Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Buddhism/archive1

Buddhism

 * I've added more pictures, so now all the unresolved objections have been resolved I think it can go back to here. Ludraman | Talk 23:32, 27 Mar 2004 (UTC)

One of the best Wikipedia articles I have seen. Very comprehensive, and NPOV (which is something extremely important in religious articles) Ludraman 19:14, 10 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * Not opposed, I like the article, but I think it would benefit from at least a couple of images. Bkonrad 21:07, 10 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * Images exist now. Kingturtle 18:50, 20 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * I second that, and I haven't even looked at the article. Buddhism (particularly for outsiders) is recognized particularly by its many images of Buddha. Sam Spade 01:51, 11 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * I'm not disagreeing with ye, but it has a picture of the Buddha, what other pictures would you have? Ludraman | Talk 10:19, 14 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * More? ;) Sam Spade 19:46, 20 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * Done! Ludraman | Talk 23:32, 27 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * Good work, :D Sam Spade 17:42, 28 Mar 2004 (UTC)


 * Support. Indeed a very comprehensive and balanced article, better than many books on the market. Luis Dantas 02:20, 11 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * Reluctant. While it looks comprehensive I still find it a bit rough, and patchy. Most of the grossly pov stuff was been weeded out recently, but it could do with some work. I think we should wait. mah&#257;b&#257;la 12:55, 11 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * Support. Looks really good, if somewhat too extensive and maybe too academic on details.  A good NPOV writing. Revth 06:09, 12 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * YEA. Because of its emphasis on psychology and philosophy, this religious article has proved to be as unbiased as a religious article could be. Usedbook 20:16, 12 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * This article is not yet ready . I support this now.Kingturtle 19:49, 14 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * Support. It is good enough. We may all have little niggles, but its a large article already, with a lot of attention going into it. 20040302 21:49, 24 Mar 2004 (UTC)