Talk:Eight precepts

WikiProject class rating
This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 03:57, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

We need to identify which traditions follow this, as our article implies they all do. Tibetan Buddhist sangha certainly eat after noon for example. I am told only Theravadins don't. Secretlondon 21:51, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Merge
See here —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:02, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Requested move 4 December 2018

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: moved. (non-admin closure) JC7V (talk) 22:15, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

Eight Precepts → Eight precepts – Per MOS:DOCTCAPS. Farang Rak Tham  (Talk) 08:43, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment: Isn't this a proper noun for a particular list of precepts, rather than a general principle to be followed? It seems like I've seen similar things capitalized on Wikipedia, such as the Five Pillars of Islam. —BarrelProof (talk) 02:41, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
 * , could be, but specifically what policy or guideline would justify capitals?-- Farang Rak Tham   (Talk) 09:00, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Proper names are ordinarily capitalized. This is mentioned in WP:Manual of Style/Proper names, and seems like a general principle of ordinary English. Ping to SMcCandlish, who ordinarily has substantial expertise on this sort of thing. Another example that comes to my mind is Ten Commandments. —BarrelProof (talk) 17:15, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
 * And Seven Laws of Noah and Four Noble Truths (but seven deadly sins). —BarrelProof (talk) 00:16, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
 * We have to be careful of circular reasoning (especially petitio principii) in cases like this. A "WP must capitalize because it's a proper name" view would pre-suppose what we're trying to establish, namely whether independent RS do consistently treat it as a proper name and capitalize it.  Whether something is a proper name in the philosophy sense is irrelevant, since that has no connection to typographic matters; only the linguistic meaning could matter for that question. But how to approach  is a matter of sharp and recently renewed conflict in RS on linguistics, so the question doesn't really help us here. It ends up boiling down to whether RS that are not published within the doctrine (nor in a field prone to over-capitalization) consistently capitalize it.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  02:28, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
 * To be honest, I won't loose my sleep over it either way, but I propose this rename to make sure it's correct. But I don't think we can rely on WP:Other stuff exists to get it right.-- Farang Rak Tham   (Talk) 19:49, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Yeah, lots of other things of this sort need re-examination. I see that we have an article at Noble Eightfold Path. I expected the simple "eightfold path [of Buddhism]" to be more common in independent RS. Google Ngrams shows that "Eightfold Path" leads, then "Noble Eightfold Path", then "eightfold path", then "noble eightfold path" last.  But this doesn't exclude works written by Buddhists for a Buddhist market. I would almost bet money that if scholarly works are examined that they'll favor "eightfold path".  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  11:26, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

— SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  02:28, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Support as obviously falling under MOS:DOCTCAPS. Primergrey (talk) 04:32, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Leaning support per DOCTCAPS, but could be swayed. "Ten Commandments" is the title (albeit traditional and translated) of a work (albeit a legendary one, and carved on stone rather than written on paper/papyrus). "Eight precepts" may not be, but a doctrinal principle.  That's a grey area in general.  We would not capitalize the Taoist "ten-thousand things" (a metaphor for the material world), but "the Virgin Birth" is usually capitalized in the singular and specific doctrinal claim about Mary and Jesus (not virgin births in legend/faith more generally). I think what we need here is an examination of how independent (i.e., scholarly not religious, and definitely not newage) books treat this phrase in English when specifically writing about Buddhism in its native lands (not neo-Buddhist stuff in the West, which capitalizes pretty much everything it can get its hands on).  Journalism sources are utterly useless for this because they reflexively capitalize in any case where there is doubt, most especially religious and other cultural matters, simply to avoid giving offense to anyone who might write an angry "letter to the editor".  So, anyway, is this a list, the Eight Precepts, that originated as such, or is just a set of doctrinal matters treated as a group and sometimes published as list, of eight precepts?  I'm thinking of  "The Scout Law" (which exists in shorter, rote-recited versions like the Boy Scouts of America's "Boy Scout Law"), the "Twelve Steps" and "Twelve Traditions" of Alcoholics Anonymous, and similar things which have a doctrinal purpose, are in list format, and are treated as proper names (titles of works) because they originated as such (though not always in the same form; I think the "Twelve Steps" was originally the "Eight Steps" or something).  WP's default is to use lower-case if there is doubt (first rule of MOS:CAPS), so either we have that doubt and it remains, or the doubt can be dispelled by showing that the phrase is virtually never lower-case in RS that aren't pre-biased towards capitalization.
 * , good points. I used over 20 reliable sources in the article. I will do a check whether these capitalize the subject, or not. I'll be back.-- Farang Rak Tham   (Talk) 08:59, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Checking all authors after the 50s (not counting before that, because style and grammar was different back then), except for the BBC, since we decided we didn't want news sources.
 * Capitalizing:, , , , , ,.


 * Not capitalizing:, , , , , , , , , , , , , ,.
 * Actually, I didn't expect this outcome, but it seems the non-capital side wins.-- Farang Rak Tham   (Talk) 09:32, 7 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Support move to Eight precepts. The phrase "eight precepts" in lowercase is used throughout the article, this is consistent with the article title Five precepts and Farang Rak Tham's source check shows the lowercase is commonly used. — Bilorv(c)(talk) 16:35, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Support per observations above and guidelines. Dicklyon (talk) 20:55, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.