Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Buddhism/Archive 2

Unreferenced living people articles bot

User:DASHBot/Wikiprojects provides a list, updated daily, of unreferenced living people articles (BLPs) related to your project. There has been a lot of discussion recently about deleting these unreferenced articles, so it is important that these articles are referenced.

The unreferenced articles related to your project can be found at >>>Wikipedia:WikiProject Buddhism/Archive 2/Unreferenced BLPs<<<

If you do not want this wikiproject to participate, please add your project name to this list.

Thank you.

Update: Wikipedia:WikiProject Buddhism/Archive 2/Unreferenced BLPs has been created. This list, which is updated by User:DASHBot/Wikiprojects daily, will allow your wikiproject to quickly identify unreferenced living person articles.

There maybe no or few articles on this new Unreferenced BLPs page. To increase the overall number of articles in your project with another bot, you can sign up for User:Xenobot_Mk_V#Instructions.

If you have any questions or concerns, visit User talk:DASHBot/Wikiprojects. Okip 01:21, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

FLC of List of National Treasures of Japan (temples)

I invite comments, questions and suggestions for the featured list candidacy of List of National Treasures of Japan (temples). The nomination page can be found here. bamse (talk) 08:37, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

The article has been listed as "FLCs of special note" because it has not received enough reviews yet. It is therefore in danger of failing for formal reasons (not enough reviews). I hope that somebody from the project has the time to review it. The criteria it should be checked against are found here and the review comments should go here.bamse (talk) 08:51, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Req for Comments re Buddhism/Hinduism differences in Personalities

To: Project_Hinduism and Project_Buddhism participants,

NOTE re LOCATION: I am putting this message here because I couldn't find a noticeboard at Project_Buddhism; please feel free to move this to a more appropriate location if one exists (my apologies if this is a bad place!) Health Researcher (talk) 15:05, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Friends, there's been a recent conversation at Talk:Buddhism_and_Hinduism about whether that page should have a new subsection that describes major differences between Hindu and Buddhist figures who have the same name. These might be either humans or devas. For example,

• Dhritarashtra is

a human king in Hinduism (see Dhritarashtra), and

a heavenly king/protector in Buddhism (see Dhṛtarāṣṭra)

Similarly,

• Yama is somewhat different in

Hinduism (see Yama_(Hinduism)) and

Buddhism (see Yama_(Buddhism_and_Chinese_mythology))

We don't know if enough cases exist to warrant a new subsection, so our primary question is:

Q1: Which figures might be most enlightening to examine in such a subsection?

Once we get more of a sense of the differences, then it'll become worthwhile to consider Q2: Does this merit a separate subsection? So if you get a chance, please drop by and post your thoughts at:

Talk:Buddhism_and_Hinduism

Regards -- Health Researcher (talk) 15:05, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Big job needs users with knowledge of Tibetan Buddhism

User:B9 hummingbird hovering has stated they are leaving the project because they have accomplished their goal here. Unfortunately that goal was to fill many articles with incoherent gibberish. Any effort in removing this material or translating it into language that can be comprehended would be awesome. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:06, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

I did have a look at the RFCU & followed the diff links listed near the beginning. Most of the material there seems to be standard stuff, not OR. It might perhaps be explained more clearly, but Mahayana Buddhist philosophy really is hard to understand. Peter jackson (talk) 11:08, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Agreed, his contributions were a mixed bag. He had a tendency to insert block quotes apropos of nothing, misuse terms, and get flowery to the point of incoherence. But he did make some valuable contributions also - it's not a total wash.Sylvain1972 (talk) 19:15, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Comment If I understand correctly, the primary focus of the RFC/U is B9's behavior; to wit: being unwilling to constructively engage with other editors who either disagreed with or did not understand his edits. The content of those edits [which as Sylvain and Peter jackson point out were not wholly without merit] and the manner in which they were presented would be best handled by collaborative discussion on the respective article talk pages if this were not apparently impossible due to B9's bad attitude and unwillingness to work with other editors. That said, it may all be moot if, as he promises, he ceases to edit. In that case, I think this project could help [if any members were so inclined] with cleaning up what remains, retaining what's correct and copyediting for clarity and tone. PlainJain (talk) 02:56, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

I agree with the last three comments. Having spent time (quite a while back) trying to "retool" a few of B9's articles, I found plenty in them to work with, it just suffered from an arcane and disjointed narrative organization, a lack of paraphrase (excessive quotation), and a generally unencyclopedic style. Not easy to muck through, but not impossible. Beeblebrox, are there any articles in particular that you feel need immediate attention? /ninly_(talk) 03:34, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

That's what is so frustrating about this, B9 clearly has extensive knowledge of these topics, he's just unwilling/unable to express what he knows in a way that a person unfamiliar with the subject can comprehend, defeating the purpose of having an entry in a place like Wikipedia which is intended for a general audience. Frankly, any article that has been heavily edited by B9 is likely to be difficult for a layperson to comprehend. Mindstream is a good example, as Ground of Being (Dzogchen) . Beeblebrox (talk) 18:30, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Right. I've got way more going on now than allows for much of a concerted effort in something like this, but i'll watch a few articles. If I get a few minutes to try to cleanup/clarify some things, I'll do it. I don't know much about the Tibetan language or the intricacies of the Tibetan discourse, though, so if anyone does... keep an eye on me! /ninly_(talk) 06:14, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Buddhism scriptures related Userboxes

Please check this discussion -- Wikipedia_talk:Userboxes/Ideas#Userboxes_about_Scriptures. Maybe you would add a few suggestions there. Thanks! -- Nazar (talk) 12:01, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

I don't want to show off by having a userbox. It would seem wrong (to me). Secretlondon (talk) 18:51, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Well, it's not about 'showing off' (to me). It's about providing practical information in a convenient and visually easy to perceive way. For me Userboxes are also a great way of structuring my own interests. And, of course, informing others about these interests, in case they are interested :) Nazar (talk) 20:00, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Divya cakkhu

Is there a reason why the fundamental topic of the divya cakkhu isn't addressed on wikipedia adequately? It ties together buddhist cosmology, karma, rebirth and pretty much all of buddhism actually. Thigle (talk) 19:39, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Possibly you can find it if you stick to one language at a time. Divya is Sanskrit & cakkhu is Pali. Dibba cakkhu? Divya caksus? Divine eye? No, those all seem to be redlinks.

Perhaps the reason is simply the Western fantasy that Buddhism is "rational", "scientific", free of "superstition" &c. Peter jackson (talk) 10:26, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

It's discussed under Abhijna. /ninly_(talk) 11:34, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Thats a big shame. There is so little info on it. This is my understanding of the divya caksus. Shakyamuni used this to trace his previous lives and other peoples previous and future lives. Thus he gained an understanding of karma, rebirth but most importantly DEPENDENT ORIGINATION. This is how he became a Buddha. He also used this to visit the gods I think, like Brahma. In fact it is impossible for anyone to gain personal experience with higher metaphysics without the divya caksus. It is possible to gain arhatship without it, but you have to take the Buddha's word on higher metaphysics if you do not have it. If you want the personal experience with higher buddhist metaphysics you must have it. Thigle (talk) 16:02, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

When I say visit the gods, I think it is sort of like an astral projection, using Western terminology.Thigle (talk) 13:32, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Three marks of existence

Anyone want to try and rewrite this? It's shocking in it's current state, as far away from NPOV as you could get. --Cameron Scott (talk) 20:23, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Vajrayana, Esoteric Buddhism, Tantric Buddhism.

