Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 11:42, 14 June 2013

	Falun Gong is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination was archived. For older candidates, please check the archive.
Article milestones Date Process Result September 29, 2012 Featured article candidate Not promoted

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Law Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Religion: Falun Gong / New religious movements Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Misplaced Pages's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is within the scope of Falun Gong work group, a work group which is currently considered to be inactive. This article is supported by New religious movements work group (assessed as Top-importance). This article has been marked as needing immediate attention. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. China High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject China, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of China related articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChinaWikipedia:WikiProject ChinaTemplate:WikiProject ChinaChina-related High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Template:WP1.0

Error: The code letter for the topic area in this contentious topics talk notice is not recognised or declared. Please check the documentation.

Please stay calm and civil while commenting or presenting evidence, and do not make personal attacks. Be patient when approaching solutions to any issues. If consensus is not reached, other solutions exist to draw attention and ensure that more editors mediate or comment on the dispute.

Archives

Index 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47

This page has archives. Sections older than 14 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present.

Marxism-Leninism

This article seems to do what a lot of articles seem to do when it comes to Marxism-Leninism, etc, in that it doesn't really separate the actual ideology itself from the post-Mao government's warping of it. The Deng legacy's authoritarianism and capitalism is counter to socialism and Marxism-Leninism. 96.41.152.155 (talk) 01:03, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Absolutely, but these are terms that they still use in official statements and documents, including where it's quoted in this article. This is the language they deal in, however inaccurate it might be. I'm not sure what can be done. TheBlueCanoe 23:19, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Notability

The onus of showing notability is on the editor wishing to add information. If "Fazhengnian" is notable, please provide some detailed academic discussion on it - not vague references to Ghits. If there is some thorough academic discussion on the topic, like there is about everything else on this page, then I think we're fine. Primary sources are not the basis for establishing notability. TheSoundAndTheFury (talk) 15:28, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

I actually have no idea what is being discussed here. The only way that notability would necessarily apply here is regarding the subject Falun Gong itself, whose notability is, I think, rather clearly established. There may be a question regarding whether something qualifies as a reliable source as per WP:RS, but that is a separate matter, which is detailed on the page linked to. I sincerely hope someone points out exactly what the nature of the current dispute is, because the above comment, regrettably, gives no real indication of the nature of the disagreement. John Carter (talk) 16:21, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

The existence of a body of reliable sources on this would satisfy the notability concerns I noted above. They are two sides of the same coin. TheSoundAndTheFury (talk) 16:39, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Let me explain it briefly: a user from Chinese Misplaced Pages has created a page about a kind of FLG exercises called Fazhengnian or "sending forth righteous thought" ,which was a DYK on Chinese Misplaced Pages, and today I've added it to the "exercises" paragraph in this article. However, TheSoundAndTheFury deleted it and nominated it for deletion (also nominated for deletion on Chinese Misplaced Pages, but the result was speedy keep).--Jsjsjs1111 (talk) 18:48, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

We make decisions based on policies here. There are policies against having articles based purely on primary sources, as well as policies against original research. If you can produce good quality, secondary sources (like books on falungong) that discuss the importance of this ritual, then we can discuss where it might fit in, how much weight to give it, where, and so on. Otherwise it doesn't belong here.—Zujine|talk 18:57, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

"发正念" has lots of result in google books.--Jsjsjs1111 (talk) 19:04, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

I looked it up in Chinese as well. Most of the Chinese results are unrelated to falungong, but instead to other Buddhist traditions. Some appear to be related to falungong, but are only mentioned in passing (eg. as part of a list of censored terms in China). Others are Falungong publications, which are primary source. That's still not enough to establish notability or to enable us to make interpretive claims about what this is and what role and significance it has to falungong overall. Sorry. —Zujine|talk 19:22, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

can someone help me out on the photos here. i notice the photo of ethan gutmann a researcher was recently deleted; it was a photograph that was taken by epoch times. woudl not that newspaper simply give us the photographs if they knew they could be useful and illustrative of the subject on wikipedia? if so can anyone point me in the direction I go about that? I would be happy to email them to request for them to sign over the rights to public domain or something creative commons. has anyone tried this?Happy monsoon day 20:35, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Here is an image of Falun Gong practitioners send forth righteous thoughts before the Chinese Consulate in New York. According to google books, secondary reliable sources discuss the subject of FLG "sending forth righteous thoughts". According to primary FLG sources: "Sending forth righteous thoughts is one of the three things that Master requires of us. It is very important, and every Fa-rectification period Dafa disciple must do well in this regard." AgadaUrbanit (talk) 21:08, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

well personally i think its problly worth mentioning something about this falun prayer thing even if the sources we have so far are not completely perfect. certainly doesnt seem to deserve a page to itself but ill add a few sentences just so we can move on how about that.Happy monsoon day 02:59, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

