Talk:Ngawa Tibetan and Qiang Autonomous Prefecture

Jinchuan
This links to a district in Seoul, South Korea, called Geumcheon-gu. Could someone who knows about it fix the disambiguation page? I don't know enough to help. Millichip 13:48, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

✅. Croquant 13:42, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

expand
Because of the earthquake, now would be a good time to expand this article, with all the details becoming available through news, in this prefecture. 74.15.105.204 (talk) 07:34, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Requested move 25 April 2015

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: no consensus. Number   5  7  12:47, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

Ngawa Tibetan and Qiang Autonomous Prefecture → Aba Tibetan and Qiang Autonomous Prefecture – Aba is the official name consistently used by the prefecture itself. See Prefecture government of Aba China; Aba Prefecture Development and Reform Commission; Aba Prefecture Bureau of Finance; Aba police; Aba Prefecture Environmental Protection Bureau; Land and Resources Department of Aba --Relisted. George Ho (talk) 16:17, 3 May 2015 (UTC) JeuxAlger (talk) 03:54, 25 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Depends on what languages do you read. Original name is "Ngawa". "Aba" is Chinese transcription of Tibetan original name. Now all related articles on English wiki are using "Ngawa", which is original name and name still in use! Chinese of course use "Aba", because they cannot pronounce and write "ng". More than 2/3 of other languages on Wiki spell name as "Ngawa", original name. 3 other languages are Chinese, one Japanese and Korean (cannot pronounce/write "ng"). Ngawa is the name coming from original language in area (Tibetan language), in area lives mainly Tibetan people. There is no reason to rename Tibetan articles according to Chinese (phonetically very very very limited) pronunciation and disability of writing complicated consonants. My reasons are phoneticals/linguistics, not political. Chinese websites might present name as "Aba". It's only because they write pinyin of Chinese characters and neglect Tibetan original and official name. Tibetan language is as well as Chinese language official language in all Tibetan autonomous Prefectures, Counties, Regions... Therefore, we can choose rename Prefecture according to Chinese wrong transcription, or keep original correct name. Andelicek.andy (talk) 08:40, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
 * I think you missed the point. This is not such a Tibetan article as you thought: the area is a Tibetan and Qiang autonomous prefecture. This article may well be named Ggabba prefecture (after its Qiang name) under your reasoning. In any case, I think we should defer to WP:NC and existing rules there require us to adopt the name Aba:
 * per WP:NC-CHN, we can use the well-established English name, if there is one. A search on bbc.com showsAba is better establsihed than Ngawa.
 * If there's no well-established English name, WP:NC-CHN requires using the name preferred by Xinhua, and Xinhuanet.com uses Aba rather than Ngawa.
 * As an alternative, WP:NC-TIBET says benefit of the doubt should be given to the name preferred by the local population. It doesn't matter that the websites above mainly uses the Chinese language. If the locals (mainly Tibetan people as you said) chose to put Aba in English on their website, that is clearly the name preferred by the local population.
 * --JeuxAlger (talk) 15:14, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
 * I missed the point?  benefit of the doubt should be given to the name preferred by the local population.   Ngawa  without doubts! Qiang people, have you met any? Of course in Chinese nationalities lists they exists, but they are relatives to Tibetan and Mongolian, can pronounce NG! If you use latin alphabet and write Ggabba, ok. Or of course, use chinese Xinhua for Meiguo and rename article for America! You give links to Chinese websites, ok, use Chinese rules for everything and rename all English wiki articles according to Chinese pinyin, I gave up for English wiki many years ago, because always somebody who wants to rename things according to foreign language comes. I use language of local people and historical reasons. Local people know what is name of their place, Tibetan and Qiang, both can pronounce NG, they call their home Ngawa. Nobody local cares Chinese and other foreign names. Locals should thank to people who lives hundreds km far and changes their homes! (see self-immolation in Tibet, many of them are because of language policies that vanish Tibetan and Qiang language). btw, WP:NC-TIBET, I never heard Tibetan person say Shannan, after many years of living there!Andelicek.andy (talk) 09:23, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
 * I agree with you (essentially following WP:NC), benefit of the doubt should be given to the name preferred by the local. The locals use Aba as the English name, Ngawa as the Tibetan name -- just as the Germans use Germany as the English, Deutschland as the German name.
 * BTW I don't think this is the proper venue to advocate your political dissent--JeuxAlger (talk) 02:32, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
 * I knew you will say it's "personal attack", but I cannot see mentioned your name. People from big nations always repress small nations and try to destroy their culture. Same as Tibetan. I'm here to advocate local people - Tibetan people. Qiang people barely exist/became Chinese. Local people, if speak English, will always say Ngawa. This request is against all morals and humanity. Not about politics. Future generations will remember people (anybody) who support destroying smaller nations and their civilisations. People as Tibetan are dying to save their language, while other people sit in warm chair and destroy their homes by one click on computer (anybody). Andelicek.andy (talk) 05:46, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
 * I knew you will say it's "personal attack", but I cannot see mentioned your name. People from big nations always repress small nations and try to destroy their culture. Same as Tibetan. I'm here to advocate local people - Tibetan people. Qiang people barely exist/became Chinese. Local people, if speak English, will always say Ngawa. This request is against all morals and humanity. Not about politics. Future generations will remember people (anybody) who support destroying smaller nations and their civilisations. People as Tibetan are dying to save their language, while other people sit in warm chair and destroy their homes by one click on computer (anybody). Andelicek.andy (talk) 05:46, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

