Jump to content

User talk:Dhammapala Tan

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

[edit]

Hi Dhammapala Tan! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

Happy editing! Wikipedia is hosted by the Wikimedia Foundation, a non-profit organization that also hosts a range of other projects:

--Gryllida (talk) 08:16, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Draft:Buddha Dhamma Mandala Society

[edit]

Hello Dhammapala Tan I have added projects Buddhism, Religion, Sociology, to your article. You may wish to join them, check their to-do, and meet new people with interest in these topics. ( To reply click "edit" next to this section, and add your reply at the end. ) Cheers, --Gryllida (talk) 08:16, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Buddha Dhamma Mandala Society (May 4)

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Tatupiplu was:
This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of organizations and companies). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
Tatupiplu'talk 10:48, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Teahouse logo
Hello, Dhammapala Tan! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Tatupiplu'talk 10:48, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

List of Buddhist temples in Singapore

[edit]

Looking at your edits in List of Singapore-related topics, don't you think it is high time to establish a list of Buddhist temples in Singapore on its own? robertsky (talk) 16:12, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

June 2020

[edit]

Information icon Hello, I'm Robertsky. I wanted to let you know that I removed one or more external links you added to the main body of an article. Generally, any relevant external links should be listed in an "External links" section at the end of the article and meet the external links guidelines. Links within the body of an article should be internal Wikilinks. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Your edits to include Buddhist temples and places of worships with external links to the body across multiple articles should be stopped. Lose the external links in the body of the articles and it should be fine. I am partially reverting your previous edits to remove these external links. – robertsky (talk) 02:42, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Yuanli, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Matsu (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:11, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Chinese characters

[edit]

Hello @Dhammapala Tan: According to the wikipedia guidelines on Chinese characters, we do not add them after the names of entities for which there is a valid wikipedia article. I have removed the Chinese characters that you added in several of your recent edits, for example: Kaohsiung. Please refrain from adding them under similar circumstances in the future. Kind regards, Phlar (talk) 02:31, 15 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Places of worship in Hong Kong, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Happy Valley (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:08, 20 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

June 2020

[edit]

Information icon Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

When editing Wikipedia, there is a field labeled "Edit summary" below the main edit box. It looks like this:

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)

Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.

Edit summary content is visible in:

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. With a Wikipedia account you can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting Preferences → Editing → Tick Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary. Thanks! Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 08:17, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Recent edit reversion

[edit]

In this edit here, I reverted some information that appears to be a violation of our copyright policy.

I provided a brief summary of the problem in the edit summary, which should be visible just below my name. You can also click on the "view history" tab in the article to see the recent history of the article. This should be an edit with my name, and a parenthetical comment explaining why your edit was reverted. If that information is not sufficient to explain the situation, please ask.S Philbrick(Talk) 12:34, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Edits while logged out

[edit]

Hello, I noticed that you may have recently made edits to Theravada while logged out. Wikipedia's policy on multiple accounts usually does not allow the use of both an account and an IP address by the same person in the same setting and doing so may result in your account being blocked from editing. Additionally, making edits while logged out reveals your IP address, which may allow others to determine your location and identity. If this was not your intention, please remember to log in when editing. Thank you. JimRenge (talk) 11:23, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

See also

[edit]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

  1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
  2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. --Hipal/Ronz (talk) 15:19, 13 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Buddha Dhamma Mandala Society

[edit]

Hello, Dhammapala Tan. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Buddha Dhamma Mandala Society".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 13:55, 4 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Control copyright icon Hello Dhammapala Tan, and welcome to Wikipedia. Your additions to Buddhism in Hong Kong have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission.) While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism issues.

  • You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
  • Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify the information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
  • We have strict guidelines on the usage of copyrighted images. Fair use images must meet all ten of the non-free content criteria in order to be used in articles, or they will be deleted. All other images must be made available under a free and open license that allows commercial and derivative reuse to be used on Wikipedia.
  • If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. Understand, though, that unlike many other sites, where a person can license their content for use there and retain non-free ownership, that is not possible at Wikipedia. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable, to the world, into the public domain (PD) or under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. Such a release must be done in a verifiable manner, so that the authority of the person purporting to release the copyright is evidenced. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
  • Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you must follow the copyright attribution steps in Wikipedia:Translation#How to translate. See also Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 16:13, 18 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

[edit]
Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:57, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

January 2021

[edit]

Information icon Please do not add or change content, as you did at List of people who have been considered deities, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Elizium23 (talk) 15:59, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Stop icon You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at List of former Catholics. Elizium23 (talk) 00:43, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Copying within Wikipedia requires attribution

[edit]

Information icon Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Chinese folk religion into Folk religion. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. Please provide attribution for this duplication if it has not already been supplied by another editor, and if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, you should provide attribution for that also. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. If you are the sole author of the prose that was copied, attribution is not required. — Diannaa (talk) 15:15, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request to visit discussion topic

[edit]

First round of discussion about 'Difference between Muslim .... and Islamic .... ?' in relation to Wikipedia article titles has been initiated at some article talk pages, including @ Talk:List of former Muslims#Difference between Muslim .... and Islamic .... ?

