A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on July 1, 2012 and July 1, 2016. |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
"BSP carriages are from Bombardier" --- what is a BSP carriage? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.241.170.18 ( talk) 20:30, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
is the chart really necessary in an encyclopedia article? will delete later if no one objects. -anon —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.180.26.63 ( talk) 14:01, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
I find this section full of contradictory statements. It speaks of the need to improve educational access to Tibetans & the ability to compete in the economy, yet rails against the logistical basis on which it must be achieved. How could access to better education come about when people have no ability migrate and settle in Tibet? How can Tibetans be competitive if they are perpetually kept in the nomadic lifestyles of feudal times? How can Tibetians benefit economically when they remain isolated and have no knowledge of or exposure to people beyond the next hill or mountain? How can the economy improve without the logistical infrastructure to channel in technology, capital, entrepreneurs, and skilled labor? It may be true that Tibetans are by enlarge unable to compete economically in the status quo. However, by NOT embarking on projects like this railway, they will only remain impoverished, and the socio-economic gap between Tibetans & Hans will be even greater. So do you guys think an attempt should be made to discuss these contradictions?-- Lssah 88 05:20, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
When the railway construction that started on June 29, 2001 is complete (expected in 2005; signalling and track testing require another 6 to 12 months), it will be possible to travel from Lhasa to Beijing in 48 hours
What's the length of the railway platforms? 68.23.224.34 17:51, 24 August 2005 (UTC)
An anonymous contributor on ipaddress 81.229.147.109 changed a section the explanation of the railways name from:
to
The second is certainly wrong, as Zizang is a piece of written text in a latin alphabet, wheras Putonghua is a spoken language only, with no way of being represented in a latin alphabet without some form of transcription. Anybody know a better way of putting this. -- Chris j wood 13:18, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
While the Google image search result showed relevant images, I do not believe that linking to such results should be included in the External links section as the search results aren't a website in itself. slambo 15:00, August 28, 2005 (UTC)
How much did it cost to construct the railway? — Insta ntnood 23:06, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
I think this article should be moved to Qinghai-Tibet Railway. That seems to be the more common name in English sources. - Nat Krause( Talk!) 17:19, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
There have been similar discussion on railway article names on the Trains project page and on individual article pages. In general, we normally use the railroad company's most recent or most common corporate name and add redirects for common names. Slambo (Speak) 19:22, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
Use the English name that is most commonly used in English-language publications, as well as most commonly used by the PRC government. — Insta ntnood 16:07, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
If it's moved again (and I have no opinion on the article title right now), please ensure that the todolist at Talk:Qingzang railway/to do gets moved appropriately too. Moving the main article does not touch subpages such as this. Slambo (Speak) 10:35, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
Why is the result "no consensus"? I count one editor (Yao Ziyuan) opposed to the move and three (myself, Gryffindor, and Instantnood) in support. - Nat Krause( Talk!) 07:29, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
I'm closing this debate as no consensus. I only count two in favor and one opposed, and this debate has gone dead anyway. Mango juice talk 15:34, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
I suggest a new section on the technical challenges encountered during the construction of the railway should be added to this article. It is because from what I read from the press, the high altitude of the region was causing all sorts of trouble during the planning and construction stage. I am no expert in the matter so it would be really appreciated if someone could add to that. cheungie 00:57, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
BBC News is reporting: "sealed cabins to protect passengers from the high altitude." http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/5133220.stm
Does that equate to a pressurised cabin? - this could be included in the article when clarified.
However, the immediate and direct economic benefit to the Tibetan population is immeasurable.
