User talk:Joshua Jonathan: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 23:23, 27 November 2012

Bodhidharma's Birthplace

Excuse me.I have sound knowledge in that field related to bodhidharma.Please recheck your work.IT has be confirmed by many scholars that bodhidharma is and always been a south indian prince..He is the 3 son of King Janaka of India.The period between the time bodhidharma was on this earth is the same point of time of many kriya yoga masters.He was thought by one of the 18 siddhas of south india. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AKveeru (talk • contribs) 07:27, 7 October 2012 (UTC) Excuse me.I have sound knowledge in that field related to bodhidharma.Please recheck your work.IT has be confirmed by many scholars that bodhidharma is and always been a south indian prince..He is the 3 son of King Janaka of India.The period between the time bodhidharma was on this earth is the same point of time of many kriya yoga masters.He was thought by one of the 18 siddhas of south india. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AKveeru (talk • contribs) 07:27, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Let's continue the discussion at Talk:Bodhidharma#Bodhidharma's Birthplace (oct. 2012). Joshua Jonathan (talk) 07:35, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Zhongfeng Mingben

If I find any interesting tidbits, should I relate them here, or on the userdraft talk-page? They may or may not be useful, but... E.g.: I found 2 separate portraits of him - but now I'll have to dig through my browser history to find them. And should the Japanese-Romaji name be: Chûhô Myôhon - see:[1] - (bottom of list). ~Eric F 74.60.29.141 (talk) 19:39, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a good portrait from WP commons (Rumania):[2]
Another portrait:[3], from here:[4] - Great, but lo-rez

Btw, I believe these are in addition to the other 2 found earlier; still looking...~Eric F 74.60.29.141 (talk) 03:01, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The userdraft talk-page would be better, I think. Thanks! Regarding the Japanese-Romaji name: I have no idea... That's a question for people like User:Tengu800 and User:Keahapana. Joshua Jonathan (talk) 03:28, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

> Link to userspace draft talk page (or whatever it's called). ~E 74.60.29.141 (talk) 06:02, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Great job on the article! Clear, concise, and reasonably complete; yet done so quickly - you know your [stuff]. ~E 74.60.29.141 (talk) 14:22, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thnaks! I've got some more; an article on Zhongfeng and "illusion" (c.q. Maya). It's funny; differences of opinion with other editors stimulate me to give the best I can in writing, but this is also stimulating. Thanks for the cooperation! Joshua Jonathan (talk) 19:16, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Image fit problem

An image of yours has a problem with fitting in its section, and (at least in my browser), instead of displaying in the section intended, it drops down to the next section and partially overlaps text. My attempts at fixing were non-productive.
Image: File:Mahakasyapa.jpg
Section: Chinese Chán / Kasyappa and the Flower Sermon
Note: it looks fine in 'Show Preview', but not when saved. ~Eric the Pest 74.60.29.141 (talk) 01:18, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid I can't help you on that one... There are other examples of such 'mistakes', for example listings which overlap with pictures. maybe you can post the problem somewhere at the help-pages? Joshua Jonathan (talk) 04:35, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Though, maybe it helps to make the picture smaller. Joshua Jonathan (talk) 04:38, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Tried that (among other things), for some reason it wouldn't let me reduce to 80px, from 100px. Anyway, I copied this discussion > Talk:Chinese_Chán#Image_fit_problem - Feel free to delete the discussion here. ~E 74.60.29.141 (talk) 01:30, 20 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your "mu window" typo was probably one of those 'inside jokes' most readers on that page already get - and I simply overstated the obvious. ~Oh well ~E74.60.29.141 (talk) 01:42, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It realyy was a typo, which I noticed after I saved the page. Joshua Jonathan (talk) 05:11, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Zen

You have done wonderful work on the subject. The article was a bit messy before you got to it so thanks for the dedication! I don't remember where but there was a discussion somewhere which quoted that any article where a paragraph is completely unsourced cannot be given GA status. At Zen, you are doing great and you are not far away from getting it to GA. The article is well detailed and presented. Just take care of the basic issues of my review and make sure that everything is sourced. This is all that is needed and once you are done, you can re-nominate it and it won't be a quick fail then. Cheers! TheSpecialUser ^TSU 04:49, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Enlightenment (spiritual)

I did get involved. I hope you'll add your thoughts when you're back from your day(s) off! Lova Falk talk 19:45, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

SPI

I haven't encountered any of those accoutns before, though some of them are obviously socks. I noticed that Minerva20 showed up. She's mentioned by me in this SPI, which unfortunately didn't go so good, despite the evidence: [[5]].

