Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Lingbao School/archive1


 * The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was not promoted by User:SandyGeorgia 21:51, 3 January 2009.

Lingbao School

 * Nominator(s): Zeus1234 (talk)

I'm nominating this article for featured article because I believe it meets all the criteria set forth. Zeus1234 (talk) 10:12, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Comments - sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 15:24, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Comments: I can't comment on the content as I lack any knowledge. Instead I'll suggest a few small improvements that might be adopted.
 * In the first para of the Rebirth section the word "Buddhist" or "Buddhism" is over-repeated (five mentions in all). A spot of rewording should deal with that.
 * "the adept's body..." An adept is a person with some particular skill or proficiency, and I'm not quite sure how this meaning suits your phrase.
 * "Sinicization" should be linked
 * "kalpa" should be linked at first rather than second mention.
 * It may be worth looking out for other specialist terms that should be either linked or explained. However, I believe the links on "sun", "moon" and "planets" are unnecessary overlinking.
 * Books in the list of references should have ISBNs

It looks an interesting and informative article. Brianboulton (talk) 18:08, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I have made the fixes you suggested. Thanks for the help!Zeus1234 (talk) 08:10, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Support &mdash; Language is fine, and the article performs well as an introductory guide to Lingbao School (origins, beliefs, and legacy). Whatever jargon (deity names and spiritual terms) are much easier to identify than before. I think this qualifies as a Featured Article. Jappalang (talk) 05:00, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Sandy Georgia (Talk) 04:21, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Done. Morenoodles (talk) 09:44, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Image review &mdash; as follows:
 * File:Ge Xuan.jpg &mdash; Source given, but it is not the page the picture exists. Please provide the link to the page where the picture is shown by this site (not the direct url of the picture).  Furthermore, date of the picture must be provided by sources to prove public domain.  Jappalang (talk) 22:15, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I located the image here but it is of smaller resolution. The page list four sources (I doubt it could be from the Records of the Three Kingdoms&mdash;Wu, so it might be from the other three), so it should be looked into from which book it came from.  Jappalang (talk) 09:43, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Removed. Jappalang (talk) 01:44, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
 * File:TaoistCharm.JPG &mdash; As above. Jappalang (talk) 22:15, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Removed. Jappalang (talk) 01:44, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
 * File:Baopuzi.JPG &mdash; As above. Jappalang (talk) 22:15, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I have corrected File:Baopuzi.JPG to conform to what is needed. Please take a look and do likewise for the other two images.  Jappalang (talk) 09:43, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I could not adequately source the other two images, so they have therefore been replaced with images that I was able to provide adequate sources for.Zeus1234 (talk) 11:50, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
 * File:Lingbao Talisman.gif &mdash; checks out fine. Jappalang (talk) 01:44, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I have replaced File:Laozi.PNG with File:Lao Tzu - Project Gutenberg eText 15250.jpg. The PNG is uploaded by an editor with a dubuous record.  The Gutenberg source is absolutely reliable (definitely expired PD).  Hence the Gutenberg image checks out fine.  Jappalang (talk) 01:44, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
 * As of this revision, images check out fine. Jappalang (talk) 01:44, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Further comments &mdash; looking into the sources, several items are cited to The Encyclopedia of Taoism, which is a tertiary source. Can references to it be reduced? Wikipedia is aiming to be a tertiary source, and it is desirable for most (if not all) of its sources to be secondary per WP:PSTS. Jappalang (talk) 02:02, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I managed to get rid of all references to the encyclopedia except for 12 and 27. These are probably present in sources I don't have access to, as I've looked in all sources available to me for any other reference.Zeus1234 (talk) 09:06, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Two references is not that major (requirements are for minimal use), so this is pretty fine. Jappalang (talk) 05:00, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I understand that this objection has been addressed and struck out, but I think it deserves a comment all the same. It strikes me as an extremely strict application, or even a misapplication, of "WP:PSTS". The "tertiary source" cited in this article is not a general-purpose work of reference that must ruthlessly or hurriedly crush knowledge and educated theory into a short space for casual or quick consumption. Instead, it's a special-purpose encyclopedia for which (or for half of which) the publisher charges $300, with signed articles; and the article cited here is written by somebody who's written other pieces that this article cites and who seems to know what he's talking about. Citing it seems perfectly proper to me. Morenoodles (talk) 09:10, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Quick-fail—1a: My head is spinning. Poorly organised ideas; repetitiveness. Here are examples just in the lead. The whole text needs a good massage. I think this should be withdrawn and put through a major clean-up.
 * "The Lingbao School is a synthesis of religious ideas that is based on Shangqing texts, the rituals of the Celestial Masters, and Buddhist practices." Somehow a little wordy. What about "The Lingbao School is a synthesis of religious ideas based on Shangqing texts, the rituals of the Celestial Masters, and Buddhist practices."? Or "The Lingbao School is a synthesis of the religious meanings in Shangqing texts, the rituals of the Celestial Masters, and Buddhist practices." Unsure.
 * "The beliefs of the Lingbao school were based on the Buddhist concept of reincarnation. The school's cosmology was also influenced by Buddhism, but still maintained many Daoist beliefs, including the idea that the world emerged from a type of qi called yuanqi, and that an apocalypse would occur that only a limited few could avoid through faith." Also? These sentences seem to contain repetitiveness/circularity. I'm confused.
 * "Laozi. Alongside Laozi," So reorganise the sentence boundaries to overcome this rep., and the noun+ing urchin, and the clumsy order of the phrases and groups: "One of its most important gods was the deified form of Laozi, alongside which were minor gods, some in charge of preparing spirits for reincarnation." That also solves the "important" but then "minor" (other minor gods) description of Laozi. Very confusing.
 * "Although reincarnation was an important concept in the Lingbao School, the earlier Daoist belief in attaining immortality remained." The logic of "although" will escape non-experts. "Likewise, Lingbao ritual was initially very similar to individual Celestial Master ritual, but went through a transformation that put more emphasis on collective rites." Why "Likewise"? I can't see the connection. Why "but"? Can a transformation put more emphasis on something, or lead to more emphasis? What a mess. Tony   (talk)  15:35, 1 January 2009 (UTC)




 * "Shanqing" is linked twice in a few seconds. More to the point, its very appearance twice at the top of the lead seems repetitive or redundant. The relationship between the first and second paras needs to be more logical and cogent.


 * I've looked over the lead, and have edited it as per your suggestions. I kept the sentence "Although reincarnation was an important concept in the Lingbao School, the earlier Daoist belief in attaining immortality remained." There is an although because reincarnation seems to be diametrically opposed to the idea of immortality. If you have the ability to reincarnate, why would you seek immortality? I hope that clarifies things.
 * As for the rest of the article, I looked it over and gave it an edit. However, it has been looked at by other editors already, so if you have any significant problems with the rest of the article, if would be very helpful if you tell me where so I can fix them. Zeus1234 (talk) 01:10, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.