Talk:Luang Por Dhammajayo/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Vami IV (talk · contribs) 19:44, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Opening statement[edit]

I am reviewing this article as a quid pro quo for the nominator's having reviewed one of my articles. I am not Buddhist or Thai, nor have I any knowledge on Buddhism or Thailand. However, I think I (now) have enough knowledge on what a quality article should look like. Let's get started. –Vami_IV✠ 00:14, 2 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

For replying to reviewer comment, please use a template such as  Done, plus Added, or  Fixed, followed by a comment if you deem necessary.

Okeedokee.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 22:13, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry the article's layout is a mess. I should have fixed that before nominating. Will continue later.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 22:54, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Referencing[edit]

There are, as of time of writing, a totality of of 131 citations. Citations 18, 19, 22–25, 27, 47, 50, and 94 are broken. They are using Template:sfnref, but there is no established ref handle for them.

 Fixed.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 22:53, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Another problem is that the citations are not consistent. I'll use the first two paragraphs of "Early life and background" to show you what I mean. In the first citation in the prose (citation 5), you have given the reference and the page to turn to (outside citation). In the second, you give the page inside the citation and it's unmarked ("p." or "pp."). Then in the third citation, the method of the first is employed again. Then there are the sfnrefs, which introduce a third citation format and another layer of citation method. Most of the citations used are one-offs, so it's natural that they're long-form. Sfnrefs are by their nature short-form, making them more suited for a reference being used frequently.

 Doing....--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 22:53, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
 Fixed.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 07:59, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Prose[edit]

Section-by-section review of the article. –Vami_IV✠ 00:15, 2 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Early life and background[edit]

  • [...] who would often play dangerous games with fellow friends. Doesn't "friend" imply "fellow"?
Green tickY Resolved Wikiman5676 (talk) 05:27, 2 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sra Prathum Palace I did a google for this and got "Sra Pathum Palace," and no Wikipedia page for either. What's going on here?
  • minus Removed. Yes, the spelling was wrong. Anyway, redlinking and explaining it inline would only distract from the main narrative, so I am removing it.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 08:11, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • [...] especially in books on Buddhist practice and biographies of leading people in the world, both religious and political. Consider especially on Buddhist practice and biographies of leading people in the world, both religious and political.
  • One of these early acquaintances later became a Buddhist monk and Luang Por Dhammajayo's assistant in the endeavor to establish a meditation center: Phadet Phongsawat, since ordaining known as Luang Por Dattajivo, who would become the vice-abbot of Wat Phra Dhammakaya. Firstly, this sentence is impressively long. Secondly, and the edit history can now attest to this, I as the reader got confused as to who our homeboy Phadet Phongsawat is, as there wasn't a link to him...except there is, four words later. I would shorten "since ordained known as" to "since ordained as" or "now known as."
Green tickY Done. Wikiman5676 (talk) 05:27, 2 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reading the rest of paragraph feels more like reading a fantasy story than a Wikipedia biography about a 20th/21st century Buddhist monk.
I agree, but this is indeed what the sources say. I think it makes more sense from a Thai perspective, as Black Magic is a concept more widely understood in Thailand. Let's see what the nominator's thoughts are. Wikiman5676 (talk) 05:27, 2 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
 Fixed. Similar discussions have been held at Talk:Luang Por Dattajivo/GA1 and Wikipedia:Peer review/Luang Por Dattajivo/archive1, but it appears no satisfying solution has been found yet. I rephrased, referring mostly to occult practices instead, keeping it broad.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 08:11, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ordination as a monk[edit]

  • The first paragraph has some problems. Sentences one and two, and three and four could, I think, be shorter and/or two sentences. As an example: During university, he took a lifelong vow of celibacy as a birthday gift to Maechi Chandra, inspiring many of her students to do the same. Sentence two mentions that Chaiyabun was persuaded to finish his degree, but the reader has to get to sentence five before they learn that his degree was in economics. I would move this into "Early life and background," unless he majored in something else when Chaiyabun enrolled at Kasetsart University. Moving that bit of sentence five will also immediately make it shorter and therefore more pleasant on the eye. To close, sentence six reads awkwardly and I think sentence seven would be better earlier in the paragraph.
  •  Fixed. I had some kind of technical glitch, but I think I fixed these problems now.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 12:14, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Life as abbot[edit]

