Jump to content

Talk:Zanabazar: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Assessed for WP:Mongols.
→‎1st or 16th: new section
Line 17: Line 17:


If he "defined the style of the Mongolian architecture for the next 200 years", then the text should say so. The reason for Categories is supposed to be immediately obvious when reading the article. --[[User:Latebird|Latebird]] ([[User talk:Latebird|talk]]) 02:55, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
If he "defined the style of the Mongolian architecture for the next 200 years", then the text should say so. The reason for Categories is supposed to be immediately obvious when reading the article. --[[User:Latebird|Latebird]] ([[User talk:Latebird|talk]]) 02:55, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

== 1st or 16th ==

Okay, I'm confused. At [[Jebtsundamba Khutuktu]], Zanabazar is clearly named as the 1st Jebtsundamba Khutuktu. When I follow the link from that page to [[Zanabazar]] and read the first paragraph, he's referred to as the 16th? What gives? Surely two related articles should be consistent. [[Special:Contributions/27.33.121.123|27.33.121.123]] ([[User talk:27.33.121.123|talk]]) 06:18, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Revision as of 06:18, 11 February 2018

Neutrality

I have made some edits to give an impression that Zanabazar's recognition as Javzandamba was probably not entirely about spiritual matters. However, I think I might have taken it a bit far, i.e. the whole connection to politics seems to be largely an inference by modern historians (a very very obvious one, though), and maybe this should be pointed out. Also, I guess there was also a spiritual dimension to it, which I may have neglected. Yaan 18:59, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bogdo Zanabazar

Mongolian "bogdo" (traditonal), "bogd" (modern) means "holy", and here is likelier a title rather than part of his name. Anthony Appleyard 22:27, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Architect

If he "defined the style of the Mongolian architecture for the next 200 years", then the text should say so. The reason for Categories is supposed to be immediately obvious when reading the article. --Latebird (talk) 02:55, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

1st or 16th

Okay, I'm confused. At Jebtsundamba Khutuktu, Zanabazar is clearly named as the 1st Jebtsundamba Khutuktu. When I follow the link from that page to Zanabazar and read the first paragraph, he's referred to as the 16th? What gives? Surely two related articles should be consistent. 27.33.121.123 (talk) 06:18, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]