Talk:International Tibet Independence Movement
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
From Wikipedia:Translation into English:
- Article: zh-tw:西藏獨立運動
- Corresponding English-language article: International Tibet Independence Movement.
- Worth doing because: Long article in Chinese; English-language article is a stub
- Originally Requested by: Jmabel on behalf of User:Eequor
- Status: In-Progress, Vina 20:56, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- Completed, Vina 06:54, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- Other notes: User:Eequor tagged the English-language page as "needing translation", but did not note it here.
- I did the Translation, but I cut quite a bit that was in other articles, and I feel that the actual article doesn't really touch on the movement as an organization, as opposed to the movement as an ideology. Don't know if futher cleanup is appropriate -Vina 06:54, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)
[edit] Why do you remove my link?
I found the author view is distinct, after reading through it I found my attitude was changed greatly. If you don't want add an external link, you can add his opinion to the article. "This is not an essay that tries to justify or defend China's human rights violations in Tibet. This is an essay that tries to present information that most Free Tibet pamphlets and articles omit, and builds the argument that campaigning to "free" Tibet is both socially and morally irresponsible."
- Ok, but don't add it to every Tibet-related page. Add it to one that's appropriate. --Khoikhoi 06:00, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Led by the 14th Dalai Lama?
I thought he renounced independence and instead advocates full autonomy within China?
As early as 1988, The Dalai Lama did make clear that he wasn't advocating for Tibetan independence and as such, the Dalai lama cannot be said to lead the independence movement. I have removed this and tried to make the introductory text more accurate. We'll see if it remains. --coldmtn 12:30, 4 Feb 2006
- The Dalai Lama wants what's realistic and does not involve any sort of aggression. Therefore he has agreed (he has no other peaceful choice!)to an autonomy BUT he has very important conditions such as freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of expression, you know, things that under the current regime china does not have! Me 21:28, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
Well, maybe not freedom of religion (good thing, IMO), but buddhists are definitely allowed to practice
[edit] Kham
This article claims that the "International Tibet Independence Movement" includes Kham as one of the three provinces of Tibet and as part of their independent movement advocacy. But isn't Kham, particularly Eastern Kham, was under the full administration of China throughout most of the 20th century? Following the collapse of Qing Dynasty, the Republic of China administrated this region and then followed by the People's Liberation Army of the Chinese Communist Party entering the Western region of Kham as well as Ü-Tsang. I think it is kind of strange that the ITIM would be claiming this region as part of their movement, since while it has Tibetan populations, it was never politically under Tibetan governing throughout modern history. Anyway, I think they are over-claiming this territories a bit, which I'm afraid won't help their cause that much.
Also, I wish this article could be more specific and neutral in terms of desribing this cause. Much of the informations displayed here appears poorly written. Could anyone provides informations from other prominent encyclopedias (i.e. Britannica) and sources other than pro-Tibetan independence websites. --Daudulaka 04:54, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
- It doesn't really matter whether you think it's a strange thing or not. It is, however, a politically contentious issue, that's for sure.—Nat Krause(Talk!) 20:56, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
