31 Mar

File talk:WWI.png

merging talk page from en.wikipedia
← Older revision
Revision as of 03:31, 31 March 2013
Line 1:
Line 1:

+
kinda one sided, aint it? —The preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment was added by [[w:User:Thealimighty1|Thealimighty1]] ([[w:User talk:Thealimighty1|talk]] • [[w:Special:Contributions/Thealimighty1|contribs]]).

+

+
:It didnt look quite so one sided during the war as some of the countries joined the allies later. ~~I dont think the USA and Russia were in the allies at the same time - russia was out in march 1917, and usa joined the following month.~~ --[[w:User:Astrokey44|Astrokey]][[w:User_talk:Astrokey44|44]] 06:29, 9 June 2006 (UTC) Never mind that, I got the [[w:February Revolution|February Revolution]] mixed up with the [[w:Treaty of Brest-Litovsk|Treaty of Brest-Litovsk]], but if you consider that the central powers were in control of most of eastern europe and russia was out of the war in 1918, it doesnt look so one sided, at least for europe, see [[:Image:World War I 1918 05.png]] --[[w:User:Astrokey44|Astrokey]][[w:User_talk:Astrokey44 |44]] 02:08, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

+

== Tibet and Mongolia ==

== Tibet and Mongolia ==

We need to discuss the status of Tibet and Mongolia. During WWI, both were de-facto independent states, unrecognized internationally (and therefore presumably recognized by the participants in WWI as part of China). I cannot think of any justification for not treating Mongolia and Tibet differently--either they should both be shown as part of China, or should both be shown as independent. I don't care which of these is used, and in fact given the Commons's policy on NPOV, I think we should have two versions. But given the very generic name of this file, I feel that we should at least try to be ''consistent'' in how we handle the issue. --[[User:Quintucket|Quintucket]] ([[User talk:Quintucket|talk]]) 10:38, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

We need to discuss the status of Tibet and Mongolia. During WWI, both were de-facto independent states, unrecognized internationally (and therefore presumably recognized by the participants in WWI as part of China). I cannot think of any justification for not treating Mongolia and Tibet differently--either they should both be shown as part of China, or should both be shown as independent. I don't care which of these is used, and in fact given the Commons's policy on NPOV, I think we should have two versions. But given the very generic name of this file, I feel that we should at least try to be ''consistent'' in how we handle the issue. --[[User:Quintucket|Quintucket]] ([[User talk:Quintucket|talk]]) 10:38, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File_talk:WWI.png&diff=93645978&oldid=65309413