This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
Hi Shirt58, Considering that the article on Edward Conze, adapted from Sangharakshita's Great Buddhists of the Twentieth Century was used by permission, I'd like to know why the article was deleted. This article gives a much more complete picture of Conze, and as such, is of higher quality that Jayarava's article. Lodru ( talk) 21:32, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
Hi Shantavira, Thanks for the response. Do you think Sangharakshita's copyright holder would be willing to license the text under the suitably-free and compatible copyright license required by Wikipedia? I sent a message to Vishvapani a few days ago, but have not heard back yet. Any idea who I should contact? Again, thanks very much for your response. Lodru ( talk) 17:08, 6 September 2019 (UTC)
The copyright holder has given permission to license the original article that was deleted by user:Shirt58 at the instigation of user: Jayarava. Can someone please either take necessary action to reverse the deletion or let me know next steps? Lodru ( talk) 13:59, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Nhlevine, your quote from Sangharakshita is too long. Please see WP:LONGQUOTE. JimRenge ( talk) 08:43, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
Under the heading Legacy are two long quotes from Sangharakshita and Ji Yun. As Sangharakshita was a personal friend of Conze's one can see how his views might be relevant, though they need to be contextualised. My friend Ji Yun has the title "Professor" but is in fact the Librarian at his religious college. He is hardly mainstream in the English speaking world because he mainly writes in Chinese. Why is Conze being defended as a religious figure? If one is going to consider his legacy then where are quotes from, for example, prominent scholars of Sanskrit or scholars of Buddhist Studies? Conze worked in Britain and America. Where are the quotes from British and American scholars? Where are the comments from his prominent former students such as Leon Hurvitz and Lewis Lancaster? Why is he defended by an old friend and an unknown librarian from Singapore? And where is the balance? For example, why is there no mention of the collapse of English language Prajñāpāramitā Studies after Conze? Why is there no objective assessment of his work - his many mistakes are documented in the sparse literature. Conze is not universally admired and the article ought to reflect this. Jayarava ( talk) 10:04, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
Hi Shirt58, Considering that the article on Edward Conze, adapted from Sangharakshita's Great Buddhists of the Twentieth Century was used by permission, I'd like to know why the article was deleted. This article gives a much more complete picture of Conze, and as such, is of higher quality that Jayarava's article. Lodru ( talk) 21:32, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
Hi Shantavira, Thanks for the response. Do you think Sangharakshita's copyright holder would be willing to license the text under the suitably-free and compatible copyright license required by Wikipedia? I sent a message to Vishvapani a few days ago, but have not heard back yet. Any idea who I should contact? Again, thanks very much for your response. Lodru ( talk) 17:08, 6 September 2019 (UTC)
The copyright holder has given permission to license the original article that was deleted by user:Shirt58 at the instigation of user: Jayarava. Can someone please either take necessary action to reverse the deletion or let me know next steps? Lodru ( talk) 13:59, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Nhlevine, your quote from Sangharakshita is too long. Please see WP:LONGQUOTE. JimRenge ( talk) 08:43, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
Under the heading Legacy are two long quotes from Sangharakshita and Ji Yun. As Sangharakshita was a personal friend of Conze's one can see how his views might be relevant, though they need to be contextualised. My friend Ji Yun has the title "Professor" but is in fact the Librarian at his religious college. He is hardly mainstream in the English speaking world because he mainly writes in Chinese. Why is Conze being defended as a religious figure? If one is going to consider his legacy then where are quotes from, for example, prominent scholars of Sanskrit or scholars of Buddhist Studies? Conze worked in Britain and America. Where are the quotes from British and American scholars? Where are the comments from his prominent former students such as Leon Hurvitz and Lewis Lancaster? Why is he defended by an old friend and an unknown librarian from Singapore? And where is the balance? For example, why is there no mention of the collapse of English language Prajñāpāramitā Studies after Conze? Why is there no objective assessment of his work - his many mistakes are documented in the sparse literature. Conze is not universally admired and the article ought to reflect this. Jayarava ( talk) 10:04, 7 December 2019 (UTC)