While this is plausible, it is unsourced and probably POV even if it were sourced. Miraculouschaos 19:54, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
For those interested, Wired Magazine wrote an article on this railway for their July 2006 issue. I read some of it and it seems quite useful. It's available online here: Wired online article. - Zepheus 19:14, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
In the lead paragraph, why isn't the Tibetan-language name given for the railway alongside the Mandarin and English ones? -- Dpr 01:35, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
â—Normal station â—Station with è§‚æ™¯å° Note: stations in gray are æ— äººèŒå®ˆè½¦ç«™ Note: 本图åªåšç¤ºæ„之用
Okay, uh, what? I thought this was the English wikipedia. That text isn't even part of the image. 24.154.89.54 03:56, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
There are some photographs in the German version of this page. Can we use them over here?-- DIGIwarez 04:44, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
This is a great list, but it makes the page a little hard to read and edit. Can I have your thoughts please on:
Thanks -- Guinnog 05:54, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
Re: The critism section. Is that normal on other Chinese trains? Jon 13:53, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
The corporation may call it Qingzang, but wouldn't it make sense to translate that into English? After all, Qingzang really only means Qinghai-Xizang, or, in English, Qinghai-Tibet. For example, you wouldn't make the page for the people's republic of China say "zhonghua renmin gongheguo." (I know that's not a great example, but I think you get my point) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.175.106.136 ( talk • contribs) 22:30, September 9, 2006. Mistakefinder ( talk) 14:26, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
User:Huaiwei's edits ( [3] [4] [5]; [6]) are effectively implying that Macao, a special administrative region which has no railway, is not a province-level entity. I agree with this view, but I am well aware that it has always been a matter of debate on Wikipedia. Saying "last province-level entity in mainland China" is, in comparison, always correct. — Insta ntnood 16:50, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
I just watched an episode of Discovery's "Man Made Wonders" that deals with this railroad. They give an inauguration date of 1 July 2005 (even emphasizing that it was completed one year earlier than planned). The article says 1 July 2006.
Which date is correct?
-- 195.56.53.118 ( talk) 22:58, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
Question to original writer: In the opening paragraph, after the Tibetian name is a series of rectangle characters(མཚོ་བོད་ལྕགས་ལམà¼). Are these supposed to be some Tibetian written script that cannot be displayed, or a mistake? Please indicate the language so I can install font support for that language or remove those characters. -- Mistakefinder ( talk) 14:43, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
Accompanied by short clip talking about "The world highest railway". No signs of explanation what effect climate change will have or when it has been predicted to happen. While that clip might be worthy to illustrate uniqueness of r/r or to introduce engineering challenges, it does not explain that predicted "negative effect" caused thawing permafrost layer. I removed that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.228.113.52 ( talk) 16:13, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
"temperatures in the Tibetan Plateau will increase by an estimated two to three degrees Celsius."
Without debating whether or not it is correct, it is not a fact but is stated as such. SteveOak ( talk) 19:07, 17 September 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by SteveOak ( talk • contribs) 04:09, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Qinghai–Tibet Railway. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 02:19, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 2 external links on
Qinghai–Tibet Railway. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked=
to true
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 15:21, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Qinghai–Tibet railway/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.