Are there any notable studies about Falun Gong's views about aliens and civilisations before human?

Though I remember there are several times where this ides was mentioned in books like Zhuan Falun and some of Li Hongzhi's teachings(such as Oklo), this area seemed to be largely neglected in this article--Inspector (talk) 14:17, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Other editors have looked into this before, and I understand that extraterrestrial life is only mentioned once or twice in passing in Zhuan Falun, meaning it doesn't make up a significant part of the teachings. Another editor also once looked at how much weight to give these teachings based on their appearance in the most authoritative books on falungong beliefs:

Ownby's 300-page volume on Falun Gong devotes two sentences to Li's statements on aliens. Penny's book, which is a much more single-minded study of all aspects of Falun Gong practice and beliefs, devotes one page out of ~250 to the subject.

According to Penny, a much more important concept than the existence of aliens is falungong's ideas about other forms of life pervading the universe—namely gods, buddhas and deities.

I can't find any mention of Oklo in the text of Zhuan Falun, but I looked through Penny's writings, and see that there is an indirect reference to it. There's a short section of Li's book where he mentions several apparently ancient artifacts to make a point that civilisation extends further back than historians and archeologists generally allow. Penny writes that "determining whether Li's contentions about certain historical artifacts or natural phenomena are correct or not is to misinterpret the nature of teachings...Li's writings should be viewed as religious texts." The tradition he's playing into here "echoes ideas present in Chinese religions for centuries," especially those of Buddhism and medieval Daoism, which hold that there are multiple ages of human civilisation that undergo cyclical periods of renewal and decline.—Zujine|talk 00:31, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

Due to the internet blocking I cannot reach the Zhuan Falun text by now, but I guess Li Hongzhi had mentioned something like "a 2 billion-year nuclear reactor that cannot be built by today's technology".--Inspector (talk) 02:16, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

Here is some pieces from the first chapter of Chinese Zhuan Falun:"非洲有个加蓬共和国有铀矿石，这个国家比较落后，自己不能够提炼铀，把它出口到先進国家。... 最後證實這個鈾礦是個大型核反應堆，而且布局非常合理，我們現在的人都不可能 ... 是二十億年前，它運轉了五十萬年。 "(Rough Translation: In Africa there is a country called Gabonese Republic; it is a developing country not able to refine uranium ore and exporting it to developed countries...It was at last confirmed that this uranium ore is a big nuclear reactor with perfect structure that cannot be build by us now ... It had run for 500 thousand years in 2 billion years ago).--Inspector (talk) 02:26, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

I can understand that certain disputable texts should not be overly criticized. Though, what was currently written in this article about this view about "echoes ideas present in Chinese religions for centuries," presented in Penny's writings?--Inspector (talk) 02:34, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

Penny's book, which is a much more single-minded study of all aspects of Falun Gong practice and beliefs, devotes one page out of ~250 to the subject. To be clear, that's a quote from User:Homunculus. Actually, this understates the amount of coverage Penny devotes to Li's alien and related beliefs in the book: the index indicates that aliens are discussed on pages 91-92, 130-132, 147-49, see also UFOs discussed on 126, 130-133, 148. There's also quite a lot of quotation and analysis on his concepts of giant pythons (p.101), evil snake spirits (p.108) and other "unusual" beliefs relative to the "persecution" that our articles like to emphasize, on Penny's chapters dedicated to Li Hongzhi and Zhuan Falun. It would be less undue to place some mention of them on the articles there. @Inspector: It's well known that Falun Gong's English translations of its texts are crafted towards its political goals, so they exclude a lot of the stuff that would be treated skeptically by the press and non-Chinese-literate scholars. Shrigley (talk) 05:46, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know about the translation.--Inspector (talk) 06:54, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

