Talk:Buddhist studies/Archive 1

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Buddhist studies. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20130104104614/http://archive.thebuddhadharma.com/issues/2006/spring/scholar-practitioners.html to http://archive.thebuddhadharma.com/issues/2006/spring/scholar-practitioners.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 12:53, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 one external links on Buddhist studies. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110930163505/http://www.tandf.co.uk:80/journals/rcbh to http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals/rcbh
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120402081600/http://www12.canvas.ne.jp/horai/pureland.htm to http://www12.canvas.ne.jp/horai/pureland.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160125125344/http://www.sh.mahidol.ac.th/bodhi/content.php?content_id=3: to http://www.sh.mahidol.ac.th/bodhi/content.php?content_id=3:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120328144037/http://ccbs.ntu.edu.tw/BDLM/toModule.do?prefix=/website&page=/periodical.jsp?seq=8 to http://ccbs.ntu.edu.tw/BDLM/toModule.do?prefix=/website&page=/periodical.jsp?seq=8

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 07:13, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

Possible Edits
I enjoyed reading this article, however, I did find some things that could possibly be edited. I noticed that there is a heavy usage of quotes and could suggest trying to interpret what the author of your reference is trying note, and from that interpretation it would be easier to use your own wording. Also, I see that there might have been some unintentional biases, when you wrote "Buddhist studies has been dominated by "outsiders"'(line 5). Instead, try remaining neutral as much as you can. Finally, I saw that some of the links to your references do not work as well. Other than these few comments I have made, I believe you did a great job.Ericneumann 99 (talk) 04:10, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

Continued Possible Edits
I also enjoyed reading the article. However, as noted by Wikipedia itself, the last two paragraphs of the "University programs and institutes" require citations. As mentioned above, their also appears to be a lack of neutrality in how the article is written. For example, the second paragraph in the "University programs and institutes" states "(A number of dharma centers offer semi-academic, unaccredited study; some of these seem likely eventually to win accreditation.)". If a source cannot be found to support this statement, it should probably be removed. Bdyoung (talk) 21:58, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

Article Evaluation
The article I am evaluating is "Buddhist studies". In general, this article is very poorly written. The main problem is that it is lacking references. A wikipedia article should have at least one citation per paragraph (as per the referencing guide) and this article only has 6 citations, with approximately 10 paragraphs in the article. The article states many things that need a citation, such as "The term applies especially to the modern academic field, which is a subset of religious studies, and is distinct from Buddhist philosophy or Buddhist theology", which already has been challenged with a [citationneeded]. The citations that are listed are extremely out of date, most of them being from 1999 or older and only 2 out of 6 of the citation links actually work and bring you to what they are referencing. The article begins with saying how Buddhist studies consists of "outsiders" and should remain more neutral. Towards the end it poses a neutral view and is not biased as most of the information is just stating the origin and what Universities have adapted and offered Buddhist studies. The article consists of mostly large quotations which could have been analyzed and put into their own words. A per others on the talk page, they have similar problems with the article as they also believe the references need to be updated and there are many points made throughout the article that need to be cited. --Nsima026 (talk) 15:43, 10 November 2018 (UTC)