text:
Talk:Tripiṭaka

Text from 2001
Is Pali the language or the name of the collection of writings? Or both? --Michael Tinkler

The name of the language. Was that unclear from the article? I'll try to make that clearer then. --WillWare

Nice writing in this entry! (Pali canon) (by WillWare ?). Thanks!

Unsorted text
A time of writing / publication would be handy. Jachin 01:49, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
 * It's not really possible to assign such a date to the Tripitaka as a whole. The Pali Canon was first written down in Sri Lanka about 100 years after the life of the Buddhja (making it around 400-300 BCE, depending on the date you like); some of the texts in the sutta pitaka and the Vinaya may date to the time of the Buddha.  The Pali Abhidhamma was still being added to during the reign of Ashoka Maurya.  Some Mahayana texts were composed in China but given a-historical Sanskrit pedigrees.  Some Tibetan texts came directly from the Indian scholastic tradition; others were composed in Tibet.  There should be some additional detail thrown in about the various dates, but there's still a lot of discussion over dating; for instance, the fact that a text appears in a written form later than another text doesn't necesarily mean that the text that was written down later was a new composition or something- a particular oral tradition may have just made the jump to writing later on.  The various versions of the Tripitika have been in publication in several different languages and a dozen more scripts pretty much continuously for the last 2000 years. --Clay Collier 03:15, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

 * The first half of the second sentence is wrong: the Pali canon was written down in the last century BC.The second half is correct, but the next is understated: additions were almost certainly being made to the Kathavatthu up to the time of writing down, if not later. I think material about dating is better placed in more specialized articles. Tripitaka is really an artificial concept, a word for a variety of things which are better dealt with separately. This should be almost a disambiguation article. Peter jackson 16:49, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Simple anyone?
The article seems to be excessivly long, I am not sure if that is just me, but if at all possible, it would be nice to get a Simple English version.

Why is there a picture of this "Rahul" guy on here? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.130.174.69 (talk) 04:00, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

How to pronounce it
Does anyone know how to pronounce tripitaka?

Yes. It should be pronounced, “tripítaka,” with the accent on the antepenultimate syllable. This is the rule in Sanskrit, unless the ultimate syllable has two consonants or there is a line over a following vowel. The “I” is soft unless it has a flat line over it. The second “t,” with the dot under it, is sounded with the tongue slightly back from the teeth, creating a softer consonant.

Links
The article gives links to the 3 pitakas. The article on Vinaya Pitaka details the various fairly similar vinayas. The article on Abhidharma Pitaka details the various quite different abhidharmas. The article on Sutra Pitaka has been deleted & replaced by a disambig, pointing to Sutta Pitaka & Buddhist texts. The latter has no section heading for SP. Is there any sense to all this? Peter jackson (talk) 18:33, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

On a quick look, Buddhist texts appears to give no explanation of what Sutra Pitaka is. Peter jackson (talk) 18:35, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Murge?
Shouldn't this page be murged with the Tipitaka page? They are the same thing!!! 86.143.22.237 (talk) 10:48, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

 * Tripitaka is a largely meaningless title for Buddhist scriptures in general. Tipitaka is the native name for the Pali Canon, the scriptures of Theravada Buddhism. Peter jackson (talk) 11:01, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

 * That's not what this article says. The first paragraph implies that the Tipitaka and the Tripitaka are the same thing --- except Tipitaka is the Pali name and Tripitaka is the Sanskrit name.  Can this be cleared up? 86.143.22.237 (talk) 11:02, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

 * You're right. Have a look at my rewrite. Peter jackson (talk) 15:26, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

 * Well, it's both, I think. The native name for the Pali Canon is a word that means "the Buddhist scriptures". What else would they call it? As in certain other cases, when you use these jargon terms in the Pali form rather than the Sanskrit, it strongly implies that you mean to refer to the Theravada form specifically. For instance, you wouldn't normally say "sutta" unless you were talking about a sutta from the Pali Canon. That said, I suppose that hypothetically, if there were a Mahayana Buddhist raised as a native Pali speaker (somewhere in Palistan or Palinesia, perhaps) he would probably refer to the Heart Sutra and the Lotus Sutra, etc., as suttas.—Nat Krause(Talk!·What have I done?) 17:04, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

 * What's both what? I don't see what you're getting at here. T(r)ipitaka doesn't mean Buddhist scriptures; it means 3 baskets. It came to be the conventional name for Buddhist canons of scripture because many of them were in fact in 3 baskets & individually called that. I think the article says that, tho' perhaps it should say it earlier. I'll have a look. Peter jackson (talk) 10:47, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

 * It says at the start that it means 3 baskets. I've corrected a few later statements.

 * As usual, the convention is to use Sanskrit for pan-Buddhist terminology, even tho' modern Buddhists themselves don't use it. Perhaps that should be made clear. Peter jackson (talk) 10:53, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

 * see what you think of how I've worded it now. Peter jackson (talk) 10:55, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

 * What I meant was, "tipiṭaka" is a word that means both "tripiṭaka" and "Pāli Canon", since the people who tend to use tipiṭaka usually see those as the same thing. The current wording seems to suggest that Sanskrit was the original Buddhist language and that other Buddhist languages only began to be used after the decline of Sanskrit.—Nat Krause(Talk!·What have I done?) 12:01, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

 * You're right, it's misleading, so I've changed it again. The rest of what you say gets into quite complicated areas of logic & philosophy of meaning. The literal meaning of the 2 terms is of course the same, but their references are different. In between, we have secondary meanings. In Mahayana, tripitaka can mean either Buddhist scriptures or "Hinayana" scriptures. Peter jackson (talk) 15:56, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

We still ought to consider consistency. Why is there an article on Abhidharma Pitaka in addition to this article, but only a dab for Sutra Pitaka? That last linked only to Sutta Pitaka & Buddhist texts, with the last link being pretty useless. I've changed it to go to Sutta Pitaka, Agama (text) & Mahayana sutras, which seems nuch more sensible if we're going to have a dab. But why the distinction? All 3 are terms applied to radically different collections of texts by different Buddhists. Is there some good reason for treating them differently? Peter jackson (talk) 14:45, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

 * Why is there even a discussion to "murge" (lol) "Tipitaka" (a redirect page) with "Tripiṭaka"?--Esteban Barahona (talk) 21:14, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

 * Definately no merge. Pali Canon is very specific for Theravada Buddhism. Would you also merge bible with koran perhaps? Both monotheistic religions about God/Allah. This merging proposal is very unsensitive and illogical too.

