Talk:Digambara

GA removed

The article contains copyright violations. See WP:AN#Repeated Copyright Violations that spans 100s of pages. Accordingly, I have removed the very recent GA status again.

@Fram The violation you pointed have been resolved. Please restore GA. -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 14:30, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

I gave an example, not an exhaustive list of all violations you added. A sentence like "The "first" (prathma) exposition contains Digambara versions of the universal history; the "calculation" (karana) exposition contains works on cosmology; the "behaviour" (charana) exposition includes texts about proper behaviour for monks and lay people." is also a copyvio from [1]. You need to find the edits you made, check them, and correct them. Not just the examples people provide, but all of them. GA will not be restored without a full check of the article. Fram (talk) 14:38, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

I've tried to resolve the ones I found. @Fram can you please have a relook. -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 04:19, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

@Capankajsmilyo: Instead of asking @Fram to check again and again, you need to go through line by line, reference by reference in this article, and either remove any WP:Copyvio or reword the troublesome text. You also need to clean up all instances of WP:Copyvio in all linked or related articles you have worked on, as well as all wiki articles you have edited, where you appear to have "copy-pasted" text from news articles or books, such as here (one of the links I see in ANI complaint against you). @जैन: Since you have been collaboratively helping @Capankajsmilyo to improve Jainism wiki articles, could you please help in checking and flagging/ removing/ 'rewriting in your own words' all Copyvio issues. It does not matter who did it. Clearly Jainism has long taught Asteya (non-stealing) as one of the ethical vows, and Copyvio is a form of theft; let us live up to the noble, beautiful values taught in Jainism and other Indian religions, in this and other wiki articles. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 12:54, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

@ Capankajsmilyo, @जैन: And while you are removing Copyvio, check also if the source is really supporting the text you claim it does. For instance, on page 299 of Sangave 1980, I do not see support for "The Bhattarakas of Shravanabelagola and Mudbidri belong to Deshiya Gana and the Bhattaraka of Humbaj belongs to the Balatkara Gana". Is Humbaj etc on a different page? If you thoroughly check for Copyvio, you will catch and fix these related issues. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 13:30, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

@Ms Sarah Welch It's little confusing. I have to write what's written in ref and still not use the words. Either I can write what's in there or use my own words. How can I do both? For eg., the terapanthi worship with ashtadrava (eight things). Now if I write that, you might say that its not in the ref whereas if I write the names of those things only then you would say that I am a copyright violator. Please help, what to do with some elaboration / explaination on the extent / limits of using the words within / beyond ref. -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 14:17, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

@Capankajsmilyo: The answer is simple. Rewrite what the source states, in your own words. For example:

If the source states (I will use what @Fram flagged above): "The first (prathma) exposition contains Digambara versions of the universal history; the calculation (karana) exposition contains works on cosmology".

Wrong thing to do: Copy and pasting it. That is WP:Copyvio.

Correct thing to do: You can reword and restate the same thing in a zillion ways. First example: "The Digambara descriptions of the universal history are found in the first (prathma) exposition, while the cosmology are discussed in the calculation (karana) exposition". Second example (better IMHO): "The Digambara texts present universal history and cosmology, the former is in the first (prathma) exposition, the latter in the calculation (karana) exposition". And so on.

If you can't rewrite in your own words, stop editing wikipedia. Don't copy-paste or plagiarize text from any copyrighted source. Such behavior does not help improve this article, or other wikipedia articles, it damages it and also shows Jainism/etc in bad light. @Fram:, @Diannaa: please correct me if I am wrong. Is there a way to put @Capankajsmilyo on watch, and are there resources within wikipedia such as WP:TEAHOUSE or something that can help @Capankajsmilyo. He seems like a diligent contributor, willing to learn. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 15:22, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

You are correct, Sarah Welch. All content we add to this wiki (other than brief quotations, where absolutely necessary) should be written in our own words. Capankajsmilyo, please read WP:copyrights and WP:plagiarism and let us know when you have done so. Please don't edit any more until you do this. Any further copyright violations will result in you being blocked from editing. — Diannaa (talk) 15:38, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Merge

I propose to merge Mula Sangha and Kashtha Sangha into this article, since both do not exist now. Merging them would help enhance all the three topics since there is not enough sourced content on the two. -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 06:53, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

No. Please don't merge. 1. Mula Sangha and Kashtha Sangha are not sects, but orders. 2. Mula Sangha still exists. All Jain munis/kshullakas belong to Mula Sangh (except those belonging to Ganini Gyanmatiji's order, since the Agrawals were historically associated with Kashtha Sangh). The temples belonging to Kashtha Sangha still exist. Malaiya (talk) 01:47, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

Digambara Terapanth

I further propose to merge Digambara Terapanth into this article and leave a redirect, as there is not enough content to qualify a separate article. Capankajsmilyo (talk) 10:13, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

Digambara Terapanth is no longer practiced sect. All the followers have migrated to Bisapanthi or "Pure Terapanthi" ( also named as "Kanji Panthi"). So, reference should be altogether removed and replaced with "Pure Terapanthi" sect, as this section supposedly should only mention "live sects". Realphi (talk) 16:18, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Digambara/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Redtigerxyz (talk · contribs) 17:52, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	Lead as a summary needed.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).
	2c. it contains no original research.	"Relics found from Harrapan excavations like seals depicting Kayotsarga posture, idols in Padmasana and a nude bust of red limestonegive insight about the antiquity of the Digambara tradition" is pure OR. There is no mention of Digambara on the page. "he presence of gymnosophists (naked philosophers) ..." no mention of have preserved the ancient Śramaṇa practice "after attaining Kevala Jnana (omniscience), arihant (omniscient beings) are free from human needs like hunger, thirst, and sleep..." Reference talks about Mahavira in specific, not arihant. Citation not found tags already by other users
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.	"dig (directions) and ambara (sky), referring to those whose garments are of the element that fills the four quarters of space" is too close to Zimmer's "those whose garment (ambara) is the element that fills the four quarters of space (dig)".
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	Important topics missed: History including The Great schism at the time of Chandragupta Maurya, Council of Valabhi Differences with Śvētāmbara sect: more details on Mallinatha (gender), views on Nuns, martial status of Mahavira, iconography (Digambara - naked, downward glance, no ornaments v/s Shvetambara) More detail on Mula sangha and other sects. Distribution in regions/Numbers
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	See OR part.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
	7. Overall assessment.