Talk:Mahabodhi Temple

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Image description corrected[edit]

The image of Mahabodhi Temple now being displayed along with the article has a wrong description - the temple is of bricks and not of stone. Please refer to (http://whc.unesco.org/pg.cfm?cid=31&id_site=1056) of UNESCO, which states as follows: QuoteThe Mahabodhi Temple Complex is one of the four holy sites related to the life of the Lord Buddha, and particularly to the attainment of Enlightenment. The first temple was built by Emperor Asoka in the 3rd century B.C., and the present temple dates from the 5th or 6th centuries. It is one of the earliest Buddhist temples built entirely in brick, still standing in India, from the late Gupta period. UNQUOTE--Bhadani 14:06, 3 May 2005 (UTC)

Further, in all World Heritage sites located in India, the tempalate stands out prominently at the beginning of the article, accordingly the present image is being moved to proper place in the article.--Bhadani 14:06, 3 May 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for correcting the information in the image caption. I'm afraid I have to strongly disagree that this page is required to follow the format used in other Indian World Heritage sites. There are 22 other such pages, but there are many, many other pages that follow the format of having an image in the upper right corner. If anything, this page should have a Template:Buddhism box before the World Heritage box. The current format, with the image and template both at the top, is much to crowded.
    • Do whatever you feel is right. My only request is that please avoid reverts which are like vandalism. Thanks.--Bhadani 16:03, 10 May 2005 (UTC)

Older remarks[edit]

Let us come closer and contribute by making positive edits to improve the article Mahabodhi Temple. I also suggest that persons who are interested in such edits to keep in tocu through the articl's talk page.--Bhadani 13:40, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I believe that my last edits improved the article. I fixed a lot of English mistakes, removed extraneous information, and fixed some awkward parts. Please do not revert these edits. - Nat Krause 13:58, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I give below my messages to User Nat Krause

QuoteYour nice articles on Buddhism == I saw your nice and informative articles on various topics, pertaining to Buddhism. I am sure to learn from you. As regards Mahabodhi Temple article, original pictures are being arranged from my contacts in Bodh Gaya, and shall be inserted in due course of time. Wish you happy editing.--Bhadani 14:00, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC) PS: Ok I got your message right now on the Mahabodhi Temple discussion page. But, please allow me time till sunday. I will do a "medium path" - I promise and keep everything, which you had done.--Bhadani 14:13, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)Unquote--Bhadani 14:13, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I just donot fine the reason for reverting an article to earlier position when the article has passed through several hands. I would request User:Nat Krause to consider all these factors. His reversal has taken down the templete conveying that it is a world heritage site. This is highly awkward. In case, you want to edit the article, it is ok, but always reverting to a particular point of time is against the wiki principles, I feel so. --Bhadani 08:07, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
But ... you reverted to an earlier version when I initially made those changes a couple weeks ago. Wasn't that against the wiki principles? In any event, I didn't just revert to an earlier version: I also included some of the changes that have been made in the meantime (see this difference). Also, I didn't take out the world heritage site template, I just moved it down the page a ways, because the top section was too crowded. - Nat Krause 08:44, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Sure, sir, I did that as at that time, I was hardly 16-day old wiki, not well aware with wiki matters/ I am still in learning mode. But, dear sir Nat Krause, I am sure you are already a learned person and know much more than me about wiki traditions as you are at least 16-month old wiki. Anyway, I would appeal to you at least do some edits to this article as now it has become truncated, after your reverts, apart from having big and small inaccuracies. Please assist in making the article complete. And, for the sake of an image, removing the world heritage template tantamount to redesigning well considered basic structure of all world heritage related articles of India - I do not feel, people come to wikipedia to see an image only, but to gather information also. It is my appeal that you please edit the article to remove big and bigger inaccuracies, and complete the missing links, which have arisen due to your reverts.. I am removing at least some obvious inaccuracies, and shall gradually try to edit to improve the article at least to the stage to which it has reached before your present reverts.--Bhadani 16:06, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Still, all I did in this particular revert was to restore some edits I had made before which were removed from the article. As for "big and small inaccuracies", which do you mean? Please point them out and/or fix them yourself. I don't agree, however, with your changing all of the instances "BCE" to "BC". BCE is in fairly common use on Wikipedia, especially when dealing with non-Western subjects. And I did not remove the World Heritage template, I simply moved it down the page a bit. The normal format for Wikipedia articles is to have a picture in the upper right -- besides, isn't the appearance of the temple a type of information about it? - Nat Krause 13:57, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Right perspective[edit]

