Talk:Jin Long Si Temple

Jin Long Si Temple was a Philosophy and religion good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
September 22, 2012	Good article nominee	Not listed
October 15, 2012	Articles for deletion	Kept

A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on October 29, 2007.

The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that a 120-year old Bodhi tree (pictured) in Jin Long Si Temple, standing over 30 m tall with a girth of 8.5 m, is the oldest and largest of its kind ever found in Singapore?

Current status: Former good article nominee

Singapore Low‑importance

	Singapore portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Singapore, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Singapore on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SingaporeWikipedia:WikiProject SingaporeTemplate:WikiProject SingaporeSingapore articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Buddhism Low‑importance

	This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Buddhism, an attempt to promote better coordination, content distribution, and cross-referencing between pages dealing with Buddhism. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page for more details on the projects.BuddhismWikipedia:WikiProject BuddhismTemplate:WikiProject BuddhismBuddhism articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Taoism (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Taoism, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.TaoismWikipedia:WikiProject TaoismTemplate:WikiProject TaoismTaoism articles

Name

Is this really how it is referred to in English? The name is redundant, as "si" already means temple, but I suppose if that's what it's called...Rigadoun (talk) 19:24, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it's called that way in English according to their flyers and on-site information board for visitors. I understand that they choose to add the "temple" part for the benefit of non-chinese speakers in their correspondence. -- Aldwinteo 15:37, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dating concern

May I suggest rephrasing terms like "66-year-old" and "120-year-old", given these are bound to become less accurate every year? Biruitorul 20:05, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Except for its discription purpose, all the date-centric references has been amended now. Thank u for your feedback & interest on this article -- Aldwinteo 01:23, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the corrections. My only further suggestions on the three remaining year-centric entries would be as follows:

1. "a nearly 120-year old Bodhi tree" --> "a Bodhi tree dating to the late 1880s"

2. "an age of approximately 120 years" --> "an age of approximately 120 years (as of 2007)"

3. "Over the past three years" --> "Since 2004"

However, these are mere ideas and I leave it to you, the author, to decide what to do. Biruitorul 02:44, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

All done as per your 2nd feedback. u & other editors are most welcomed to amend on this article or any of my previous works if nec, as long as its informational value & content is not degraded for the common good of Wikipedia. Rgds, -- Aldwinteo 03:45, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Updating of "Relocation" section

The "Relocation" section of the article requires updating as it mentions the High Court case but not the subsequent Court of Appeal decision in the matter. See Eng Foong Ho v. Attorney-General for information on this. — Cheers, JackLee ^–talk– 08:14, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the pointer. Perhaps I should withdraw the GAN. What else do you know about the relocated temple? --J.L.W.S. The Special One (talk) 14:12, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

See Eng Foong Ho v. Attorney-General for information about what happened after the High Court case. — Cheers, JackLee ^–talk– 15:23, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]