Fringe proponents love to sock and meat, and also canvass off-site. I'm sure a mix of all three is at work here. Dominus Vobisdu (talk) 19:20, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I saw the names when I read the Talk Page of User talk:DeltaQuad and followed the link of your message about Logical 1. Joshua Jonathan (talk) 07:55, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Surreal

My 1st Barnstar! ~Thanks! :) ~Eric the Surreal 74.60.29.141 (talk) 10:52, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Users: → User:

I noticed the subpage you misplaced in article space earlier, so I went ahead and moved it to User:Joshua Jonathan/Xuefeng Yicun 2 (you already had a subpage with that title apparently, so I appended the 2). Just wanted to let you know. --Kinu ^t/_c 08:09, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Mistake, sorry; User:Joshua Jonathan/Xuefeng Yicun 2 can be deleted. Joshua Jonathan (talk) 08:10, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Buddhism templates

Joshua, I believe these template are being misused. First off, they are navigation templates. Wikipedia has always had a standard that navigational templates should be bi-directional: see WP:NAVBOX, last sentence in the main section: "Finally every article that transcludes a given navbox should normally also be included as a link in the navbox so that the navigation is bidirectional." Second, the templates themselves say "Part of a series on ...". This suggests that the article linked in the templates are "the series". How then can articles not linked in the template be part of this series? Quite frankly, this appears to be a form of religious proselytism, actively encouraging readers to read other loosely-related articles on Buddhism rather than being used as navboxes are intended to be used. This is completely inappropriate, and seems to be part and parcel of a number of breaches of Wikipedia policy on the part of WikiProject Buddhism, such as repeatedly including titles and honorifics such as "Geshe", "Lama", and "Rinpoche" against Wikipedia guidelines. All these issues need to be addressed and WP Buddhism needs to understand that these policies and guidelines should not be overridded by a consensus among Buddhist editors. And, by the way, I am a Buddhist, so this is not some sort of anti-Buddhism campaign. Yworo (talk) 17:12, 7 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. The correct method for doing what is intended is the use of the {{Portal}} template in the see also section. Yworo (talk) 17:15, 7 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, that's a clear answer! I'll read the guideline, and the portal. Thank you! Joshua Jonathan (talk) 06:17, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Just wondering...

...is there any connection between a Dharmacakra, ("Wheel of Dharma") and a ship's steering wheel? No mention in the article, but hard to believe it's purely coincidental. ~Eric F 74.60.29.141 (talk) 05:20, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I really don't know. But... somehow I do remember that the steering wheel is being used for a rudder which is positioned in the middle of the ship. And that's a relatively recent technological development, as far as I remember; maybe end of the middel-ages. While the dharmacakra probably is much older. Joshua Jonathan (talk) 05:47, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Things like this tend to drive me nuts until I find an answer, but there might not be an answer (check your mu window-ledge). One can imagine a symbolic analogy: instrument of guidance - path of enlightenment - sea of existence - dissemination - turnings, etc. The history of the rudder can be traced to the ancient Chinese, with possible parallel development elsewhere (Kelts, for example). The history of the steering wheel is another matter. There was a mutually-beneficial period of interchange between Eastern and Western marine technologies, when the steering wheel seems to have developed. One can wonder if there was a connection, since engineers of that time tended to include mystic or archaic symbology in their designs. ~Anyway,...~E:74.60.29.141 (talk) 23:47, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

To be driven nuts by questions like is a great character-trait for being a scientist or researcher. Keep on wondering!! Joshua Jonathan (talk) 06:10, 10 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Entire 'Atman (Buddhism)' Article Been Removed!

Hello Joshua Jonathan. I wonder if you could assist with the restoration of 'Atman (Buddhism)'? To my horror, I found just now that someone has very recently 'merged' it with 'Atman (Sanskrit)', but that they have actually removed the entire content of the original article and simply directed the reader to 'Anatta' - which is a different article entirely! This is outrageous behaviour. I have tried to restore 'Atman (Buddhism)', but have evidently failed: when one types in 'Atman (Buddhism)' into the Wiki search engine now, it still brings up the substituted article, 'Atman (Sanskrit)'. I am not sure how to restore the original Atman (Buddhism) article successfully. Any suggestions and input? The original article is this one: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C4%80tman_(Buddhism). Thanks for any help you can offer. Best wishes to you from Suddha (talk) 01:22, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Don't panic! Somebody moved it, to Ātman (Buddhism), then redirect got pointed to the wrong place. It was never merged or deleted that I can see. In any case, I have fixed it. Yworo (talk) 03:21, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please see talk page at Ātman (Buddhism) article.Merigar (talk) 03:28, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Good morning everybody! Busy traffic around here. Joshua Jonathan (talk) 06:11, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Joshua Jonathan! Best regards - Suddha (talk) 14:19, 21 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You are SO welcome

