User:Jawner22/sandbox

Article Evaluation
The article that I will be evaluating is Pallbearer. The following answers are in response to the assigned questions presented for the assignment: Upon observation of the article, it can be stated that the information contained in the article is relevant to the topic of discussion. As far as I can see, there is nothing that distracts me, as there does not seem to be any spelling errors and the images coincide with the topic. For a majority of the article, the text appears to be neutral. There are some points in the information that could be considered opinion, due to a lack of citations. In order to mitigate the idea that the information is biased, there needs to be an inclusion of more citations of where the information came from. Claims made about pallbearers in other countries appear biased, as they lack citations. I would not say that the authors viewpoints are overrepresented or underrepresented, due to a lack of information on the topic as a whole. However, there are points in the text lacking citations, which makes the information appear to be viewpoints. In this regard, there are too many viewpoints if taking these into consideration. The citations listed in the article do work and coincide with the text in the article. Although there are a few references noted in the article, there is information noted that do not have references that appear to be opinion-based. Those facts with citations do have references, linked to other articles on Wikipedia. I would say that those references outside of Wikipedia are not wholly reliable, as the author's reference to Lee Harvey Oswald is from The Denver Post and a PDF article written in a funeral liturgy in Evangelical Lutheran Worship. These biases are not noted as biases, but cited instead. The information does not appear out of date, as pallbearers are still utilized today. However, there is a lack of information, making it a stub article. The article can use a lot more information, as I am sure there are numerous reliable resources outlining what pallbearers do and how they perform in different countries throughout the world. These can be made into different subsections, with a full description of how pallbearers compare and contrast with one another throughout the countries who have them. The author's Talk page has some recommendations and changes, but only a few due to the lack of information included on the topic. There seemed to be some confusion as to whether or not the term "Pallbearer" should be hyphenated or not, as in "Pall-bearer." The article is a part of WikiProject Death, with a rating as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale and Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. We have yet to discuss the topic regarding Pallbearers in class.
 * Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?
 * Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article?
 * Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference? Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted?
 * Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added?
 * Check out the Talk page of the article. What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

Addition to Pallbearer
At times additional pallbearers, known as Honorary Pallbearers, walk either behind or directly in front of the casket in a showcase of supplemental distinction towards the deceased. This type of pallbearer is most often a gentleman in the profession of the deceased who has achieved significant merit within their position.

Potential Tackle Topics
I believe the following topics could use extensive improvement:

Euthanasia

I chose "Euthanasia" because in this Wikipedia article, there is a subsection titled "Religious Views" that only discusses the three Abrahamic religions of Christianity, Judaism, and Islam. However, there is an EXHAUSTIVE list of other religions in the world, of which could use discussion in an article such as this. The religion that I would like to discuss is Buddhism. There is an article on euthanasia in Buddhism that already exists, but the information within is lacking, as the only detail provided is short excerpts from scripture. Improvements to Euthanasia, with my focus in Buddhism, will include information on the perspective of Buddhists and euthanasia. This topic can go into a myriad of directions, to include, but not limited, perspectives from named Buddhists that existed throughout history and the reasons why Buddhism promotes (or rejects) euthanasia.

University of North Texas Center for Human Identification

I chose the "University of North Texas Center for Human Identification" as my second topic to improve because there is no information on the article other than what the UNTCHI is. With that, this article can go into a myriad of directions. Everything from who operates the center, where it is, what happens there, who utilizes it, what their mission is, who supports the center's operations, and information regarding CODIS (Combined DNA Index System), which is an Federal Bureau of Investigation support program for criminal justice DNA databases. This article really needs some work, and I think that it would be very beneficial to the Wikipedia community to establish.

