Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Farang Rak Tham (talk | contribs) at 11:42, 26 April 2020 (→Tantric Theravada?: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

This is the talk page for discussing WikiProject Buddhism and anything related to its purposes and tasks.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6Auto-archiving period: 30 days

Buddhism Project‑class

This page falls within the scope of WikiProject Buddhism, an attempt to promote better coordination, content distribution, and cross-referencing between pages dealing with Buddhism. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page for more details on the projects.BuddhismWikipedia:WikiProject BuddhismTemplate:WikiProject BuddhismBuddhism Project This page does not require a rating on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.

Buddhism articles by quality and importance Quality Importance Top High Mid Low NA ??? Total FA 1 4 3 8 FL 3 3 A 1 1 GA 5 10 24 28 67 B 28 75 94 248 18 463 C 49 81 192 935 26 1,283 Start 35 81 429 2,092 26 2,663 Stub 2 10 123 1,598 15 1,748 List 3 1 8 91 1 104 Category 2,141 2,141 Disambig 15 15 File 24 24 Project 12 12 Template 140 140 NA 4 4 15 60 69 152 Other 21 21 Assessed 126 263 890 5,058 2,423 85 8,845 Unassessed 3 3 Total 126 263 890 5,058 2,423 88 8,848 WikiWork factors (?) ω = 30,459 Ω = 4.89

Linkspam in 'See Also' Sections

I've noticed that someone(s) have added 'Secular Buddhism' in the 'See Also' section of a wide number of Buddhism articles, often articles with no or at best tangential relationship to the topic. It's difficult to quickly tell using 'What links here' which articles it was included in for spurious reasons and where it was included as part of the topic, but it's worth keeping an eye out for. --Spasemunki (talk) 02:19, 15 December 2019 (UTC)

Spasemunki, this has happened before, and the user has already been warned for this. Could you help point out which articles are still being spammed?--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 09:32, 15 December 2019 (UTC)

Sutra and Caodong school are the most recent ones that I've seen, but I don't know when the link was added- it may have been from before the action was taken against the spammer. I thought there had been a few more a few months back, but I can't find them in my contribs right now. Unfortunately because of its inclusion in a template that is in the footer of a lot of pages, it's hard to verify when it's being linked inappropriately. --Spasemunki (talk) 03:14, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

Spasemunki, what's the name of the user again?--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 22:18, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Okay, I have found him. It appears the IP has been used to spam external links for quite a while now. I have reported him here.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 22:24, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Are Sutta Central and Palikanon.com suitable as external links?

There is a discussion going on here about the suitability of mentioned websites as External Links, as to whether they are spam and whether they are scholarly in nature. Feel free to take part, anyone.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 22:14, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Thich Quang Do

Nominated at WP:ITN/C under the recent deaths section Bumbubookworm (talk) 12:48, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

No reason for using Devanagari in Buddhist articles

It seems there are certain users that want to add Devanagari script renditions of terms in numerous articles about Buddhism on Misplaced Pages. There seems to be no good reason for this, other than perhaps nationalistic or revisionist ones.

Devanagari does not come from the time of the Buddha or from the time of Ashoka (from which date the first Buddhist related inscriptions), as the wki article says it reached regular use by the 7th century CE.

None of the major Buddhist canons (Tibetan, Chinese, Pali) are recorded in Devanagari, they use Chinese, Tibetan script and various South Asian scripts like Sinhala or Burmese. None of the major publications of these canons use Devanagari. Even the Sanskrit Buddhist texts are mostly not published in Devanagari, but use IAST instead. None of the main scholarly publications on Sanskritic Buddhism use Devanagari either, they all use IAST (for example: Siderits and Katsura 's "Nagarjuna's Middle Way: Mulamadhyamakakarika").

It makes absolutely no sense to put Devanagari in Buddhist articles. For these reasons, I am removing any instance of these that I see. Anyone have any objections? Javierfv1212 14:12, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

I agree with this. Stick to the traditional Buddhist Canon languages or national languages when relavent. Wikiman5676 (talk) 18:43, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

Agree per proposal and reasons given at WP:INDICSCRIPT.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 20:42, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

Tantric Theravada?

Your input is needed here in this discussion. Thanks.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 11:42, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

• Project-Class Buddhism pages
• NA-importance Buddhism pages
• Misplaced Pages pages with to-do lists
• Misplaced Pages pages with to-do lists, unused