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
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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
International relations 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.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations articles
A fact from Memorandum on Genuine Autonomy appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the Did you know column on 29 August 2021 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as
this nomination's talk page,
the article's talk page or
Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
New (3 days from creation to nomination); long enough; no sign of copyvio (there was one list of items where the role of quotation marks was difficult to decide; I added the quotation marks); generally follows Wikipedia policy. I smoothed out a bit of the English. However, the hook is not justified literally, since finding a source that can objectively decide when autonomy is "genuine" or not, and whether or not the Dalai Lama's approach was really seeking that or not, is a matter of judgment.I propose ALT1. The aim is to focus on the document itself - the Memorandum - rather than on what the Dalai Lama's intentions were or whether the autonomy would have been genuine or not. I also inserted full as a redundant adjective to reduce the chance of misunderstanding of what counts as autonomy and what counts as independence. Would ALT1 (or a new ALT2 or ALT3...) be acceptable?
Boud (
talk) 03:14, 18 August 2021 (UTC) I forgot to mention: QPQ - yes.Boud (
talk)
03:25, 18 August 2021 (UTC)reply
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
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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
International relations 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.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations articles
A fact from Memorandum on Genuine Autonomy appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the Did you know column on 29 August 2021 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as
this nomination's talk page,
the article's talk page or
Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
New (3 days from creation to nomination); long enough; no sign of copyvio (there was one list of items where the role of quotation marks was difficult to decide; I added the quotation marks); generally follows Wikipedia policy. I smoothed out a bit of the English. However, the hook is not justified literally, since finding a source that can objectively decide when autonomy is "genuine" or not, and whether or not the Dalai Lama's approach was really seeking that or not, is a matter of judgment.I propose ALT1. The aim is to focus on the document itself - the Memorandum - rather than on what the Dalai Lama's intentions were or whether the autonomy would have been genuine or not. I also inserted full as a redundant adjective to reduce the chance of misunderstanding of what counts as autonomy and what counts as independence. Would ALT1 (or a new ALT2 or ALT3...) be acceptable?
Boud (
talk) 03:14, 18 August 2021 (UTC) I forgot to mention: QPQ - yes.Boud (
talk)
03:25, 18 August 2021 (UTC)reply