You are so welcome to interfere - I am out of energy for wikipedia discussions tonight... Lova Falk talk 19:54, 21 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Tao of Spider

For some reason I've been doing a total re-vamp of the Cultural depictions of spiders article, and am currently trying to do a 'Philosophy' section.
Can you think of any reference to spiders in Buddhism? (Or anything else useful) —— This is the closest I could find →
Unfortunatly, that "meditation" (Zen poem?) isn't notable enough for the article, at least not without some foundational material relating spiders to Tao.

Btw, speaking of coincidence, I recently also did some editing on that Rolling Stones song article.
~Thanks for the photo, ~Eric F 20:57, 21 November 2012 (UTC)Last modified:74.60.29.141 (talk) 02:20, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

^ Ming-Dao, Deng (1992). 365 Tao : daily meditations (1st ed. ed.). [San Francisco]: HarperSanFrancisco. p. 234. ISBN 9780062502230. Spider {{cite book}}: |edition= has extra text (help)

Unfortunately, I've got no suggestions for 'Buddhism and spiders'... Joshua Jonathan (talk) 21:12, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Though, some Google-search:

Greetings, Joshua Jonathan (talk) 06:03, 24 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

~Thanks again, I'll check out the links. ~∑ric F ^Talk Modified:74.60.29.141 (talk) 22:40, 26 November 2012 (UTC).[reply]

... Now all I need is a proper place to link Interpenetration. ←That is a disambiguation - This→ Interpenetration (Buddhism) goes to Buddhist philosophy

Regarding the Jeff Shore Addition To Shinge Roshis Page

Hello, I was wondering if you could provide the cited documents in regard to the lineage of the Eido line that you keep posting and I keep removing. Once you provide adequate proof of this...I would be inclined to stop editing it. But until then, it is fraudulent and I will be deleting it every time I see it. Thanks Chimon — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chimon21 (talk • contribs) 17:44, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion to be continued at Talk:Sherry Chayat#Hear-say emails (Third opinions are welcome)

Editing dispute at Sherry Chayat

Hello Joshua. Please see Talk:Sherry Chayat#Fully protected, where your ~~name~~ recent edit has been mentioned. I have considered the possibility that the cited emails are not legit. Anything negative about Eido Shimano should come from a reliable source, such as a book, newspaper or magazine with a named publisher and a reputation for fact checking. The website at www.shimanoarchive.com is anonymous and even the name of the owner of the domain is hidden. It should not be used as a source of biographical information about Sherry Chayat or Eido Shimano, per WP:Biographies of living persons. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 06:23, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, you aren't the person who first added this. The reference to the emails was recently added to the Sherry Chayat article by an anonymous editor. You merely restored the IP's material. EdJohnston (talk) 06:41, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for interfering. If The Shimano Archive is not accepted as a source, then it may take a while to add this info. Greetings, Joshua Jonathan (talk) 07:52, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Psychology

Hello Jonathan. The Unconscious is not the monopoly of Freudians. It is common to all psychodynamic psychology. However, it was the Yogacarins who invented the concept of the unconscious not Dr Freud. Keep the chutzpah up old man. 81.106.127.14 (talk) 23:23, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

[1] Ming-Dao, Deng (1992). 365 Tao : daily meditations (1st ed. ed.). [San Francisco]: HarperSanFrancisco. p. 234. ISBN 9780062502230. Spider {{cite book}}: |edition= has extra text (help)

[1]

@@ Line 136: / Line 136: @@
 :Actually, you aren't the person who first added this. The reference to the emails was recently added to the [[Sherry Chayat]] article by an anonymous editor. You merely restored the IP's material. [[User:EdJohnston|EdJohnston]] ([[User talk:EdJohnston|talk]]) 06:41, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
 ::Thanks for interfering. If The Shimano Archive is not accepted as a source, then it may take a while to add this info. Greetings, [[User:Joshua Jonathan|Joshua Jonathan]] ([[User talk:Joshua Jonathan#top|talk]]) 07:52, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
+==Psychology==
+Hello Jonathan. The Unconscious is not the monopoly of Freudians. It is common to all psychodynamic psychology. However, it was the Yogacarins who invented the concept of the unconscious not Dr Freud. Keep the ''chutzpah'' up old man. [[Special:Contributions/81.106.127.14|81.106.127.14]] ([[User talk:81.106.127.14|talk]]) 23:23, 27 November 2012 (UTC)