| Revision as of 05:03, 24 February 2008 editEditor2020 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Rollbackers155,688 editsm →Proposed Merge: self delete← Previous edit | Revision as of 08:55, 5 May 2009 edit undoStevertigo (talk | contribs)43,174 editsm →Offensive statement in the lead.Next edit → | ||
| Line 28: | Line 28: | ||
| "The use of this classification is waning due to Islam's place among the Abrahamic religions and Islamic academic abandonment of '''archaic Orientalism.'''" <small>—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 20:06, 27 January 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | "The use of this classification is waning due to Islam's place among the Abrahamic religions and Islamic academic abandonment of '''archaic Orientalism.'''" <small>—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 20:06, 27 January 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | ||
| == Dubious flags == | |||
| Someone added dubious and cite flags to the lede. I will check back in here tomorrow for any comments that normally accompany such flagging. Regards, -]] 08:55, 5 May 2009 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 08:55, 5 May 2009
 | Religion B‑class High‑importance | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
This article does not reflect the way the term "Eastern religion" is actually used. In common usage, the "Eastern" religions are those that originated in Idia and China and are currently the dominant religions of Asia. Judaism, Christianity, and Islam are considered Western religions because they originated in the western part of Asia and are currently the dominant religions of Europe and the Americas.
All of today's major world religions originated in Asia, so classifying all Asian religions as "Eastern" isn't very useful. Pterodactyler 15:22, 13 August 2005 (UTC)
The only remotely useful information on this incomplete page is the somewhat-dubious definition of 'Eastern Religion'. The rest can be found at the religions' respective pages. If there is no objection before tomorrow, I am going to rewrite this page. Turly-burly 07:14, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
Why is there only the Dharmic religions here? What about Taoism and Confucianism? And don't the folk and animistic religions get a say?
Working towards improvement
I have been adding summary style sections and rewriting sections as summaries. I have been improving the sourcing and trying to improve the writing overall. If anyone has any comments, criticisms or suggestions, they would be quite welcome. Vassyana 16:11, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
- I have been working here and on the Gurus article, which I think is getting pretty comprehensive. I think rather than making a Guru section here, we could just link to Gurus. What do people here think? Actually, is there anyone here? Rumiton 15:07, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
- Hello Rumiton, the section on Guru's in this article already links to Guru, so I've removed the duplicate link. I don't think we should get into too much detail here, but there should at least be a simple summary? Regards, Gouranga(UK) 16:02, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
- Ah, there is someone here. Yes, I noticed the other link afterwards. Thanks for the deletion. I guess the difficult thing will be summarizing a large body of information in a fair way. Care to make a start? Rumiton 16:26, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
Reliable sources for the term dharmic religions?
Where are the reliable sources that use the term dharmic religions in the context of this article? Dharmic religions is a now deleted obscure neologism and should not be used throughout Misplaced Pages. a good alternative is Indian religions. Andries 15:55, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
I propose to use the alternative phrase Indian religions. The number of google scholar results for "Indian religions"+"Indian religion" is (45.600 + 84.200) while it is only (492+475) for "dharmic religions" +"dharmic religion". See Misplaced Pages:Deletion_review/Log/2007_September_8. Andries 19:21, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
- Dharmic religion already disambiguates to Indian religions and Indian philosophy ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 20:32, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, I know. I think should be bypassed. Andries 20:34, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
Offensive statement in the lead.
"The use of this classification is waning due to Islam's place among the Abrahamic religions and Islamic academic abandonment of archaic Orientalism." —Preceding unsigned comment added by Editor2020 (talk • contribs) 20:06, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
Dubious flags
Someone added dubious and cite flags to the lede. I will check back in here tomorrow for any comments that normally accompany such flagging. Regards, -Stevertigo 08:55, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
Categories: