This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Tibet Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Tibet, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Tibet on Wikipedia. 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 articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale. China Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject China, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of China related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChinaWikipedia:WikiProject ChinaTemplate:WikiProject ChinaChina-related articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

I recently proposed a new set of Tibetan naming conventions which could end up affecting the title of this article. Please see Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Tibetan) and Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (Tibetan)#New naming convention proposal. Your comments and feedback are requested.— Nat Krause^{( Talk!· What have I done?)} 23:36, 25 April 2010 (UTC) reply

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Lhasa which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. — RMCD bot 22:44, 10 July 2015 (UTC) reply

The population in the table must be wrong - not only is it too low to support a mining town, but one has a population of 0, one of 2.5 and another of -6 5.173.233.45 ( talk) 08:09, 29 October 2022 (UTC) reply

This seems to be because of the Revision as of 15:44, 8 May 2021, this page has a history of vandalism — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.173.233.45 ( talk)