Talk:Hoh Xil

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Hoh Xil article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

China

	China portal 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 has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Tibet

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Tibet, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Tibet 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.TibetWikipedia:WikiProject TibetTemplate:WikiProject TibetTibet articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

Protected areas Low‑importance

	This article is part of WikiProject Protected areas, a WikiProject related to national parks and other protected natural or ecological areas worldwide.Protected areasWikipedia:WikiProject Protected areasTemplate:WikiProject Protected areasProtected areas articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

Is "Hoh Xil" really a Tibetan toponym? It looks rather Turkic to me, with a meaning like "Sky Hills." Does anyone have proof that this is really an authentic Tibetan name and not a Turkic or Mongolic one?

I'd agree - the Tibetan version of the name does not look at all like a native Tibetan word. I'd certainly guess that the origin was Altaic. BovineBeast 15:00, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Least populated area

The question of least populated area seems to be an arbitrary one. First of all a distinction must be made between the least populated and least densely populated area.

The Pitcairn islands are, for instance, considered the world's least populated country, but they are tiny, and other sovereign states are in fact less densely populated than them.

Then comes the question of the word "area". I'm not sure that Hoh Xil is even an official administrative division in the PRC -- perhaps it refers to the area of the Qinghai-Kekexili National nature reserve.

It could also be a misunderstanding: Hoh Xil would not be the world's third least populated "area", but rather the third largest area with no permanent inhabitants, that is what the information in Chinese says at any rate, but I have no sources to back this up.

TheZoolooMaster (talk) 16:52, 11 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed: this language, "the world's third-least populated area" is absolutely meaningless, unless one explains how one defines areas and how one ranks them! Amazingly, though, this snippet is quite popular, and is reproduced (without explanation) in a variety of sources (e.g. http://www.cctv.com/english/special/tibet/20090527/104495.shtml ; although here at least they define the area as "the 45,000 square kilometers Hoh Xil nature reserve").

But yes, the way you describe it makes perfect sense, ("the third largest area with no permanent inhabitants", and the largest such area in China), and I see this description in various sources too (e.g.

http://www.china.org.cn/travel/2014-08/01/content_33115857.htm ), although of course much depends on how one defines "areas".

In any event, I'd welcome you rephrasing that sentence in the article to make more sense. -- Vmenkov (talk) 00:02, 13 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Hoh Xil. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:13, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]