You are being informed of the discussion, since its seems you have edited related topic previously.

Please do join in discussions, Thanks and regards

Bookku (talk) 03:04, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Temples don't persecute

[edit]

Unless you have specific information about the involvement of a specific temple in a specific act of persecution of pagans, please stop placing generic tags in the "See also" section of those temples. Laurel Lodged (talk) 11:16, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

June 2021

[edit]

Information icon Hi Dhammapala Tan! I noticed that you recently marked an edit as minor at Chinese Singaporeans that may not have been. "Minor edit" has a very specific definition on Wikipedia – it refers only to superficial edits that could never be the subject of a dispute, such as typo corrections or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not a minor edit, even if it only concerns a single word. Please see Help:Minor edit for more information. Thank you. – robertsky (talk) 02:37, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Spamming see also section in lists of Buddhist temples

[edit]

Please don't spam see also sections like that. The entries are supposed to be closely related. Local architecture is closely related and you've been removing it in places. The lists did need Buddhism in <country> added, but that should cover and summarize every other link you added that's relevant. If you think that article is incomplete, then also add the related category (you'll need a colon before 'category' to get it to list). Your lists appear to be attempted Proselytism, which isn't really appropriate in an encyclopedia. Skyerise (talk) 18:52, 4 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Balangoda Ananda Maitreya Thero, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sutta.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:57, 29 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello! I hope you're doing well. I pinged you recently on the Talk page of List of books related to Buddhism. You've edited the page since then but haven't replied to me. That's absolutely your right, but I wanted to check in to make sure that you hadn't just missed the Talk page discussion. I'm thinking about soliciting feedback from a larger group. It's possible that I'll propose deletion again if I can't rouse enough interest in creating inclusion criteria. Since you seem interested in the page, I'd love to hear your thoughts on the matter. Take care! Pathawi (talk) 20:15, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, hope you are doing well. I do see some potential in this page, and is planning to expand two new section for scriptural translation and meditation. Deletion of this page will be a pity in my personal opinion. Dhammapala Tan (talk) 22:21, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Please stop spamming articles with too loosely related see also links. Also please stop spamming articles with external links. The rule is that any one site may have only one link in the external links section. I will be reverting all your spamming. Skyerise (talk) 14:48, 4 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I am not spamming, these are all actual articles related to the topics. You can advice me about the standard and not wrongly accusing me on spamming. Dhammapala Tan (talk) 14:53, 4 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Do you know how much time and effort that was needed to find and include those articles? It's not very polite to wrongly accusing me of spamming. Dhammapala Tan (talk) 15:01, 4 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The articles are not closely related enough. That's spamming. Adding three external links to the same site at the beginning of the external links section is also spamming. It's spamming when you do it to multiple articles in rapid sequence. Lay off. Skyerise (talk) 16:28, 4 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You also seem to be ignorant of the rules governing see also sections. They should not have any links which are already present in the article body. If the Four Noble Truths are mentioned and linked in the article, it should not also be added to the see also section. Our goal is to have short see also sections, which disappear entirely as more content is added to the article which can integrate the links into the body of the article. Please don't continue to add duplicate links into see also and try to follow WP intent for the see also section. (1) They should be short; (2) they should not attempt to be a directory to the broader topic (we have navboxes, outlines, and portals to serve that purpose); (3) they should not include links already in the article. If you will follow these rules, you'll be reverted less. Skyerise (talk) 17:08, 4 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Finally, you've been warned about this before, by me, in early October. You should have then researched the rules concerning the see also section instead of waiting a month and then just doing it again. Any time lost is your own fault here. Skyerise (talk) 17:13, 4 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Changing Buddha to Lord Buddha

[edit]

