|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Microcosmic orbit article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
|WikiProject Taoism||(Rated Start-class, Low-importance)|
|WikiProject China||(Rated Start-class, Low-importance)|
Was this cut and pasted from somewhere? I ask because it seems to have footnote numbers in parentheses that may have been links on the site it came from. If so, it must be deleted as a copyvio. —Hanuman Das 13:52, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
No, this article was created from scratch. Jzkramer 23:36, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
Added 'citation needed' tags in a few places. They could have been placed in several other places also. Please see WP:CITE for information on how to add references, and what qualifies as a citable source. Also see WP:VERIFY for the need to verify information in an encyclopedia article. Uncited statements can be removed after a reasonable length of time.
I also changed the unprovable "The Microcosmic Orbit or Circulation of Light meditation is the Taoist Qigong version of the Kriya Yoga breathing technique" to the possibly provable "The Microcosmic Orbit or Circulation of Light meditation is the Taoist Qigong breathing technique said by some to be similar to the Kriya Yoga breathing technique. " It will still need a citation.
For the same reason, I changed "The primary difference between the Microcosmic Orbit technique and the Kriya Yoga technique is that the Qigong practitioner often practices the meditation in a standing posture, while the Kriya Yogi practices the technique in the seated lotus or half-lotus posture" to "One difference between the Microcosmic Orbit technique and the Kriya Yoga technique is that the Qigong practitioner often practices the meditation in a standing posture, while the Kriya Yogi typically practices in a sitting posture."
ॐ Priyanath 20:39, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
Good points, thankyou. Jzkramer 23:36, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks for adding the reference. Can you please add the exact quote and page number where Mantak Chia says that this is 'similar to the Kriya Yoga breathing technique'? It can go inside the 'ref' tags, so the reader can see it at the bottom of the page under 'Notes'. That way, it's clear that Mantak Chia made that exact statement (rather than someone concluding that the techniques seemed similar, which would Original Research). Thanks, ॐ Priyanath 23:43, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
Thanks Priyanath. Now tell me what have you and other editors got against this Shitole character? It seems that he has been strongly criticised in Wikipedia but no evidence why. Jzkramer 00:02, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
- You're probably referring to an edit dispute where a devotee of Shitole was trying to insert uncited, unencyclopedic, and probably untrue material into the Kriya Yoga article and into Shitole's own biography. Since this is an encyclopedia, new information needs to be cited, WP:CITE, and verified, WP:VERIFY. Even now, his biography, Yogiraj Gurunath Siddhanath is full of unreferenced claims, and claims that are strongly POV and unproveable. I've added a standard Wikipedia 'welcome' message on your talk page that explains what Wikipedia is, and isn't, and how to add information to articles that is encyclopedic. ॐ Priyanath 00:18, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
This is a very poor article and needs a complete rewrite. It is a comparison with Kriya Yoga. Should every article about a method in WP be a comparison with Kriya Yoga? This just comes across as spam. --Simon D M (talk) 18:27, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
I would have to agree, even with the obvious editing it's still a pretty poor article. Firstly that Zhang Zhong book is a pretty lightweight affair of nice pictures, drawings and a lot of waffle about 'energy' but I cannot find any references to the microcosmic orbit at all, page reference anyone? Also the author of the article seems to have the breathing technique muddled the wrong way round as energy rises on inhalation and vice versa. There are much better books and references to much earlier works which describe these techniques such as Lu kuan Yu and Da liu which Mantak Chia can hardly be said to do justice to. In my opinion the whole article needs re-writing with proper references and links to other articles on similar subjects such as chinese alchemy and neidan. Chuangzu (talk) 22:57, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
Specific issues noticed
This is a worthy start for this subject however a citation is needed for paragraph 1. Also Taoist Alchemy and Chinese Alchemy are used, one or the other would be better for cohesiveness. There is a style issue in paragraphs 6, the second sentence is wordy. A citation is needed for paragraph 9. The first sentence of the last paragraph is a run-on sentence and this paragraph also needs a citation. The last line of this entry states an opinion as fact in Wikipedia's voice. The opinion should be attributed to the text from which it came instead. WordsUnited (talk) 11:01, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
Chinese character issue
From History section: “For example the Chinese character for the I Ching hexagram number 5, Waiting, depicts a person sitting in meditation”. Does it? Because the character in question appears to be 需, which depicts no such thing. My Chinese is a little rusty, but: according to shufaji.com, it originally depicted a person sweating from illness, meaning 'weak' or 'soft'; the current form of the character is comprised of 雨 and 而, 'rain' and 'beard'. As far as I can tell the character's history/evolution has never been connected with meditation. Headbeater (talk) 13:52, 24 October 2015 (UTC)