I think that Buddhism and euthanasia would be a fine topic. You could speak with our guest lecturer on 3/19 about finding sources for this topic, and you should be able to find a good amount on this. I think your other topic on UNT isn't as good, however. Maybe consider finding another plan B just in case your first topic does not produce a substantial amount of information? Alfgarciamora (talk) 22:43, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

Contributions to Add to Buddhism and euthanasia
Hello all! I am enrolled in a course titled "Death and Dying" at the University of Miami and a part of the course is assisting Wikipedia with making additions to an article I felt was interesting to me. With that, I would like to make the following additions:


 * Describe in detail how Buddhism views euthanasia as a whole
 * Whether or not Buddhism views euthanasia as acceptable and why
 * How Buddhism defines death
 * Should patients in a vegetative state be euthanized under Buddhist beliefs
 * Options for Buddhists in place of euthanasia
 * "Compassion" according to Buddhism
 * How Buddhist texts explain euthanasia
 * Kamma/karma and how it is affected by euthanasia

Buddhism and Euthanasia First Draft
Keown, Damien. Buddhism and Euthanasia.

Keown, Damien. (2005). End of life: The buddhist view

Keown, Damien., & Keown, John. (1995). Killing, karma and caring: Euthanasia in buddhism and christianity.

Lecso, Philip. A. (1986). Euthanasia: a Buddhist perspective

Lin, Saw. (2016). The Response to Euthanasia from the Perspective of Buddhism

Perrett, R. W. (1996). Buddhism, euthanasia and the sanctity of life

Wagner, Sarah. (2002). Ethics of Life in Buddhism

Buddhism and euthanasia

Buddhist views, although varying on a series of canons within the three branches of Buddhism (Theravada, Mahayana, and Vajrayana), observe the concept of euthanasia, or "mercy killing", in a denunciatory manner. Such methods of euthanasia include voluntary, involuntary, and non-voluntary. In the past, as one school of Buddhism evolved into the next, their scriptures recorded through the oral messages of Buddha himself on Buddhist principles and values followed, guiding approximately 500 million Buddhists spanning the globe on their path to nirvana. In the Monastic Rule, or Vinaya, a consensus is reached by the Buddha on euthanasia and assisted suicide that expresses a lack of fondness of it's practice. It should be mentioned that Buddhism does not confirm that life should be conserved by implementing whatever is necessary to prolong death, but instead expresses that the intentional precipitation of death is ethically inadmissible in every condition one is presented in.

Vinaya
The Vinaya Tripitaka is one of three Buddhist canonical sources that makes up the Tripitaka that most relates to euthanasia. It was created to encompass a series of case laws in which Buddha provided judgement on various matters, even though the term "euthanasia" is not specifically mentioned. Monks and nuns are meant to follow the decorum that is relayed, which expresses what is considered to be wrongfully killing someone (prohibited by Buddhist precepts) by the actions of another who is conferred to follow holy orders and those who are not. Outside of Vinaya, there is no specific mention in early Buddhist texts on euthanasia. During the life of Buddha, instances occurred when monks who practiced medicine were put in situations where they had to make a decision to assist in another's suicide by physically taking their life, providing the instrument used to take their life, or allowing the person to suffer, as observed in cases written in Vinaya. The Buddha therefore included a precept in Vinaya against the termination of another human life following the discovery that monks either took their own life or requested that others kill them because they were unhappy with their body. Buddha stated that:

""Should any bhikkhu, in what is reckoned a theft, take what is not given from an inhabited area or from the wilderness — just as when, in the taking of what is not given, kings arresting the criminal would flog, imprison, or banish him, saying, "You are a robber, you are a fool, you are benighted, you are a thief" — a bhikkhu in the same way taking what is not given also is defeated and no longer in affiliation."

With this, Buddha later expanded the precept in the third parajika, adding the punishment of excommunication for life from the Sangha after recognizing a number of monks provoking a patient to believe that he should choose death over life. In this instance, the monks praised the idea that death was beautiful to a sick monk, persuading him to take an unrevealed measure to end his life. Because of the monk's expression of virtue, as he was informed by other monks, he would receive a good rebirth. As a result of these provocations, the monk stopped eating and later died.

Death and karma
Buddhists believe that life begins at the point of birth and ends when the individual dies. Throughout the course of the individual's life, between life and death, they are to be respected with dignity, regardless of their state of mental capacity or psychometric functions. What constitutes life in a body is usma (heat), ayu (vitality), and vinanna (sentiency). Among Buddhists, there is much confusion as to when one is truly dead. Some consider death to be when the brain loses its functionality. And there are those who disagree with this idea. When Buddha passed away, according to ancient texts, his 25-year personal attendant Ananda declared him as dead. However, Ananda was later corrected by a monk senior to him, claiming that Buddha was only in a severe state of yogistic stupor. During this yogic trance, Buddha lacked any vital signs of life, making it unclear for future Buddhists to determine the point of death when such physiological states exist and are relayed in Buddhist literary texts. Although at death one loses all physical possessions, leaving their family, loved ones, and achievements all behind, death does not destroy all that belongs to a person. The purification of their character through virtuous and meditative practices carries over into their next life and into their mental sequence of continuation.