These are used various all around wikipedia to refer to the exact same thing, which is very confusion to those who don't know that. It would probably be a good idea to pick one and stick with it. Vajrayana is likely best since that's where the article is. Zazaban2 (talk) 21:37, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

First Buddhist nunnery in North America

I'm not sure where this belongs, so I thought I'd mention it here. According to our local paper, the first Tibetan Buddhist nunnery was recently (September 11, 2010) consecrated in Lincoln, Vermont. Here's the cite: {{cite journal|publisher=The Eagle|title=Buddhist monastery for women opens in Bristol|date=September 18, 2010}}Note: The title of the article says 'Bristol' but the nunnery is actually in Lincoln.

Thanks, Dismas|^(talk) 15:05, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Redemption (theology)

I'm trying to expand the coverage of Redemption (theology) to additional religions. I added a few words on Buddhism, but I'm sure the article would benefit from the attention of people having more expertise on the topic. bd2412 T 01:34, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Buddhism articles have been selected for the Wikipedia 0.8 release

Version 0.8 is a collection of Wikipedia articles selected by the Wikipedia 1.0 team for offline release on USB key, DVD and mobile phone. Articles were selected based on their assessed importance and quality, then article versions (revisionIDs) were chosen for trustworthiness (freedom from vandalism) using an adaptation of the WikiTrust algorithm.

We would like to ask you to review the Buddhism articles and revisionIDs we have chosen. Selected articles are marked with a diamond symbol (♦) to the right of each article, and this symbol links to the selected version of each article. If you believe we have included or excluded articles inappropriately, please contact us at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8 with the details. You may wish to look at your WikiProject's articles with cleanup tags and try to improve any that need work; if you do, please give us the new revisionID at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8. We would like to complete this consultation period by midnight UTC on Monday, October 11th.

We have greatly streamlined the process since the Version 0.7 release, so we aim to have the collection ready for distribution by the end of October, 2010. As a result, we are planning to distribute the collection much more widely, while continuing to work with groups such as One Laptop per Child and Wikipedia for Schools to extend the reach of Wikipedia worldwide. Please help us, with your WikiProject's feedback!

For the Wikipedia 1.0 editorial team, SelectionBot 22:08, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

If anything, I think maybe main articles on some of the different schools or branches of Buddhism might be included. Any other suggestions, or particular schools/branches that should be included? John Carter (talk) 15:12, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Translating Deekshabhoomi to various languages

Hi friends,

Deekshabhoomi is the place in India where Dr. B. R. Ambedkar took refuge to Buddhism along with his about 380,000 followers on October 14, 2010. This place is of immense importance in the history of Buddshim in India and in revival of Buddhism in its homeland. Deekshabhoomi is celebrating the 55th anniversary of the conversion ceremony this year on October 14th. Can we please try to improve the article on this occasion? This already has been a DYK article on Wikipedia, but it still leaves a lot of room for improvement.

Also I would like this article to be translated in variuos major languages in the world, especially in Thai, Chinese, Japanese, Sinhala, Vietnamese, Burmese, etc. and in Western languages if possible. I would request to the members of this project to please translate this article in anyone of the languages above you know. I have already placed a translation request on Local Embassy on Thai and Japanese Wikipedia and waiting for their response. It would be a great work for all of us if we can do that. Thanks! Shivashree (talk) 04:55, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

• Translated to Japanese by ja:利用者:ЧК. Shivashree (talk) 03:51, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
• Thai translation being worked by User:Mahatee. Hindi and Urdu stubs created by myself. Shivashree (talk) 04:48, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
• Created stub in Persian by Muhammad. Shivashree (talk) 03:49, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
• German translation done by Druffeler. Shivashree (talk) 08:18, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Help please

Hello, I was hoping to get some contributions about the Dae Gak and whether certain information should be in the article. The discussion is going on here. User_talk:Jikaku —Preceding unsigned comment added by UhOhFeeling (talk • contribs) 19:01, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject cleanup listing

I have created together with Smallman12q a toolserver tool that shows a weekly-updated list of cleanup categories for WikiProjects, that can be used as a replacement for WolterBot and this WikiProject is among those that are already included (because it is a member of Category:WolterBot cleanup listing subscriptions). See the tool's wiki page, this project's listing in one big table or by categories and the index of WikiProjects. Svick (talk) 19:39, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Possible annual discussion of religious topics

I have proposed at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Religion#Annual meeting? that, maybe, we have some sort of regular discussion across religious topics and projects about various issues and material relevant to multiple religions and WikiProjects. Any input is more than welcome there. Thank you. John Carter (talk) 19:18, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Articles up for deletion

Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Black Buddhist and Buddhist Nation (which is proposed for speedy deletion). Borock (talk) 16:29, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Walter Nowick

There is currently a discussion at WP:BLPN#Walter Nowick about a Buddhism-related article, Walter Nowick, that has various issues. Notability is now in question, although the article is not yet tagged for that. People from Wikiproject Buddhism may wish to look into improving the article (or offering opinions on it). In addition, you may wish to extent a project invitation to the user who began the discussion, Scaccerus (talk • contribs). Regards --Demiurge1000 (talk) 17:23, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

An IP user suggested merging Twelve Nidanas with Pratityasamutpada, providing no rationale or support on either talk page. Please weigh in at Talk:Pratityasamutpada if you have an opinion either way (or I'll remove the merge-request template in a couple days). While you're there, comment also on moving Pratityasamutpada to Dependent origination. Thanks! /ninly_(talk) 23:09, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Merge Nidanas with Pratityasamutpada?

An IP user suggested merging Twelve Nidanas with Pratityasamutpada, but provided no rationale or support on either talk page. Please weigh in at Talk:Pratityasamutpada if you have an opinion either way (or I'll remove the merge-request template in a couple days).

While you're there, please comment also on moving Pratityasamutpada to Dependent origination. Thanks! /ninly_(talk) 23:10, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

15th Dalai Lama

A stub has been created for the 15th Dalai Lama. I encourage project members to help with expanding the article, as there has been much speculation, debate, and politics between China, Tibet and India regarding possible successors and the nomination process. --Another Believer _(Talk) 22:10, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Question about Buddhist holidays

Hi, I'm in the process of arranging the distribution of 400 free Credo Reference accounts to Wikipedians, generously donated by the company and organized by Erik Moeller of the Wikimedia Foundation. See WP:CREDO for more details. The accounts will be distributed on a first-come, first-served basis, plus some eligibility requirements, and the application list will open on March 23 at 22:00. I want to make sure that this day doesn't clash with any religious holidays (Buddhist, Christian, Hindu, Jewish, or Muslim) that would make it less likely, or impossible, for observant Wikipedians to be online. Could you please let me know if there's any such issue with March 23? The list will remain open for a week, but the first day is likely to be the busiest. Many thanks, SlimVirgin ^{TALK|CONTRIBS} 18:12, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

L. Ron Hubbard

The article L. Ron Hubbard is included in this Wikiproject, but the connection seems very tenuous at best. Hubbard claimed to be the Maitreya, amongst many other claims. Would there be any objections to me removing the article from the Wikiproject? Thanks in advance, MartinPoulter (talk) 14:23, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

