Talk:Yarkant County

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Untitled[edit]

Hi! I'm es:User:Colegota from Spanish Wikipedia and Commons. I prefer not to edit myself, but pinyin name for Yarkand is Sache. Yéchéng is for the city also called Karghilik in Uyghur. Regards, Colegota

"lengthy quotations" ![edit]

Is such a massive amount of text from so recent a book legitimate? 68.39.174.238 05:34, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

How can one article have so many templates?[edit]

Seems like too many. --Mattisse 01:38, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

History re-write[edit]

Since I am no expert of this particular section of Kashi Prefecture, I do not know exactly how the history section should be re-written. But here I will alert other editors to the issues at hand. The section is too lengthy, with the majority of it being a massive quote. This text block, even as a reference, cannot be so lengthy. It makes the article seem to have more content than it really does. ---华钢琴49 (TALK) 02:28, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

County or city[edit]

The article nearly exclusively describes the town Yarkant, only part of the side box (coordinates seem to be from the town, too) and part of the first paragraph deal with the county. I suggest to either split or move&edit. -- Tomdo08 (talk) 01:09, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Report of a mission to Yarkund in 1873, under command of Sir T. D. Forsyth: with historical and geographical information regarding the possessions of the ameer of Yarkund By Sir Thomas Douglas Forsyth[edit]

http://books.google.com/books?id=JxwPAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

Title Report of a mission to Yarkund in 1873, under command of Sir T. D. Forsyth: with historical and geographical information regarding the possessions of the ameer of Yarkund Author Sir Thomas Douglas Forsyth Publisher Printed at the Foreign department press, 1875 Original from the New York Public Library Digitized Oct 11, 2007 Length 573 pages Subjects History › General

Rajmaan (talk) 19:16, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Should the new blockquote be removed?[edit]

The new blockquote inserted by User Rajamaan about Chinese officials taking temporary local wivess is perhaps of some interest but I feel it may very biased and, possibly, inaccurate (present-day Uighurs, in general, are very dissapproving of relationships between non-Muslims and Uighur women). It is possibly more reflective of 19th century British prejudices than fact. Moreover, it may well be considered offensive. Also, I am not sure that these observations are of enough historical note to be worthy of quoting on a one page encyclopedia article on Hotan. I think they should probably be removed. Please - would other editors please comment? Many thanks, John Hill (talk) 21:11, 20 October 2015 (UTC)