User talk:Ogress/Archive 55
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:Ogress. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 50 | ← | Archive 53 | Archive 54 | Archive 55 | Archive 56 | Archive 57 | → | Archive 60 |
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
| Views/Day | Quality | Title | Content | Headings | Images | Links | Sources | Tagged with… |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 5,817 | 
|
Buddhism (talk) | 
|
Add sources | ||||
| 1,427 |
|
Hangul (talk) |
|
Add sources | ||||
| 23 | 
|
Georgia Byng (talk) |
|
|
|
|
|
Add sources |
| 119 |
|
Timeline of Buddhism (talk) |
|
|
Add sources | |||
| 221 |
|
Bon (talk) |
|
|
Add sources | |||
| 222 |
|
Three Jewels (talk) |
|
|
Add sources | |||
| 70 | 
|
Rainbow body (talk) |
|
|
|
|
|
Cleanup |
| 249 |
|
Sadhana Sargam (talk) |
|
|
Cleanup | |||
| 9 |
|
Mogok Sayadaw (Venerable Sayadawgyi U Wimala) (talk) |
|
|
Cleanup | |||
| 33 |
|
Maitrayaniya Upanishad (talk) | Expand | |||||
| 160 |
|
Tuffi (talk) |
|
|
|
|
|
Expand |
| 12 |
|
Samding Dorje Phagmo (talk) |
|
|
Expand | |||
| 92 |
|
Dharwad (talk) |
|
Unencyclopaedic | ||||
| 1,988 |
|
Dalit (talk) | Unencyclopaedic | |||||
| 212 |
|
V. P. Singh (talk) | Unencyclopaedic | |||||
| 96 |
|
Buddhist councils (talk) |
|
|
|
Merge | ||
| 6 |
|
Dhammakaya Open University (talk) |
|
|
|
|
|
Merge |
| 10 |
|
Pnong people (talk) |
|
|
|
|
|
Merge |
| 210 |
|
Buddhism and violence (talk) |
|
Wikify | ||||
| 557 |
|
Saṃsāra (talk) |
|
|
|
Wikify | ||
| 235 |
|
Religion in Vietnam (talk) | Wikify | |||||
| 4 |
|
Minling Khenchen Rinpoche (talk) |
|
|
|
|
Orphan | |
| 2 |
|
Rajguru Aggavamsa Mahathera (talk) |
|
|
|
Orphan | ||
| 6 |
|
Michaela Haas (talk) |
|
|
|
|
|
Orphan |
| 14 |
|
Ṛddhi (talk) |
|
|
|
|
Stub | |
| 12 |
|
Khalapur (talk) |
|
|
|
|
|
Stub |
| 21 |
|
Khotang District (talk) |
|
|
|
Stub | ||
| 18 |
|
Palani Baba (talk) |
|
|
|
|
|
Stub |
| 9 |
|
Diktel (talk) |
|
|
|
Stub | ||
| 17 |
|
Gaoli bangzi (talk) |
|
|
|
|
Stub |
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 01:08, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for May 2
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Limbu people, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Nepali. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:51, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
Mahāyāna Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra
Greetings Ogress! I hope you are doing well. Anyway, I restored some of the language tags[1] at Mahāyāna Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra, but I thought of messaging you since you are more of a expert when it comes to those. Are the ones I restored erroneous, or could they be preserved in the article? (The formatting for some reason gives two semi-colons after traditional Chinese, I don't know why though...) Cheers! Jayaguru-Shishya (talk) 12:23, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
- @Jayaguru-Shishya:, there is absolutely no reason to list its name outside of Chinese characters or Tibetan. It makes a mess, it's against Wiki standards, and if a person wants to examine the text in Chinese or Tibetan they now know the name (and certainly don't need transliteration). Basically it's a mess and greatly redundant. Ogress smash! 17:28, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks for your reply, Ogress. I must confess, I am not an expert on the Wiki standards when it comes to the use of language tags, that's why I thought it's better ask for your consultance. Maybe it's just my innate fascination towards all writing oriental, who knows :-D Jayaguru-Shishya (talk) 10:58, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
- Hi again. Can you point me out those guidelines that are dealing with the use of language tags? :-P Thanks! Jayaguru-Shishya (talk) 14:31, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
- @Jayaguru-Shishya: Hi, um, they are in different places: poke around like Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Indic), Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Dharmic), Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Chinese), Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Tibetan) and related pages. Basically, there are two poles we bounce off of: this is an English encyclopedia and the use of non-English words should be practical, and there is a scholarly standard for most everything and it's usually useful. For example, Devanagari for Sanskrit and Pali is not appropriate (basically anywhere except in a quote) because it is not a historic script - it was adopted in the 19th century, a modern employment of a "neutral" script for a dead language. It's not "the original script" we're providing, it's a kind of false science to provide it, unlike with, say, with Hindi, Urdu, Marathi and Tamil words. There's a page somewhere that specifies not to use Indic script like that. I'll look for it, I don't remember this stuff offhand, sadly.
