Misplaced Pages

Talk:Dalai Lama: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 01:52, 25 March 2024 edit68.47.47.224 (talk) →Kundun movie: new sectionTags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit New topic← Previous edit Latest revision as of 12:24, 12 January 2025 edit undoLowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,308,474 editsm Archiving 1 discussion(s) to Talk:Dalai Lama/Archive 10) (bot 
(16 intermediate revisions by 10 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Talk header}}
{{talk header|archive_age=90|archive_bot=Lowercase sigmabot III}}
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=C|vital=yes|living=no|listas=Lama, Dalai|1= {{WikiProject banner shell|class=C|vital=yes|blp=other|listas=Lama, Dalai|1=
{{WikiProject Tibet|importance=top}} {{WikiProject Tibet|importance=top}}
{{WikiProject Buddhism|importance=high}} {{WikiProject Buddhism|importance=high}}
Line 7: Line 7:
{{WikiProject Politics|importance=mid}} {{WikiProject Politics|importance=mid}}
{{WikiProject Religion|importance=mid}} {{WikiProject Religion|importance=mid}}
}}
| blpo=yes}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config {{User:MiszaBot/config
|archiveheader = {{aan}} |archiveheader = {{aan}}
Line 17: Line 17:
|archive = Talk:Dalai Lama/Archive %(counter)d |archive = Talk:Dalai Lama/Archive %(counter)d
}} }}
{{Top 25 Report|Apr 9 2023}}


==exorcism==
== Possible copyright problem ==
The Dalai Lama has a autobiography called freedom in exile. In this books he talks about how he exorcised a spirit. Don't know if it's important. But it maybe added to thearticle what do you think?
] This article has been revised as part of ]. (See ]) Earlier text must not be restored, ''unless'' it can be verified to be free of infringement. For legal reasons, Misplaced Pages cannot accept ] text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions must be deleted. Contributors may use sources as a source of ''information'', but not as a source of ''sentences'' or ''phrases''. Accordingly, the material ''may'' be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original ''or'' ] from that source. Please see our ] for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Misplaced Pages takes copyright violations very seriously. <!--Signature-->]<sup>]]</sup> 03:34, 8 January 2021 (UTC) <!--{{CCI}} end-->

== Date of birth ==

It is cute to mention (in the bio capsule on the right) the beginning of the current Dalai Lama's tenure as January 22, 1940.

But surely Misplaced Pages is capable of listing his birthdate near the beginning of the article!


== legally returned? ==
There is every reason to do this, and no reason not to do it. ] (]) 15:29, 22 June 2022 (UTC)


The article says in lede that DL "legally returned to the secular leadership position of governing Tibet". But under what authority? Tibetan sovereignty isn't recognised by anyone including the United states. They all recognised it as part of China especially during the mid 1900s. Not only is that statement unsourced but it's obviously got no reliable sources to support that statement. ] (]) 00:55, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
== Kundun movie ==


:Also previous revision makes it seem like Tibet had an independent leader when technically Tibet was under non Tibetan surzeingty since 13th century. And omitted that Ganden Phodrang government was a protectorate under Qing China rule. You can't omit this context merely because it's not a popular truth. I added in that Ganden Phodrang government functioned as a protectorate under Qing China rule but its leaders disagreed that relationship continued with ROC and declared independence. Tho international law doesn't recognise that independence and that DL despite revoking the agreement with China and supporting independence of Tibet, later moderated his views to not support separatism and agree Tibet was part of China in 2005. I included all sources to support the previously omitted context. Without that context, this article is just pushing a pov and omitting facts that are obviously politically unpopular in the west. ] (]) 01:50, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
Just watched Martin Scorsese's movie "Kundun" that portrays the life of the 14th Dalai Lama. If would be nice to mention this in yhe article. ] (]) 01:52, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
::Also, the final paragraph of the lead section presents an oversimplified perspective, aligning primarily with the Tibetan exile government's viewpoint, which is not universally accepted. Historian Sam van Schaik notes that during the Mongol rule, Tibet functioned as a colony. The Bureau of Buddhist and Tibetan Affairs and the Imperial Preceptor, based in Khanbaliq (modern-day Beijing), were officially at the helm of Tibetan administration. However, due to the considerable distance between Mongolia and Tibet, their direct influence on daily governance was minimal. Portraying Tibet as an independent country during this period, free from non-Tibetan suzerainty, lacks support from international law and is not corroborated by historical records from other nations. Notably, during the Qing Dynasty, no country recognized Tibet as an independent state; the relationship was characterized more accurately as a priest-patron dynamic. It should be rewritten to reflect Global consensus and not narrowly to a party in exile unilateral talking point, that's disputed by most western scholars. ] (]) 02:05, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 12:24, 12 January 2025

