User:Farang Rak Tham/sandbox

This is the user sandbox of Farang Rak Tham. A user sandbox is a subpage of the user's user page. It serves as a testing spot and page development space for the user and is not an encyclopedia article. Create or edit your own sandbox here.

Other sandboxes: Main sandbox | Template sandbox

Finished writing a draft article? Are you ready to request review of it by an experienced editor for possible inclusion in Wikipedia? Submit your draft for review!

Example of telling someone their article is fringe

An article you recently created, Muhammad and the Hindu texts, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 17:36, 7 November 2019 (UTC) (reply)

Lazy-restless: Please try to find peer-reviewed reliable sources, preferably mainstream academic scholarship, such as the Rowena Robinson Religious Conversion in India: Modes, Motivations, and Meanings source you did cite. Missionary publications, self-published sources, advocacy groups with no independent peer-review process, websites, blogs and other questionable sources are not okay for wikipedia articles. Please avoid such sources in this and other articles of wikipedia. When you do find sources such as Robinson, please summarize the source fairly and per our NPOV guideline. Your last version did not. Your cooperation is requested,

DYK template

I'm reviewing this in a moment.

Review not started

useful quotes and abbreviations

"model of love and co-operation"

WP:Free encyclopedia

mn Mongolian

794–1185 Heian period Conversely, the high-quality popular press can be a good source for social, biographical, current-affairs, financial, and historical information in a medical article. WP:MEDRS

“

Some scholars, on ideological or pedagogical grounds, have questioned whether the critical/historical method of analysis is a valid approach to understanding Buddhism at all. From the ideological standpoint, the question is whether this method makes assumptions that would be rejected by Buddhists themselves. From the pedagogical standpoint, the question is whether the historical method is equal to the task of making the bewildering variety within the Buddhist tradition intelligible. On both counts, however, a valid case can be made that the critical/historical method, even though it may not offer the final word on Buddhism, is still a useful introit to the tradition.

Robinson, Richard H.; Johnson, Willard L. (1997). The Buddhist religion: a historical introduction (PDF) (4th ed.). Belmont, California: Cengage. ISBN 0-534-20718-9.

”

Checklist after finishing an article

Check if the most recent views on all contentious issues have been included.
Check for duplicate references
Expand citations using left menu bar
Check which is used the most in the sources: Pāli, Sanskrit or Chinese.
Add useful external links.
Make sure all other articles that mention the subject wikilink to the article.
Make summaries to broader articles.
Archive all sources.
Contact authors that might continue to write about the topic through Academia, by posting them a message or by following them.
Ask for important, inaccessible sources on WP:RX.

Checklist before starting GA review

nominator recently active
nominator has significantly contributed to the article, or knows the sources used
sources reliable
no edit wars
is nominator willing to do the copy-editing required? (Make an estimate)

GA review template

Introduction and limitations

Before starting this review, I'd like to state that I have little knowledge on the subject, apart from a few news reports. I do think it is a very essential subject, and will be more and more so in the near future.

Overview

I have assessed the article at ... now.

1. Prose:

No copyright violations.
The article reads ... Below I will do a detailed review.

2. MOS: ...

3. References layout: ...

4. Reliable sources: ...

5. Original research: ...

6. Broadness: ...

7. Focus: ...

8. Neutral: ...

9. Stable: article is stable.

10-11. Pics: ...

Detailed review per section

I will continue with a detailed review per section. Feel free to insert replies or inquiries. To keep communication to the point, you might want to use templates like Done, Doing..., Not done, Removed, Added, and Fixed. Please do not cross out my comments, as I will not yours but only my own. I will do the review of the lead mostly at the end.

Good Article review progress box

Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()

3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()

Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

Other useful templates

Copied to Talk:Proto-Indo-European homeland#Iranian hypothesis

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.

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.