Talk:Lhasa (disambiguation)

This disambiguation page 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

Disambiguation

This disambiguation page is within the scope of WikiProject Disambiguation, an attempt to structure and organize all disambiguation pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, you can edit the page attached to this talk page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.DisambiguationWikipedia:WikiProject DisambiguationTemplate:WikiProject DisambiguationDisambiguation articles

Requested move 9 August 2017

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Not moved. Whatever the outcome of the Move Review will be, there is clear consensus that the dab page at base title is not the preferred option. No such user (talk) 11:26, 21 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Lhasa (disambiguation) → Lhasa – Per WP:MALPLACED. Also suggested by Feminist at Talk:Chengguan District, Lhasa#Requested move 27 July 2017. The redirect created by Alex Shih after reverting the move was retargeted by 111.207.200.219. GeoffreyT2000 ^{(talk, contribs)} 01:53, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. The capital of Tibet is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC of the title Lhasa. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 09:56, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. In my experience, WP:PRIMARYTOPIC is often over-enforced, resulting in a page collecting large numbers of bad links. I only like it when one meaning is overwhelmingly the main one. This is one such case: Lhasa is the capital of Tibet. The only question for me is whether Lhasa should redirect to Chengguan District, Lhasa or to Lhasa (prefecture-level city), but that is outside this discussion. Narky Blert (talk) 10:14, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

On most Wikipedia language editions, Lhasa (prefecture-level city) is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, but Chengguan District, Lhasa seems to be more sought after here. Having the disambiguation page at the base title is a good compromise. f e minist 12:08, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose, the population center is by far the common meaning. And this poorly attended RM should be revisited (and IMO, Chengguan District, Lhasa should be moved back to Lhasa). older ≠ wiser 12:26, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose and send prior move to move review seeking Overturn. The central Chengguan District is the dominant subject for "Lhasa" and should retain the simpler title. — JFG ^talk 17:59, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. This case rhymes with New York, which might lend support to the idea that there's no primary topic. But, while Lhasa (prefecture-level city) is the rough equivalent of New York (state), it is definitely not the case that the Chengguan District is equivalent to New York City. That would be like taking a government entity whose boundaries were all of Long Island and every borough of New York except The Bronx, and calling that the primary topic article about New York (in my analogy, Doilungdêqên District is like Bronx, albeit west of the center rather than north of it). As with New York, most people living outside the prefecture view the urban core as the primary topic. I was thinking it possible, that, as with those living Upstate in NY, Chinese readers might view the "City" (actually more like a city-state) as the primary topic, but hey, look at the Japanese "ambiguity avoidance" page: neither the "City" nor the Chengguan District is primary topic. Rather the Japanese primary topic at the base title ja:ラサ is about the "ancient capital of Tibet established in the seventh century". Maybe we can follow Japan's lead and get most of the content of the Chengguan District article split to an article at the base title that gives a broad overview of the metro area, even though we can't define specific political boundaries for it? A trout to those who made the recent move that JFG wants to overturn, without notifying the participants in past discussions about this. wbm1058 (talk) 18:20, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Compare this with Chongqing (Chung King), a major "city" in southwest China that covers 82,403 km² (almost as big as South Carolina). That article is filled with skyline photos showing lots of tall buildings, including this photo that is also included in the Yuzhong District article. So far, I don't believe that there's been any push to redirect Chung King to Yuzhong District. It's odd that the article specifically about "downtown Chongqing" has so little information about the urban center, while the article about the great "city-state" with lots of surrounding countryside seems to have an unbalanced focus on its relatively small-sized urban core. wbm1058 (talk) 19:26, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Very interesting information, thanks. What Chinese people call a "city" seems very different from what English speakers call a "city". Per WP:UE, we should focus on what an English reader considers a city. I would support a split of the Chengguan District, Lhasa article into one about the historical city center "Lhasa" and another about the larger district. But let's settle the present debate first. — JFG ^talk 08:08, 10 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. I agree that the move of Lhasa to Chengguan District, Lhasa should be revisited. User:Wbm1058's link to ja:ラサ is pertinent. The 1904 Younghusband Expedition is also relevant. Narky Blert (talk) 22:21, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose this proposal. Support a relisting/revisit/overturn of the recent RM of the Lhasa article. That discussion was closed poorly as it left "Lhasa" hanging as a redirect creating this problem here. User:Wbm1058 makes good points above that should be considered. — AjaxSmack 01:55, 10 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Procedural note – Move review filed. — JFG ^talk 08:03, 10 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Santa

Santa 2603:6081:5C01:4A01:E0E6:604A:380D:45E5 (talk) 16:12, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]