Wikipedia is neither by nor for believers. We do not refer to religious figures as "Lord", neither Jesus nor Buddha should be referred to this way in an encyclopedic setting. Please stop adding Lord to references to Buddha. All such additions will be reverted. It seems you want to use Wikipedia to promote Buddhism. That is highly inappropriate. Skyerise (talk) 17:31, 4 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of books related to Buddhism is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/_List of books related to Buddhism (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

Skyerise (talk) 21:05, 4 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

[edit]
Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:53, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Tips and pointers about your recent edits to Taiwanese religion

[edit]

Hello, thanks for your edits to Wikipedia. I want to leave some feedback about your recent edits to Taiwanese religion and temples:

  • Avoid linking common words (overlinking). A very small minority of readers don't know what a "deity" is.
  • You don't need to explain what Mazu is; your overly-verbose description of Mazu is what a "sea goddess" is. That is why I use the phrasing "...the sea goddess Mazu" or similar, and if people don't know what that means there's a link to explain that. WP:SEAOFBLUE also applies here. If you really think a link is really necessary, then "...Mazu, a sea goddess" is also acceptable.
  • Words such as "deity" and "god" are not proper nouns and should not be capitalized.
  • I don't have a problem with you using direct Chinese romanizations for the deity names, I just ask for you to stay consistent.

Let me know if there's any questions, and remember to use {{Reply to}}. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (talk) 05:58, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I 've been told you many times

[edit]

Please don't add unrelated links between articles, like Xinwu Tianhou Temple and Taoyuan Confucian Temple. Thanks a lot.--迴廊彼端 (talk) 14:39, 21 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Dhammapala Tan:: "As a general rule, the "See also" section should not repeat links that appear in the article's body." Maybe this would help you. Thanks for edits and Happy Lunar New Year.--迴廊彼端 (talk) 03:27, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Copying within Wikipedia requires attribution (2nd request)

[edit]

Information icon It appears that you copied or moved text from Kwong Wai Siew Peck San Theng to Former cemeteries in Singapore. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. Please provide attribution for this duplication if it has not already been supplied by another editor, and if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, you should provide attribution for that also. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. DanCherek (talk) 19:42, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited She (surname), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Teochew.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:05, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Index of Buddhism-related articles, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Anjali.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:14, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Wai khru, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dana.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:19, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Amended, thanks Dhammapala Tan (talk) 06:05, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

short descriptions

[edit]

you have changed over 30 articles about buddhism in Indonesia short descriptions by taking their character numbers to 53 or more rather the required (where possible) 40...

So why the need for detail and over the limit against the short description limit?

Is there something you know about short descriptions that could be shared perhaps? JarrahTree 10:21, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

JarrahTree, there is no hard upper limit to short descriptions, 40 characters is an arbitrary suggestion from WMF, suggested to suit their app, but it is more important that a short description should be meaningful, accurate, useful to the reader, non-repetitive, unambuguous if possible (not always possible), and most importantly not misleading or unnecessarily confusing. We do try as far as is reasonably possible to stay below 100 characters, but even this is sometimes impracticable. On the other hand, while candi may be the correct term for Buddhist temples/stupas in Indonesia, it is not a word familiar to most of our readers, so unless there is a compelling reason which I have yet to see, the word temple serves the purpose much better. Candi is not actually misleading, just unhelpful to the millions of readers unfamiliar with the term. Even stupa is likely to be more familiar and useful, but if temple is actually wrong, religious building might be better even though a bit longer. Cheers, · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 11:41, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Dhammapala Tan, Please either stop changing the short descriptions to candi, or provide authoritative evidence that the term temple is wrong, and that religious building or some other more familiar term cannot be used. Please ping with reply. Cheers, · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 11:41, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Dear all , these candi are not consider as temples. They are more like some sort of archaeological sites. Candi is actually stupa or pagoda, also have the similar meaning of chedi. Dhammapala Tan (talk) 11:48, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
They are in all cases actually default archaeological sites due to the age and dating and remains, and the status is almost universal for known and named sites in Java.
to suggest they are not temples is a misunderstanding - candi/stupa/pagoda/chedi are not accessible terms for the average reader of wikipedia - the buddhist candi of central java are sufficiently formed as being a type of temple - and that is an adequate term to be used. There is adequate material clarifying the usage of such a term.
Pbsouthwood - thanks for clarification - to see an already 40 character or less item increased to 53 with detail that is added with an obscure term seems worth checking. I fail to see why a 'date' or era has to be added to a short description. Even if the 40 limit is seen as arbitrary, it is damned useful most of the time. JarrahTree 12:02, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