 * In this article: "Tipiṭaka." Encyclopædia Britannica. Ultimate Reference Suite. Chicago: Encyclopædia Britannica, 2008.  Tripitaka deals only with southern Buddhism. No Mahayana at all, strange to say. Greetings, Sacca 04:16, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

 * no::

NO! They should not be merged. There is some confusion in nomenclature. You see, "Tripitaka" (sanskrit) and "Tipitaka" (Pali) are indeed just two different names for the same thing in different languages, but there is more than one version. To make an analogy, "Pali Canon" is to "Tipitaka/Tripitaka" what "KJV" is to "Bible". "The Bible" is the generic term for a body of Christian writings, and the "KJV" is just one rendition or recession thereof (as opposed to the NIV, NKJV, etc.). The early, pre-mahayana Buddhist sects each had a distinct rendition/recession of the "original" Tripitaka/Tipitaka, all of which differed in terms of language, phrasing, and the inclusion or exclusion of certain material, but were basically the "same" thing. While the magnitude of difference between the ancient Tipitakas were much larger than the amount of difference between, say, the (Protestant) KJV and the (Catholic) Duay-Rheims Bibles, it was essentially the same predicament. The "Pali Canon" should discuss specifically the canon as recieved by the Theravada, and the "Tipitaka" should discuss pre-mahayana ("Hinayana") holy canons of scripture in a more generic sense. There should also be a page for the "Sino-sanskrit canon" - that is, the amalgamated "tripitaka" composed of the four Chinese Agamas, the Dharmaguptaka Vinaya-pitaka, and the Sarvastivada Abhidharmapitaka taken as a whole, that is sub-summed inside the Da-zang jing or chinese Canon (along with the mahayana sutras).

Another important point that wikipedia (and most of the web) over looks is that "Tripitaka" rightly only refers to the pre-mahayana holy scriptures of Buddhism. A compilation of writings that includes both Hinayana/Tripitaka material and Mahayana material isnt a "Tripitaka". However, confusion over this point by early western scholarship lead to the incorrect usage of the term "tripitaka" to incorrectly refer to ANY compilation/canon of Buddhist holy writ, even those containing mahayana stuff. To make an analogy, "Tripitka/Hinayana Sutra" is to the "Mahayana Sutras" what "Tanakh/Old Testament" is to "New Testament". Hence calling the Dazang-jing and Tibetan Kanjur the "Chinese Tripitaka" and "Tibetan Tripiataka" repectively, is an error, comparable to calling the Vulgate the "Catholic Tanakh". modern scholarship recognizes this error, however, as the usage is now set, set phrases like "Tripitaka Koreana" and other such terms are still used.

So, to bring it all home: "Tripitaka/Tipitaka" is the name for the body of Buddhist Holy Scriptures thought to have been composed by the early Buddhists after Buddhas Parinirvana by Upali, Ananda, and Sariputra, at the first council, Composed of the Vinayapitaka, Sutrapitaka, and Abhidharmapitaka, repectively. Mahayana Buddhists call this stuff "Hinayana Sutra", a term considered derogatory to some (just as the term "old" in "Old Testament" is considered deragatory to some jews, who prefer the term "tanakh"). The earliest sects like the Theravada, Sarvastivada, Dharmaguptaka, etc. each maintained different recessions of this material, which included variant "duetro-canonical" material (especially in the Abhidharma). The Pali Canon was/is just one among many such recessions (comparable to the KJV among biblical recessions). However, ironically, it is the only one which survives in its entirety. The Mahayana nad Vajrayana Buddhists have othe scriptures "The mahayana sutras and tantras, etc.", and these sects maintain there own collections of material containing both Hinayan/tipitaka stuff and mahayana stuff (the Da zang Jing and Kanjur) but inasmuch as they contain both the old and new scriptures, they arent "Tripitakas" per se. But they do sub-sum a collection of hinayana material which could be called a tripitaka in its own right, the Sino-sanskrit canon, the consequence of translating portions of the Hinayana sutras piecemeal from among the tripitakas used by pre-mahayana sects who had converted mahayana. The Sino-sanskrit canon mostly comes from the sarvastivadins (2 of the agama/Nikayas and all of the Abhidharma) but also took some stuff from the Dharmaguptaka (Vinaya and 1 Agama/nikaya)and the Mahasamghika (last agama/nikaya). To make an analogy, it would be rather like translating a whole bible by taking the epistles from the KJV, the Gospels from the NIV, the Old testament from the Vulgate, etc, and rescinding it all together into one bible, and thean subsuming it with the "Book of Mormon and the Gnostic Gospels"(the Mahayana sutras) inside the Christian Da ZangJing.

So, Tripitaka = Buddhist old testament

There are 2 surviving versions

Pali Canon (used by Theravada, the Jews of Buddhism) Sino-Sanskrit Canon (Used along with mahayana sutras = "Buddhist New Testament" by Mahayana, the Christians of Buddhism)

This second tripitaka is an amalgam of other, now dead, tripitaka recessions —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.207.224.175 (talk) 08:56, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

 * It's not correct to attribute the use of the term to refe to Mahayana canons to Western scholars. It's quite common Chinese & Tibetan traditional usage too, alongside the narrower usage you mention.
 * Triptaka = Buddhist OT implies that Buddhists as a whole regard it thus, which is plainly false.
 * There are more than 2 versions:
 * Theravada
 * (Mula)Sarvastivada (even if you count these as 1, not 2): Tibetan Vinaya; Chinese Vinaya, Madhyama & Samyukta
 * Dharmaguptaka: Chinese Dirgha
 * Mahasanghika: Chinese Vinaya & probably Ekottara
 * Mahisasaka: Chinese Vinaya
 * an unknown number of others represented by extracts & fragments, often of unidentified school

 * Peter jackson (talk) 10:51, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

 * I've substantially revised the article with additional and better organized information about the Tripitakas of the other early schools. I think this will further illustrate why a merge with Pali Canon is inappropriate.Sylvain1972 (talk) 15:53, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Alternative proposal: disambiguation
It seems clear from comments above & at Talk:Pali Canon that the very existence of an article on Tripitaka misleads some people into supposing that there is some definite thing called that. I therefore propose instead that this page should become a dab, reading roughly as follows.

Tripitaka can refer to

 * the Pali Canon of Theravada Buddhism
 * the Kangyur, scriptures of Tibetan Buddhism
 * the Chinese Buddhist Canon
 * Xuanzang, a Chinese Buddhist monk

Useful material can move to Buddhist texts if not specific to one of the above.

