Talk:Kashgar

Bias

This article is heavily bias towards China and Chinese rule over Xinjiang/Kashgar and portrays everything from the perspective of Chinese dominion in Kashgar. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.117.71.132 (talk) 04:14, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Which bias is expected? Kashgar/Kashi is part of China, not part of India, USA, Vietnam or any other country. --Atitarev (talk) 12:28, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

I agree that the article is biased. Like all articles on Wikipedia, that involves in xinjiang. This part of the world has been inhabited by human beings for a very long time, but all references to people living there prior to Chinese history have been scrubbed from all of these pages. Even pages that seem unrelated like the page on Jade, which 10 years ago used to describe Jade mining in the hogan region of Xinjiang now makes no mention of the area prior to the advent of Chinese historical writing 2000 years ago. 206.212.225.151 (talk) 06:21, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

Just so you know, you are replying to a comment from 15 years ago. I agree that it would be good to expand coverage in this area as much as possible, but as is a perennial issue, we need written sources to refer to, and literary cultures produce written sources at a rate that makes coverage of them unfair. So, if you have any sources we could use to expand coverage in this area, they would be deeply appreciated. Remsense聊 06:27, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

yweah.......it is china —Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.51.77.250 (talk) 10:21, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

It may be in China, but given that Kashgar is a Muslim Uyghur city, it's not only the view of the Communist govt, nor the view of what is good for the Han people, that is important. With clashes between locals and police, and the threats to demolish the old city, there are multiple views here. LordAmeth (talk) 22:11, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

I agree with both points, first Kashgar is in China (with no critical political tension, correct me if i am wrong) so it shouldn't be considered "bias" since that's the Chinese perspective. Second point as some mentioned, to include the "local" perspective which may be different, it should be clearly pointed out what need revision and new material should be suggested, in order to improve, with explicit and clear sources and citations. hameed (talk) 12:25, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

that's because china is the only one that recorded detail history back then. the local language spoken back then in this region is dead.

"but given that Kashgar is a Muslim Uyghur city" it isn't, it is a persian buddhist city that was conquered by the uyghur from the north.

go play crusader king and see where the uyghur actually starts off at, it pretty much an established and agreed fact that the turk invaded the region a 1000 year ago. the region is originally buddhist and part of the kushan empire and is therefore more persian-iranian than turkish. the Uyghur nationalist has been incorrectly claiming the persian-iranian heritage as their own because as they claim they use the same word as those historic script, but that is only because the Uyghur later copied those word and use them, those word were not original to Uyghur(it as silly as claiming tofu is british because it is a valid word in english now). the reality is the region were fought for between the persian buddhist and the turk muslim, with tibetan and chinese picking sides from time to time which eventually lead to the region becoming a vassal state of china only because the alternative is to be ruled by muslim who would forcefully convert them into muslim. that at least under "chinese protection" they could ironically practise their own religion. that is the historical context. and they ain't wrong, not long after the chinese left, they were conquered by the muslim and forced to convert which is why we have the reality today. 58.182.210.94 (talk) 16:03, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

It is technically in China but given the current controversies, including political unrest, heavy surveillance and persecution of the Muslim minority there, it seems that worries about pro-Chinese bias or only presenting one side (the government sanctioned side, of course) are valid. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.74.210.198 (talk) 12:44, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

Old city

It would be great to have section or even a separate article on the pre-demolition old city, what it looked like and its architectural significance. There seems to be debate on its cultural relevance and the reasons for its demolition.Ballystrahan (talk) 10:09, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

1219 Genghis Khan assertion needs a citation.

The section Mongol Rule starts with the claim "The Kara-Khitai in their turn were swept away in 1219 by Genghis Khan," but this claim is without citation. In addition, it conflicts with - or needs clarification of how it does not - the claim with citation that Kashgar was taken in 1216 by Jebe in the article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_Mongol_Empire. Jeffme (talk) 06:35, 25 January 2024 (UTC)