| Revision as of 19:41, 20 May 2008 editSineBot (talk | contribs)Bots2,556,669 editsm Signing comment by 129.59.8.10 - "→Sources: "← Previous edit | Revision as of 13:23, 21 May 2008 edit undoGuox0032 (talk | contribs)35 edits →RV: new sectionNext edit → | ||
| Line 21: | Line 21: | ||
| :I see Tsering Shakya's book was quoted, Tsering Shakya is a Tibetan, who escaped from communist government. His view is probably biased. If you can use a Tibetan source, there are plenty Chinese source to be found too. I think it is best we use third party sources. <small>—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 19:40, 20 May 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | :I see Tsering Shakya's book was quoted, Tsering Shakya is a Tibetan, who escaped from communist government. His view is probably biased. If you can use a Tibetan source, there are plenty Chinese source to be found too. I think it is best we use third party sources. <small>—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 19:40, 20 May 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | ||
| == RV == | |||
| If someone wants to do a RV, please give a reason, I don't think POV is a reason, how about why do you think it is POV. ] (]) 13:23, 21 May 2008 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 13:23, 21 May 2008
This article still needs editing and more information. Thanks for your input. Foxhunt99 (talk) 19:36, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
- I rather see this article completely rewritten or deleted altogether. The tone reveals that the author is out to make a point about the current status of Tibet, not illuminate the history of Tibet.--Amban (talk) 01:26, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
- The author mentioned no current status of Tibet at all. It is just some history that some people choose to forget. I am glad that it is here. It does needs a bit more editing, the tone is fine. Guox0032 (talk) 02:18, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
And who are you? A single edit account that is three days old if I were the judge.--Amban (talk) 04:09, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
In order to be balanced, this article needs give a more complete picture of Tibetan society. For instance, the article fails to me mention the fact that Melvyn Goldstein shows that not all serfs were destitute, but could amass considerable wealth and even own their own land. Furthermore, in the book that Charles Bell points out that slavery in the Chumpi valley, were of a comparatively mild type. Finally, I do not think Anna Louise Strong can be quoted as a scholarly and neutral authority on Tibetan society. It is up to those who want to keep the article to improve it, I will propose its deletion if nothing happens.--Amban (talk) 14:44, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
- On what page did Goldstein say that, I will look into it. Anna Louise Strong's report is well known in Tibet history studies. Guox0032 (talk) 15:55, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
On page 5 in Goldstein's History of Modern Tibet. Also read his article from 1971.--Amban (talk) 20:18, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
torture
I know there are torture chambers used by slave owners (lamas), and there are pictures of those, I would like to see some of those. 98.240.20.14 (talk) 22:34, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
- There are pictures on the web, google it. 129.59.150.62 (talk) 19:05, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
Sources
This article seems to be sourced entirely from Parenti, Tom Grunfeld, and Anna Louise Strong. Of these three, only Grunfeld is a serious historian of Tibet, and his biased attitude toward the subject is well-known. Parenti and Strong should not be cited at all in an encyclopedia.—Nat Krause 03:13, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
- I will have to disagree. Parenti is a well known historian as well, and Anna Louise Strong's book give much more insight that a normal historian can't because she was there at the time when it happened. Plus she is a third party, not from Tibet or China. Foxhunt99 (talk) 14:57, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
Grunfeld is indeed a serious historian, but as many reviewers of his book has noted, he has not made any use of Tibetan language sources whatsoever, neither has he availed himself sufficiently of Chinese language sources. Another egregious omission is his complete failure to interview Tibetans on their own society. As for Parenti, what can I say? As far as I can tell, he has no credentials in either Chinese or Tibetan history. If no improvement of this article takes place soon, I will nominate it for deletion.--Amban (talk) 16:24, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
- It comes to what you are trying to dispute, the existence of serfdom and slavery, or the source? I don't think there is any doubt that serfdom or slavery existed in old Tibet. If you want to argue to what degree were the serfdom and slavery then I can understand. Most the Tibetan in exile won't talk about this, a lot of the sources about the serfdom and slavery was obtained by Chinese, but I don't think if I used any publication from the Chinese would convince you anyway. Only source would work here is from third parties like Anna Louise Strong. 129.59.8.10 (talk) 15:19, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
- I see Tsering Shakya's book was quoted, Tsering Shakya is a Tibetan, who escaped from communist government. His view is probably biased. If you can use a Tibetan source, there are plenty Chinese source to be found too. I think it is best we use third party sources. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.59.8.10 (talk) 19:40, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
RV
If someone wants to do a RV, please give a reason, I don't think POV is a reason, how about why do you think it is POV. Guox0032 (talk) 13:23, 21 May 2008 (UTC)