This article has a lot of good stuff, but too many pictures and tables. -- Danaman5 07:07, 14 January 2007 (UTC) |
Last edited at 01:47, 1 January 2012 (UTC). Substituted at 03:36, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Qinghai–Tibet Railway. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 10:40, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Qinghai–Tibet Railway. 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:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.cntabi.com/kankou/qingzang/qztl-jingdian.phpWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 23:41, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
The "economic" and "social" sections of the page are literally Chinese state propaganda. The railway is presented only as a boon to Tibetan peoples. This POV is, of course, exactly what the authoritarian state would like to suggest. Quoting state only state sources wildly biases these section. By contrast, notable Tibet Studies scholars such as Emily Yeh, Charley Makley, and Andrew Grant have extensively published on the detrimental impacts felt by Tibetan peoples, as a direct result of infrastructure such as the Q-T railway. This article badly needs to get rid of Chinese state sources and present leading academic scholars' points of view. -- Smilo Don ( talk) 14:26, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on July 1, 2012 and July 1, 2016. |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
"BSP carriages are from Bombardier" --- what is a BSP carriage? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.241.170.18 ( talk) 20:30, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
is the chart really necessary in an encyclopedia article? will delete later if no one objects. -anon —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.180.26.63 ( talk) 14:01, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
I find this section full of contradictory statements. It speaks of the need to improve educational access to Tibetans & the ability to compete in the economy, yet rails against the logistical basis on which it must be achieved. How could access to better education come about when people have no ability migrate and settle in Tibet? How can Tibetans be competitive if they are perpetually kept in the nomadic lifestyles of feudal times? How can Tibetians benefit economically when they remain isolated and have no knowledge of or exposure to people beyond the next hill or mountain? How can the economy improve without the logistical infrastructure to channel in technology, capital, entrepreneurs, and skilled labor? It may be true that Tibetans are by enlarge unable to compete economically in the status quo. However, by NOT embarking on projects like this railway, they will only remain impoverished, and the socio-economic gap between Tibetans & Hans will be even greater. So do you guys think an attempt should be made to discuss these contradictions?-- Lssah 88 05:20, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
When the railway construction that started on June 29, 2001 is complete (expected in 2005; signalling and track testing require another 6 to 12 months), it will be possible to travel from Lhasa to Beijing in 48 hours
What's the length of the railway platforms? 68.23.224.34 17:51, 24 August 2005 (UTC)
An anonymous contributor on ipaddress 81.229.147.109 changed a section the explanation of the railways name from:
to
The second is certainly wrong, as Zizang is a piece of written text in a latin alphabet, wheras Putonghua is a spoken language only, with no way of being represented in a latin alphabet without some form of transcription. Anybody know a better way of putting this. -- Chris j wood 13:18, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
While the Google image search result showed relevant images, I do not believe that linking to such results should be included in the External links section as the search results aren't a website in itself. slambo 15:00, August 28, 2005 (UTC)
How much did it cost to construct the railway? — Insta ntnood 23:06, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
I think this article should be moved to Qinghai-Tibet Railway. That seems to be the more common name in English sources. - Nat Krause( Talk!) 17:19, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
There have been similar discussion on railway article names on the Trains project page and on individual article pages. In general, we normally use the railroad company's most recent or most common corporate name and add redirects for common names. Slambo (Speak) 19:22, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
Use the English name that is most commonly used in English-language publications, as well as most commonly used by the PRC government. — Insta ntnood 16:07, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
If it's moved again (and I have no opinion on the article title right now), please ensure that the todolist at Talk:Qingzang railway/to do gets moved appropriately too. Moving the main article does not touch subpages such as this. Slambo (Speak) 10:35, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
Why is the result "no consensus"? I count one editor (Yao Ziyuan) opposed to the move and three (myself, Gryffindor, and Instantnood) in support. - Nat Krause( Talk!) 07:29, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
I'm closing this debate as no consensus. I only count two in favor and one opposed, and this debate has gone dead anyway. Mango juice talk 15:34, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
I suggest a new section on the technical challenges encountered during the construction of the railway should be added to this article. It is because from what I read from the press, the high altitude of the region was causing all sorts of trouble during the planning and construction stage. I am no expert in the matter so it would be really appreciated if someone could add to that. cheungie 00:57, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
BBC News is reporting: "sealed cabins to protect passengers from the high altitude." http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/5133220.stm
Does that equate to a pressurised cabin? - this could be included in the article when clarified.
However, the immediate and direct economic benefit to the Tibetan population is immeasurable.