Oppose move: This request is against all morals and humanity and should never appear on "free encyclopedia" as Wiki tries to represent. Dozens of people in NGAWA died to protect their languages, e.g. correct name of their home. Andelicek.andy (talk) 05:46, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
 * This request has nothing to do with morality. Please don't superimpose your view on every edit.--JeuxAlger (talk) 14:40, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Oppose move: The official name of Ngawa TQAP is not identifiable from Chinese language websites; as an official Qiang/Tibetan AP, we would use Q/T names. Of those, Ggabba is not widely-employed in English but Ngawa is, as Tibetan is a widely-spoken language. In addition, we use many Tibetan names in preference to their "official" Pinyin romanisation: Ngari, Puhrang, Lhoka, Derge, Golog, as mentioned specifically in the wiki guidelines above. Ogress smash! 21:38, 26 April 2015 (UTC)


 * I believe the official name is identifiable because it is written there in English, as I have reproduced below.


 * --JeuxAlger (talk) 01:55, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
 * That is the Hanyu Pinyin romanisation of the name. The name is right above that in Tibetan, and it is a Tibetan and Qiang Autonomous Region and therefore should fall under the purview of the . Should we change the name of Tibet Autonomous Region to Poi Autonomous Region? Ogress smash! 02:45, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
 * No we shouldn't. I think we fundamentally agree with each other. Precisely because Tibet is the English name while Poi is the Tibetan Pinyin, just as Aba is the English name and Ngawa is the Tibetan Pinyin.--JeuxAlger (talk) 14:43, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
 * "We agree that Aba is the English name because Aba is the English name" is not agreement. Aba is the Standard Chinese in Pinyin, and it's a TQAR, why would the English name be the Standard Chinese attempt to approximate a Tibetan word instead of the Tibetan word? Ogress smash! 18:31, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Missing the point. This is always Chinese pinyin, which they made English name. Nobody asked local people for correct name. This is the point. Andelicek.andy (talk) 06:17, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Those pictures are from local websites. If you claim Aba is not the correct local name you should produce at least some evidence.--JeuxAlger (talk) 14:40, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Support - but not for the reason given by the proposer. Wikipedia does not really care about the official name, but the WP:COMMONNAME used in English, although they are often the same. Native names do not matter either, otherwise we'd have to move Tibet to Bod, China to Zhongguo, and Germany to Deutschland. And the common name for the prefecture is clearly Aba, as shown on Google Ngram. The other alternate spellings, Ngaba and Ngawa, are too uncommon to register on Ngram. -Zanhe (talk) 04:09, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Try it without "Prefecture" and get a very different story. Ogress smash! 05:16, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
 * You did not remove "prefecture" from Aba, only the others. Without "prefecture" it actually looks like this, but that would include lots of false matches for "Aba". That's why I included "prefecture" in the first place. -Zanhe (talk) 05:27, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
 * ... that's why I left in "Aba Prefecture" as-is, because "Aba" isn't a complete title, it's always "Aba Prefecture" or "Abazhou". In comparison, Ngawa and Ngaba rarely use "Prefecture" as it is an actual word in Tibetan and not random syllables to approximate a foreign language, c.f. the Lai Yunfan article I read today that cited "[town name], Rngaba, Sichuan".
 * Sorry but your reasoning is seriously flawed. Aba is as much a complete title as "Ngawa" or "Ngaba" is. Besides, by comparing "Aba Prefecture" to "Ngawa" and "Ngaba", you exclude common occurrences of "Aba Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture" and "Aba, Sichuan", for example, while including all correspondent occurrences of Ngawa and Ngaba, as well as "Ngawa County", "Ngaba Town", "Ngaba (Democratic Republic of Congo)", and so on. That's an apples-to-oranges comparison. -Zanhe (talk) 08:17, 1 May 2015 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Logo doesn't exist
08:48, 4 May 2015 (UTC) LOGO: there is NO official logo of prefecture (check on chinese/tibetan languages websites). Deleted "logo" was only headline from website. Deleted "Full names of the prefecture in Tibetan, Chinese, and English shown on the prefectural government's website" was another headline picture from website. From article is clear chinese pinyin spelling, also all kinds of names for this prefecture. No need to put many headline pictures from chinese websites to show chinese spelling. Andelicek.andy (talk) 08:48, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