To make clear that the above 3 canons are really quite different things, let me just point out that the Kanjur (several times as common spelling on internet search, as I pointed out, but I think the article still has the other name) is 2 or 3 times as long as the Pali Canon, & the Chinese canon is several times as long as the Kanjur. Peter jackson (talk) 10:52, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, the wording isn't perfect, but the general idea is a good one, imho. --Storkk (talk) 11:33, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

I agree with this proposal. I was just doing some categorizing within Buddhist texts and found this problem... and then this discussion. I've created a category 'Pali canon' for all the articles on it and embedded that in the Tripitaka category. I hadn't realised this discussion was going on or I'd have left off acting. It wasn't intended to prejudice this discussion which I was unaware of. But that said... since Mahayana sutras already appeared in the category Tripitaka something really needed doing to distinguish the Pali canon material from other Buddhist canonical literature. I'd further suggest changing 'Tripitaka' as a category to something like 'Buddhist canonical literature' Any objections to me proceeding with that? Dakinijones (talk) 12:12, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

 * A problem with that is the inconsistent ways such terms are used: see User:Peter jackson. Peter jackson (talk) 08:13, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

 * Perhaps a more useful category would be Buddhavacana. I see there isn't even ana article on it yet. Perhaps I'll create one. Peter jackson (talk) 10:45, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

 * I'd love to see an article on Buddhavacana so please do write it... there's times I've really wanted to be able to link to one. I see a problem though in having Buddhavacana as a category name since it's quite inaccessible for people without a Sanskrit - or at least Theravada Buddhist - background. Is there an English language term that you'd be happy with? Dakinijones (talk) 21:36, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

 * Schopen writes about the vagueness of the term buddhavacana somewhere. Apparently, it came to have quite a bit of polemical weight, and so people applied it freely to whatever they thought was important. In practice, then, it meant the same thing as "canon".—Nat Krause(Talk!·What have I done?) 01:23, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

 * I'd be interested to see a reference on that. I have references to say that Buddhavacana is the Pali Canon in Theravada (does Schopen or anyone else disagree with that?) & Kanjur in Tibetan Buddhism. My understanding, without a currently available ref, is that in East Asian Buddhism it means Agamas, Vinaya & Mahayana sutras (including lower tantras). Peter jackson (talk) 08:32, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

 * I think we definitely need an article on Buddhavacana but it has certainly got polemical connotations since the various schools don't always agree about what is the 'word of Buddha'. Canon is less contentious since it indicates more what the text has been defined as by some Buddhists in some time and place... Buddhavacana is more of a statement of doctrine and as such can easily invite debate. In practice, a Buddhist will tend to see their own Canon as Buddhavacana but - for example - although a Theravada practitioner might readily accept that the Tibetan Buddhist Canon is indeed its Canon, they might be much less willing to accept that all of it is indeed Buddhavacana. Can't think of any good sources on this for you right now but I'll pass them on if any come to mind Dakinijones (talk) 18:01, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

 * I should go into more detail. In the citations on my page, Gombrich uses the term "scripture" to include both canons & commentaries. The other citation uses the term "canonical" to include both scriptures & other writings. This makes both terms ambiguous, so we should avoid them. I thought "Buddhavacana" was unambiguous in the sense that it had a fairly well defined meaning within each tradition, but Nat's remark above seems to question this. I'd forgotten that Honen calls Shan-tao's works Buddhavacana, 7 the situation may be more complicated. perhaps we'll end up having to avoid such cross-traditional categories altogether if they don't have clear meanings. Peter jackson (talk) 08:20, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

 * I'd be happy to go with another term if you can think of one. But to a certain extent all terms are imprecise... they describe reality rather than are it. I think most applicable terms will have an academic somewhere debating its precise meaning. For the higher levels of a category tree that's really not a problem - in fact, the vaguer the better in the highest levels. Our top level category is religion which is very far from precisely defined... and we can't even all agree whether Buddhism is a religion or safer called something like a belief system or maybe even a philosophy. Within an article it matters a great deal, of course, what the precise meaning of a term is, in categorisation the whole point is to start generalising about the specific articles. Personally I think as long as we had your material on the vagueness of Canon (and how it relates to Tripitaka, Buddhavacana and so forth) in a lead article on Buddhist Canons, then the term would work very well as a category.

 * Interestingly, though, the Library Catalogs seem to go with Tripitaka - Buddhist Tripitaka appears 4 or 5 times more often than Buddhist Canon according to the google books search of libraries. In the general google books search Tripitaka appears only marginally more often than Buddhist Canon... although it seems like the term Tripitaka may be more common in pre-50's books, so perhaps there's a change in usuage ocurring? I'd prefer an English Language term as I think it'd be better used by WP editors in general - being more accessible - but it seems like a close call as to what term the sources are using. Whatever we go for, I do think we need a category of texts that are viewed by their adherants as Canonical (whatever we go with calling it) as opposed to practice texts, commentaries, songs and poems of realisation, meditation manuals, biographies etc etc simply because our readers will want to know what is Canonical or not, since it's a fundamental concern of the Western/English language approach to religion. Dakinijones (talk) 12:01, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

 * I'm still not getting across what I mean. The point is that both "scripture" & "canonical" are used by some authorities to mean what you probably mean by canonical, but by others to include a wider range of texts, including much of what you describe as "practice texts, commentaries, songs and poems of realisation, meditation manuals, biographies etc etc"; even Tripitaka,in the Sino-Japanese tradition, includes a lot of that. There's no single term that unambiguously means what we want it to mean, unless it's Buddhavacana, for which we await more details from Nat. Even if we combine terms, eg "Buddhist canonical scriptures", we still have ambiguity, since some authorities would include the Tenjur, others not. Peter jackson (talk) 08:19, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

 * I'd agree with you that ambiguity seems to be virtually unavoidable. I went to check what the Christian cetegory had done and they've avoided the issue by simply ignoring it. If we go the way of the Christianity category we'll just have sections for the separate Canons and no group category. I really don't know if it's possible to find an unambiguous term... "The Tibetan Assimilation of Buddhism" p.121 onwards (available limited view via google books) has a discussion of Buddhavacana, Canons etc you might find useful. Dakinijones (talk) 14:09, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

 * Hi, sorry to exert a disruptive influence on the discussion. My only point in bringing up the ambiguity of buddhavacana is to remind the interlocutors that the usages of this term do not necessarily match what would seem to us like a sensible way to describe something as "the words of the Buddha". For instance, I would not be too surprised to learn that the Platform Sutra of the 6th Patriarch was counted as buddhavacana, even though nobody ever claimed that it was spoken by the Buddha. That said, I now think that Peter and I have roughly the same understanding of the issue. As far as I know, the statement, "Buddhavacana is the Pali Canon in Theravada ... & Kangyur in Tibetan Buddhism ... in East Asian Buddhism it means Agamas, Vinaya & Mahayana sutras" is roughly correct, although, as Peter points out, there can be some ambiguity at the edges. One source of wiggle room is that the line between "Mahayana sutras" and associated peripheral texts might be vague in some cases.—Nat Krause(Talk!·What have I done?) 18:52, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

 * There's fuzziness at the edges everywhere. The contents of the Pali Canon & Kanjur vary between editions. Actually being spoken by the Buddha was never a requirement. Eg Theragatha, Vimalakirti &c. So I think we should go with Buddhavacana as the relevant category, & create an article for it too. Peter jackson (talk) 08:14, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

 * OK,I've made a start on the article. Peter jackson (talk) 08:25, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Sorry for jumping in so late, but I want to go back to the first statement, that people might suppose there is such a thing as the Tripataka (or Tipitaka in Pali). I believe that it is correct to believe that there is such a thing as the Tipitaka. The Tipitaka came about as a result of the Fourth Buddhist council, and was, quite literally, the three baskets used for grouping the teaching of the Buddha as they were transcribed onto palm leaves. At that point in time, the Pali Canon and Tipitaka were referring to the same body of work. (See http://www.tipitaka.org/chattha for background).