One holds the belief that upon death, they are reborn and will experience life through a series of lifetimes called samsara until they can cease to desire and nirvana is obtained. In conjunction with a person's previously attained karma, their state of mind at the point of death holds great importance when the determining of what kind of rebirth is to take place. There are six realms of life in Buddhist cosmology: Hell realm (Naraka), hungry ghost (Preta) realm, animal realm (Tiracchānayoni), human realm (Manussa), demi-god realm (Asura), and god realm (Deva). Of all the realms that exist, the human realm is the most anticipated, yet the most difficult to obtain. Based on the level of karma one garners in their current lifetime, it is determined at which realm one diverges to next upon death. The first three realms (Hell realm, hungry ghost realm, and animal realm) are the most detested of the six and are meant to cause suffering, disallowing proper mental capabilities as a result of negative karma from negative acts performed during the previous life. And although more acceptable than the former, the asura and god realm remain unfavorable as they permit one ultimate happiness but prevents the opportunity for the spirit to progress. Only through good karma can one's spirit reach the human realm. Euthanasia, although it can be considered a compassionate act, is not seen in Buddhism as an act of selflessness and benevolence, but rather an act of damage masked as help, which in turn can result in negative karma. If someone is suffering as a result of sickness, it could be a result of karma, and ending their life is not likely to end their adversity, as the suffering caused by karma will only follow them after death until its energy concludes.

Compassion
Compassion (karuna) is a Buddhist value that reinforces how Buddhism views standards in medicine, which is observed in all three schools of Buddhism. Although it can be seen as morally good, committing an act through compassion is not always justified. Taking a life out of compassion to mitigate the affliction one experiences through illness or injury is an instance in which a person may feel he or she is vindicated to exploit euthanasia. However, in Buddhism and the Bodhisattva, it can create incongruities through the infringement of life. An example of an unjustified act of compassion is a case written in the Vinaya, where a convicted man is hastily executed after a monk requests the executioner to do so, as to not prolong his suffering and the sorrowful period he has to wait. A morally good scenario of compassion would be if a patient in a hospital in his or her right mind feels that their ailment is using too much of a valuable resource in limited quantities, or causing their family to spend large sums of money that is not readily available on medical bills to keep them alive. Out of morally good compassion, he or she might decide to cease the sources of life preservation without pressure from others. Had those associations been pressuring the patient to forgo further life saving treatment, this could be observed as murderous. If the patient were terminally ill and unable to eat on their own accord, it would be a requirement of his or her associations to assist them, even if intravenous feeding was necessary. Buddhism paints life in a way that is fundamentally valuable, and it should never be surrendered for any reason, whether compassion, amity, or anything of value. It would be an ill-advised way to show compassion rooted in misconception to endorse death using compassion as the reasoning

Vegetative State
According to Buddhist precepts, someone who is in a vegetative state is neither dead nor alive, but instead is said to be in some form of obscure state of mind and still a living individual. They lack the necessity to rely on outside assistance to support their ability to stay alive other than being supplemented with nutrients to keep them functioning for a significant number of years. With this, Buddhism sees someone in a vegetative state as a living, breathing life form, because the value in which one's life holds is not observed through individualism. Although Buddhism views this state of being as damaged, the individual should be treated no different than before. Both animals and humans, prior to their birth as they await in the mother's womb, have value and therefore should not have their life taken from them. However, some Buddhists are under the impression that an unconscious life, or one that lacks awareness, does not have value, which is highly debatable. Buddhism shows that even with a damaged physical organ, such as the brain, someone is still deserving of compassion because they are still capable of causing varying emotions in someone who cares for them. To end a life because of a patient's state of mind and to deny them treatment would be an act of abandonment, which would be considered irrational and unfair because Buddhists have a strong belief in compassion for all living things. A vegetative state can be considered a varied form of meditation where the sentience of someone acts in a way not ordinary to what is regularly observed. Another form of consciousness where the body does not react is that of "formless" rebirths. Due to these meditative states, it is often difficult to determine in a physical manner a state of consciousness. The state of consciousness, at the time, may be experiencing a demonstration of going through the processes of death in ultimate preparation so that once death does come, it can receive the best form of rebirth. During this process of preparation, the eyes and other sense-organs will cease to function, but the person's sense of touch, brain function, and life force lie in the heart. In Buddhism, considering the conception of meditative states, some in a vegetative state are therefore still sentient. Being in a continuous state of vegetation is not the same as the process by which one prepares for death, even though it does resemble it. The possibility exists for one to lack the function to breathe and think, but still be alive.