History and names section
Hi. There was a revert of 6 edits to the section. Establishing clarity of reasons for reverts and building CON for a better encyclopedia would be good @. Thanks. Pasdecomplot (talk) 14:07, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
 * In the first paragraph: the link to Vairotsana explains this historical person was a renown translator during the reign of Tibet's king Trisong Deutsen, and was responsible for translating Buddhist texts into the Tibetan language. At that time, Tibet was a recognized sovereign nation with a king. Unless history itself is being challenged, the reason for the revert is unclear (especially since no RS are currently provided).
 * 2nd paragraph: The link to Gelug explains it is a school of Tibetan Buddhism, as most editors of Tibetan Buddhism know. Unless these facts are being challenged, the reason for the revert is unclear.
 * 3rd paragraph: the phrase "According to contemporary history" is OR sinced it's unsourced. Whose version of contemporary history - China's, or Tibet's, or an academic interpretation, or personal opinion? A ref would answer the question. But, what is the definition of contemporary history? At which dates does contemporary history begin and end, as it references the page's subject? These questions and lack of RS led to the edit of the phrase to read as more NPOV, especially since views of history are different, "According to some sources". Is there RS, or does the NPOV phrase stand?
 * 4th paragraph: Adding the historical name Battle of Chamdo to the highly notable fight is obviously a beneficial edit; The Battle is a highly notable historical event for the page's subject. Afterwards, including mention of the current and well known Tibetan interpretation of the Battle's result (an official military invasion) seemed obvious, and is followed by better sentence structures. The reverts here are unclear.
 * 5th paragraph: the date was edited for standard format - day month year. The revert undid the format.
 * 6th paragraph: here, missing info was inserted, "On 16 March 2008, clashes between Chinese authorities and Tibetan monks and nuns together with ordinary Tibetans commenced in Ngaba prefecture and spread during the 2008 Tibetan uprising anniversary, seen as the most serious threat to China's rule since the 1959 Tibetan uprising." It's easy to add an RS for the last statement, if that's the issue. Deleting all notable info on the 2008 unrest (which is supported by RS at the links) makes the later paragraph 7 seem random.
 * 7th paragraph: date of RS is 2013 and edits correspond to title of RS on China's Cyber wall. Reverts are again unclear.
 * 8th paragraph: no edits, no reverts
 * 9th paragraph: Self immolations in Tibet are very notable since they began in page's subject, and are widely reported on by international RS. As a reminder, RSN closing said each source should be commented on separately; before RSN closing, ITC was considered one of the better sources, and use was described generally. Since section does not include sources or RS except from abazhou.gov (except for 7), and since the ITC source on all self-immolations from 2009-2019 is solid, it seemed appropriate to provide ITC as a source. It can be supported by RS, and should be readded.


 * 7th: double checked RS, added edits per text RS, and a quotation
 * 9th: readded very notable info on self immolations in the prefecture (it's actually called the 'self-immolation capital of the world'), with NYT, and Tibetan Express RS w quotation. It's even better.
 * Good? Thanks. Pasdecomplot (talk) 15:36, 16 October 2020 (UTC)


 * Recorrected/readded basic historical facts to 1st and 2nd paragraphs. Pasdecomplot (talk) 18:11, 24 October 2020 (UTC)