|WikiProject Buddhism||(Rated C-class)|
|It is requested that a diagram or diagrams be included in this article to improve its quality. Specific illustrations, plots or diagrams can be requested at the Graphic Lab.
For more information, refer to discussion on this page and/or the listing at Wikipedia:Requested images.
- Could the color sequence be described as important?
- On the same page http://web.tiscalinet.it/merigar/Community_eng.htm I could find both blue->yellow->red and also the same as Sam-Taeguk: blue->red->yellow. Victor Klimov (talk) 18:37, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
- I disagree with recycling the Sam-Taeguk image. There are four other Gankyil images in the article that could be used instead. Using the Sam-Taeguk image might start up some unnecessary misunderstandings. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk) 19:43, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
I've gone through and standardised all the references so that they all appear in the references section, removing a little repetition along the way. There are still problems with this article though!
- The first paragraphs should give a simple introductory explanation rather than rabid digression. It desperately needs rewriting.
- The symbol "incised on the Pictish stones of Scotland and Celtic art and knotwork" is as much a gankyil as Scotland is a province of Tibet. The similarity can be alluded to, but to use a Tibetan word to refer to symbols elsewhere is very misleading.
- It's not really clear if some of the references/quotations actually say all that the text of the article claims.
- Much of the article reads like original research.
- The pseudo-linguistic phrase "holds the semantic field of" is unnecessary verbiage. I can find no instance of it on Google that doesn't ultimately originate here.
I may not get the time to fix all these, but at least I've flagged where I think it's going wrong.
OK, I've done a major edit, rearranging the material into a more logical format. All the groups of threes are under the same heading. Format of definitions has be simplified and merged where material was repeated.
Material that was going off on a tangent about some aspect of an element of these trinities has been removed. If anyone feels the need to put it back, please put in the relevant article, not here.
The references to Celtic symbols has been removed. It wasn't clear if the referenced work even made any reference to gankyils so it amounted to a completely unreferenced assertion. Equally if it wasn't actually asserting anything, what was it doing there?
The following was also removed. It may be a relevant digression, but it is obviously unfinished so does not belong in the article.
Deletion of patent nonsense and original research
I've removed some cruft from this article. Please rewrite according to Wikipedia guidelines if you feel the removed material has any value.
I can't see any reason to keep this, as it seems to be all original research. The sentence “The Gankyil is a vriddhi derivation of the dragon's fiery 'pearl of great price', the priceless Pearl of Wisdom.” is nonsense - vrddhi derivation is a way of forming new words in Sanskrit; its relevance here is far from clear. The Ingersoll reference, while evocative, is not relevant nor a reliable source.
More original "research". The postmodernist posturing "The front-end of this metatext is primary and to be foregrounded whilst the back-end translineage association is to inform an aggregation: to graft unity of the disparate. (The gendered language of the back-end deixis is not upheld herewith.)" looks like it could have been stolen from Herbert Guenther. In any case it's out of place and meaningless in this context. Likewise the lovely quote from Blake.
Attribution and misattribution
I don't know how I know. I have learnt not to doubt. I have never read it but I know the gankyil is an attribute of the Snowlion. Sooner or later I will find a source. I always do. B9 hummingbird hovering (talk • contribs) 13:19, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
- magic:  (accessed: 9.1.9)... or maybe I have read it before and just don't remember... the symbol I first encountered as a result of dream work, i had it tattooed onto my left arm... the symbol lead me to Dzogchen, I was so disappointed because it was the three poisons hehehehehe, and then I find out... well...then i REMEMBER... hheheeheh B9 hummingbird hovering (talk • contribs) 14:01, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
Can we perhaps find a different word than 'trinities' -- I realize it just means 'a group of three' but to my ear there is an infelicitous and unavoidable resonance with the Christian Trinity which seems out of place here.
- For a detailed discussion refer: Wayman.
- Ingersoll, Chapter Ten: The Dragon's Precious Pearl