The Act provides that the District Magistrate of Gaya district shall be the ex-officio chairman of the BTMC. It is implied that a District Magistrate may belong to any religious faith: Hinduism, Islam, Christianity and so on - so mentioning his religion against his name is extraneous and gives a wrong impression, and contravenes the spirit of the legal enactment. As such, suitable corrections should be made. --Bhadani 17:10, 3 August 2005 (UTC)

On the contrary, the act requires that the chairman of the BTMC must be a Hindu. If the District Magistrate is not a Hindu, he may not hold the position, and someone else must be appointed—I believe by the state government. - Nat Krause 01:35, 17 August 2005 (UTC) (below is the relevant text from the Bodh Gaya Temple Act of 1949)
(2) The Committee shall consist of a Chairman and eight members nominated by the [1] [State] Government, all of whom shall be Indians and of whom four shall be Buddhists and four shall be Hindus including the Mahanth:
Provided that if the Mahanth is a minor or of unsound mind or refuses to serve on the committee, another Hindu member shall be nominated in his place.
(3) The District Magistrate of Gaya shall be the ex-officio Chairman of the Committee: Provided that the1 [State] Government shall nominate a Hindu as Chairman of the Committee for the period during which the district Magistrate of Gaya is non-Hindu.

Important notice[edit]

Experienced users, I feel picture of temple will look better in architecture section. At top, the Buddhist announcement box should be fine. Many many thnxs, --MissingLinks 14:13, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

Bell sent from America to Hang in Mahabodhi Temple[edit]

http://www.bodhgayanews.net/News2002/2002_03_10.htm

Image:Mahabodi.jpg has been listed for deletion[edit]

An image or media file that you uploaded, Image:Mahabodi.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.

Coordinates[edit]

{{geodata-check}} The coordinates need the following fixes:

  • Write here

Wrong again, Google Earth says here: {{coord|24.696004°, 84.991358° Thanks 71.155.149.183 (talk) 18:05, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Done. BrainMarble (talk) 20:49, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Hindu Presence[edit]

There is no mention here of the Hindu occupation of the temple from the 17th century (if memory serves). This is important in understanding the modern history of disputed ownership of the temple, and the mix of people on the temple management committee. Jayarava 10:11, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Update needed[edit]

Surfing to this entry after the horrible vandalism earlier this month, I noticed the Bodhi tree controversy section may not have been edited in several years. I was surprised that the Committee as a whole serves a three year term, rather than members, though I was unable to check the cited law. Another citation is needed concerning the Bodhi branch controversy, since I presume the criminal case hasn't hung around for 7 years. Did all the committee members resign en masse? If so, that was a couple of terms ago. Pruning seems reasonable, but any monies clearly should have gone to the temple and not individuals. Just a thought...Jweaver28 (talk) 14:41, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Mahabodhi Temple. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

As of February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required on behalf of editors regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification, as with any edit, using the archive tools per instructions below. This message updated dynamically through the template {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 1 May 2018).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.


Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 08:48, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Copyright problem removed[edit]

Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: http://www.thedhamma.com/whos_who.htm http://whc.unesco.org/pg.cfm?cid=31&id_site=1056. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)

For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, providing it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. /wiae /tlk 14:37, 24 September 2016 (UTC) /wiae /tlk 14:37, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mahabodhi Temple. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

As of February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required on behalf of editors regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification, as with any edit, using the archive tools per instructions below. This message updated dynamically through the template {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 1 May 2018).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.


Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:46, 12 January 2018 (UTC)