JarrahTree 11:59, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

JarrahTree, Use your discretion. If the new short description works better, keep it, if it is worse, revert. if it has the same functional value choose the one which is shorter (within reason) or just leave it. Cheers, · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 12:09, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
If 40 characters can do the job, why use more? It is a good exercise in concision. · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 12:32, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Dhammapala Tan, Please use English terms when possible for short descriptions, this is English Wikipedia. In all cases where it is not possible, leave an explanation for why it is not appropriate on the talk page. Please provide the evidence I requested from a reliable source that there is no suitable English term. The article Candi of Indonesia suggests to me that temple or shrine is generally an acceptable translation. Regards, · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 12:01, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Site, or if necessary, archeological site are also comprehensible to most readers, and may be useful alternatives. · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 12:13, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Site will be more sensible than temple. Dhammapala Tan (talk) 12:16, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Use the English term which fits best, but be ready to explain if someone asks why. Cheers, · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 12:27, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I think that Site, changes the description of structures which are named - it doesnt make sense, very few of them have been reduced to rubble or foundations only... I would have thought a specific location is more relevant than date, and that central java is more relevant than the century... JarrahTree 12:30, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Most of them are located in Java area, I feel that the period will be more interesting for reader. Dhammapala Tan (talk) 12:36, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Judge each case on its merits. They do not all have to use the same words. I have reasonably confidence of your judgement. If in doubt, ping me, · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 12:43, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I honestly give up - Java is an island in Indonesia (not an area), and central java has the preponderance of locations yes, but in most cases the time that they were created 'era' is about as clear as the word candi to the average reader. I have no faith that the short descriptions are either resolved or of any use to anyone. Enjoy. JarrahTree 12:53, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If there is disagreement on the best short description for any article, propose the alternatives on the talk page, explain why one is better than the other, and get consensus. The short description is subject to all the normal rules for content as well as the special rules for its functionality, so BRD applies. The usual caveats apply. I can only give a personal opinion if I know which case is under discussion. · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 13:04, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dear all, thanks for all the suggestion. l have been to Jakarta and is aware that it is an island. Most of the candi are located in Java, not many readers will know the difference between central Java or East Java or West Java. I also not sure how to replace century with era. Dhammapala Tan (talk) 13:25, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Smot (chanting), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sutta.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:01, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@DPL bot , have already amended. Thanks for the update. Dhammapala Tan (talk) 09:27, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:47, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please reply

[edit]

Did you see this Talk:Zuowanglun question? Thanks, ~~~~ Keahapana (talk) 21:52, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Reversions

[edit]

Hello, Dhammapala Tan. As discussed on Talk:Zuowanglun, changing Dao… to Tao… goes against Wikipedia conventions. When are you going to revert those edits? Thank you, Keahapana (talk) 20:51, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Keahapana Hi, there is nothing wrong to use Tao, Dao is Chinese pin yin usage. Dhammapala Tan (talk) 21:55, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Did you read and understand Wikipedia:Consistency and MOS:CHINESE? There is nothing wrong with using either Taoism or Daoism when adding new content to WP, but the rules and guidelines prohibit users from arbitrarily changing Daoism to Taoism, or vice versa, in existing pages, especially within quotes. Keahapana (talk) 01:03, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Keahapana, I cannot recalled all that I have changed, will revert what I can remember. Dhammapala Tan (talk) 01:12, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for being reasonable and constructive. With your User contributions list, there is no need to remember past edits, and reverting changes is generally faster than making them, see Help:Reverting. After you get started undoing past edits, I'm willing to help with some of the Daoism related pages. Best wishes, Keahapana (talk) 21:00, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:59, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to participate in a research

[edit]

Hello,

The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of Wikipedians to better understand what draws administrators to contribute to Wikipedia, and what affects administrator retention. We will use this research to improve experiences for Wikipedians, and address common problems and needs. We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this anonymous survey.

You do not have to be an Administrator to participate.

The survey should take around 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement .

Please find our contact on the project Meta page if you have any questions or concerns.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 19:26, 23 October 2024 (UTC) [reply]

Reminder to participate in Wikipedia research

[edit]

Hello,

I recently invited you to take a survey about administration on Wikipedia. If you haven’t yet had a chance, there is still time to participate– we’d truly appreciate your feedback. The survey is anonymous and should take about 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement.

Take the survey here.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 00:39, 13 November 2024 (UTC) [reply]

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:46, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Dhammapala_Tan&oldid=1258297004"