I totally agree. L. Ron Hubbard should be removed as part of this project. Though I'm not a member of Project Buddhism, I was flabbergasted to see the L. Ron Hubbard page listed as a "featured article" on the Portal:Buddhism. I think allowing that to stand is an embarrassment to WikiProject Buddhism, and might eventually result in the withdrawal of "Featured" status from the Buddhism Portal. --Presearch (talk) 17:30, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Update: HERE is the DIFF (2 consecutive edits) from Sep 3 2007 in which the L. Ron Hubbard page was added to WikiProject Buddhism. This was detected thanks to the "Article Blamer" software. It shows that User:John Carter's motive for adding the Hubbard to this project was so that its accuracy could be oversighted. He didn't realize that a side-effect would be to provide free advertising for the Scientology folks through the Buddhism portal. Perhaps there would be a way to make the bot smarter so it doesn't list such peripheral pages as a Buddhism "Featured Article" on the Buddhism Portal. But the simplest fix would seem to be to de-list the article from Project Buddhism by removing the Buddhism template from the article's talk page. Unless someone advocates for something different, I expect I will do that in a few days. -- Presearch (talk) 06:45, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

I agree completely with the removal of these articles from WikiProject Buddhism. They have nothing to do with Buddhism other than the...claim...by Hubbard to be the Maitreya Buddha. A claim which is apparently minor enough not to even be mentioned on Hubbard's article. - SudoGhost™ 08:58, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Doesn't look like you need much corroboration here, but I agree; take it out. /ninly_(talk) 15:50, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Done. I just removed it the Buddhism banner from the Hubbard page. Perhaps we should wait a day or two for the bot to update the Buddhism portal? If the Hubbard page isn't removed from the Buddhism Portal featured article list in a couple of days, maybe it should be manually removed. -- Presearch (talk) 17:43, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

On second though, I just went ahead and manually removed the Hubbard page from the Portal's featured content. Perhaps the bot would have updated it eventually, but this way we don't need to wait. I don't know if listing the page produced any other unintended consequences; if so, then unless other users hand-fix it, the fixes will need to wait for the bot. -- Presearch (talk) 17:53, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

The delisting of L. Ron Hubbard from WikiProject Buddhism was reverted by a user who said they "didn't follow" and wanted more explanation. I've provided an explanation, but please consider monitoring or weighing in on the discussion at Talk:L._Ron_Hubbard#De-listing_this_page_from_WikiProject_Buddhism. Thank you. -- Presearch (talk) 23:12, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Further update: De-listing has now been re-implemented, and it appears likely to "stick" this time. -- Presearch (talk) 16:49, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

List of Buddhists

Hi. According to BLP concerns, all of the living people at List of Buddhists need sources which prove that the people listed really do self-identify as Buddhists. I brought this up at WP:BLPN and it was suggested that I bring it here. The Mark of the Beast (talk) 18:20, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

I would suggest removing all living people who do not have a recent reliable source with clear self-identification, per WP:BLPCAT, and then trying to find adequate sources to reinstate those names for which adequate sourcing is available. --JN466 22:39, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Buddhism by region

The article Buddhism by region has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No content except internal links, redundant with existing categories

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Angr (talk) 12:10, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Addition to Śūnyatā article

An addition was proposed to the Śūnyatā article here. I reverted that and asked the editor to discuss it. Would someone knowledgeable in the Theravada tradition be able to take a look at his revisions and comment on the article talk page? My question is that whether it is expressed in a neutral and fair manner in accordance with Wikipedia policy. Sunray (talk) 16:45, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

I've got an eye on it, but I'm not as knowledgable about Theravada to really comment on it in the detail you're looking for, but I'll take a look at it. - SudoGhost 19:19, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Merge in another month Buddhism and Gnosticism to Buddhism and Christianity

Noted on Talk for several months, almost nothing there that isn't OR or duplication. If anyone has an opinion... or even better a WP:RS... no hurry :) In ictu oculi (talk) 11:27, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Amitabha is listed as a deity

Buddhanet classifies him as a deity so I adjusted the categories. In 2 traditions he is a deity and others he is just Buddha. The {{Chinese Buddhist Pantheon}} and {{Buddhist Pantheon}} do not list him as a deity. Buddhanet clearly states he is a Chinese deity so not sure how to adjust {{Chinese Buddhist Pantheon}}. Alatari (talk) 19:15, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Rfc: lower case for terms of religious doctrine or systems of thought

The MoS guidelines call for using lower case for religious terms, e.g. virgin birth, original sin. From a cursory review, it appears that many Buddhism articles do not adhere to this style or do so inconsistently, e.g. Three Jewels, Wheel of Life, Three Poisons. From my incomplete review it appears the practice of capitalizing such terms is pervasive in the sources and naturally and understandably carries over into the articles. However, I think there is great benefit in maintaining a consistent Wikipedia style across all articles. Am I misunderstanding the application of the style guide to these articles? If not, is there good reason for making an exception to Wikipedia's "house style" here? Jojalozzo 04:13, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

No, I think you are right, it is quite common for a specific interest area, not just religions, to use capitals far more for certain nouns or noun phrases than WP. In particular, for example, one editor claimed the "mixed martial arts" should be treated as a proper noun. The only place we have given ground de jure rather then de facto(as it were) is in the (pseudo) Latin names of certain species, and then not in every context. This may have been motivated by a desire to be seen to be on a par with "academic writing", if so it was a poor motivation in my opinion. Rich Farmbrough, 17:54, 24 October 2011 (UTC).

In general, I agree with this sentiment; however, the word Buddha is a special case. The article in the OED states "When applied to Sakyamuni, Buddha is in English use treated as a proper name, and even when used in a general sense, it is always written with a capital B". Likewise there may be times when translated words or phrases (e.g. trikaya) are not easily identified as being specific terms, even within the context that they are place. It may not be the best thing to do to capitalise them, but they will need to be differentiated somehow. (20040302 (talk) 11:41, 25 October 2011 (UTC))

I agree that Buddha is a proper name as are names of other contemporary, historical, mythological and fictional people, institutions and places. This policy is aimed at doctrine and systems of thought. I also agree that translations of specific terms may be understood in a mundane and generic sense without stylistic methods to distinguish them. Italics is one method recommended in the MoS to emphasize special interpretations of terms when they are introduced (with lower case thereafter, since italics throughout can be distracting). Jojalozzo 15:11, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

As per Jojalozzo above, I think that, with the exceptions of terms that are obviously specific titles, honors, books, etc., we should not use capitals. I myself am not necessarily the best person to determine how to apply that in this particular case. Maybe the best way to go would be to add piped links, if necessary, so that

I also think that italics may work as you suggest, Joja. On a technical point, regarding 'Buddha' and it's derivatives, Buddhahood, Buddha-nature, Buddha-mind etc. are all capitalised, in that, as the OED states, Buddha is always written with a capital B. It is a special case in the English language. (20040302 (talk) 16:02, 25 October 2011 (UTC))

Just in case it needs to be said, I agree with the statements above. I don't think Three Jewels needs to be capitalized in a sentence, but that Buddha does, being a proper name. - Sudo