Alternatives to Euthanasia
Moving someone who is terminally ill into hospice care to help mitigate physical pain with pain relievers that is not intended to end their life, allowing them to pass away painless and comfortable, is a highly considerable alternative to euthanasia. Hospice care is meant to assist a person to have, what is called a "good death." When one nears death, they should be able to reflect on their life peacefully. Since 1971, the San Francisco Zen Center has offered assistance to terminally ill patients, with trained hospice employees since the inception of a hospice training program in 1987. The Buddhist Hospice Trust in the United Kingdom has been an alternative to this center since it's founding in 1987. Not only does it provide volunteers to visit those nearing death, but it provides an avenue for those who lost someone they cared about to receive counsel and sympathy and is also used as a center into researching death and mourning. The purpose of such a center is to truly alleviate any amount of anxiety one could experience when approaching death, leaving known loved ones behind, and to ensure a clear and calm state of mind. Hospice care employees therefore prefer not to allow a person to die in an anesthetized, unconscious state of mind. A positive transition to a future life is best obtained when one dies with a clear conscience, free of anger, dissent, and anxiety, and in a relaxed state of being. In Buddhism, a "good death" is facilitated by family and friends, who do their best to ensure the dying person is untroubled and uplifted.

Hello Dr. Garcia. I am not sure why my sources are still not adding up. I corrected the citations to the proper documents, but the numbers are still not correlating to the proper citations. I figured out that this is why I am unable to post. Do you have any thoughts as to how I could fix this? Maybe delete previous citations in my Sandbox? Thank you. Jawner22 (talk) 02:15, 6 April 2018 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry - I know how frustrating this must be. I would say contact the class Wiki expert (their Wiki link is on our class homepage) and ask him/her. I think that reformatting your content could, however, help you with fixing this. Alfgarciamora (talk) 18:44, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

Hi Dr. Garcia! I received a response from Shalor that the issue was resolved, but when I attempted to transfer the information again from my Sandbox to the main page in the way they stated, I still saw the same message error from the system regarding my citations. I also reached out to the gentleman who made the corrections on the page for helpful advice, so hopefully I receive some assistance soon. I do not know what else to do at this point. I am not sure if I should continue adding information and new sources until it gets resolved so that it does not make it more difficult to find a solution. What do you think? Jawner22 (talk) 18:33, 12 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Hm, that is really strange. Keep trying, because I really don't know what else to do. It's a trial and error kind of thing. Did you try copying everything to Word and just emptying your sandbox? Or maybe taking small bits of information one at a time over to the main page? Alfgarciamora (talk) 22:02, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

Tell me about it. I removed the citations from the Pallbearer additions in my Sandbox and tried transferring the information again from the Buddhism and euthanasia sections, but to no avail. Each time I take parts of a section and move it, the same notification occurs. I requested additional help from Shalor and am currently awaiting a response. The gentleman who made the previous corrections suggested that I create a new page to isolate the text I want to insert and then invite him to help me edit/correct the draft. I will try copying everything and emptying my Sandbox now. Jawner22 (talk) 23:38, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

It did not work, Dr. Garcia. What I noticed is that the numbers are not reformatting to the correct number when pasted to the main page from my Sandbox. Wikipedia is only reading what the number was based on the number in my Sandbox. Jawner22 (talk) 00:45, 13 April 2018 (UTC)