Misplaced Pages

Talk:Demchok sector: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 15:47, 19 July 2020 editMarkH21 (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers35,587 edits Luv Puri passage: need RSes for such a claimTags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit Advanced mobile edit← Previous edit Revision as of 16:47, 19 July 2020 edit undoKautilya3 (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers86,786 edits Luv Puri passage: ReplyNext edit →
Line 21: Line 21:
:*{{cite web |publisher=] |url= http://www.indiandefencereview.com/spotlights/the-case-of-demchok/ |first=Claude |last=Arpi |authorlink=Claude Arpi |title=The Case of Demchok |date=19 May 2017 |accessdate=19 July 2020 |quote= The talks were held in Beijing between Zhang Hanfu, China’s Vice-Minister of Foreign Affairs, N. Raghavan, the Indian Ambassador to China and T.N. Kaul, his Chargé d’Affaires and Chen Chai-Kang, a Director. They lasted from December 1953 till end of April 1954. Kaul objected, Demchok was in India, he told Chen who answered that India’s border was further on the West of the Indus. On Kaul’s insistence Chen said “There can be no doubt about actual physical possession which can be verified on spot but to avoid any dispute we may omit mention of Demchok”. In October 1962, the Demchok sub-sector was held by the 7 J&K Militia. The PLA launched an attack on October 22. The PLA eventually withdrew, but occupied the southern part of Demchok.}} :*{{cite web |publisher=] |url= http://www.indiandefencereview.com/spotlights/the-case-of-demchok/ |first=Claude |last=Arpi |authorlink=Claude Arpi |title=The Case of Demchok |date=19 May 2017 |accessdate=19 July 2020 |quote= The talks were held in Beijing between Zhang Hanfu, China’s Vice-Minister of Foreign Affairs, N. Raghavan, the Indian Ambassador to China and T.N. Kaul, his Chargé d’Affaires and Chen Chai-Kang, a Director. They lasted from December 1953 till end of April 1954. Kaul objected, Demchok was in India, he told Chen who answered that India’s border was further on the West of the Indus. On Kaul’s insistence Chen said “There can be no doubt about actual physical possession which can be verified on spot but to avoid any dispute we may omit mention of Demchok”. In October 1962, the Demchok sub-sector was held by the 7 J&K Militia. The PLA launched an attack on October 22. The PLA eventually withdrew, but occupied the southern part of Demchok.}}
:So you’re claiming that some RS says that Demchok was under Chinese control sometime between 1954 and September 1962 but lost it by October? Or that there is a multitude of RSes directly contradicting both Puri and Arpi? You haven’t given any RS suggesting that the split ''did not occur'' during the 1962 war (and you still claim that the Puri article is an op-ed despite it not saying that anywhere). — <span style="font-family:Trebuchet MS;font-size:100%;color:black;background-color:transparent;;">]<sup>]</sup></span> 15:42, 19 July 2020 (UTC) :So you’re claiming that some RS says that Demchok was under Chinese control sometime between 1954 and September 1962 but lost it by October? Or that there is a multitude of RSes directly contradicting both Puri and Arpi? You haven’t given any RS suggesting that the split ''did not occur'' during the 1962 war (and you still claim that the Puri article is an op-ed despite it not saying that anywhere). — <span style="font-family:Trebuchet MS;font-size:100%;color:black;background-color:transparent;;">]<sup>]</sup></span> 15:42, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
:: No, I was talking about ''British colonial period''. You know that that period ended in '''1947'''.
:: From 1684 till 1954, the southern Demchok village (which was the only Demchok village that mattered) was under Tibetan control. During this time, a couple of houses and a camp site cropped up on the northern side of the river. Nobody has demonstrated any connection between these couple of houses and the southern Demchok village.
:: Most Indian commentators don't know this. They all seem to believe that the real Demchok village was on the northern one and that it gave rise to an offshoot on the southern side. I too was under this impression until I started investigating recently, when I discovered that map after map showed only the southern Demchok village.
:: What happened in 1954 is not known. While India included the southern Demchok village in its territorial map, there is no evidence that it extended its administration to it. If it did, there would have been complaints from the Tibetans which would have been escalated to diplomatic level. Similar disputes in the ] did get escalated.
:: So, this idea that there was a "single village" that got split across is pure mythology as far as I am concerned. I am not willing to buy it unless there is a ] that has studied the actual happenings. -- ] (]) 16:47, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