Just to be clear here, and in light of the comments made by SudoGhost and Jojalozzo, Buddha is NOT always a proper name. When we talk of the Buddhas of the ten directions, or achieving Buddhahood, or mention the thousand Buddhas of the 'lucky' aeon we are using the term Buddha in a manner which is not that of a proper name. It's a noun. There is an explicit ruling in English that the word Buddha is always capitalised. (20040302 (talk))

Ghost 16:13, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

• Comment Three Jewels is in fact a doctrine across many forms of Buddhism. It is usually stylised in caps, as found in literature, account the earlier observations in this section. Where a doctrine is referenced, or a teaching - across religions - (not just Buddhism) there tends to be usage of capitals, despite what the MoS has to say. If you take the Lutheran doctrine of Justification by Faith, or the 2nd Vatican Council Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, or the Sikh teaching on Khalsa, then you might find capitals are always used; to a lesser extent, in Hinduism also, eg, Sathyagraha as used by Gandhi. If you mercilessly enforced the MoS then you would have editors with a lot of work and a long time spent cleaning up things. I'd go for a common sense solution, leave it alone except where capitalisation is used to pointless excess. Whiteguru (talk) 10:21, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
• Comment I agree that if the term is clearly a title, honorific, or similar, it would make sense to capitalize it. Otherwise, we migt be able to add piped links so that the article text might read "'three jewels' of Buddhism", and a link to the related article. Such clarification in the text points out the specific usage while at the same time avoids the capitals. John Carter (talk) 19:55, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
• Comment I agree with Jojalozzo that italics on first mention for the teachings would work well, followed by lower case.--Miniapolis (talk) 02:23, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
• Comment—agree: italics then downcased is ideal. Tony (talk) 01:41, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
• Comment, yes capitalized in italics followed by downcase in subsequent use is maybe the best solution as suggested above. (It's a little iffy because the question is whether these are are proper names or not. Basically not, I would say. And regarding the Three Jewels and so forth, I'm not in favor of any special pleading just because they're religious doctrines. We don't say "He followed the Basic Principles of Social Democracy..." or "He believed in obeying the Will Of The Electorate as closely as possible..." or "His management style exemplified the Firm Leader approach..." and so forth.) Herostratus (talk) 16:23, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

  I didn't understand anyone to have proposed using upper case on a term's first mention. Wikipedia capitalization style is to keep caps to a minimum and to be consistent. I think readers and editors would be confused if we up-cased it once (in italics) and then down-cased it. I like your analogies. Jojalozzo 16:51, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

• Comment. I also agree with italics on first mention followed by lower case. Following the MoS here seems like a good idea to me. — Mr. Stradivarius ^♫ 04:09, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
• Comment. I think Joja has raised a good point. I am in the process of moving the article on the three poisons to Three poisons. I was not familiar with the WP guidelines when I originally created the article. Regarding the other terms mentioned, my understanding (FWIW) is:
  • The term Buddha should be first-letter capitalized when it is referring to Buddha Shakyamuni. However, when referring to "a buddha" or "buddhas" in general, it can be treated as an ordinary noun with lower case.
  • The term Three Jewels is (in my understanding) an honorific, since it refers to three honorific terms:
    • Buddha Shakyamuni
    • The Dharma (as in the teachings of the Buddha) - according to my understanding, dharma can have many meanings, but when specifically referring to the teachings of Buddha Shakyamuni, it is capitalized. E.g. when referring to dharma as "the truth", it need not be capitalized.
    • The noble Sangha (as in those who have liberated themselves from samsara)
• My understanding comes from the Mahayana/Tibetan tradition. I can't speak for other traditions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dorje108 (talk • contribs) 00:01, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

New Buddhist Shrine Article

Could use some help in fixing it and adding references. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Buddhist_Shrine Reathomis (talk) 13:45, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

AfD

Please see: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Falun Gong’s Theory on Male-Female Dual Cultivation.Steve Dufour (talk) 17:17, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

Golden Light Sutra

The article on the Golden Light Sutra does not cite a single reference and is written as if it is trying to sell the sutra. I inserted some requests for citations and they were all deleted. In addition, further information was added with no reference added. I am not sure how to address this situation. Aaronasterling (talk) 01:17, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Talk:Brahman#Brahman in Early Buddhism

Would anyone like to take a look at Talk:Brahman#Brahman in Early Buddhism? I've made a suggestion there for rewriting a section of the Brahman article. My rewrite wouldn't produce anything like a complete overview (it was cobbled together from what few sources I could find on short notice), but I think it's far superior to the current section, which seems to consist almost completely of original research. --Phatius McBluff (talk) 19:56, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Username discussion

There is a discussion as to whether Buddhists might find the username "Bodhislutva" offensive going on here. Yworo (talk) 15:53, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Category:Guatama Buddha family

The spelling here is incorrect: it should be "Gautama".--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 19:36, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

WikiWomen's History Month

Hi everyone. March is Women's History Month and I'm hoping a few folks here at WP:Buddhism will have interest in putting on events related to women's roles in Buddhism. We've created an event page on English Wikipedia (please translate!) and I hope you'll find the inspiration to participate. These events can take place off wiki, like edit-a-thons, or on wiki, such as themes and translations. Please visit the page here: WikiWomen's History Month. Thanks for your consideration and I look forward to seeing events take place! SarahStierch (talk) 19:10, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Category:Buddhist temple stubs

Greetings! A stub template or category which you created has been nominated for renaming or deletion at Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion. The stub type most likely doesn't meet Wikipedia requirements for a stub type, through failure to meet standards relating to the name, scope, current stub hierarchy or likely size, as explained at Wikipedia:Stub. Please feel free to make any comments at WP:SFD regarding this stub type, and in future, please consider proposing new stub types first at Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals! This message is a boilerplate, left here as a courtesy, and should not be considered personal in nature. Dawynn (talk) 16:15, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Possible greater cooperation across religion and philosophy projects

Please feel free to make any comments you might wish at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Religion#Activity regarding possible more closely coordinated activity between the various religion, philosophy, and mythology WikiProjects. John Carter (talk) 21:28, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

• See the counter-proposal there at: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Religion#Seven Point Counter Proposal. Thank you, IZAK (talk) 09:37, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Nio Zen

An editor, User:BuddhistPHD has created a page Nio Zen that, from my recollections of learning Buddhism in college, is largely original research. The sources I find say Nio Zen was founded by Shosan or Shozan in the 16-17th century. The editor has also been making dubious additions to many Buddhism-related pages, including quite a number that are PR for an obscure museum called the Zenji Museum (which seems to be associated with Zen Acharya, who runs a website called niozen.com). I have removed some of those, but I was hoping someone with more expertise could check this article and this person's other edits. (Note that this editor and some likely related editors also worked on the page Karma: The New Revolution, which is all basically PR. I have nominated it for deletion.) Michitaro (talk) 12:48, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

I've stubbed the article, as I didn't think there was much coherent content worth saving. — Mr. Stradivarius ^♫ 16:11, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Furthermore, I've proposed that the article be merged with Suzuki Shōsan. Please see the merge discussion at Talk:Suzuki Shōsan#Merge proposal. Thanks — Mr. Stradivarius ^♫ 15:18, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Changlu Zongze

