Talk:Tibet under Qing rule: Difference between revisions
m Srnec moved page Talk:Tibet under Qing administrative rule to Talk:Tibet under Qing rule: parallel with Mongolia and Taiwan articles |
→POV pushing and original research: new section |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{WPCHINA|tibet=yes|class=B|importance=Mid}} |
{{WPCHINA|tibet=yes|class=B|importance=Mid}} |
||
{{talkheader}} |
{{talkheader}} |
||
== POV pushing and original research == |
|||
This article is written like a Chinese schoolbook and contains a lot of original research. The title itself (Tibet under Qing rule) is a POV, and sources are often diverted from their original meaning. |
|||
Just to give a couple of examples, the sentence "''Tibet is often considered as a protectorate of China during this period''" does not reflect the source, which says "''The protectorate that China had established over Tibet in the eighteenth century remained into the twentieth century. By the late nineteenth century, however, given the weight of China's domestic and foreign-related burdens, Chinese hegemony over Tibet remained in theory but in actuality was a dead letter.''" (Revolution and Its Past: Identities and Change in Modern Chinese History, by R. Keith Schoppa, p341). The claim that 2,000 imperial troups were stationed at Lhasa is does not concern most of the period in question. The maps are original reseach too and have been discribed as "[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File_talk:Qing_Dynasty_1820.png modern fantasy with no historical basis]". |
|||
The whole article should be rewritten with a new title and a more neutral approach.--[[User:6-A04-W96-K38-S41-V38|6-A04-W96-K38-S41-V38]] ([[User talk:6-A04-W96-K38-S41-V38|talk]]) 10:06, 29 October 2015 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 10:06, 29 October 2015
 | Tibet B‑class Mid‑importance | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
 | China B‑class Mid‑importance | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Tibet under Qing rule article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
| Archives: 1 |
POV pushing and original research
This article is written like a Chinese schoolbook and contains a lot of original research. The title itself (Tibet under Qing rule) is a POV, and sources are often diverted from their original meaning.
Just to give a couple of examples, the sentence "Tibet is often considered as a protectorate of China during this period" does not reflect the source, which says "The protectorate that China had established over Tibet in the eighteenth century remained into the twentieth century. By the late nineteenth century, however, given the weight of China's domestic and foreign-related burdens, Chinese hegemony over Tibet remained in theory but in actuality was a dead letter." (Revolution and Its Past: Identities and Change in Modern Chinese History, by R. Keith Schoppa, p341). The claim that 2,000 imperial troups were stationed at Lhasa is does not concern most of the period in question. The maps are original reseach too and have been discribed as "modern fantasy with no historical basis".
The whole article should be rewritten with a new title and a more neutral approach.--6-A04-W96-K38-S41-V38 (talk) 10:06, 29 October 2015 (UTC)