User talk:Art LaPella

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


Udumbara (Falun Gong)[edit]

Please helping write Udumbra by Falun Gong from sources : [1] [2]

Base Buddhism's book and [3] then Udumbra (by Falun Gong) is Chrysopidae eggs and photoshop. See more, or translate from in [4]

Thank you very much. Nguyenquocminhminh (talk) 15:09, 14 August 2017 (UTC)


I often edit existing articles, but I never write new articles. I suggest you try Wikipedia:Requested articles/Social sciences/Religion. Art LaPella (talk) 15:47, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

Yes thank you very much, see the article in vi.wikipedia. There are many reference from Viet Nam's website. if you need I will provide. I can edit the actical Udumbara (Buddhism). But maybe my english is litle. Can you help. Or I can edit, but please help me review and correction grammar english? Nguyenquocminhminh (talk) 16:01, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

There are many results for Udumbara by Viet Nam google search this result from Falun Gong. The comunity base on Buddhism's book. But really Buddhism's book don't mention color, size, shape of Udumbara. There are many article from Viet Nam show that Falun Gong using "Chrysopidae eggs and photoshop" and base on Buddhism's book to say Chrysopidae eggs is Udumbara to let Li Hong zhi is god of god, an buddha of buddha
Yes, if you write the article, or a draft in your sandbox, then I often improve the English in such articles (I'm American). In some cases I would have to ask you to re-explain, because I understand most of your English but not all of it. I don't have experience to know if English Wikipedia will consider it notable enough. Art LaPella (talk) 16:30, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

Dear Friend, I translate from wiki Viet Nam, please help me correction

Google search by Viet Nam, have above more than 2290000 (result for Udumbra (Viet Nam leanguage)). And there are above 1000 articles for Udumbara from 10 years until now, but original from Falun Gong.

The result from google search by Udumbra (Viet Nam leanguage)

Nguyenquocminhminh (talk) 16:51, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

Done. That text was easier to understand, but I had to use Google Translate to get English Wikipedia software to understand Vietnamese reference parameters. Please correct me if I misunderstood you. There may be a Wikipedia:Neutral point of view problem (for instance, if Vietnam is anything like the United States, there is little agreement on whether something is contrary to scriptures) but I'll let others debate that. Art LaPella (talk) 19:03, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
Thank you for your helping Nguyenquocminhminh (talk) 06:44, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

Udumbara Again[edit]

Dear Sir Art LaPella,

Please see:

I am sure that the source of Viet Nam are good. They are not self-published Vietnamese blogs.

And please read in the talk page:

Compare lacewings eggs published by Ohio State University and Udumbara published by Falun Gong[edit]

Google search: Udumbara

Page of Falun Gong:

Lacewings eggs publish by Ohio State University

2405:4800:12A6:BB18:AD0B:29CA:504A:4172 (talk) 04:25, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

As I explained last time, I do basic proofreading. That includes improving the use of English in articles about places around the world. I have little experience with arguing things like whether references are good enough.
The usual place to debate whether such a section should be in the article is on the article's talk page. I don't think your sources are all blogs. In particular, Dân Trí looks like news, and it currently has an article about North Korean missiles. But Talk:Udumbara (Buddhism) is the place to argue that.
I don't understand the purpose of links here. The objection was about the sources you linked in the article, not the links you show here. The Ohio State article, for instance, is not a blog but I don't understand why it is here. It presents lacewings from a Western scientific point of view. It doesn't say whether lacewing eggs can be the same as tree flowers, because Western science considers the animal and plant kingdoms to be completely separate, so such a question would never arise here. Art LaPella (talk) 07:38, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

Thank You, Yes, Ok. If You read again the text as follows, You will understand what I want to say:
Udumbara from a Falun Gong web site

It was discovered in 1997 in China, Taiwan, Hong Kong, Korea, Malaysia, Singapore, Australia, France, the United States ... In Vietnam strange creatures were discovered in the provinces of Da Nang, Vung Tau, Quang Nam, Phu Yen, Hai Phong, Nha Trang, Thai Nguyen, Nam Dinh, Ha Tien. These creatures are said to be Udumbara.[1] The images are cited by some Falun Gong websites as Uranus, when they are magnified 400 times. But some other evidence suggests that it uses Photoshop techniques.[2][3][4]

Some experts think that the eggs of a winged insect of the genus Chrysopa in the Chrysopidae family named lacewings, are considered to be Udumbara flowers. Larvae of lacewings are called aphid lions. When laying eggs, the female secretes a glue and lifts its abdomen up to form a thin stalk. White eggs are laid on this thin stem to keep larvae from eating meat after hatching. The type of flower that is considered Udumbara is about the same size as the lacewing egg and also on a thin stem.[5] In Vietnam, this exotic species is considered by some scientists to be a fungus, that can not be ascertained because of its strange appearance. However, there is no basis to consider this strange creature as the Udumbara because it is contrary to the Buddhist scriptures.[6]

Falun Gong websites promote aggressively in their media, so there are 2,980,000 results for the word Udumbus.[2][3]

While the scientific evidence provided by the Falun Gong organization to assert alienness is that Uucupunism is just microscopy, there is no biological or chemical analysis available.[3] The smallest organism attributed to the Udumbara that the organization offers is theoretically different from the Buddhist text as figs,[2][7] however, Falun Gong websites have created thousands of articles. The grounds that Falun Gong inserted were based on Buddhist texts to say that tiny creatures are Udumbara flowers.[4][8]

Some articles claim that the strange creature is rumored to be the Udumbara because the Falun Gong organization wants to legitimize Mr. Li Hongzhi, the founder of Falun Gong as a God of God and Buddha of Buddha.[2][8][9][10] The images that Falun Gong websites attribute to the primitive flower blooms of a single flower bouquet[11] have been exposed by some articles as insect eggs,[7] or moldy mushrooms, mold.[12] After it was exposed that the alien creatures were not Udumbara according to some articles on Buddhism, Falun Gong continued to use Photoshop to confirm the creature as the Udumbara.[2][3][8][13]

Next comment I will prove that the source are repliable, the source are not blogs, and and self-publish.
I improved the English for that text, so I recognize it. Do you understand that your argument needs to be made at Talk:Udumbara (Buddhism)? Art LaPella (talk) 05:49, 10 September 2017 (UTC)


It's in all the dictionaries, for instance here (see the examples). Is this a MOS thing? - Dank (push to talk) 17:20, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

No. Lately I've been hyphenating "mid" based on this. Art LaPella (talk) 22:43, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
Does the ngrams viewer do a better job now correctly recording punctuation? It used to be completely unreliable for that. - Dank (push to talk) 00:23, 20 August 2017 (UTC)
I didn't know that, so please tell me more, as I use ngrams a lot. However, a Google Books search gives the same answer about mid-1945. I searched for "mid 1945", but most of the hits were "mid-1945". Art LaPella (talk) 02:44, 20 August 2017 (UTC)
Agreed, that search and others are turning up a lot more hyphens. Thanks. - Dank (push to talk) 03:01, 20 August 2017 (UTC)