We don't seem to have any way of knowing what changes occurred (if any) between the original oral work produced by the first Buddhist Council and the written version produced by the Fourth. I have read arguments that the first oral version of what came to be known as the Pali Canon, contained phrases spoken by the Buddha, which were added to over the years to make them easier to remember. The additions were assumed to be the repetitions and stock phrases we now see in the written versions. Some people believe that the original words of the Buddha were only added to, and never modified. If that is the case, it would be correct to say that the Tipitaka contains "buddhavacana" but is not equivalent to it.

The reason I used the phrase "point in time" in my first paragraph was that I believe that the Tipitaka has been added to by various Buddhist lineages, and now now longer refers to the same exact collection of works, depending on who you talk to. I propose that the Tipitaka should refer to the work of scriptures produced by the Fourth Council, and viewed as the Theravada version of the Buddhist scriptures. For authoritative references, I suggest the Theravadan sites, since they follow the Tipitaka as their doctrine. In particular, I would recommend http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ as authoritative -- the materials are written by Western born Theravada monastics, fluent in both Pali and English. Hotei dave (talk) 23:27, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

 * You have to distinguish between Tipitaka & Tripitaka. Tipitaka is the Pali Canon, but Tripitaka is a vague term for any Buddhist canon.
 * You've been misled by a common myth. In fact the term pitaka occurs in inscriptions of the 2nd century BC, i.e. before the Canon was written down at the 4th Council.
 * Buddhavacana isn't understood literally. The Canon itself says whatever is well said is the word of the Buddha.
 * "I believe that the Tipitaka has been added to by various Buddhist lineages, and now now longer refers to the same exact collection of works, depending on who you talk to." I'm not sure what you mean by this:
 * Do you mean within the Theravada? If so, that's true: there are disagreements on whether the Netti, Petakopadesa & Milindapanha are canonical.
 * Or do you mean the Mahayana disagrees with Theravada about what's canonical? If so, that's true as well, but isn't really anything to do with the 4th Council. Buddhism had already split into various schools by then, Theravada being just 1. Each had its own version of the canon, & the background of Mahayana is in some of the others.
 * "I propose that the Tipitaka should refer to the work of scriptures produced by the Fourth Council, and viewed as the Theravada version of the Buddhist scriptures." You can't do that:
 * You can't simply invent your own meaning for a term.
 * Having done so, you certainly can't then assert that it's the scriptures of a religious denomination without regard to what that denomination actually reagards as its scriptures.
 * We don't know what was written down then anyway.
 * Theravadins have different views. No Theravada source is authoritative for the views of Theravadins in general.

 * Peter jackson (talk) 09:46, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Title
I strongly disapprove of the use of the exotic character in the title. On many computers this shows as an oblong or blank, which looks ridiculous. Peter jackson (talk) 08:28, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree... best to leave the diacritics for the body of the text. There's also a category Pāli which is virtually inaccessible by HotCat so I suspect it's being massively underused. Dakinijones (talk) 17:37, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

 * just get decent unicode support. Who doesn't use unicode anyway?! I suggest you upgrade to Firefox, Safari or Opera. You know you're suggesting to standarize on ASCII text? When all wikipedias (that I participate in) are standarizing on unicode?--Esteban Barahona (talk) 21:13, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.251.54.3 (talk) 18:29, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Mahayana?
Mahayana's text is not the orginal, historical tipitaka. The original tipitaka are the words of the Buddha and not the words of any monk. I see it would be best to seperate the Mahayana varaition of the tipitaka and the historical tipitaka —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dalek666 (talk • contribs) 14:14, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

 * That sounds rather like what I was suggesting in the way of disambiguation above. Note, however, that no independent historian would agree with your idea of "the orginal, historical tipitaka". It's a matter of degree. The Pali canon is mostly earlier than the Mahayana scriptures, but most of it dates from after the Buddha's death. It isn't actually important whether he actually said something: the Pali Canon itself says whatever is well said is the word of the Buddha. Of course that leaves it to be decided what actually is well said, which is what Theravada & Mahayana disagree about. Peter jackson (talk) 09:51, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Section mistakenly deleted?
I notice in the page's history that back in March 2010, a vandal replaced a large section of the page with an irrelevant line in this edit, but when another editor removed the inappropriate line in this edit he or she didn't also restore the text the vandal had deleted. Was this intentional? Given that there was no edit summary, it seems not; it appears that the person who reversed the vandalism didn't notice that the vandal had also deleted some legitimate content. I was going to restore the deleted content (and leave a note here explaining my actions in case I was wrong and it was deleted for a reason), but it's been long enough that the page has changed a lot in the meantime and I'm not sure how much of the deleted content still may be worth restoring and how much has now been rendered redundant. So... I figured I'd just point out the matter here and leave it to someone more knowledgeable about the subject matter to decide what to do about it. Smeazel (talk) 18:12, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

 * That section probably was lost accidentally. This section is, for the most part, more accurately covered in the new version. However, I did see one referenced bit of information that was helpful, so I made a change to the article to include that. Thanks for catching this. Tengu800 23:36, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Pali or Sanskrit?
Tripiṭaka (Pali: Tipitaka) is a Sanskrit word meaning Three Baskets

RfC: Are texts written by Buddhist writers and teachers that explain basic Buddhist concepts reliable secondary sources?
The RfC by Dorje108 states that:

"I propose that texts written by Buddhist writers and teachers that explain basic Buddhist concepts should be considered secondary sources as long as they meet the criteria specified in the guidelines (regardless of whether or not the writer has Western academic training). Do you support this?"