I quickly wrote something about Changlu Zongze just because it was a red link in something else I was writing, but I do not feel on solid ground writing on the topic. Could one of you guys take a look at it, correct whatever necessary, etc.? I am not going to work on it any more, so I will just leave it to this project to look after. Thanks. History2007 (talk) 15:18, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Buddhist Brahmins

User:Buddhakahika, who created the page Buddhist Brahmins, has been blocked indefinitely for abusing multiple accounts (Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Buddhakahika). One of the sockpuppets was BuddhistPHD, who created the article Nio Zen that I reported above. I worry that since Buddhist Brahmins has largely been edited by Buddhakahika and his/her sockpuppets, that it lacks a neutral, objective perspective. I also worry that, given Buddhakahika's other efforts on Wikipedia to promote a particular religious organization (headed by Zen Acharya, who is cited in Buddhist Brahmins), the page may not be factually accurate, and may ultimately promote the position of this organization. I am not an expert in this, so I hope more expert eyes could look over the article. (I am also contacting WikiProject India.) Michitaro (talk) 03:39, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

The Five Houses of Chán

Considering that these articles featured quite prominently on the Template:ZenBuddhism, they were all in a pretty sorry state, all of them either stubs, or just redirecting to the teacher for whom the house was named. Because of this, and the fact that the houses all share things in common (such as Guiyang, Fayan, and Yunmen's eventual absorption into the Linji house), I went ahead and merged all of them into a new article, The Five Houses of Chán. I'll be working on the article periodically over the next few weeks, but if anyone has any references they can point me to, or can give me a hand with fleshing out the article, I'd greatly appreciate it. - SudoGhost 12:18, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Nice! Looks good so far; I hope we can get some more detail on the individual schools. I'm a bit too tied up for research/authoring these days, but I'll keep an eye on it for cleanup and similar purposes. Thanks! /ninly_(talk) 15:03, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Reference to Kwan Kung Chung Yi Temple stub

Question to the user who edited the above stub. You mention that this temple is on Chung Chau. Please could you explain where on Chung Chau so I can try and visit it? Many thanks User:pavillion32 07:57, 28 October 2007 (BST)

Top-priority articles?

I have started a list at User:John Carter/Religion articles#Buddhism which contains a list of the articles in the Lindsay Jones Encyclopedia of Religion, with articles listed in each section of the "Synoptic Outline" in which they appear. I believe that any article included in that work is probably justifiably a "Top"-importance article, for both the individual relevant faith (if any) and religion as a whole. Would there be any objections to my going through and assessing and tagging the articles included there for both the Buddhism and Religion WikiProjects? John Carter (talk) 20:00, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Proposed MOS for Religion

There is now a proposed general Manual of Style for Religion and other articles relating to ethoses or belief systems at Wikipedia:WikiProject Religion/Manual of style. Any input would be welcome. I personally believe at least one of the reasons why many articles in this field have been as contentious as they have been is because of lack of such guidelines, and would very much welcome any input from others to help come up with some generally acceptable solutions to some of these problems. John Carter (talk) 21:58, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Related RfC

Please comment at Template talk:Religion topics#RfC on what articles to be included in this template. Thank you. John Carter (talk) 21:35, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Soka Gakkai

There is at present a bit of a heated discussion involving this article. Any and all parties who have any knowledge of the subject are very much urged to take part in the discussion and help resolve the issue. Thank you. John Carter (talk) 01:33, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

I have to agree somehow this site seems a bit dormant, as a matter of fact - at least form my point of view - anny issues surrounding Nichiren Buddhism need more neutral input.--Catflap08 (talk) 22:31, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Yet again I would ask for more neutral support also on the Nichiren article. Latest edits on this article just as in the Nichiren Buddhism were counterproductive in terms of stlye and quality. Cheers.--Catflap08 (talk) 16:59, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

RfC on God

There is a request for comment regarding the scope of the article God at Talk:God#Scope of this article. Any and all input is welcome. John Carter (talk) 15:34, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Proposed changes to WP:NOT

Please see the recent notifications at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Geopolitical, ethnic, and religious conflicts#Proposed changes to WP:NOT and Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Proposed changes to WP:NOT as it effects all religion editors: "There is currently discussion at Wikipedia talk:What Wikipedia is not#Is wikipedia a devotional compendium? regarding a proposed addition to that policy page. As topics of this nature tend to spawn some of the most heated and contested discussions we have, any and all informed, neutral opinions are more than welcome. John Carter (talk) 15:33, 6 August 2012 (UTC)" Thank you, IZAK (talk) 08:20, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

image ident?

Can someone tell me what File:IMG 0275Sg.JPG and File:IMG 0277Korea.JPG are? I think they might be Buddhist passages. Would these particular photos be images of important texts? -- 70.24.247.121 (talk) 23:46, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tenzin Wangchuck

Does anyone know what Tenzin Wangchuck's name is in Tibetan or Chinese script? The article has been nominated for deletion, and knowing his name in one of these scripts would be very useful to help find sources about him. Of course, if anyone is aware of any sources we could use for the article, that would be a great help too. Best regards — Mr. Stradivarius ^{(have a chat)} 13:02, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

ālayavijñāna

Does anyone know what happened to the article on the ālayavijñāna (now redirected to Eight Consciousnesses) and why can no record of the article be found? Meclee (talk) 19:43, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

Possible religion related goals for 2013

This is probably more than a bit presumptuous on my part, but I have started a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Religion#Goals for 2013? asking what if any sort of goals we might be able to reasonably set for the next year, in wikipedia and other WF sites as well. I figured the wikipedia probably gets more attention, which is why I started the discussion there. But I would be very interested in seeing any input regarding what the editors here think might be the areas here most in need or meriting additional attention. Maybe, and at this point it is just a maybe, maybe we might be able to get some input on such topics if we have some idea what it is we really need to work on. Anyway, I would welcome any input anyone here might have. John Carter (talk) 20:06, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

List of articles in other reference work

I have started a page at Wikipedia:WikiProject Buddhism/Encyclopedic articles which lists the articles to be found in at least one print reference work, and the named subsections of those articles. I have no doubt however that many of our articles, if we have any, will be under substantially different titles, like, for instance, we would have an article on "Buddhism in India" which would probably be our equivalent of the article "India" in that source. If there is anyone who would be interested in helping go through and check to see if the titles are accurate, and, maybe, if we do have separate articles on any of the subsections, I think that might be useful. John Carter (talk) 22:56, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Concerns about existence of temple

Hello, I'd appreciate it if anybody could help me wih my query about the existence of a temple added by an unregistered user to the Chiang Mai page. Graham87 06:01, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Daisaku Ikeda

Daisaku Ikeda heads a large Japanese organization. The article on him is long, poor (in my opinion), getting longer, and hardly getting better. The participation of one or two more editors with taste and stamina would be most welcome. Or indeed half a dozen more editors. (I've kept an eye on the article myself for some time, but know little about Buddhism, etc, so am constrained.) ¶ I'm about to cross-post this to WikiProject Japan. -- Hoary (talk) 15:14, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Relics of the Buddha

Various travelers from antiquity such as Faxian and others have recorded relics of the Buddha and sacred sites that existed in areas which now fall in Pakistan , Afghanistan and Central Asia . Would appreciate if someone here could guide me if there is one such comprehensive article , where I could add information . Thanks Intothefire (talk) 13:10, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Try Cetiya. Jojalozzo 17:57, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks ....Ive started to build it here and would appreciate help in improving /developing it . Intothefire (talk) 18:08, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

