![]() | Eight precepts 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. Review: October 26, 2019. ( Reviewed version). |
![]() | A fact from Eight precepts appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 9 January 2019 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
| ![]() |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 03:57, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
We need to identify which traditions follow this, as our article implies they all do. Tibetan Buddhist sangha certainly eat after noon for example. I am told only Theravadins don't. Secretlondon 21:51, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
See here — Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 21:02, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: moved. ( non-admin closure) JC7V ( talk) 22:15, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
Eight Precepts →
Eight precepts – Per
MOS:DOCTCAPS.
Farang Rak Tham
(Talk) 08:43, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
I think what we need here is an examination of how independent (i.e., scholarly not religious, and definitely not newage) books treat this phrase in English when specifically writing about Buddhism in its native lands (not neo-Buddhist stuff in the West, which capitalizes pretty much everything it can get its hands on). Journalism sources are utterly useless for this because they reflexively capitalize in any case where there is doubt, most especially religious and other cultural matters, simply to avoid giving offense to anyone who might write an angry "letter to the editor". So, anyway, is this a list, the Eight Precepts, that originated as such, or is just a set of doctrinal matters treated as a group and sometimes published as list, of eight precepts? I'm thinking of "
The Scout Law" (which exists in shorter, rote-recited versions like the Boy Scouts of America's
"Boy Scout Law"), the
"Twelve Steps" and "Twelve Traditions" of Alcoholics Anonymous, and similar things which have a doctrinal purpose, are in list format, and are treated as proper names (titles of works) because they originated as such (though not always in the same form; I think the "Twelve Steps" was originally the "Eight Steps" or something). WP's default is to use lower-case if there is doubt (first rule of
MOS:CAPS), so either we have that doubt and it remains, or the doubt can be dispelled by showing that the phrase is virtually never lower-case in RS that aren't pre-biased towards capitalization.
—
SMcCandlish
☏
¢ 😼 02:28, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
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 toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Tea with toast ( talk · contribs) 04:36, 21 September 2019 (UTC)
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
A few minor things that could be added moving forward (not necessary for a GA pass, but more for expansion to move towards feature article status):
Cheers, Tea with toast (話) 03:19, 30 September 2019 (UTC)
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 toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Vami IV ( talk · contribs) 12:21, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
In reviews I conduct, I may make small copyedits. These will only be limited to spelling and punctuation (removal of double spaces and such). I will only make substantive edits that change the flow and structure of the prose if I previously suggested and it is necessary. For replying to Reviewer comment, please use Done,
Fixed,
Added,
Not done,
Doing..., or
Removed, followed by any comment you'd like to make. I will be crossing out my comments as they are redressed, and only mine. A detailed, section-by-section review will follow. —
♠Vami
_IV†♠ 12:21, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
Disclosure: I consider myself at least a wiki-acquaintance of the nominee, Farang Rak Tham, and I have previously reviewed several of their articles before. – ♠Vami _IV†♠ 12:21, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
Thank you for all your efforts, Vami IV. You are an invaluable asset to our Wikipedia!-- Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 21:45, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
[...] wrong speech [...]Having reviewed the five precepts article, I understand the meaning here, but don't think it adequately conveyed. "Damaging" would be better than "wrong" in this instance.
[...], as well as the [...]Replace with "and"
[...] brahminism did not migrate to the early Buddhist region till much later.This should be "Brahaminism".
"Till much later" is confusing without any dates being used before. It's like saying "and then he traveled from nowhere to somewhere".
Fluids are allowed.Considering that this forms a (short) exception to the previous sentence and uses the same citations, I advise combination of the two.
In the 1980s and 1990s, Thailand saw the rise to popularity of the politician Chamlong Srimuang. As a member of the Buddhist Santi Asoke movement, Srimuang observed the eight precepts continuously, even during his life as a politician.Combine and condense.
Good Article review progress box
|
![]() | Eight precepts 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. Review: October 26, 2019. ( Reviewed version). |
![]() | A fact from Eight precepts appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 9 January 2019 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
| ![]() |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 03:57, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
We need to identify which traditions follow this, as our article implies they all do. Tibetan Buddhist sangha certainly eat after noon for example. I am told only Theravadins don't. Secretlondon 21:51, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
See here — Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 21:02, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: moved. ( non-admin closure) JC7V ( talk) 22:15, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
Eight Precepts →
Eight precepts – Per
MOS:DOCTCAPS.
Farang Rak Tham
(Talk) 08:43, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
I think what we need here is an examination of how independent (i.e., scholarly not religious, and definitely not newage) books treat this phrase in English when specifically writing about Buddhism in its native lands (not neo-Buddhist stuff in the West, which capitalizes pretty much everything it can get its hands on). Journalism sources are utterly useless for this because they reflexively capitalize in any case where there is doubt, most especially religious and other cultural matters, simply to avoid giving offense to anyone who might write an angry "letter to the editor". So, anyway, is this a list, the Eight Precepts, that originated as such, or is just a set of doctrinal matters treated as a group and sometimes published as list, of eight precepts? I'm thinking of "
The Scout Law" (which exists in shorter, rote-recited versions like the Boy Scouts of America's
"Boy Scout Law"), the
"Twelve Steps" and "Twelve Traditions" of Alcoholics Anonymous, and similar things which have a doctrinal purpose, are in list format, and are treated as proper names (titles of works) because they originated as such (though not always in the same form; I think the "Twelve Steps" was originally the "Eight Steps" or something). WP's default is to use lower-case if there is doubt (first rule of
MOS:CAPS), so either we have that doubt and it remains, or the doubt can be dispelled by showing that the phrase is virtually never lower-case in RS that aren't pre-biased towards capitalization.
—
SMcCandlish
☏
¢ 😼 02:28, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
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 toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Tea with toast ( talk · contribs) 04:36, 21 September 2019 (UTC)
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
A few minor things that could be added moving forward (not necessary for a GA pass, but more for expansion to move towards feature article status):
Cheers, Tea with toast (話) 03:19, 30 September 2019 (UTC)
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 toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Vami IV ( talk · contribs) 12:21, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
In reviews I conduct, I may make small copyedits. These will only be limited to spelling and punctuation (removal of double spaces and such). I will only make substantive edits that change the flow and structure of the prose if I previously suggested and it is necessary. For replying to Reviewer comment, please use Done,
Fixed,
Added,
Not done,
Doing..., or
Removed, followed by any comment you'd like to make. I will be crossing out my comments as they are redressed, and only mine. A detailed, section-by-section review will follow. —
♠Vami
_IV†♠ 12:21, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
Disclosure: I consider myself at least a wiki-acquaintance of the nominee, Farang Rak Tham, and I have previously reviewed several of their articles before. – ♠Vami _IV†♠ 12:21, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
Thank you for all your efforts, Vami IV. You are an invaluable asset to our Wikipedia!-- Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 21:45, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
[...] wrong speech [...]Having reviewed the five precepts article, I understand the meaning here, but don't think it adequately conveyed. "Damaging" would be better than "wrong" in this instance.
[...], as well as the [...]Replace with "and"
[...] brahminism did not migrate to the early Buddhist region till much later.This should be "Brahaminism".
"Till much later" is confusing without any dates being used before. It's like saying "and then he traveled from nowhere to somewhere".
Fluids are allowed.Considering that this forms a (short) exception to the previous sentence and uses the same citations, I advise combination of the two.
In the 1980s and 1990s, Thailand saw the rise to popularity of the politician Chamlong Srimuang. As a member of the Buddhist Santi Asoke movement, Srimuang observed the eight precepts continuously, even during his life as a politician.Combine and condense.
Good Article review progress box
|