While this is plausible, it is unsourced and probably POV even if it were sourced. Miraculouschaos 19:54, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
For those interested, Wired Magazine wrote an article on this railway for their July 2006 issue. I read some of it and it seems quite useful. It's available online here: Wired online article. - Zepheus 19:14, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
In the lead paragraph, why isn't the Tibetan-language name given for the railway alongside the Mandarin and English ones? -- Dpr 01:35, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
â—Normal station â—Station with è§‚æ™¯å° Note: stations in gray are æ— äººèŒå®ˆè½¦ç«™ Note: 本图åªåšç¤ºæ„之用
Okay, uh, what? I thought this was the English wikipedia. That text isn't even part of the image. 24.154.89.54 03:56, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
There are some photographs in the German version of this page. Can we use them over here?-- DIGIwarez 04:44, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
This is a great list, but it makes the page a little hard to read and edit. Can I have your thoughts please on:
Thanks -- Guinnog 05:54, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
Re: The critism section. Is that normal on other Chinese trains? Jon 13:53, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
The corporation may call it Qingzang, but wouldn't it make sense to translate that into English? After all, Qingzang really only means Qinghai-Xizang, or, in English, Qinghai-Tibet. For example, you wouldn't make the page for the people's republic of China say "zhonghua renmin gongheguo." (I know that's not a great example, but I think you get my point) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.175.106.136 ( talk • contribs) 22:30, September 9, 2006. Mistakefinder ( talk) 14:26, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
User:Huaiwei's edits ( [3] [4] [5]; [6]) are effectively implying that Macao, a special administrative region which has no railway, is not a province-level entity. I agree with this view, but I am well aware that it has always been a matter of debate on Wikipedia. Saying "last province-level entity in mainland China" is, in comparison, always correct. — Insta ntnood 16:50, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
I just watched an episode of Discovery's "Man Made Wonders" that deals with this railroad. They give an inauguration date of 1 July 2005 (even emphasizing that it was completed one year earlier than planned). The article says 1 July 2006.
Which date is correct?
-- 195.56.53.118 ( talk) 22:58, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
Question to original writer: In the opening paragraph, after the Tibetian name is a series of rectangle characters(མཚོ་བོད་ལྕགས་ལམà¼). Are these supposed to be some Tibetian written script that cannot be displayed, or a mistake? Please indicate the language so I can install font support for that language or remove those characters. -- Mistakefinder ( talk) 14:43, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
Accompanied by short clip talking about "The world highest railway". No signs of explanation what effect climate change will have or when it has been predicted to happen. While that clip might be worthy to illustrate uniqueness of r/r or to introduce engineering challenges, it does not explain that predicted "negative effect" caused thawing permafrost layer. I removed that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.228.113.52 ( talk) 16:13, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
"temperatures in the Tibetan Plateau will increase by an estimated two to three degrees Celsius."
Without debating whether or not it is correct, it is not a fact but is stated as such. SteveOak ( talk) 19:07, 17 September 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by SteveOak ( talk • contribs) 04:09, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Qinghai–Tibet Railway. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 02:19, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 2 external links on
Qinghai–Tibet Railway. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked=
to true
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 15:21, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Qinghai–Tibet railway/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.
This article has a lot of good stuff, but too many pictures and tables. -- Danaman5 07:07, 14 January 2007 (UTC) |
Last edited at 01:47, 1 January 2012 (UTC). Substituted at 03:36, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Qinghai–Tibet Railway. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 10:40, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Qinghai–Tibet Railway. 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:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.cntabi.com/kankou/qingzang/qztl-jingdian.phpWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 23:41, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
The "economic" and "social" sections of the page are literally Chinese state propaganda. The railway is presented only as a boon to Tibetan peoples. This POV is, of course, exactly what the authoritarian state would like to suggest. Quoting state only state sources wildly biases these section. By contrast, notable Tibet Studies scholars such as Emily Yeh, Charley Makley, and Andrew Grant have extensively published on the detrimental impacts felt by Tibetan peoples, as a direct result of infrastructure such as the Q-T railway. This article badly needs to get rid of Chinese state sources and present leading academic scholars' points of view. -- Smilo Don ( talk) 14:26, 27 September 2022 (UTC)