"Dharmic writers"

Some time ago (2007), the article Dharmic religion was deleted after this deletion discussion and redirected to Indian religions. Category:Dharmic religions was deleted in 2008 after this deletion discussion. There is currently a deletion discussion about the final remnant category of these POV forks, Category:Dharmic writers. Attention may also need to be paid to {{Modern Dharmic writers}}, which contains such occultists as Helena Blavatsky. This all seems rather ill-defined and not source based. Please consider participating in this discussion. Thank you. Yworo (talk) 17:09, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Cremation of Siddhartha

This Islamicised account by Ibn Babuwayah 9thC of the death of Siddhartha contains 2 things which I am not familiar with from Buddhist accounts. (1) a named disciple "Ayabad"? (2) Siddhartha Gautama asked to be laid out facing east - obviously consistent that he should face east because he was facing east when he achieved total enlightenment under the bodhi tree. But is this deathbed request mentioned in any Buddhist accounts of his death or is it a tradition only in Islamic sources?

After that he departed from the land of [Saulabath] (sic, Kapilavastu) and traveled to many areas propagating religion and reached the land of [Kashmir] (sic, Kusinara). He toured the place and gave a new life to the dead hearts of the people of this country and he died during this period. Leaving the mortal body his soul flew up to the ethereal world. Before his death he summoned his disciple named, Ayabad who was serving him in sincerity and was a perfect man in all regards. He made a bequest to him in which he stated that it was time for him to depart from the world. You must fulfill all your duties. You must never give up truth and continue to remain on piety and worship. Then he ordered Ayabad to prepare a place for him to lie. Then he stretched out his legs and turned his head to the west and his face to the east. He died in this position.

In ictu oculi (talk) 03:10, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Soka Gakkai

Can some experienced editors please check over Soka Gakkai (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views).

There's some discussions going on, and a couple of editors have strong views. It would help if others could contribute to improve the article. Thanks, 88.104.27.2 (talk) 01:38, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Buddhist Terrorism

The new article Buddhist Terrorism (incorrect capitalization) seems to me to be a very new, unsourced neologism. I think a better article might be Buddhism and violence (currently a redirect to Criticism of Buddhism), which we have lots of information on, whereas terrorism might be stretching it. I AFD'd the article as a neologism, but I'm sure it will need attention if its kept. (ive also placed it as a "see also" at articles related to the burma fighting).Mercurywoodrose (talk) 03:33, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Mahajima Nikaya section needs date and authorship

The section on the Mahajima Nikaya needs basic information like when the hell it was written, and who is thought to have written it. I say this not as an authority on Buddhism, but as a frustrated user. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.251.145.68 (talk) 23:39, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Buddhaimage1.JPG

image:Buddhaimage1.JPG has been nominated for deletion -- 65.94.79.6 (talk) 05:34, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Buddha statue photos up for deletion

• File:Buddhaimage2.JPG (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• File:Buddhaimage3.JPG (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• File:Buddhaimage4.JPG (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• File:Buddhaimage5.JPG (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• File:Buddhaimage6.JPG (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

-- 65.94.79.6 (talk) 00:51, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

Iconography of Gautama Buddha in Laos and Thailand

FYI, a large portion of Iconography of Gautama Buddha in Laos and Thailand (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) was removed late last year, with these edits -- 65.94.79.6 (talk) 01:10, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

Maitreya project.jpg

image:Maitreya project.jpg has been nominated for deletion -- 65.94.79.6 (talk) 04:48, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Templates

Recently I made some improvements to the following templates:

• Template:Chinese Buddhism
• Template:Zen Buddhism
• Template:Theravada Buddhism
• Template:Western Buddhism
• Template:Mahāyāna Buddhism
• Template:Japanese Buddhism

User Frietjes, who seems unrelated to Buddhist topics, has reverted all the improvements I made without any explanation of her action. --79.21.83.28 (talk) 13:06, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

see wp:deviations. Frietjes (talk) 15:30, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Well, I think the colours used were contrasting enough to make the templates accessible (bostly blues on yellowish colors).--79.21.83.28 (talk) 15:54, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Narodakini150.jpg

image:Narodakini150.jpg has been nominated for deletion -- 76.65.128.222 (talk) 04:24, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Buddhist Flag.jpeg

image:Buddhist Flag.jpeg has been nominated for deletion -- 76.65.128.222 (talk) 03:59, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

My missing topics pages

I have updated Missing topics about Buddhism - Skysmith (talk) 11:38, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Fringe article discussing Buddhism needs eyes

Sanat Kumara discusses Sanat Kumara in Buddhism, and I have no idea if it is accurate. It's full of some very fringy stuff so I'm dubious. Dougweller (talk) 11:35, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Talk:Sūtra

Hi. Where is the guideline about use of IAST? In ictu oculi (talk) 00:53, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

AfC submission

Mind having a look at this submission? Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 17:42, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

header page image

I have just been to this wikiproject for the first time and am wondering if there needs to be an image on the page like other wikiprojects. Has this been brought up previously? Thank you --Turn685 (talk) 05:49, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Rami M. Shapiro

Hello Buddhism experts. The above submission at Afc may be of interest. —Anne Delong (talk) 21:21, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Oops, never mind, it's "Judaism", not "Buddhism". Sorry. —Anne Delong (talk) 18:16, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/European Institute of Applied Buddhism

Good day, Buddhism experts. Is this a notable organization, and are the sources reliable? It's an old abandoned Afc draft that will soon be deleted unless someone thinks its worth working on. —Anne Delong (talk) 21:44, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Diffused problem of original research and misuse of sources in articles related to the number of Buddhists

Articles such as Buddhism by country or List of religious populations have been constructed through misuse of sources and original research (for example combining statistics of different religions), in order to enormously inflate the number of Buddhists in the world.

Chart created mixing the statistics of Buddhism with those of other religions (Shinto, Chinese religion, Dao Mau, Tengrism, etc.).

Inflated numbers: according to surveys China and Vietnam should be in the 10-20 tonality, Taiwan and Japan in the 30-40, Mongolia in the 50%.

For example, in the article Buddhism by country statistics of Buddhism have been mixed with those of other religions of East Asia (Chinese folk religion, Taoism, Shinto, Dao Mau), that have more followers than Buddhism in the respective countries, claiming that they are "related" to Buddhism, when this is utterly false. In the case of China and Vietnam, where Buddhism is followed by little more than 10% of the population (see religion in China, religion in Vietnam), mixing this statistics with that of indigenous religions, the article says that these countries are 50% to 80% Buddhist. In the case of Taiwan, Korea, Japan and Mongolia, where according to censuses or surveys the Buddhists are, respectively, 35%, 22%, around 30% and 53%, the article says that they are over 90%, 50%, 90% and 90% respectively. The authors of this type of edits also use unreliable sources (tourist and travel websites, for example). The same hyper-inflated fake numbers (over 1 billion Buddhists in the world) have been cited also in the main article, Buddhism (which even reports 1.6 billion Buddhists!).

