Talk:Dhammakaya meditation/GA1

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Stedil (talk · contribs) 01:06, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

Greetings! I will be reviewing this article. General comments and review progress will go in the table. Specific things to fix will be listed below. Stedil (talk) 01:06, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

Great, Stedil, thank you. Appreciate the help.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 02:18, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

I should start by admitting that I am not very proud about this article, and I think it still requires a lot of work. It is basically the first article I ever contributed to, and I did so without much editing experience. This review might therefore be quite intensive.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 14:07, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	I copyedited in places, but there are still a few areas that need addressing. Update: prose has been cleaned up.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.	There are several large (100 pages+) references whose in-line citations do not contain page numbers. It is difficult to verify information from those sources without the page numbers. Update: issue resolved.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).	I'll update this section once I can verify more sources (page # issue above). Update: issue resolved.
	2c. it contains no original research.
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	Just the 1917 discovery point mentioned below. Update: source digging revealed more work needed to be done here. Article has expanded to cover even more areas related to the topic.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
	7. Overall assessment.	Some points to address below. Fix the page number issue first, as more points to address may materialize once I can check those sources. Update: all issues resolved. Passing.

Lead

* I'm noticing this issue in the lead, but it may need to be fixed throughout the article: Dhammakaya meditation is described in various points as a "method," "approach," "technique," with the terms used interchangeably and inconsistently. One example of inconsistency: "the technique was developed from 1916 onward," vs. in the photo caption: "there are several techniques," then later in the lead: "the method that Luang Pu Sodh developed and discovered." What would be the best way to describe it? I'm guessing either "method" or "approach" is the more accurate description for Dhammakaya meditation as a whole since there are probably several techniques used within the method/approach.

* "The technique was developed from 1916 onward, after which Luang Pu Sodh made a discovery which followers describe as a historical breakthrough. In particular, the method that Luang Pu Sodh discovered and developed is seen as the original method the Buddha used to attain enlightenment." Poorly phrased. Perhaps something along the lines of: "The (technique/method/approach) was discovered by Luang Pu Sodh in either 1916 or 1917. Since its discovery, it has been developed to reflect what followers believe was the original (technique/method/approach) the Buddha used to attain enlightenment." Stedil (talk) 01:13, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

i have standardized to method and reworded the lead along the lines of your suggestion Wikiman5676 (talk) 04:11, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

Origins

• Dhammakaya 1996: provide page numbers to help identify the location of the cited information in the source. There are several other sources in this section that could also use page numbers.

 Done--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 20:41, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

* "This he would later describe as a deeper meaning" what does 'this' refer to? 'this' should be avoided at the beginning of paragraphs, as the paragraph break implies the beginning of a new idea.

Fixed Wikiman5676 (talk) 04:34, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

• Dhammakaya Open University 2010, p. 154: double check to make sure the page number is correct. I can't seem to find the information referenced here on that page. Also, that page refers to the page of the pdf. Shouldn't it refer to the page printed on the document?

* "The center of the body is essential in this process: whatever technique someone might use to meditate, the mind can only attain to a higher level through this center, which Luang Por Sodh precisely describes." This sentence confuses me. What is the 'center of the body?' What is meant by 'attain to a higher level?' How, exactly, does 'Luang Por Sodh precisely describe' it?

Fixed Wikiman5676 (talk) 04:34, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

* "As its theoretical foundations, temples of the movement refer to the Satipatthana Sutta or the Visuddhimagga, among others" What does 'its' refer to? Are 'Satipatthana Sutta or the Visuddhimagga' the theoretical foundations, or is 'its' referring to the meditation methods referred to earlier in the paragraph?

Fixed Wikiman5676 (talk) 04:36, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

• "but a new discovery by Luang Pu Sodh is 'quite possible'" the 'quite possible' quote in the source has nothing to do with any new discoveries by (about?) Luang Pu Sodh. Stedil (talk) 03:26, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

 Rewritten.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 20:41, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

• "Temples that refer to Luang Pu Sodh Candasaro as their teacher have published several biographies about him." Yesterday, I copyedited this sentence to make it flow better. In retrospect, I'm not sure it works well as an opening sentence to the body of the article. Perhaps a sentence that directly addresses the origins of Dhammakaya meditation would work better.

I think it suffices. Thank you.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 20:41, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

• The lead mentions in a footnote that there are discrepancies between sources concerning when Luang Pu Sodh's "breakthrough" happened, but then this discrepancy isn't mentioned at all in the origins section. Related to the point above, perhaps a sentence about the fact that there is a discrepancy would be a good way to open this section. The article contains a lot of information about a September 1916 origin, but no mention of 1917 origins. A summary of information from these 1917 sources would be useful, plus any other discrepancies regarding the date of discovery. Stedil (talk) 00:43, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

from my understanding the only difference is the year. September 1916 or September 1917. Wikiman5676 (talk) 04:17, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

I'll check the other sources and add discrepancies in the article. See also this section on this talk page.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 20:41, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

Okay, Stedil and Wikiman5676, I have checked several secondary sources and made notes of what they say about Luang Pu Sodh's timeline. There is only one secondary source that mentions the attainment of the Dhammakaya, and places it at 1916. So, unless we have other secondary sources stating otherwise, I'll have to remove the note about an alternative timeline at 1917. Sorry about that.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 22:48, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

Development until present

* "According to a textbook of one temple, this was reserved for gifted practitioners" What does 'this' refer to? specify for clarity.

fixed Wikiman5676 (talk) 04:38, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

* "The brief was to use the meditation" What is meant by 'the brief'?

