Talk:Amban

List of Ambasa in Tibet

Is this list really necessary? I can find the "correct" spellings of the names, little by little, but I don't like the way the whole text is dominated by a list. Shall we delete it or move it to a box or something? --Niohe 13:34, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

From the map in the Qing Dynasty article, it's clear that these territories were considered part of the Qing Dynasty, not merely accepted Qing's suzerainty (and yes, the meanings of suzerainty and sovereignty are different). Either the relevant wording in this article or the map of the Qing Dynasty should be changed. But if you don't like the word "sovereignty", then let's change it to "authority" instead.--207.112.71.179 (talk) 06:27, 19 October 2008 (UTC)


 * I don't think that the categories of "sovereignty" and "suzerainty" are very relevant to Qing China. I would suggest finding another wording ... "authority" might be the right choice.&mdash;Nat Krause(Talk!·What have I done?) 18:20, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Amban. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120322030513/http://onlinehistories.ssrc.org/centralasia/glossary/default.aspx to http://onlinehistories.ssrc.org/centralasia/glossary/default.aspx
 * Added tag to http://iea.cass.cn/jianbao/F000252.doc

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 10:38, 3 July 2017 (UTC)