Given that there's a lot of misinformation around falungong, be careful not to make erroneous statements that could further misunderstandings. The leading scholars on falungong haven't said anything about its english translations having any kind of "political goals." There are reputable scholars who read both English and Chinese and who have read both versions of Li's writings, and their findings don't at all support your statement. Penny spends more time discussing the slight translation differences between the three English editions of Zhuan Falun than he does elaborating Li's views on aliens, and yet he makes no mention of any form of manipulation in the translation—to the contrary, he notes that the texts are translated assiduously. The biggest inconsistency he mentions is the translation of "Shijian fa" into "in-triple-world," which is apparently because they were treating "shijian" like "sanjie".

I also checked H's observation for myself. Penny indeed devotes about one page (<1.5 pages) to explaining falungong's beliefs on aliens. He spends another half page to a page on other people's writings on extraterrestrials and speculating about what kind of discourses may have been influential in China in the 1980s and 1990s. All the other mentions from the index are tangential, one-word mentions outside the context of really explaining falungong's beliefs.

Certainly, Penny's book dedicates relatively little space to the persecution, because Penny's study is a textual analysis of falungong's books, not a general overview of all things falungong. The history of the practise and the origins of persecution are given an excellent introduction in the first chapter, but that's about it. Since this article is an overview with only one small section on falungong's central beliefs and teachings, it should remain focused on the most central beliefs, not the ones that certain editors find "unusual" or sensational.—Zujine|talk 15:33, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

Eastern Lightning

Are there any known ties between Falungong and the doomsday cult Eastern Lightning?? This cult seems to be also engaging in anti-CCP rhetoric, and called the Chinese government the "red dragon" of the Book of Revelations, a term also used by Falungong's Nine Commentaries. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.174.128.66 (talk) 09:02, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Don't think so. They share some things in common in terms of the treatment their members have received at the hands of Chinese authorities, and it's not entirely surprising that they've adopted some similar anti-government rhetoric. But in terms of doctrinal similarities or lineage ties, there's no connection. Interesting though. TheBlueCanoe 12:35, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Proposal to add news report

Here's the report: http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Falun-Gong-Derided-as-Authoritarian-Sect-by-2783949.php It's from a mainstream news outlet, appears to be notable, reliable, and relevant to the subject. According to talk archive there is a tremendious effort by Falun Gong disciple to circle the wagon here to push POV, so I am proceeding cautiousely and requesting adminstrative oversight. Bobby fletcher (talk) 18:24, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

This is an old debate, and one that's been hashed out at length before. Long story short: these three individuals represent an extreme fringe. One is an undergraduate student. Their arguments have been addressed and discredited by serious scholars, and so highlighting their criticisms in this manner is giving their opinions vastly undue weight. There is already a section in the article that addresses the 'cult' debate, and the role that a handful of western anti-cultists had in legitimizing the Chinese government's discourses, but the views of mainstream scholars should be given prominence.

If you want to dispute my reversion at ANI, please do. I will happily draw their attention to evidence of your conflict of interest. —Zujine|talk 21:40, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Putting personal issues aside ( and for the record I have no COI vis-à-vis China's Communist party or Falun Gong), I do agree that any reliably sourced content which discusses FG in terms like "cult" or "millennial movement" is branded as "communist propaganda" and rapidly removed. AgadaUrbanit (talk) 23:41, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

@AgadaUrbanit, I will support your opinion if this news report belongs or not, and edit suggestion you may have.

Bobby fletcher (talk) 03:52, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Don't include. Event was not notable. This is a summary article, not a list of every conference and event where someone has expressed views on Falun Gong.TheBlueCanoe 11:42, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

• All unassessed articles
• B-Class law articles
• Mid-importance law articles
• WikiProject Law articles
• B-Class Religion articles
• Top-importance Religion articles
• B-Class New religious movements articles
• Top-importance New religious movements articles
• New religious movements articles
• Religion articles needing attention
• WikiProject Religion articles
• B-Class China-related articles
• High-importance China-related articles
• B-Class China-related articles of High-importance
• WikiProject China articles