I'm pretty sure i fixed this but Farang Rak Tham should double check. Wikiman5676 (talk) 04:42, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

That is good, but I had to rewrite it closer to the sources. My mistake.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 20:41, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

* "in branch centers of the temples mentioned" does this refer to Wat Phra Dhammakaya and Wat Luang Por Sod Dhammakayaram? It's unclear and clunky phrasing. Stedil (talk) 01:42, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

fixed Wikiman5676 (talk) 04:57, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

The samatha stage

• "e.i. recollecting the Buddha qualities." e.i? is this supposed to be i.e.?

 Fixed--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 20:41, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

• "every human being consists of eighteen bodies." Doesn't Mackenzie say eight? I'm not finding any reference to eighteen bodies in any of the cited sources. Stedil (talk) 01:33, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

 Fixed--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 20:41, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

The vipassana stage

* "this final aspect" Be more specific - what does this refer to? Does it refer to abhiñña as a whole, or just to the extinguishing of Mara? Stedil (talk) 02:12, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

clarified Wikiman5676 (talk) 05:10, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

Discussion and research

• "stating there was no widespread criticism" page number in reference is incorrect.

 Fixed.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 20:41, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

* "Discussion within the Thai Sangha" Who are the Thai Sangha? Is there a wikilink?

rephrased Wikiman5676 (talk) 05:07, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

• "As is common with all meditation techniques that emphasize samatha, the technique has been commented on mostly from a modernist standpoint" Meaning is unclear. From reading the source cited at the bottom of the paragraph, I think what is meant is that modernists are generally critical of meditation techniques that emphasize samatha. Rephrase so that this connection is more clear. Stedil (talk) 02:49, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

 Fixed, I think.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 20:41, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

A little wordy, but it works. Stedil (talk) 02:32, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

 Tweaked--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 12:34, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

28 February

I'll have to start with adding the page numbers first. Today I have run out of time though.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 14:07, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

March

Wikiman5676, was celebrating Magha Puja today, and have guests tomorrow. Not sure how much I can fix of this in the following days. Can you help me out a bit? Thanks.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 23:09, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

I'm involved in quite a few things right now. But i'll try to do a bit. Wikiman5676 (talk) 02:22, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

Finished the initial review. See table for general comments. Stedil (talk) 03:04, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for your time and effort, WM! I have now added some page numbers and rewritten some parts closer to the sources cited. There was also one incorrect source; I have replaced it with the correct one. I will try to continue this evening.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 14:02, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

Most page numbers have now been added. Those which have not been added yet, are sources which are not paginated (some Google Books are not), or not OCR-ed and therefore difficult to search. I have also rewritten and deleted considerably to get closer to the sources cited and to prevent WP:OR.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 00:30, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

ping, ping.

I'll take another look through the article sometime this week. Stedil (talk) 22:53, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

Appreciated, Stedil.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 23:21, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

Second Reading

• "Besides the original meaning, there is also another meaning involving meditation technique" This sentence is unclear. It raises questions for the reader about what the original meaning is that aren't necessarily pertinent to the article. Would this sentence clarify the meaning better - "The deeper meaning was revealed to Luang Por Sodh through a meditation technique." It's also more internally consistent - "deeper meaning" vs. "another meaning".

Most of the issues I found were minor prose/grammar issues I could fix easily. I'm about ready to pass it pending your thoughts/revision above. Stedil (talk) 02:32, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

from my understanding. besides the original meaning of middle way, to avoid extreme asceticism and sensual indulgence, the Middle way has a deeper meaning regarding how to meditate. That's essentially what the statement is trying to say Wikiman5676 (talk) 02:50, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

 Rewritten.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 12:27, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

9 March

Stedil, I have now expanded the article considerably, as I noticed that the references contained content that was not covered yet in the article. I have also added a table with the kāyas, the states in meditation. I hope it will not take too much of your time to take a look at the article again.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 22:36, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

• Background section - this is a good start to a new section, but some more detail would be helpful. "people's perceptions" Did all Thai people really think that way? "reformed and became politicised" how so? why? Expand on how the reforms influenced meditation practice, if possible from available sources. Is there any other background information that would be useful here?

There is.  Expanded.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 08:54, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

• "However, the emphasis differs, with some temples being more esoteric about the method than others." Could you expand on this a bit? How is it more esoteric?

 Done.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 08:54, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

• What is an "absorption"? Stedil (talk) 02:06, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

A meditative state. Difficult to rephrase without becoming vague, but wikilinked throughout the article.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 08:54, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

As a sidenote, I'd like to say that by tomorrow I am going to a foreign country, and may respond less frequent here. I will be back here the 24th.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 12:18, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

Since all issues have been addressed, I'll pass the article. Good work on this article, and enjoy your trip. Stedil (talk) 13:38, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, Stedil! In the meantime, good luck with the Wikicup!--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 14:39, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.