleanup tags, sorted by project, is available. The list is automatically updated each hour when it is loaded. Please try to fix any urgent problems in the selected articles. A team of copyeditors has agreed to help with copyediting requests, although you should try to fix simple issues on your own if possible.

We would also appreciate your help in identifying the version of each article that you think we should use, to help avoid vandalism or POV issues. These versions can be recorded at this project's subpage of User:SelectionBot/0.7. We are planning to release the selection for the holiday season, so we ask you to select the revisions before October 20. At that time, we will use an automatic process to identify which version of each article to release, if no version has been manually selected. Thanks! For the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial team, SelectionBot 23:06, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

CfD nomination of Category:Tibet Autonomous Region

Category:Tibet Autonomous Region has been nominated for deletion or merging. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page.

The discussion would benefit greatly from your informed input. Cgingold (talk) 02:08, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

RfC re: Sinicization of Tibet

Hi there, much concern has been raised that the article Sinicization of Tibet has serious NPOV problems. I have made an attempt at neutralising the article. However, the article is being jealously guarded by User:YakLee. I would like to ask interested editors to comment.

The relevant versions of the article are: this version by YakLee and the last version by me. Please comment at Talk:Sinicization of Tibet. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 08:50, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Above user is has had talk with a lot of contributors yet that have tried to convince him not to use his POV in the article and on the talk page. He added a mayor one-hand piece with no references in the article and he places {fact}-templates, where text has been referenced by respected sources. Next to that he doesn't recoil - here above - to even make personal attacks on my address. I am NOT jealously guarding the article: the contrary is true: see the facts for your self. This games is really beyond every limit. I suspect political motivation with this user. YakLee (talk) 09:11, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

A new article which needs some attention

Hi folks, I am not knowledgeable on these topics at all, but I have been working away to clean up and Wikify a new article Historical money of Tibet. if someone could take a look at it it would be helpful. The original writer is still around. Invertzoo (talk) 16:10, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

I've done some layout matters, linkfixes, tables, external links, etc. I didn't know more content for it. If someone has coins or bank notes at home, please take a picture of it and grand it to Commons. That would make the article more attractive to read. Hopefully the Numismatic project knows to contribute as well. Davin (talk) 12:51, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Changthang

I'd just like to leave a brief note pointing out that the Changthang article is very short, almost exclusively deals with Ladakhi Changthang, is not very encyclopedic, and has great potential. It's such a fascinating area, with the nomads, the traders, the Great game history, European explorers, the wildlife, the importance to China for minerals and Nuclear testing... I know it sounds like I'm trying to sell it, but I am. I've got some reference material, but mostly dealing with Ladakhi Changthang. Any help is most welcome.--Keithonearth (talk) 07:55, 26 December 2008 (UTC)