In other cases, List of religious populations#Buddhists, the same author uses reliable survey statistics (those reorting lower numbers) claiming that thair count is only of "practicing Buddhists", while uses the hyper inflated numbers claiming that they represent both practicing and non-practicing Buddhists. East Asian Buddhism has been created using the same type of unreliable sources mentioned above to sustain the high statistics, claiming that East Asians practice "mixed religions" ultimately resulting in this "East Asian Buddhism". Also, many charts have been created by the same authors: I have inserted some of them here on the left.--95.236.78.188 (talk) 19:25, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Namaste and Buddhism

Greetings:

The editor User:Blueyarn keeps taking from Talk:Namaste the mention that it is part of Project Buddhism. He says that inclusion shows POV and demands sources. I reverted him and posted a comment on that talk page: Talk:Namaste#Namaste_and_Buddhism to try and reason with him but I though I'd let you know. My arguments are on that talk page.

Cheers,

Contact Basemetal here 18:57, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Picture requested

Also: if you stumble on a photograph of a sculpture/painting of Buddhist origin representing the anjali mudra, that is the namaste gesture so called, could you please transclude it in article Namaste?

Similarly if you happen on a modern photograph of a person from a Buddhist country (Sri Lanka, Thailand, Burma, Cambodgia, Laos, etc.) doing the anjali mudra please transclude it there.

There might be such a picture at article Añjali Mudrā (picture on the right): that one seems to me to be a Buddhist statue.

Thanks.

Contact Basemetal here 18:58, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/BARUA BUDDHIST COMMUNITY

Hello, Buddhism experts: Here's another one of those old abandoned Afc submissions that will be deleted unless someone takes an interest in it. Is this a notable topic, and should the article be kept and improved, or let go? —Anne Delong (talk) 15:47, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Popular pages tool update

As of January, the popular pages tool has moved from the Toolserver to Wikimedia Tool Labs. The code has changed significantly from the Toolserver version, but users should notice few differences. Please take a moment to look over your project's list for any anomalies, such as pages that you expect to see that are missing or pages that seem to have more views than expected. Note that unlike other tools, this tool aggregates all views from redirects, which means it will typically have higher numbers. (For January 2014 specifically, 35 hours of data is missing from the WMF data, which was approximated from other dates. For most articles, this should yield a more accurate number. However, a few articles, like ones featured on the Main Page, may be off).

Web tools, to replace the ones at tools:~alexz/pop, will become available over the next few weeks at toollabs:popularpages. All of the historical data (back to July 2009 for some projects) has been copied over. The tool to view historical data is currently partially available (assessment data and a few projects may not be available at the moment). The tool to add new projects to the bot's list is also available now (editing the configuration of current projects coming soon). Unlike the previous tool, all changes will be effective immediately. OAuth is used to authenticate users, allowing only regular users to make changes to prevent abuse. A visible history of configuration additions and changes is coming soon. Once tools become fully available, their toolserver versions will redirect to Labs.

If you have any questions, want to report any bugs, or there are any features you would like to see that aren't currently available on the Toolserver tools, see the updated FAQ or contact me on my talk page. Mr.Z-bot (talk) (for Mr.Z-man) 04:56, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Looking for feedback for Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Shaila_Catherine

Hi,

I submitted an article to document Shaila Catherine’s work as a leader in the modern day Vipassana movement, and in particular, as an expert in the meditative state of the Jhanas. The article is located: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Shaila_Catherine

The article was reviewed with the following feedback: "This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability—see the guidelines on the notability of people and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing, so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia."

After talking more with the reviewer, they suggested I contact this page as they were unfamiliar with the subject.

I’d like to improve the article and found the following secondary reliable sources. Before adding them, I wanted to get some guidance to ensure that they would strengthen the case for Shaila Catherine’s notability. Do the following improve the article for inclusion into Wikipedia?

• Leigh Brasington listed Catherine as an expert on the Jhana’s: http://www.leighb.com/jhanantp.htm
• Catherine was interviewed by insightmediation.org.nz: http://www.insightmeditation.org.nz/wiki/Library/ShailaCatherine-TheWayOfCommitment
• Catherine was referenced as an expert within Pacific World: Journal of the Institute of Buddhist Studies, a scholarly journal: http://sh1.webring.com/people/ll/lbrasington/Jhana_in_Theravada_Quli.pdf
• Catherine has been referenced as an expert within Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vipassana_movement
• Catherine has been referenced as an expert within the book Exploring the Edge Realms of Consciousness by Daniel Pinchbeck & Ken Jordan
• Catherine has been referenced as an expert within the book Search Inside Yourself by Chade-Meng Tan
• Catherine has been referenced as an expert within the book 50 Mindful Steps to Self-esteem: Everyday Practices for Cultivating Self-acceptance and Self-compassion by Janetti Marotta.

Thanks in advance. Rgs23 (talk) 15:48, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

Battle of Shigisan

There is a discussion at talk:Battle of Shigisan about expanding this article into a wider conflict article. However according to this [1] that wider conflict is the resistance to the introduction of Buddhism into Japan, so you might be interested -- 65.94.171.126 (talk) 12:49, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

Related RfC

Please feel free to take part in the current RfC at Talk:Dorje Shugden controversy#RfC on restoring last stable version of this article. John Carter (talk) 18:27, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

B9's legacy

@Tengu800: @JimRenge: @Jayaguru-Shishya: As you have noticed, I'm working (again) on the Buddha-nature article. In the past, it's been heavily edited by B9, an editor with a sahrp mind and a good insight into Buddhism, but also a talent for original research (sorry, B9). Buddha-nature leads me to Dharmadhatu, Five wisdoms and Mindstream, which also bear his influence. With all respect of the work he's been doing, I think it's time to clean-up those articles, and turn them into readable and informative articles. what are your impressions of those articles? Best regards, Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 08:31, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

@Joshua Jonathan: I have already noticed the edits of B9 in many buddhism related articles and I agree, there is a need for clean-up. Feel free to remove anything that appears to violate policies/guidelines (OR, UNDUE, POV). JimRenge (talk) 09:06, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

@Joshua Jonathan:, I agree. I'd like to encourage B9 to keep editing, put to pay more attention in the future to what is OR and what does the source actually say. :P A clean-up, however, would be in place. Jayaguru-Shishya (talk) 19:10, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

He's been blocked indef a couple of years ago. Fascinating edits, though; he's linked to mindstream at several places; looks like a valid intuition. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 04:47, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

Celestial Buddha

Is there a reason this article doesn't exist, even as a redirect to Eternal Buddha? It's the only way they are discussed in the two St. Louis temples I've been to.

Celestial Buddha- Those Buddhas, or those manifestations of the one buddha-nature, who appear in the trikāya forms of manifestation, in the sambhoga-kāya. - http://www.encyclopedia.com/

Alatari (talk) 06:07, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Merger proposal: Ātman (Buddhism) into Buddha-nature

See Talk:Buddha-nature#Merger proposal: Ātman (Buddhism). Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 06:26, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

Too much Chinese in infoboxes ?

