Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 19:45, 30 November 2014

This is the talk page for discussing WikiProject Buddhism and anything related to its purposes and tasks.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6Auto-archiving period: 30 days

Buddhism Project‑class

This page falls within the scope of WikiProject Buddhism, an attempt to promote better coordination, content distribution, and cross-referencing between pages dealing with Buddhism. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page for more details on the projects.BuddhismWikipedia:WikiProject BuddhismTemplate:WikiProject BuddhismBuddhism Project This page does not require a rating on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.

Buddhism articles by quality and importance Quality Importance Top High Mid Low NA Other ??? Total FA 1 4 3 8 FL 3 3 A 1 1 GA 5 10 24 28 67 B 28 75 94 248 18 463 C 49 81 192 932 1 3 25 1,283 Start 35 81 429 2,079 2 10 26 2,662 Stub 2 10 123 1,596 2 15 1,748 List 3 1 8 91 1 104 Category 2,141 2,141 Disambig 15 15 File 24 24 Project 12 12 Template 139 139 NA 4 4 15 6 70 54 153 Other 21 21 Assessed 126 263 890 4,986 2,426 69 84 8,844 Unassessed 2 1 3 Total 126 263 890 4,986 2,426 71 85 8,847 WikiWork factors (?) ω = 30,454 Ω = 4.89

Article alerts

This is a notice to let you know about Article alerts, a fully-automated subscription-based news delivery system designed to notify WikiProjects and Taskforces when articles are entering Articles for deletion, Requests for comment, Peer review and other workflows (full list). The reports are updated on a daily basis, and provide brief summaries of what happened, with relevant links to discussion or results when possible. A certain degree of customization is available; WikiProjects and Taskforces can choose which workflows to include, have individual reports generated for each workflow, have deletion discussion transcluded on the reports, and so on. An example of a customized report can be found here.

If you are already subscribed to Article Alerts, it is now easier to report bugs and request new features. We are also in the process of implementing a "news system", which would let projects know about ongoing discussions on a wikipedia-wide level, and other things of interest. The developers also note that some subscribing WikiProjects and Taskforces use the display=none parameter, but forget to give a link to their alert page. Your alert page should be located at "Misplaced Pages:PROJECT-OR-TASKFORCE-HOMEPAGE/Article alerts". Questions and feedback should be left at Misplaced Pages talk:Article alerts.

Message sent by User:Addbot to all active wiki projects per request, Comments on the message and bot are welcome here.

Thanks. — Headbomb {_{κοντριβς} – WP Physics} 08:54, 15 March, 2009 (UTC)

Request for input in discussion forum

Given the closely linked subjects of the various religion, mythology, and philosophy groups, it seems to me that we might benefit from having some sort of regular topical discussion forum to discuss the relevant content. I have put together the beginnings of an outline for such discussion at Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Religion/2011 meeting, and would very much appreciate the input of any interested editors. I am thinking that it might run over two months, the first of which would be to bring forward and discuss the current state of the content, and the second for perhaps some more focused discussion on what, if any, specific efforts might be taken in the near future. Any and all input is more than welcome. John Carter (talk)

_{Automated message by Project Messenger Bot from John Carter at 15:44, 5 April 2011}

Eyes needed -- mass deletions on Tulku

An editor has repeatedly been making mass deletions on Tulku, gutting the article without any attempt at discussion or notification or remedy. Please help keep this article-gutting from happening. Thank you. Softlavender (talk) 00:07, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

Help for new contributor

Can anyone offer guidance to a new contributor who seems to be wanting to create articles about a Buddhist sect whose current head is based in Taiwan? See User_talk:Thubtenrigzin#Speedy_deletion_nomination_of_Kathog_Rigzin_Chenpo_lineage. Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 14:33, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

Shinnyo-en

The first time I saw this article was in February 2014, when I clicked the "see also" at Mahaparinirvana Sutra. The article was tagged since April 2013 with good reason: "This article appears to be written like an advertisement. Please help improve it by rewriting promotional content from a neutral point of view and removing any inappropriate external links". I realized that the article contained inline-citations which appeared to be almost exclusively from Shinnyo-en sources, a section with unsourced quotations of their founder and an (old) talk page comment which claimed that: "I intend to modify this article according to Wiki policy and Shinnyo-en policy." Since then I have tried to improve the references, added academic sources and removed some obvious policy violations. I am aware of the prejudices against new religious minorities (new religious movement in Japan), which may have influenced scholars and publications. See:

• Dormann, Benjamin (2005). “New Religions through the Eyes of Ōya Sōichi, ’Emperor’ of the Mass Media”, in: Bulletin of the Nanzan Institute for Religion & Culture, 29, pp. 54–67
• Dormann, Benjamin (2004). “SCAP’s Scapegoat? The Authorities, New Religions, and a Postwar Taboo”, in: Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 31/1: pp. 105–140

It is also reasonable that Shinnyo-en-related sources may be cited in the article about this organization. However, editors should primarily reflect what independent (secondary) mainstream academic sources write about the topic and comply with[REDACTED] policies.