- The standard romanisation we use for Indic languages - IAST for Sanskrit and the extended IAST of National Library at Kolkata romanization for non-Sanskrit Indic languages - is the absolute standard both on Wikipedia and in scholarly works. It has some wiggles in it, such as whether to use long marks or not on Pali e and o before geminates since there are no minimal pairs, but these are largely specialist issues that don't really matter. What does matter is a standard romanisation of classical IA and Dravidian languages and of modern Indic languages.
- When it comes to Sinoxenic, when we are discussing a Chinese-language text, there is zero reason to add the romanisation unless, like the Yijing or Zhuangzi, this name is in common usage. There is even less need to provide Korean, Vietnamese, Cantonese and Japanese Sinoxenic pronunciations of those same words unless there is a good reason, because they are simply pronouncing Classical Chinese according to local tradition. When referencing the Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra - called the Mahāyāna Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra for technical reasons to distinguish it from the very different Theravadin Mahāpārinibbāṇa Sutta - it's the height of redundancy to give Sinoxenic pronunciations for what is a kind of specialist text. Basically, if someone wants to examine it in Classical Chinese, they just need to know the CC title. They already know how to use local pronunciation of CC. Mandarin, Cantonese, Japanese - it doesn't matter what literary pronunciation you are using, it's a dead language and all you need is already there: the characters.
- Classical Tibetan is notable because it's an entirely different literary tradition; but again, we don't list the Dzongkha, Sikkimese, Standard Tibetan, Kham, Sherpa and Amdo romanisations, because all of them use the archaic Tibetan spelling in reading and it's not useful to an English encyclopedia. We only note when the topic is localised, such as modern Bhutanese placenames, which should be romanised according to the Official Romanisation and Official Dzongkha spellings, or the like. Wylie should be limited to "hey this is what we call Yogacara in many languages" or to topics that are well-established, and it has an official Standard Tibetan pronunciation form that is the Wiki standard as well, THL Simplified Phonetic Transcription. If a term is in common use, like tulku or shentong, we use that THL form and usually also provide the Wylie so people can see where it came from. (Incidentally, shentong is the wrong romanisation and we are working on moving it to zhentong per Wiki standard.) But a lot of the time, a topic that merely also has a Tibetan counterpart, like the sutra title above, need only have the Tibetan script or Wylie so the reader can make the connection if they want to read in Tibetan. They already know how to read Tibetan if that is true...
- Basically, your general operating procedure of Wikipedia:KISS - is the go-to. If it's not someone's name, like a notable Vietnamese Buddhist logician who wrote in CC, don't stick in Sinoxenic (or Mandarin) pronunciations if they have a courtesy name. Don't use Devanagari for Pali or Sanskrit, it's a neologistic practice and you can easily write the Devanagari if you know Devanagari. Use IAST whenever possible for Indic languages unless there's a Common Usage, in which case probably stick the appropriate IAST form in somewhere. This is well-done in a lot of Indo-Aryan language pages but not in Dravidian ones; a lot of pages romanise Tamil and other languages according to "what it sort of sounds like in English", which is both maddening and obscures the actual Tamil terms for the individual seeking to learn more. The Hinduism pages are a particular cesspool of "I am romanising a word and I have no idea that there might be a system and also I am basically writing a fan-page". Wikignoming those is ... a challenge.
- It's complicated, I know. But remember why you strip out Kyoto links when we already have a link to Kyoto. The same policy applies in general: who is the reader? Ogress smash! 16:47, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
- Ogress, I am the most impressed. Thanks for your thoughtful and throughout answer! You won't find me restoring the language tags anymore :-)
- By the way, I think your careful response above would justify an article of its own. Best regards, Jayaguru-Shishya (talk) 19:07, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
Reference errors on 4 May
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
- On the Middle Way page, your edit caused a cite error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:29, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 04:38, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
Sabhaktikamanuruddha
Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sabhaktikamanuruddha. JimRenge (talk) 12:55, 6 May 2015 (UTC)