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Dalai Lama 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, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10Auto-archiving period: 3 months 
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  level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject iconTibet Top‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Tibet, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Tibet on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TibetWikipedia:WikiProject TibetTemplate:WikiProject TibetTibet
TopThis article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale.
WikiProject iconBuddhism High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis 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.BuddhismWikipedia:WikiProject BuddhismTemplate:WikiProject BuddhismBuddhism
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconBiography
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Misplaced Pages's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
WikiProject iconVeganism and Vegetarianism Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Veganism and Vegetarianism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of veganism and vegetarianism on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Veganism and VegetarianismWikipedia:WikiProject Veganism and VegetarianismTemplate:WikiProject Veganism and VegetarianismVeganism and Vegetarianism
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconPolitics Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconReligion Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Misplaced Pages's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report. The week in which this happened:

exorcism

The Dalai Lama has a autobiography called freedom in exile. In this books he talks about how he exorcised a spirit. Don't know if it's important. But it maybe added to thearticle what do you think?

legally returned?

The article says in lede that DL "legally returned to the secular leadership position of governing Tibet". But under what authority? Tibetan sovereignty isn't recognised by anyone including the United states. They all recognised it as part of China especially during the mid 1900s. Not only is that statement unsourced but it's obviously got no reliable sources to support that statement. 49.180.4.243 (talk) 00:55, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

Also previous revision makes it seem like Tibet had an independent leader when technically Tibet was under non Tibetan surzeingty since 13th century. And omitted that Ganden Phodrang government was a protectorate under Qing China rule. You can't omit this context merely because it's not a popular truth. I added in that Ganden Phodrang government functioned as a protectorate under Qing China rule but its leaders disagreed that relationship continued with ROC and declared independence. Tho international law doesn't recognise that independence and that DL despite revoking the agreement with China and supporting independence of Tibet, later moderated his views to not support separatism and agree Tibet was part of China in 2005. I included all sources to support the previously omitted context. Without that context, this article is just pushing a pov and omitting facts that are obviously politically unpopular in the west. 49.180.4.243 (talk) 01:50, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
Also, the final paragraph of the lead section presents an oversimplified perspective, aligning primarily with the Tibetan exile government's viewpoint, which is not universally accepted. Historian Sam van Schaik notes that during the Mongol rule, Tibet functioned as a colony. The Bureau of Buddhist and Tibetan Affairs and the Imperial Preceptor, based in Khanbaliq (modern-day Beijing), were officially at the helm of Tibetan administration. However, due to the considerable distance between Mongolia and Tibet, their direct influence on daily governance was minimal. Portraying Tibet as an independent country during this period, free from non-Tibetan suzerainty, lacks support from international law and is not corroborated by historical records from other nations. Notably, during the Qing Dynasty, no country recognized Tibet as an independent state; the relationship was characterized more accurately as a priest-patron dynamic. It should be rewritten to reflect Global consensus and not narrowly to a party in exile unilateral talking point, that's disputed by most western scholars. 49.180.4.243 (talk) 02:05, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
Categories:
Talk:Dalai Lama: Difference between revisions Add topic