Talk:70,000 Character Petition

Reliability of sources
The primary source for the relevant information in this article is almost exclusively TIN, the Tibet Information Network, a pro-Tibetan independence group with stated interest in portraying PRC actions in Tibet negatively. In and of itself this isn't a problem, but directly or indirectly, all but 3 of the citations relating to the subject matter (and not the disappearance of the 11th Panchen Lama or other secondary information) are from TIN or news agencies reporting on the TIN release, and TIN language colors the entire article. It doesn't seem very neutral to have an article entirely based upon repeating political propaganda, without contextualizing the source or including other views.--AScanner (talk) 05:26, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

Translation in progress...
The original English version was translated from the French article using the mw:Content translation tool. The tool leaves a lot of cruft that needs manual updating, and I've been busy doing mostly that, along with adding refs and fleshing out existing refs by adding cite web templates and other minor general cleanup. When I have a version that seems like a clean translation, I'll mark it so here using the Translated page template, and remove the in use banner from the article page. Mathglot (talk) 19:41, 18 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Great, thanks for working on it. It's an important topic, well worth attention. – Greg Pandatshang (talk) 13:50, 19 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Even though there's some cruft left, it's mostly done. There are some quotations in French from books translated from English into French that need to find the original English as it was written--it won't do to back-translate a French translation back into English again.  There are also some similar or duplicate references to be consolidated, and other minor stuff.  At this point, it's more important to pick up the article and start to improve it (there's plenty of room for that) than to get every last minor translation issue covered.  So, have at it! Mathglot (talk) 08:47, 20 April 2016 (UTC)