This 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 articles
This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
This article 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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
Latest comment: 13 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion
What is non-encyclopedic about the statement, "What is more, his troops went on a rampage through Lhasa and its environs, looting, raping and killing"? It's certainly pertinent information that the Zunghars went in with the Tibetans expecting them to be benefactors, and the Zunghars planning to be received as benefactors, and then utterly destroyed those expectations in this fashion. This is how Mullin characterizes Desideri's first-hand account of the Zunghar occupation of Lhasa. Bertport (talk) 17:01, 10 January 2011 (UTC)Reply
What is "POV" about it? If you have another source that says otherwise, then we can include that too, and point out that there is disagreement amongst scholars. Otherwise, it stands as the historical account of what happened. Bertport (talk) 14:48, 13 January 2011 (UTC)Reply
.svg){kind=small}