While the biographies of living persons policy does not apply directly to the subject of this article, it may contain material that relates to living persons, such as friends and family of persons no longer living, or living persons involved in the subject matter. Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons must be removed immediately. If such material is re-inserted repeatedly, or if there are other concerns related to this policy, please see this noticeboard.
This article is part of WikiProject Tibet:Tibetan Buddhism, an attempt to improve content and create better coordination between articles related to traditional religion, cultural practices and customs in Tibet. Please participate in improvement by editing Dalai Lama and related pages, or visit the WikiProject Tibet main page for more details on the projects.
This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Buddhism, an attempt to promote better coordination, content distribution, and cross-referencing between pages dealing with Buddhism. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page for more details on the projects.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Is there a particular reason for why the Dalai Lama title is included in its Chinese versions? I get using Tibetan, Sanscrit and Mongol but two Chinese languages seem odd. Why not use German and Hungarian too then? --Dereck Camacho (talk) 07:09, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
It seems warranted, because the subject is widely discussed in these languages, especially Mandarin, though I prefer to have these transliterations listed in some sort of infobox format rather than inline.--Farang Rak Tham (talk) 09:06, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
Yes, it's kind of invasive. Could be a good idea to limit them to maybe the original Mongol and put the rest in a note or something. --Dereck Camacho (talk) 10:39, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
In Buddhist doctrine articles, there is an infobox format with translations in multiple languages. See for example the article on Sthavira Maudgalyayana.--Farang Rak Tham (talk) 13:33, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
Dereck Camacho, if you are deleting something from the talk page without there being consensus for that yet, that may at times be allowable, but don't say "as talked in the talk page" when in fact no such conclusion was reached.--Farang Rak Tham (talk) 07:27, 25 November 2017 (UTC)
Farang Rak Tham, if there are no objections here that I can see, then how is not consensus? Unlss you were against the idea, but if that's the case I'm sorry but I did not get it. --Dereck Camacho (talk) 07:30, 25 November 2017 (UTC)
┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘It seems warranted, because the subject is widely discussed in these languages (above) seems pretty clear to me. Look, I am not making a big issue out of this minor edit, but you shouldn't refer to me when I did not express any approval, that's all.--Farang Rak Tham (talk) 07:33, 25 November 2017 (UTC)
Wasn't clear to me, maybe because English is not my first language. --Dereck Camacho (talk) 08:42, 25 November 2017 (UTC)
I came across Mind and Life Institute, which claims to be the organization responsible for convening conferences and dialogues with the Dalia Lama. I went through and marked some dead links, but it stuck me how much of the notability of the institute is based on the Dalai Lama. WP:INHERITED aside, the fact that the Institute isn't mentioned in the Dalai Lama article seems odd. Anyone have any thoughts on whether a) the info should be linked to somewhere in the Dalai Lama article, or b) is it really that notable an organization? TimTempleton(talk)(cont) 00:48, 18 January 2018 (UTC)