Talk:Gedhun Choekyi Nyima
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Requested move
- Copied from WP:RM. Dragons flight 05:55, August 30, 2005 (UTC)
Since the page for the Chinese version of the Panchen Lama, Erdini Qoigyijabu has no "11th Panchen Lama" suffix to his name, we should remove it from Gedhun Choekyi Nyima's name because two different people think they are the Panchen Lama. --Hottentot
- Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one sentence explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~
- Support --Hottentot 06:19, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
- Reserved, I would also have no prob with adding "11th Panchen Lama" suffix to Erdini Qoigyijabu, as both are claimed to be that incarnation.Alf 12:01, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
- Oppose, I dont believe just because their is a dispute that it should be removed (though I favor this canidate to be the true panchen lama). I think until proof might one day be given, they both be marked the "11th Panchen Lama", especially in the case that it starts a devision on the line of reincarnations. Midusunknown 11:53, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
It was requested that this article be renamed but there was no consensus for it be moved. Since the other Panchen Lama also now has the title in his name, and none of the discussions on the matter seem to have attracted much attention, I'm going to close this as no consensus and go with the apparent convention to let them keep the title. Dragons flight 05:01, 15 September 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Discussion
Discusion requested to be centralised at Panchen Lama. Alf 01:34, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
[edit] External Link : The truth the mainland Chinese government doesn't want you to know
Does anybody else think the external link above would be helpful? I have posted it to this article, but it was removed by Hottentot. Please give an opinion. I personally, believe that the link is extremely relavent to the article.--FT in Leeds 02:10, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
- I think the news article is fine, but I must admit the above titlte is very POV, I'm fine with how I left it as I see no problem refering to it by the same name as the BBC uses for the article. I personally do not mind discussing these three articles on individual pages, but I genuinely think we'd be better talking about them together, on one page. Alf 12:01, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Broken link
The reuters link (hosted by yahoo) is broken. I can't find it on Reuters now. 24.18.128.228 03:25, 3 May 2006 (UTC)