Today, SPA(s) removed the terms "new religion", "medium", a sourced section about "missionary activities" ()and substituted an academic source about the imprisonment of their founder with a sectarian source ().

The article is not very popular; any input by non-COI editors would be appreciated! Thank you JimRenge (talk) 20:35, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

More than agree with you. Jayaguru-Shishya (talk) 21:25, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

Disruptive talkpage behaviour

Comments would be welcome at Talk:Four Noble Truths and Talk:Karma in Buddhism. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 14:55, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

Recent re-writes of key concepts

Fellow editor Joshua Jonathan has recently rewritten the articles on two key concepts in Buddhism (Four Noble Truths and Karma in Buddhism). We are unable to agree on the validity of his edits, so I am seeking the opinions of other editors on the matter. You can view the changes here:

• Four Noble Truths
  • Before rewrite: https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Four_Noble_Truths&oldid=624606929
  • Current version: Four Noble Truths
• Karma
  • Before rewrite: https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Karma_in_Buddhism&oldid=625391227
  • Current version Karma in Buddhism

Joshua and I have both been active editors on Buddhism-related articles for several years, and we have often agreed in that past, but on the current matters we are in complete disagreement. I have no doubt that we are both editing in good faith and trying our best to improve these articles, but since we are unable to agree on a way forward with these articles, I am seeking input from other editors. Basically, we are disagreeing in the following areas:

• Method
• Sources
• Use of quotes

I am creating a separate sub-section for each area to explain the disagreement and give Jonathan the opportunity to respond to each point. Following that, I will address specific points in each article (also in separate sub-sections).

Method

Jonathan’s method is to quickly re-write an entire article without warning or discussion. He leaves no opportunity for other editors who have worked on the article to explain or justify the current content or structure of the article.

Sources

Jonathan is currently asserting that texts by Buddhist writers and teachers (who do not have Western academic training) should be considered primary sources. This means that, from Jonathan’s point of view, the vast majority of actual Buddhist teachers and writers are not reliable secondary sources. You can view Jonathan's opinion here: Talk:Karma_in_Buddhism#Sources.

I completely disagree with Jonathan on this matter. I find this position to be biased and completely unsupportable based on the wiki guidelines. If we follow Jonathan's logic, then the Dalai Lama is to be considered a primary source on key topics in Buddhism (even in a text that is written specifically to explain these topics for a Western audience), but an obscure academic should be considered a secondary source, and thus to be given more weight.

Use of quotes

Use of quotes within the article

Several editors have criticized my use of quotes in a number of articles that I have worked on, stating that the articles contain “too many quotes.” Other editors have supported way in which I have used quotes. I find the issue to be highly subjective, and I don’t think “too many quotes” is a constructive criticism. I think the focus should be whether or not a particular quote helps to improve and clarify the article; see: WP:IGNORE. For additional discussion on this topic, see Talk:Four_Noble_Truths#Too_many_quotes and Talk:Four_Noble_Truths#Quotes_are_an_exemption_from_copyright_and_should_be_used_very_sparingly.

Use of quotes within footnotes

Surprisingly to me, Jonathan and other editors have criticized my use of quotes within footnotes. Basically in many cases, rather than just citing a book and a page number as a reference for a point, I pulled in the whole quote that was being referred to (and added the quote within a footonote). I have done this for the sake of clarity, to avoid any confusion regarding the reference. I find it a very helpful practice and I would encourage other editors to do the same, particularly for areas where there are differing opinions and a lot of confusion. This method is intended as an aid the readers and other editors, so that they can see exactly what the authors said in their own words. You can find a bit more on this topic here: Talk:Four_Noble_Truths#Too_many_quotes

Four noble truths article

Basically, the version of this article that I worked on presented an explanation of the Four Noble Truths based on prominent and well-respected Buddhist writer and teachers, as well as highly regarded academics in the field. Jonathan has re-written the article to emphasize his understanding of a small group of academics.

• Before rewrite: https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Four_Noble_Truths&oldid=624606929
• Current version: Four Noble Truths

Karma in Buddhism article

Again, the article was re-written to reflect Jonathan’s understanding based on selected sources:

• Before rewrite: https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Karma_in_Buddhism&oldid=625391227
• Current version Karma in Buddhism

• Project-Class Buddhism pages
• NA-importance Buddhism pages
• Misplaced Pages pages with to-do lists
• Misplaced Pages pages with to-do lists, unused