Talk:Khaplu

External Links

I just re-removed the addition of an EL to a "Tibetan Encyclopedia", since, first of all, the site isn't in English, so it is very likely to not be useful to readers of en.wiki; second, it's quality/authority is unclear to me (although maybe someone who can read German can clarify that); finally, since it isn't in English, I can't verify that it actually meets the fairly strict standards in WP:EL, requiring that the information be neutral, high quality, etc.

However, in the edit summary, the adder of the EL (User:Kmhkmh) pointed out that the other links currently in the article aren't so great. There is a specific reason for linking to picture sites, mentioned in WP:ELYES #3. It is likely, though, that we don't need all of those flickr and other photo posting sites. As such, I think it would be good if we cut them down to the best ones. The network I'm accessing WP from at the moment blocks sites of that type, so I can't investigate myself, but I'd like input from others anyway about which seem to be the best and worth keeping. Unless they really offer something special and unique, I'd say we don't want more than 1 or 2 of those photo sites. Remember, our job with External Links is not to provide every possible online resource--only the absolute best that help readers understand the encyclopedic subject in question. Qwyrxian (talk) 05:33, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Alright

• You are indeed correct that the Tibet Encyclopedia is not in English, but the language issue aside it doesn't violate WP:EL. I must admit since I can read German I've paid not attention to the language, but this does indeed severely limit its use as an external link in en.wp. It still is an excellent site for images and maps of the area though. More importantly however it is an not just another website on Tibet, but an expert site (it actually qualifies as a source). The site's main author and supervisor is Dieter Schuh, who is a retired professor for Asian and Tibet studies of the University of Bonn. Since the site contains a lot more and better researched information than the current literature under references, I'd suggest to move it from external links to references. There it can be used to source the current stub but also serve as an excellence reference for further extensions. It also provides a bibliography of authoritative literature on Khaplu and sourroundings that might be helpful for authors.
• As far as the other links are concerned, their purpose is indeed just to provide pictures as we currently have none on Commons. Principally in such a case one link with an appropriate collection of pictures would be sufficient under external links. However in this special case, there was originally no collection covering all important visual aspects/attraction of the town (fort, palace, mosque, panoramic view), that's why we had 4 different links for 4 different photos/motives. Later one collection was added, which covers all motives but the fort. This could be used to replace 3 older links by the new link, but imho its images are clearly inferior in resolution and lighting, that's why so far I left the links as they were. I guess one could also simply remove the later link by arguing it doesn't any important new visual material. However, it is not that this article is currently under threat of being spammed with unwanted links, so I don't see any harm in keeping it.

--Kmhkmh (talk) 10:11, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Given that Schuch has his own Wikipedia page with references that seem to verify that he does qualify as an expert in Tibet, it does, in that sense, seem like an acceptable link and/or reliable source. I'm going to go ahead and self-revert and add the German language tag. If you think there's info in there worthy of being included in the article, feel free to convert it to a source. My apologies for making such a big deal about this; I see all sorts of really bad links, sometimes even to sites that claim to be encyclopedias or other high quality sources, but which aren't. The other day someone even recommended Meatapedia as a reliable source...so, I was perhaps unacceptably skeptical.

Regarding the pictures...I'm willing to trust you if you think that all of the picture sites are worthwhile. Qwyrxian (talk) 11:56, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

request to merge article

Article Khaplu Valley and article Khaplu are the same article defining about the same place so it should be merge into Khaplu to avoid confusion.--Baltistani (talk) 08:59, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Khaplu. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150110001321/http://www.skardu.pk/khaplu-valley to http://www.skardu.pk/khaplu-valley

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).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:16, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

The first image is the image of Northern India

Not sure why Indian lands are being encroached upon by neighboring countries on Google maps 2600:1700:1482:46F0:80DD:1A74:9168:3706 (talk) 23:09, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

If you bothered to click on the link to Gilgit-Baltistan, you would have known the answer. More on it at Kashmir conflict. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 00:08, 30 December 2021 (UTC)