Please see: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Buddhism

Robert Walker (talk) 14:53, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

piṭaka and pitaka
In this article the word piṭaka, either alone or as part of the words tipiṭaka (Pāli) or tripiṭaka (Sanskrit) appears 58 times as piṭaka and 16 times as pitaka, written with a t instead of a ṭ.

t and ṭ are different consonants of the Pāli and Sanskrit alphabet. Unfortunately there is no equivalent in the latin alphabet for the the retroflex consonants so when Pāli or Sanskrit are written using the latin alphabet diacritics must be used. In the case of retroflex consonants a dot is placed under the corresponding dental consonant. This is very unfortunate indeed because in many places of the Internet and even printed books I find words written with and without the dot inconsistently.

When Sanskrit or Pāli are written in Devanagari, Thai, Khmer, Sinhala, etc., completely different letters are used for both consonants.

I understand that a proper font is needed to render characters like ṭ, but once you decide to use the ṭ I don't see any reason to be inconsistent.

I'd rather comment on this here before editing the article.

83.165.98.43 (talk) 17:18, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

RfC on use of the word "redeath" in the article and lede for Four Noble Truths
Is the word redeath (sanskrit punarmrtyu) commonly used in Buddhist texts and teachings, and is it an appropriate word to use in the Four Noble Truths article, and in the statement of Buddha's Four Noble Truths in its lede?

Comments welcome. Please respond on the talk page for the article here: RfC on use of the word "redeath" in the article and lede for Four Noble Truths

I've posted here since it is closely connected to questions about how to interpret the four noble truths in Buddhist Texts. So editors of this article may have a valuable perspective on the debate.

Thanks! Robert Walker (talk) 09:39, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

Name in Tangut
I wanted to add the Tangut translation to the infobox: /*lhejr²-sju¹/; but I don't know how. Could someone help? Source: http://ccamc.co/tangut.php?XHZDid=4344 --Gao Dan'er (talk) 07:32, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Do you think that language is relevant enough, ?
 * -- Farang Rak Tham   (Talk) 22:59, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
 * The language itself is probably only relevant to Tangutologists. I want to change that, to make this long forgotten language and culture known again. I'll understand if this reason is not good enough for inclusion in this case. Gao Dan'er (talk) 19:55, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes,, I'm afraid we have to follow what secondary sources on the topic are likely to include.-- Farang Rak Tham   (Talk) 12:38, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

title: Talk:Tripiṭaka


text: File:Dohány Synagogue3.jpg

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: File:Dohány Synagogue3.jpg


title: User:Howabout1/Licenses


text:
BSM

BSM may refer to:

Education

 * Benilde-St. Margaret's, a Catholic, co-educational college prep school in Saint Loius Park, Minnesota, USA
 * Black-Scholes-Merton formula, a formula to calculate option prices
 * Black Student Movement, at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, US
 * Bloomingdale School of Music, Manhattan, New York City, New York, US
 * British School of Motoring, a British driving school
 * Budapest Semesters in Mathematics, program for North American students, Budapest, Hungary

Military

 * Band Sergeant Major, a warrant officer appointment in the British Army
 * Battery Sergeant Major, a warrant officer appointment in some Commonwealth artillery corps
 * Bronze Star Medal

Organizations

 * Bangladesh Society of Microbiologists
 * Big Scary Monsters Recording Company, a record label based in the UK
 * Brick Squad Monopoly, a subsidiary of the 1017 Brick Squad Record label
 * Blue Star Mothers

Science and technology

 * Bag Source Message, corresponding to an airline bag tag
 * Basic Safety Message, a type of message sent in dedicated short-range communications, used in automotive
 * Basic Security Module (OpenBSM), a computer auditing system
 * Beyond the Standard Model, extensions to, or phenomena not explained by, the standard theory of particle physics
 * Blind Spot Monitor, a vehicle-based sensor system
 * Bovine Submaxillary Mucin Coatings, a biocompatible coating used to reduce bacterial cell adhesion
 * Business semantics management, an approach to align data (formats, content, metadata, etc.) to the business
 * Business service management, an information technology methodology

Other uses

 * Baltimore Streetcar Museum, in Baltimore, Maryland, USA
 * Bata Shoe Museum, in Toronto, Ontario, Canada
 * Britain's Strongest Man, an annual competition

title: BSM


text:
RRU

RRU may refer to:

 * Rapid response unit, a specialized medical response team
 * Rashtriya Raksha University, National security and Police university of India
 * Remote radio unit, part of a wireless network
 * Ridge Racer Unbounded, a racing video game from Microsoft
 * Royal Roads University, a Canadian public university

title: RRU


text: Template:Campaignbox Third Koryo-Khitan War


text:
Category talk:Economy of the Caribbean

Reason for creating this. I'm seeing these little blue tabs show up exclaiming that the Caribbean articles need to be 'conformed' with Wikipedian styles see Anguilla's. There's also a strong bias on the Economy of North America article which basically exclaims you have the Unites States and Canada and then a much "poorer Mexico" and pretty much of the other countries south of there are "poor", to pretty much sum up the region's economy. But in fact, many of the Caribbean islands rank globally between upper-middle-class to middle-class areas. Also, the Caribbean just established it's own credit bureau and other things which is going to make future growth better regionally.

I'm also thinking, it may not be a bad-idea just to update the CIA Worldbook info portions in each nation when the new year begins. I personally am all for preserving the other parts besides the figures, which are able to be updated.

I figure 2005 is almost done, so the new 2006 CIA Worldbook info I believe will be coming out within the next ~90 days or so for the year 2006. CaribDigita 01:52, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

title: Category talk:Economy of the Caribbean


text:
Natalie Radford

Natalie Radford (born 24 June 1966) is a Canadian actress. She has acted in various television shows and movies, including Darcy's Wild Life and Jewel.

title: Natalie Radford


text: User:Griot~enwiki

title: User:Griot~enwiki


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ragga metal

 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Delete (See Tally Reasoning on Talk Page) Karmafist 08:17, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

Ragga metal
This word looks like yet another instance of the "$GENRE metal" genre and has some 500 Google hits when searching for English pages. When asking Google to omit the name of the pioneer band Skindred this goes down to 175 hits. Pilatus 01:53, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, 26,800 hits. Wikipedia is not a dictionary of the English language. Kappa 05:39, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Only 233 of those 26,800 hits are unique. Pilatus 13:53, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete imaginary music genres. —Wahoofive (talk) 05:45, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, original research. In some peoples opinion they (Skindred) are the founders of a new genre ragga metal. Punkmorten 16:35, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete OR --Rogerd 21:34, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete per nominator. Quale 06:17, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep what the hell? Skindred is notable, and so is the genre of music they play.  Grue   18:26, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.


text:
Talk:Liars (Todd Rundgren album)

Liars is Todd's last full blown solo recording effort, and arguably the best, ever.