I wonder why the infoboxes used on the right hand side of articles such as Avalokiteśvara, Manjusri, Maitreya, Cundi (Buddhism), Sitatapatra, Samantabhadra, Ksitigarbha, etc. contain so much Chinese - and why do all those Chinese names come before the Sanskrit and Pali names in Devanagri script? This is the English Wikipedia and all these Bodhisattvas or Buddhist deities originated in the Indian subcontinent, not in China — so I would think Sanskrit and Pali names should come before all those Chinese names. And why so many different Chinese names in some of these infoboxes? Surely anyone who can read Chinese could refer to the corresponding article on Chinese Wikipedia if they want to know all the different Chinese names of these figures (just the sort of thing the inter-wiki / inter-language links are there for) — for everyone else this is meaningless and starts to overwhelm the page. Avalokiteśvara and Manjusri each have over 108 different names in Sanskrit and some of the others many Sanskrit names too. Should all those names be listed as well? And of course all those Sanskrit names have Tibetan, Mongolian and Manchu equivalents that could added to these boxes as well. Clearly that would be ridiculous - so why privilege Chinese language and script (and several different forms of Chinese transliteration / transcription)? Perhaps we need to make a new {{Buddhist deity}} template for articles on Bodhisattvas / Buddhist deities that gives a little less prominence to Chinese language and script which could be used in place of the {{Chinese}} template in these articles. It's not just articles on Buddhist deities that use this {{Chinese}} infobox — I also see it being used in articles like Karuṇā, Bhikkhu, and Tathatā which are originally Sanskrit/Pali terms — not Chinese. I think the {{Buddhist term}} template, which we already have, would be far more appropriate on such pages. Chris Fynn (talk) 06:25, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

Go ahead and fix them.VictoriaGrayson (talk) 21:14, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

Formatting sentences with multilingual words

Greetings! I was inquiring something related to this language thing at WP:MOS (Talk) (I didn't know any more appropriate place for the discussion). Could somebody wiser than me take a quick look? Thanks! :) In short, I was wondering if there is any guideline for formatting sentences with multilingual words (very usual in Buddhism related articles). For example, if we have (1) a Japanese word (Kanji), (2) romantization of that Japanese word, (3), an English translation, and (4) an explanation for the English term: when all those appear in one sentence, how should the sentence be formatted? :P Jayaguru-Shishya (talk) 13:07, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

In case there are no rules for this (probably not), I would try to get some inspiration from the Encyclopedia Brittannica, The Princeton Dictionary of Buddhism, the Encyclopedia of Buddhism, or one of the reputable Journals, like Japanese Journal of Religious Studies and JIABS. JimRenge (talk) 14:00, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, especially the last one[2] I found helpful. In the Japanese Journal of Religious Studies they seem to have a clear practice for that (following the numerations introduced above):

1st, if a person's name is mentioned: (2) romanization, and then (1) Kanji. No parenthesis here.

2nd, if a concept is mentioned: (3) The English translation, and then in parenthesis (2) romanization followed by (1) Kanji.

Similarly, (2) romanization and (1) Kanji, then followed by (3) the English translation in parenthesis, is used.

I still find it hard though, to find a decent spot to place (4) an explanation for the English term. My best suggestion would be that (3) the English translation would appear always without apostrophes, and the (4) explanation for the English term would appear in a separate clause between commas with apostrophes. For example (taken from the article I am editing), currently it goes as follows:

Shinnyo-en followers must accept sesshin and undertake three forms of activity (the “Three Activities,” mittsu no ayumi 三つの歩み): joyful giving (kangu 歓喜, financial contribution to the organization), recruitment of new members (otasuke お救け), and service (gohōshi ご奉仕).

I'd find it better if it was (numerals added):

Shinnyo-en followers must accept sesshin and undertake (3) the Three Activities (Japanese: (2) mittsu no ayumi (1) 三つの歩み): (3) joyful giving (Japanese: (2) kangu (1) 歓喜), (4) "financial contribution to the organization"; (3) recruitment of new members (Japanese: (2) otasuke (1) お救け), and (3) service (Japanese: (2) gohōshi (1) ご奉仕).

Another example from the very same article. The current one:

'Spiritual guides', (Jpn. Reinōsha = medium), are practitioners who are mediums, and have been specially trained in order to perform the so-called Sesshin, face-to-face guidance from the spirit world.

My suggestion (numerals added):

(3) Mediums (Japanese: (2) Reinōsha (1) 霊能者), (4) the "spiritual guides", are practitioners who have been specially trained in order to perform the so-called Sesshin, face-to-face guidance from the spirit world.

Oh boy, I am getting confused as I am writing this here... Well, what do you think? Or shall I take this back to repair shop straight away? :D Cheers! Jayaguru-Shishya (talk) 16:08, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

To simplify a little bit, given the numerals and their explanation above, my suggestion would always follow a simple formula:

3 - 2 - 1 - (4), where 4 does not occur every time. :P (Oh, indeed... I am not making a WP:MOS suggestion here, I am merely asking you if this makes any sense. As a Buddhism editors you sure are familiar with the multilanguage issues...) Jayaguru-Shishya (talk) 16:17, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

Nice, I would prefer abbreviations like Jpn.; Ch.; Skt. JimRenge (talk) 18:08, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi! Actually, I would prefer more simple ones like that as well. I've just seen those templates being used, and I thought it's kind of "norm" here. Anyway, when it comes to the formatting (assuming we have replaced those templates with simple "Jpn.; Ch.; Skt.; etc.), do you think what I presented would be nice? The three first ones (3 - 2 - 1) are taken from the Japanese Journal of Religious Studies, and the fourth one I had to improvise. Well, I haven't seen the fourth one so much in use, except for that "Shinnyo-en" -article I was editing. Cheers! Jayaguru-Shishya (talk) 18:39, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

SGI again

I would again like to ask editors to contribute to the article on Soka Gakkai especially in terms of references. Keeping fanatics at bay is tedious. --Catflap08 (talk) 22:23, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

Bhikkhuni/Priestess/Nun Clarification

Over on the Category for Discussion (CFD) page, we're trying to clarify these categories and we could use some help with defining each of these groups. Specifically, is there a difference between nun and female priest in the Buddhist traditions? Please give us a hand at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2014 September 18#Category:Buddhist priestesses. Thanks! RevelationDirect (talk) 00:17, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/European Institute of Applied Buddhism

Dear Buddhism experts: This old AfC submission will soon be deleted as a stale draft. Is this a notable topic, and should the page be kept and improved instead? —Anne Delong (talk) 14:08, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Comment on the WikiProject X proposal

Hello there! As you may already know, most WikiProjects here on Wikipedia struggle to stay active after they've been founded. I believe there is a lot of potential for WikiProjects to facilitate collaboration across subject areas, so I have submitted a grant proposal with the Wikimedia Foundation for the "WikiProject X" project. WikiProject X will study what makes WikiProjects succeed in retaining editors and then design a prototype WikiProject system that will recruit contributors to WikiProjects and help them run effectively. Please review the proposal here and leave feedback. If you have any questions, you can ask on the proposal page or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you for your time! (Also, sorry about the posting mistake earlier. If someone already moved my message to the talk page, feel free to remove this posting.) Harej (talk) 22:47, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

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 wikipedia policies.

Today, SPA(s) removed the terms "new religion", "medium", a sourced section about "missionary activities" ([3])and substituted an academic source about the imprisonment of their founder with a sectarian source ([4]).

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)

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 "Wikipedia:PROJECT-OR-TASKFORCE-HOMEPAGE/Article alerts". Questions and feedback should be left at Wikipedia 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 {^ταλκ_{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 Wikipedia: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}