Talk:Jīvaka

To remove

It's a nice story but as far as I know it's pure lore. It's not corroborated by any historical document, truth and falsehood cannot be separated and so it is to be removed from Wikipedia. On a sidenote, I like the dollar sign next to the sums - ancient Indians must have used US dollar as early as 540 BCE, quite advanced must I say. Let alone the mere mention of exact amounts.LXNDR (talk) 20:44, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

Agree. It is a collection of traditional stories, which is not what should be in an encyclopedia.--Gronk Oz (talk) 06:35, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Jīvaka/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Vami IV (talk · contribs) 20:13, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

Opening statement

In reviews I conduct, I may make small copyedits. These will only be limited to spelling and punctuation (removal of double spaces and such). I will only make substantive edits that change the flow and structure of the prose if I previously suggested and it is necessary. For replying to Reviewer comment, please use  Done,  Fixed,  Added,  Not done,  Doing..., or  Removed, followed by any comment you'd like to make. I will be crossing out my comments as they are redressed, and only mine. A detailed, section-by-section review will follow. —♠Vami_IV†♠ 20:13, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

Disclaimer: I am in good standing with the nominee, Farang Rak Tham, and have previously reviewed some of his articles. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 20:13, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

Noted. Thanks, Vami, for all your efforts and sacrifice of time. I am glad my articles aren't boring you yet.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 14:18, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

Lead

• This section has that present-tense issue I pointed out in my review of Ānanda. See: Jīvaka is found, As he grows up, He turns out to be a promising student [...] starts his healing profession in Rājagṛha, and so on.

•  Done.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 13:23, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

• but the texts do not agree who this courtesan was, nor who the father was. Abbreviate.

• I have split it. hope this suffices.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 20:49, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

• Sort of. I had envisaged: Textual traditions agree that Jīvaka was born as a foundling of a courtesan, but not on the identities of his parents.

• Second try.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 21:12, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

• As he gets more into contact with the Buddha, he develops faith in Buddhism [...] This could be better abbreviated.

•  Done.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 20:49, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

• Try: As Jīvaka came into contact with the Buddha more, he became an important supporter of the religion and eventually founded the Jīvakarāma monastery.

 Done.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 21:12, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

• building a monastery in the process. I would expand the link here from just "monastery" to "a monastery" for greater specificity with the link. As it is, it looks like it's just going to Monastery until you hover over it.

•  Done.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 13:23, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

• Jīvaka is depicted performing complicated medical procedures, including procedures It is a general rule of thumb to not use a word twice in the same sentence.

•  Fixed.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 20:49, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

• Specificity may also been a boon here, like how many operations here.

• That's difficult to say. So many different texts, with different accounts.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 20:49, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

• Was he known for ancient brain surgery? That's pretty cool regardless.

• It is, isn't it?--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 20:49, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

• Jīvaka's legendary persona has had an important role in helping to proselytise and legitimise Buddhism, Shorten.

•  Done.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 20:49, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

Sources

• The life of Jīvaka exists in several early Buddhist textual traditions, This sounds slightly erroneous. Of course it "exists", so I think "documented" would be a better word here. I think the sentence could be constructed better, too.

• Done.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 13:23, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

Accounts

• Furthermore, some versions of the story, the Sanskrit and Tibetan version and the Jīvaka Sūtras, I think everything in this sentence before "the Sanskrit" could be safely cut.

•  Removed.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 20:57, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

• superior above, up unto Redundancies.

• Fixed, I think.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 20:57, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

• Jīvaka is recognised and named the "Medicine King" by the court up unto three times, whenever he performs a miraculous feat of medicine. Abbreviate.

 Done.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 20:57, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

Try: In the Sanskrit and Tibetan version, Jīvaka is recognised and named the "Medicine King" by the court three times, each time after a medical miracle.

 Done.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 21:15, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

The foundling

• (Pali: jīvati) [...] When the people respond that it is, he decides to raise him and names him "he who is alive", for having survived the ordeal. I think the Pali text would be better placed at the end of the selected sentence here.

•  Done.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 13:25, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

• a city Could you expand the link text here to include "a city" rather than just "city"?

You want me to name the city? Wouldn't that be redundant? I have changed the wikilink, if that is what you mean.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 21:20, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

Thank you; Changing the link is what I was asking for. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 16:34, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

• I don't see a time named for Jīvaka's birth. Could you add this? Really sticks out, especially with the mention of the Persian conquest in 515 BC later on.

• Arg.  Doing...--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 20:36, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

I have added that he is a contemporary of the Buddha. That's really all the information that is available.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 21:10, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

Life as healer

• As the king was bleeding through his rectum, his female servants made fun of him, saying that he was bleeding "like us women". I fail to see the relevance of this passage to the article's subject. Recommending abbreviation or cutting this altogether.

 Removed. Is the issue really relevance, or is there some other reason?--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 13:27, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

I guess I could have better phrased this with a suggestion of "abbreviate", like condensing that to say "an anal fistula that caused the king great embarrassment", but it works now. I didn't think the king being mocked by servants with no other role in the account for bleeding out of his anus was important to Jīvaka. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 15:21, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

I don't mind removing it, but I thought you disliked it because it has an air of misogynism. Could lead to an interesting debate.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 21:08, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

References

There is an unused book with an sfn link, Sarah Shaw's Buddhist Meditation: An Anthology of Texts from the Pāli Canon. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 16:49, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

 Removed.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 20:38, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

Images

The images of the ivory carvings are uploaded by a user who has been infinitely blocked for copyright violation. While I don't think this makes the images out-of-copyright, it could, and I want to note that. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 20:13, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

True, but I uploaded the FoP copyright tag for the sculpture myself, and the picture was not uploaded elsewhere before, so the person seems to have taken the picture himself. At least, there is no evidence to the contrary.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 21:29, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

August, 2019

Awaiting further comments, Vami_IV.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 07:39, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay: the internet in my residence has been shut off and I have no definite estimation for when it will be turned back on. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 16:22, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

No problem, good luck with it. I hope it is easily resolved.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 16:30, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

GA progress

Good Article review progress box Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV () 3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant () Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.