Fair use rationale for Image:Toddrundgren liars.jpg
Image:Toddrundgren liars.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 04:51, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

title: Talk:Liars (Todd Rundgren album)


text:
User talk:NightWolf1298

One of these days, I'll get around to writing something more detailed for this page...

Henry the Navigator
An article that you've edited before (Henry the Navigator) is nominated for Biography Collaboration of the Week. If you want go there and vote. Thanks. Gameiro 20:44, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

User categorisation
You were listed on the Wikipedians in high school page. As part of the User categorisation project, these lists are being replaced with user categories. If you would like to add yourself to the category that is replacing the page, please visit Category:Wikipedians in high school for instructions. --Cooksey 19:21, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Alex from the Cornell meeting
*waves* Hey; it's Alex. Here's my talk page if you want contact info. See you at Cornell! —AySz88\ ^ - ^ 02:42, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

title: User talk:NightWolf1298


text: User talk:69.177.222.74

title: User talk:69.177.222.74


text:
Ron Sparks (comedian)

Ron Sparks (born May 20, 1977) is a Canadian comedian, actor, writer, and producer. He is known as an alternative comedian and frequent guest on CBC Radio's The Debaters, and on TV as a regular and favourite juror on MuchMusic's highest-rated show, Video on Trial, also starring as The Judge in the Stars on Trial Christmas special and various other VOT spin-offs.

Early life
Sparks was born in Chatham-Kent, Ontario.

Theatre
As a student at Chatham-Kent Secondary School Sparks enjoyed doing improv and performing in drama class and at assemblies. His first TV appearance was a televised swearing-in ceremony in which he and a friend did a sketch about a border officer interviewing an immigrant. In 1997 his farce Chuck Sent Me won the Grand Theatre Stage Presence Competition for young playwrights.

At York University his one act plays Richard Keats' Apartment of Doom and Home to Mother both won the Vanier College playwriting competition in 2000 and 2001 while A Thanksgiving That Would Even Make Great Aunt Gladys Proud and My Favourite Aunt also took 2nd and 3rd prize in 1999 and 2001. Apartment of Doom and My Favourite Aunt were both remounted as Toronto Fringe Festival shows.

At York University, Sparks contributed humorous articles and reviews for the student newspaper The Vandoo and was promoted to an editor, but quit after frequent complaints by Vanier College administration led to tighter guidelines.

Improv and sketch
Sparks first began performing comedy regularly with York University's Vanier Improv Company as a student, where he became a standout and met his sketch troupe mates The Minnesota Wrecking Crew. They would go on to be nominated four straight years (2003–2006) for the Best Sketch Troupe Canadian Comedy Award, winning in 2003 and 2004. In 2006 they won again for Best Taped Live Performance for the CBC special Sketch with Kevin McDonald.

The MWC became the "house troupe" at Second City Toronto's Sketchy at Best showcase, where they would perform sets of mostly new sketches every week.

Sparks was a member of the sketch troupes Rocket 9, Gazebo Pals and the CCA-nominated Shoeless, and has also hosted Comedy Bar's Sunday Night Live more than any other guest.

Stand-up
After performing on the show with the Wrecking Crew a few times, he began working the door for Toronto's legendary ALTdot COMedy Lounge at the Rivoli in 2002. At show producer Zoe Rabnett's urging he tried performing stand-up in 2003 at The ALTdot COMedy Lounge and went on to win that year's Tim Sims Award, given to Toronto's most promising new comedy act, in just his 20th set. He then also won the 2004 Best Stand-up Newcomer Canadian Comedy Award, becoming the first person to win both.

After his Tim Sims Cream of Comedy showcase, he was invited to write and star in his own series of shorts for The Comedy Network, From the Desk of Ron Sparks, based on real letters he has written since childhood.

Stand-up credits include Just for Laughs as well as the Halifax, Winnipeg, Laughing Gas and YYC Comedy Festivals. He was JFL's Toronto Homegrown Champion in 2007 and has performed in various JFL and JFL-42 shows including Set List, The Alternative Show with Andy Kindler and The Debaters. He has opened for such comedians as Kyle Kinane, Moshe Kasher, Russell Peters, Kevin Pollak, Marc Maron, Janeane Garofalo, Norm Macdonald, Joan Rivers, Brian Posehn, Mike Wilmot, David Cross, Andy Kindler, Tom Green, Doug Stanhope and Todd Barry.

His 2008 CTV Comedy Now! stand-up special won a WorldFest Award and two Canadian Comedy Awards.

When the ALTdot added a second weekly show, the SketchDot COMedy Lounge, Sparks was invited to do a weekly Weekend Update style segment, The News Desk with Ron Sparks.

Film & TV
On television he starred in MuchMusic's highest rated show Video on Trial and its spin-off, Stars on Trial, also writing for those and other MuchMusic series. He co-wrote and starred as Chris Christie in the series You Got Trumped, for which he won multiple awards. He was also a regular panelist on the Super Channel series Too Much Information and has been a regular on various Ed the Sock series (including co-hosting the cult hit This Movie Sucks!), and T1's The Toronto Show as Ron the Hollywood Reporter and other characters.

Other TV credits include NBC's The Firm, The Beaverton, This Hour Has 22 Minutes, Meet the Family, Straight Man, Clumsy & Shy, Dark Rising: The Savage Tales of Summer Vale, The Jon Dore Television Show, Sox in a Box and The Invasion Report.

Film credits include Medium Raw, Dark Rising, By George, Sweetener and Ham & Cheese.

In 2006 Sparks offered to fight Uwe Boll, who had challenged his critics to a series of boxing matches leading up to the release of his movie Postal.

He is the subject of the book The Essential Actor's Guide: Spotlight on Ron Sparks.

