Jump to content

Talk:Wat Paknam Bhasicharoen

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleWat Paknam Bhasicharoen has been listed as one of the Philosophy and religion good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Good topic starWat Paknam Bhasicharoen is part of the Dhammakaya movement in Thailand series, a good topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.
Did You KnowOn this day... Article milestones
DateProcessResult
February 7, 2018Good article nomineeListed
August 23, 2018Good topic candidatePromoted
Did You Know A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on March 23, 2018.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that the Thai Buddhist temple Wat Paknam Bhasicharoen organizes blood donations every three months?
On this day... A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on March 4, 2024.
Current status: Good article
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Wat Paknam Bhasicharoen. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:08, 26 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Wat Paknam Bhasicharoen. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:21, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 91 external links on Wat Paknam Bhasicharoen. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:03, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Wat Paknam Bhasicharoen/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Mike Christie (talk · contribs) 11:26, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'll review this. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:26, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

General

[edit]
  • Not necessary for GA, but you may want to change "mae chi" to "maechi" to conform to the other articles.
Done.--Farang Rak Tham (talk) 13:19, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Pre-modern times (fifteenth century–1915)

[edit]
  • Wat Paknam simply means 'lock in canal': I was surprised to see this, since I gather "wat" means "temple"; does "Wat Paknam" really translate to a phrase that does not include "temple"?
No, it doesn't. Fixed.--Farang Rak Tham (talk) 13:16, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • The pre-1915 history is very short. Are there really no further sources that could be used? I see from the subsequent section that it was quite a minor temple, so perhaps that explains it.
Well, I have used almost every source i could scrape from the online clippings, except for very old newspapers. More detail would require me going there. That's an expensive ticket, lol.--Farang Rak Tham (talk) 13:16, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Revival by Luang Pu Sodh (1916–59)

[edit]
  • a temple with only thirteen monks that was abandoned: "abandoned" implies there was nobody there at all. Perhaps "little used"?
In disrepair. Fixed.--Farang Rak Tham (talk) 13:16, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Although Luang Pu Sodh has already passed away, his remains have been kept in a coffin: we don't need "although", and it's best not to use euphemisms. How about "Luang Pu Sodh died in 1959, and his body has been kept in a coffin"?
Done.--Farang Rak Tham (talk) 13:21, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Somdet Chuang Varapuñño as abbot (1960–2013)

[edit]
  • no successors were appointed, which led to discussion: vague.
Fixed.--Farang Rak Tham (talk) 13:28, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • I was surprised to see that there's no separate article for Somdet Chuang Varapuñño. Quite a bit of the material in the article is about him, rather than the temple, though I can see they're intertwined. Should the article perhaps be split?
Possible, but most content would be the same, and all English-language sources deal mostly with the temple rather than Somdet Chuang. So you would end up with an article with hardly any English source. That is allowed, of course, but not ideal. In the Thai Wikipedia, the two are separated, but the article about Somdet Chuang reads like a sort of resume.--Farang Rak Tham (talk) 13:28, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I have added an inter-language link at the first instance of his name.--Farang Rak Tham (talk) 14:22, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Somdet Chuang used to be monastic Chief of Region 3, 17 and 7, respectively: is there a possible link to something that explains what these regions are?
I'll have to search for that.--Farang Rak Tham (talk) 13:28, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Just in Thai probably. Added.--Farang Rak Tham (talk) 14:22, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wat Paknam was displeased by the report and had Phra Adisak leave Wat Paknam, but he did not comply: seems odd; he continued to live there, or to be a member? They had no power to force him to leave in either case?
Incompletely summarized. Rewritten now.
  • of embezzlement and other accusations: you can't be accused of an accusation. Perhaps "of embezzlement and other crimes"?
Fixed.
  • which was one of 6000–7000 cars sold: I don't follow this.
Explained.
  • The car under investigation was an eighty-old year wreck that had been fixed by adding new parts to it, before offering it to the museum: this sounds like a defense of the temple; it should be attributed to the source, rather than stated in Wikipdia's voice, unless we are sure it's a statement of facts which is not disputed by anyone. The word "wreck" is not neutral in this context.
Attributed and rephrased.

Practices and propagation

[edit]
  • The temple does, however, not only try to appeal to mae chis, but follows a general policy with regard to 'suitability': I'm not sure what "appeal" means here; I think it refers to the temple's ability to attract maechis. If so I don't think it's needed; that much is already evident to the reader. Perhaps just "The temple's policy is to make itself 'suitable' (Pali: sappaya), meaning that it attempts to be attractive...".
Good! Done.
  • has acted resolutely: not neutral language.
Fixed.
  • he taught her to be patient and enduring: "taught" implies she successfully learned this from him; I think a verb such as "recommended" would be more neutral.
Fixed.--Farang Rak Tham (talk) 22:04, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

-- Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 13:15, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The fixes all look good to me. Passing. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 01:41, 7 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


Coverage of Somdet Chuang

[edit]

Going through the article, I also think it'd be best if the coverage on Somdet Chuang was split into a separate article. A lot of the subsections under History cover him in a personal capacity not directly related to the temple. I see this was already mentioned in the GA review; we could probably let it rest for a while, and revisit the issue some time in the future. Just leaving my thoughts for the record. --Paul_012 (talk) 09:21, 13 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I actually intended to do this for a while, but then discarded the idea on the grounds that, as stated in the review, ... most content would be the same, and all English-language sources deal mostly with the temple rather than Somdet Chuang. So you would end up with an article with hardly any English source. That is allowed, of course, but not ideal.
But I am not opposed to it for other reasons than language, and have actually kept some notes from the Matichon clippings in case I'd ever start an article dedicated to him.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 12:51, 13 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Paul 012:.
I would also think that Somdet Chuang would be good simply a its own article. And perhaps cover the material between Luang Pu Sodh and Somdet Chuang more evenly in the Wat Paknam page. Wikiman5676 (talk) 01:47, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

I've removed the links to Matichon E-library, which no longer work. Per WP:SOURCELINKS, it's not necessary to list the content deliverer in citations to material that is available offline. And it's no use to the reader to make WP:Shallow references to the paywall homepage. (If, however, there are direct URLs that still work, they could be helpful for those with a subscription, so such links should be fine.) --Paul_012 (talk) 14:39, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like good reasoning, but it is interpreted as linkrot, and did you know nomination has been bounced back as a result. This seems undue to me. What's so terribly wrong with using newspaper clippings?--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 02:03, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I see you have explained it now. Thanks.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 02:16, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "http://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Talk:Wat_Paknam_Bhasicharoen&oldid=1218755984"