Talk:Indonesian Esoteric Buddhism

Latest comment: 9 months ago by ThoughtIdRetired in topic Maritime Southeast Asia to 1500 by Lynda Norene Shaffer

External links modified edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Indonesian Esoteric Buddhism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 15:00, 23 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

Reworked this whole thing edit

This was sort of a mess. It had very few sources and whole sections that were useless. The whole "legacy" section just restated the story of Yi Jing and Atisha for example and did not add much. The history section was also strongly lacking, it only had a single source. The intro was also pretty bare on actual information of the Buddhism of this region.

I have gone ahead and reworked a lot of this material, adding a lot of new content. Now it is at least ok in structure and has some key info on this form of Buddhism. It is probably more historically accurate to rename the article again to Esoteric Buddhism in Maritime Southeast Asia (as per the major publication on this "Acri, Andrea. Esoteric Buddhism in Mediaeval Maritime Asia: Networks of Masters, Texts, Icons") but this is quite a mouthful and I will leave it as is for now since it does focus on the Esoteric Buddhism of the Indonesian islands of Sumatra and Java. Javierfv1212 (talk) 15:38, 2 September 2017 (UTC)Reply

External links modified edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Indonesian Esoteric Buddhism. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 13:26, 13 November 2017 (UTC)Reply

Maritime Southeast Asia to 1500 by Lynda Norene Shaffer edit

Maritime Southeast Asia to 1500 by Lynda Norene Shaffer is questionable as an RS. There are two academic reviews of this work that are totally damning. Both mention many errors of fact. One also criticises the choice of references that Shaffer makes, many being outdated. The other says that, as well as the factual errors, the book gives a misimpression of consensus on certain points, when actually she is using outdated sources to support positions that are hotly contested by those working in the field. The two reviews can be found at [1] and [2]. ThoughtIdRetired (talk) 16:42, 19 July 2023 (UTC)Reply