Radio
Sparks is a regular and favourite guest on CBC Radio's The Debaters (which he also writes for). He has also appeared on Brave New Waves, Definitely Not the Opera and Out Front. He had his own weekly segment The News Desk with Ron Sparks on 102.1 The Edge.

title: Ron Sparks (comedian)


text:
User talk:David G Brault

Krishna article and avatar discussion
Hello David G Brault. There is a discussion on Krishna's status as avatar at Krishna and Vishnu avatar discussion. Any comments you have would be appreciated. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 05:16, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Gour Govinda Swami
Hello David G Brault. I have been trying to find references for Gaura Govinda Swami. Do you happen to know of any, I know its a shot in the dark, but I am having a hard time. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 23:18, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

 * Thank you for your response. I feel that an ISKCON swami is notable if: they have significant media coverage, or are on ISKCON's Governing Body Commission, or on the faculty of Bhaktivedanta College, or have had their works reviewed by the academic community. These are the type of standards that I feel show signs of notability. Also, the readers deserve a reliable source to go to for confirmation. The types of standards I have listed above allow for dozens of articles on ISKCON swamis, I do not think that they are placing any unusual requirments upon their notability. I am open to any thoughts you have. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 19:39, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

 * I think that Gour Govinda Swami is an example of one of many notable ISKCON religious leader. ISKCON celebrates his annual 'disapearance day' . In addition, he is celebrated as a 'saint' by ISKCON along with their previous acharyas and Jayananda Dasa. I am going to try to find more about him, and write an article if I find enough. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 20:49, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

New Articles
David G Brault, after the recent Afd discussions on ISKCON leaders, I must admit to you that I was wrong concerning the articles Sacinandana Swami and Indradyumna Swami. If there are any related articles that you feel need to be created, please let me know and I will work with you. I have already began work on an ISKCON article, Gour Govinda Swami. Again I apologise for being wrong on the above two articles, please let me know if I can be of any help. I am not anti-ISKCON, so please let me know of any areas that I may help with or new articles that need to be made. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 06:02, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

"Vandalism"
Hello! In this edit, you reverted my addition of two templates to the Ramakrishna article with the edit summary "Reverting vandal. 'Weasel?'". The problems with this edit are two. One, my placement of the templates was correct (please see WP:AWW), and two, you should not call people vandals unless you are certain that what they did was in fact vandalism. Encyclopedia articles should not say that someone "was known" to have done something without specifying who claims that "it is known". These are weasel phrases which allows the writer to claim something without actually specifying what they are claiming. I affixed the template to the article rather than deleting the offending passages. — goethean ॐ 23:14, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

latin
thanks for giving me that infomation i apreciate it--Wikiscribe (talk) 17:05, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

 * Dear David, thank you very much for looking at my userpage and the corrections on my userpage. I havent had the time to go through and do that. It was very nice and I appreciate it. Love and Namaskar. Govinda Ramanuja dasa USA (talk) 08:45, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Ramayana
Hi David, I am not sure if you intentionally undid some of my corrections on the page. Can you please clarify the reason? Abecedare (talk) 07:12, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
 * No problem; I suspected as much but wanted to make sure. The main change was the deltion of a duplicated sentence. The rest were minor stylistic changes. Cheers. Abecedare (talk) 07:19, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Ramayan (TV series)
Thank you for contributing to this article. However, I'm afraid I disagree with you. The plot summary that you put there is relevant to the TV series and the epic by Valmiki, but is closer to Valmiki. The TV series also borrows heavily from Tulsidas, including such elements as Sita having an actual swayamvara and not Rama simply asking to try to lift the bow. Also, in Tulsidas and in Ramanand Sagar's Ramayan, Sita's banishment is not shown (although it is shown in Sagar's next series, Luv Kush). The plot summary that you included only has details from Valmiki, not Tulsidas, and so it has a place in the Ramayana article, but not the Ramayan (TV series) article. More than that, though, I don't think we need a long plot summary in the Ramayan (TV series) article. It detracts too much from the rest of the article and is redundant with the information about the epic in the Ramayana article. What we really need in that article is more about the production and the impact of this series, since it was thanks to Ramanand Sagar's Ramayan that religious TV series became popular in India. Thanks for understanding! :) --Hnsampat (talk) 00:21, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

 * Perhaps if we want to include a summary of episodes, we could have a separate article called List of Ramayan episodes. One thing to be cautious of though: the 16-DVD Ramayan set is not faithful to the original series. It's been heavily and crudely re-edited, sometimes with episodes ending in the middle of key scenes. An entire crucial subplot about Bharat disowning his mother Kaikeyi has been deleted. (Not to mention the fact that songs and sound effects have been re-dubbed or re-recorded, essentially losing everything that made the original series good.) If you want to write a List of Ramayan episodes article based on what you see in the series, I strongly urge you to watch either the 12-DVD set or the 26-VHS set. I can help you write this list of episodes article, as I have both the 26-VHS set and the 12-DVD set. --Hnsampat (talk) 00:50, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Queston on article images
Hello David G Brault. There is a Vaishnava editor who is trying to find out how to make images. Do you think you could offer him any advice? His question is at Shri Swaminarayan Temples. I thought you might be able to point to some tools. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 03:30, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Also
I saw on you userpage your Youtube links, I admire you talents in Latin and appreciate your posting the videos. I have tried to learn Latin in the past but became overwhelmed. I want you to know that I have been using the ISKCON Sannyasa Ministry's webpage, located at List of Sannyasis in ISKCON April 2008 to create new articles on religios leaders in ISKCON. Again, I apologise for my past mistakes concerning particular ISKCON swamis. I hope to rectify these past mistakes. I want you to know that I am committed to creating new articles for these notable individuals. Any thoughts or guidance you have would be appreciated. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 03:58, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Would you like to add another tradition to the list
{| class="navbox collapsible" style="text-align: left; border: 0px; margin-top: 0.2em; -moz-border-radius: 9px;" ! style="background-color: orange; text-align: center;-moz-border-radius: 9px;"|Invitation to create a Krishna centered Hinduism project {| '''Proposed project - Krishna worshipers WikiProject David - its your invitation - lets create unity in diversity!''' Proposal for discussion - May 2008 Please, say what you think about it:
 * style="border: solid 3px orange; -moz-border-radius: 9px;" |
 * style="border: solid 3px orange; -moz-border-radius: 9px;" |
 * colspan="3" valign="middle" style="width: 60%; border: 0.5px #778899 solid; padding: 1em; background: #6495ED; -moz-border-radius: 9px;" |
 * valign="top" style="border: 0.5px #778899 solid; padding: 1em; width: 100%;-moz-border-radius: 9px; " |
 * valign="top" style="border: 0.5px #778899 solid; padding: 1em; width: 100%;-moz-border-radius: 9px; " |

 * Just a few words... what may interest you and attract other editors across a wider spectrum of Krishna-centered or connected traditions in Hinduism?
 * Go on over to our new project discussion page Talk:Krishna/Krishna worshipers. We need to talk it over!
 * Look over the complete list of proposed traditions forming the scope of the project - this list is by far not complete, please add your favorites and discuss!