  • However in years to follow this would gradually become less, as she grew older and withdrew more to the background of the temple's organization and Luang Por Dhammajayo received a greater role. Long and awkward. Rewrite?
  • (during the Asian economic boom) Link?
  • By the mid-1980s, the temple was attracting up to fifty thousand people on major ceremonies. This and the above bullet point could be the same sentence, which could then form the final sentence in the first paragraph of "Life as abbot."
  • Widespread negative media coverage at this time was symptomatic of the temple being made the scapegoat for commercial malpractice in the Thai Buddhist temple community[50][51] in the wake of the 1997 Asian financial crisis.[52][53] I loathe citations not held down by punctuation, but reviews aren't for pushing my dogma. The other problem with this sentence is that it's pretty wordy and not very clear. Refer to WP:SPADE: Widespread media coverage made the temple a scapegoat for the commercial malpractice of the Thai Buddhist temple community in the wake of the 1997 crisis.[50][51][52][53]
  • minus Removed clause about crisis. This was already mentioned earlier in the section. I have removed citations that are less relevant. There is a lot of content in this article dating from the early 2000s, when Wikipedia standards were a little lower.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 12:41, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • I run the risk of hypocrisy for saying this with the above rewrite, but this section has a case of WP:OVERCITE, with three or four citations to one sentence. I would advise this for something highly contentious. I wouldn't think, say, the temple filing libel suits requires four citations.
  • The paragraphs that begin with "In 2006" and "In 2011" should be one, as the last and first sentences of are the perfect glue for the two.
  • Note 3 should be deleted and it's content redistributed to the prose.
  • I prefer to have it minus Removed, if you don't mind. It is not relevant enough for this article.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 12:41, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Since the 2014 coup d'état[edit]

  • Link the specific military junta in the second sentence.
 Done Wikiman5676 (talk) 03:27, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • I understand pages for Paiboon Nititawan and Phra Suwit Dhiradhammo currently do not exist, but I would link them anyways.
 Done They exist in Thai, so I redlinked and put the Thai in parenthesis. Wikiman5676 (talk) 03:27, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • [...] a department modeled on the FBI, [...] Irrelevant?
 Fixed Wikiman5676 (talk) 03:36, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • The hover-over alt-text is unnecessary because the un-abbreviation of KCUC is in the same delicious, bite-sized paragraph.
 Fixed Wikiman5676 (talk) 03:36, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Paragraphs 3 and 4 should probably be one.
 Done Wikiman5676 (talk) 03:36, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Teachings[edit]

  • Did you mean "thought" or "taught" in The temple emphasizes the usefulness of meditating in a group, and public meditations are taught to have powerful effect on the minds of the practitioners.? The sentence implies the former.
  • [...] emphasizing cleanliness, orderliness and quiet, as a morality by itself, and as a way to support meditation practice. The latter portion of this is kind of awkward. Perhaps [...] orderliness and silence, as a morality by itself and as a support for meditation.?
 Fixed Wikiman5676 (talk) 04:17, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • I wasn't sure if "the temple" was metaphorical, so I changed it to "Wat Phra Dhammakaya."

Lead[edit]

  • I have only problem with the lead - whenever I look at the first paragraph, all I really see is Thai or bolded text, all related to his name. There's just not enough English prose to hold me. Forgive the inappropriate analogy, but it's like a T-bone steak but with too little meat.
  • Paragraph three is also too small; provide some detail on these controversies.
  • Can you try shrinking the second paragraph of the lead?

August 2018[edit]

Thanks for all the help, Wikiman5676! --Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 07:37, 6 August 2018 (UTC) I have now addressed all your comments, but I will be expanding the article a bit during the following days before we wrap up.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 11:55, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Noted. –Vami_IV✠ 17:54, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

GA Progress[edit]

Good Article review progress box
Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()
3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()
Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed
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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Luang_Por_Dhammajayo/GA1&oldid=854644615"