Talk:South Tibet

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Is it sure that South Tibet and Arunachal Pradesh are the same place? I don't think so.And South Tibet is part of Tibetan culture for long time. you can go to Tibet to clarify it.Ksyrie 02:45, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

South Tibet (藏南) is just what China calls Arunachal Pradesh, according to that article. I myself have never heard "South Tibet" used by Tibetans. Another thing, I thought that most of the ethnic groups in Arunachal Pradesh weren't Tibetans, but different tribal peoples. Correct me if I'm wrong. (for both of the things I said) --Khoikhoi 02:49, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

I didn't mean they are Tibetan but only they are Tibetan or of Thai-Burmese origin.And for more South Tibet has much links with Tibet as I knowKsyrie 03:23, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

Yes, but did the Tibetans refer to it as South Tibet? It seems that it is just a Chinese term, and should be merged into the main article, Arunachal Pradesh. --Khoikhoi 05:29, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

But it seems Arunachal Pradesh is a indian term,not a tibetan term.Ksyrie

Two terms for the same place... Khoikhoi 20:17, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Not exactly,South Tibet roughly corresponds the Arunachal Pradesh,but not completely--Ksyrie 22:07, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

If so, cite sources. Khoikhoi 02:01, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

All the sources you can find in Arunachal Pradesh--Ksyrie 03:13, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Although part of that article is sourced, the paragraph about South Tibet is not. Khoikhoi 04:47, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

This article doesn't make sense. It doesn't even define the concept or territory of "South Tibet". Two "definitions" are given:

• "it roughly corresponds to the presently Indian-administered state of Arunachal Pradesh"
• and "South Tibet means Zangnan (藏南) in Chinese."

No sources are given for either definition, and there is a huge contradiction between the two: Zàngnán 藏南 is the area between the Himalaya and Gangdisê (Kailash) mountain ranges, and that's not the same as Arunachal Pradesh. I doubt that "South Tibet" is a clearly defined term in English, as Zàngnán 藏南 is in Chinese. Three "references" are given:

• "Satellite Map of Zangnan"

The title of this map is actually "Màixiàn yǐnán wèixīngtú 麦线以南卫星图", i.e. "Satellite Map [of the areas] south of the McMahon line". Not a word about "Zangnan" or "South Tibet". The translation "Satellite Map of Zangnan" is wrong and misleading.

• "Introduction to the geography and political problem in Zangnan"

This is an anonymous post to a discussion forum, probably copied from somewhere else. It is not really about "Zangnan", but about the dispute with India. "Zangnan" is not really equated with Arunachal Pradesh that post. Besides that, the title is not quoted (translated) correctly. Clearly not an appropriate reference.

• "The map of Zangnan occupied by India"

This is actually a map that shows the border dispute between India and China in the eastern sector. The title is actually "China-India Border: Eastern Sector". It doesn't contain the words "Zangnan", "South Tibet", or "occupied". —Babelfisch 03:27, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] No, South Tibet doesn't cover the same district as Arunachal Pradesh

Somebody asked me for the comments to the deletion of the article. I don't care the political dispute over this area, but I'm afraid that the article Arunachal Pradesh could be renamed to be South Tibet in 50 years. ——Nussknacker胡桃夹子^.^tell me... 11:26, 28 March 2007 (UTC)