From ancient to modern You can join and make a difference! This is an informal invitation to join a joint cross boundary venture. You and your friends are invited to discuss and comment on the proposal of new Krishna centered project. There are many traditions where Krishna is worshiped and His names revered. Lets join the forces and create more of the beautiful and well resourced articles on all related subjects and traditions. The traditions are not limited to one or two, there are many and all should be given equal attention by us. Drop me a few words or lets discuss it at the discussion page. Wikidās ॐ 21:10, 8 May 2008 (UTC) Lets us know what you think. Wikidās ॐ 22:24, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

TfD: Template:VaishnavaSampradayasrs
I have nominated Template:VaishnavaSampradayasrs for deletion as suggested. Please comment and support/oppose the nomination there. Thanks -- Shruti14 t c s 01:22, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada call

 * David, you were one of the editors who contributed to the above article. Since the article has stabilised and I have added proper references as well as provided a NPOVs references, I suggest final edits by the editors who were contributing to the article. Following the general proofing and copyedit, I would suggest nominating it towards GA (Good Article). Wikidās-ॐ 14:22, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:NothingToLoseButAllToGain.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:NothingToLoseButAllToGain.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 10:14, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:TheVision.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:TheVision.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 10:15, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Your You Tube Videos
As you may be aware, YouTube has recently come in for criticism over it's handling of copyrighted works.

I note that you have a number of potentially interesting videos on You Tube that you link to from your user page.

Instead of supporting troubled proprietary sites, Why not support projects that value creative talent and assist in ensuring that a viewing public can enjoy and expand upon it?

Wikimedia Commons is one project that needs creative content (under licensing that lets people enjoy and expand upon it).

It would be much appreciated if you would consider migrating videos for which you are the copyright owner to 'open' formats like Ogg Theora,  and moving them from 'failed' proprietary sites like YouTube to community sites like Wikimedia Commons, under an appropriate license.

Sfan00 IMG (talk) 20:02, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Book of Job
Thank you for "cleaning up" part of the article. Other users may still correct minor details, but I do appreciate your work.Dampinograaf (talk) 14:15, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

You maybe interested in the Article Rescue Squadron

I notice that you are part of Category:Inclusionist_Wikipedians. I would like you to consider joining the Article Rescue Squadron. Rescue Squadron members are focused on rescuing articles for deletion, that might otherwise be lost forever. I think you will find our project matches your vision of Wikipedia.

Ikip (talk) 00:58, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Romapada Swami
I have nominated Romapada Swami, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/Romapada Swami&. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Wikid as© 08:50, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Romapada Swami
An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Romapada Swami. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Articles for deletion/Romapada Swami (3rd nomination). Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:09, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Manner poster

The article Manner poster has been proposed for deletion  because of the following concern:
 * Unsourced original research

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing  will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. DAJF (talk) 03:31, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Urmila Devi Dasi
An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Urmila Devi Dasi. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Articles for deletion/Urmila Devi Dasi (2nd nomination). Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:08, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

AfD nomination of List of International Society for Krishna Consciousness members and patrons
An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is List of International Society for Krishna Consciousness members and patrons. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Articles for deletion/List of International Society for Krishna Consciousness members and patrons. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:02, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Category:Yule songs
Category:Yule songs, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. The Bushranger One ping only 00:35, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:True inheritance suspenders.jpg

A tag has been placed on File:True inheritance suspenders.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F10 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a file that is not an image, sound file or video clip (e.g. a Word document or PDF file) that has no encyclopedic use.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.  Del ♉ sion 23  (talk)  21:53, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Files missing description details
Dear uploader: The media files you uploaded as: are missing a description and/or other details on their image description pages. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors make better use of the images, and they will be more informative to readers.
 * File:US zones.jpg
 * File:USA zones.png

If the information is not provided, the images may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.

If you have any questions, please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Theo's Little Bot (error?) 09:43, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

assistance required
Hi.I am not a regular editor.I was reading the article "astra' and found many factual inaccuracies,particularly the one where it says sudarshan chakra can be stopped by lord shiva.I tried to edit it,but some editor is reverting it,and i found in history that other editors have found this inaccurate too.I have found supporting links in google books,but don't know how to substantiate it.can you please look into it? 117.201.99.241 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 11:28, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Musical clock for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Musical clock is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Musical clock until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. <<< SOME GADGET GEEK >>> (talk) 18:40, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:Wise Image 01-1-.gif

The file File:Wise Image 01-1-.gif has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern: "unused, low-res, no obvious use"

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:01, 22 November 2019 (UTC)

WikiProject Hinduism
 WikiProject Hinduism

Hello, David G Brault. We would like to inform you about the recent changes to the WikiProject. We would like to introduce a newsletter to Wikiproject Hinduism. A newsletter is always help to inform recent changes in the project to project members and help for effective coordination. Now we have launched a new newsletter for the Wikiproject. As a member, you are cordially invited to subscribe to the newsletter. Also do not forget to contribute to the newsletter. Thank you!

 Subscribe

- Discuss this newsletter

Contribute

Subscribe/Unsubscribe

Archive

Sent by on behalf of WikiProject Hinduism. Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:14, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

title: User talk:David G Brault


text:
User:NightWolf1298

As of now, I edit various articles for grammar and spelling, add and fix links, and such.

I am primarily interested in computer programming (particularly in C#), computer repair, web page design, and physics.

title: User:NightWolf1298


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marigold cafe

 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was delete --Cel e stianpower hablamé 14:00, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

Marigold cafe
This is an entry of a random restaurant in Colorado Springs without any assertion of notability. Pilatus 01:57, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Delete per nom --JAranda | yeah 04:18, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Most cafes are not valid encyclopedic topics, and while Marigold seems to be somewhat luxurious, it does not appear to be encyclopedically significant. Sjakkalle (Check!)  08:04, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete Not that notable.  Ban e  s  10:00, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete: NN --Bhadani 13:51, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete - nn. Advert (includes phone number)? CLW 15:58, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete NN--Rogerd 21:35, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.


text: Category talk:Warhammer 40,000

title: Category talk:Warhammer 40,000


text: User talk:70.70.135.14

title: User talk:70.70.135.14


text:
Aizukotetsu-kai

The Seventh Aizukotetsu-kai (七代目会津小鉄会) (sometimes written Aizu-Kotetsukai or Aizu Kotetsu-kai) is a yakuza organization in Japan based in Kyoto. Its name comes from the Aizu region, "Kotetsu", a type of Japanese sword, and the suffix "-kai", or society.

In 1992 the Aizukotetsu-kai became one of the first yakuza syndicates named under Japan's new anti-boryokudan legislation, which gave police expanded powers to crack down on yakuza. Its chairman at the time, Tokutaro Takayama, campaigned publicly against the new laws, and the group launched a lawsuit challenging their constitutionality. In September 1995 the Kyoto District Court threw out the lawsuit. At its peak in 1993 the group had 1,600 active members.

In October 2005, the group allied with the Sixth Yamaguchi-gumi, Japan's largest yakuza clan now led by Kenichi Shinoda (Oyabun) and his second-in-command (Wakagashira) Kiyoshi Takayama.

title: Aizukotetsu-kai