Revision as of 16:47, 19 July 2020

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconIndia: Jammu and Kashmir Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Misplaced Pages's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Jammu and Kashmir (assessed as Mid-importance).
Note icon
This article was last assessed in May 2020.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconChina Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject China, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of China related articles on Misplaced Pages. 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
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconTibet Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Tibet, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Tibet on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TibetWikipedia:WikiProject TibetTemplate:WikiProject TibetTibet
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconHistory Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconMaps Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Maps, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Maps and Cartography on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MapsWikipedia:WikiProject MapsTemplate:WikiProject MapsMaps
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconMilitary history
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history
B checklist
This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
  1. Referencing and citation: criterion not met
  2. Coverage and accuracy: criterion met
  3. Structure: criterion met
  4. Grammar and style: criterion met
  5. Supporting materials: criterion met
Additional information:
Note icon
This article is not currently associated with a task force. To tag it for one or more task forces, please add the task force codes from the template instructions to the template call.
Text and/or other creative content from this version of Charding Nullah was copied or moved into Demchok sector with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists.

Luv Puri passage

I am contesting this passage:

After the 1962 Sino-Indian War, the village of Demchok was divided in two parts, with Demchok, Ladakh administered by India and Dêmqog, Tibet Autonomous Region administered by China. The split did not divide any of the resident families.

References

  1. ^ Puri, Luv (2 August 2005). "Ladakhis await re-opening of historic Tibet route". The Hindu. Archived from the original on 24 December 2013. Retrieved 19 July 2020. Administrative record books show that it has a population of 150 people living in 24 houses, all having solar-powered lights. The village itself was divided into two parts one held by India and the other by China after the 1962 Sino-Indian war, though there is not a single divided family. On the Chinese side one can spot two houses and the road seems to be in a poor condition.

This is just a newspaper op-ed column, not peer-reviewed or even editorially reviewed. Even though the author has written books on the Kashmir dispute, he did not write anything about Ladakh. He seems to have travelled to Demchok in 2005 and described what he saw. There is no telling what he knows about the history of the place. Does he even know that the southern Demchok village was under the Tibetan control throughout the British colonial period?

So, I recommend removing this page as being dubious and half-baked. We have much better information available elsewhere. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 14:50, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

You removed it on the basis of your claim that the split happened much earlier, when what is written is supported by both Puri's article and Claude Arpi:
  • Arpi, Claude (19 May 2017). "The Case of Demchok". Indian Defence Review. Retrieved 19 July 2020. The talks were held in Beijing between Zhang Hanfu, China's Vice-Minister of Foreign Affairs, N. Raghavan, the Indian Ambassador to China and T.N. Kaul, his Chargé d'Affaires and Chen Chai-Kang, a Director. They lasted from December 1953 till end of April 1954. Kaul objected, Demchok was in India, he told Chen who answered that India's border was further on the West of the Indus. On Kaul's insistence Chen said "There can be no doubt about actual physical possession which can be verified on spot but to avoid any dispute we may omit mention of Demchok". In October 1962, the Demchok sub-sector was held by the 7 J&K Militia. The PLA launched an attack on October 22. The PLA eventually withdrew, but occupied the southern part of Demchok.
So you’re claiming that some RS says that Demchok was under Chinese control sometime between 1954 and September 1962 but lost it by October? Or that there is a multitude of RSes directly contradicting both Puri and Arpi? You haven’t given any RS suggesting that the split did not occur during the 1962 war (and you still claim that the Puri article is an op-ed despite it not saying that anywhere). — MarkH21 15:42, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
No, I was talking about British colonial period. You know that that period ended in 1947.
From 1684 till 1954, the southern Demchok village (which was the only Demchok village that mattered) was under Tibetan control. During this time, a couple of houses and a camp site cropped up on the northern side of the river. Nobody has demonstrated any connection between these couple of houses and the southern Demchok village.
Most Indian commentators don't know this. They all seem to believe that the real Demchok village was on the northern one and that it gave rise to an offshoot on the southern side. I too was under this impression until I started investigating recently, when I discovered that map after map showed only the southern Demchok village.
What happened in 1954 is not known. While India included the southern Demchok village in its territorial map, there is no evidence that it extended its administration to it. If it did, there would have been complaints from the Tibetans which would have been escalated to diplomatic level. Similar disputes in the Assam Himalaya did get escalated.
So, this idea that there was a "single village" that got split across is pure mythology as far as I am concerned. I am not willing to buy it unless there is a WP:HISTRS that has studied the actual happenings. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 16:47, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
Categories:
Talk:Demchok sector: Difference between revisions Add topic