User:Kerenefernandez/sandbox

Wiki Project Article: Buddhist Symbolism (draft)

Different symbolism in all sects

Buddhism has other symbolism that are physical and needed for ritual such as their robes. The robes for example in the sect of Theravada are noticeably different than the robes of the other sects of Buddhism. Since Theravada is the orthodox or most oldest of the three sects, they have a different traditional layout of their Theravada robes, they carry it over their shoulders, most often showing their arm and the color for Theravada is Saffron, while other sects of Buddhism (and in different countries) will have it as a different color as well as the style. Once Buddhism spread back in the __ to China, it was seen wrong to show that much skin, and that's when the both arm long sleeve robe came in to play. Other parts of china such a tibet, have changed over time and they show both their shoulder as well as having a two piece attire rather than one.. Thereafter Japan integrated a bib along with their long sleeve robe called a Koromo. This was a clothing piece made specifically for their school of Zen and they practice in ​takahatsu which involves the monks of japan wearing a straw hat.

In all sects of Buddhism there is a ringing of a bell where a Buddhist monk rings the large bronze bell signifying the start of the evening rituals. They use the bell to detain away the bad spirits and have the Buddha protect them at the time of their ritual. Some sects call this a part of the the "Mystic Law" which is the beginning of a Buddhist ritual.

Shaving ones head is another act of ritual for which you need to complete before being a part of Buddhism and to ultimately reach nirvana. Shaving ones head merely signifies ones readiness into Buddhism.[1]

Pali language, china common language, Vajrayana language

"Evaluating an Article" Assignment

---

I identified an article that has a content gap from one of the articles provided on wiki edu:

Buddhist symbolism

1. Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you? After reading the entire article, I believe the article was on topic, but what distracted me was how this article keeps saying a lot of stuff (correct information) but no citations to back it up and in my head I was thinking someone without any knowledge of Buddhism wouldn't know if this article is credible.
2. Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added? There are not many sources (which I will eventually add) in order to find our if its outdated. The information, however is updated and correct. It gives a pretty good general explanation of the symbolism on Buddhism, just needs sources which is the content gap that is missing in this article.
3. What else could be improved? Just the sources, even Wikipedia has recognized that this article needs citations.
4. Is the article neutral? Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? I'd say this article is neutral, it's just giving basic facts about the symbolism of Buddhism and there are no heavy claims.
5. Are there viewpoints that are over represented, or underrepresented? No, it gives evenly portioned representation
6. Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article? There are only 2 links that don't work, the ones that do work, give correlated information. A problem here would be how there are only 7 sources for a topic that has a lot of information
7. 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? They're all appropriate sources and are relevant to the topic, they're neutral sources giving facts about this information, no bias.
8. What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? There has only been one conversation and it was between two people. One person put information about the article on the talk page and someone else told them that this was the talk page and its for conversations about what edits would be beneficial to the article and another portion of the talk page was someone that made an edit and was asking for advice/review of their edit but nobody responded. Seems to me so far, not many people are involved with this article.
9. How is the article rated? Is it a part of any Wiki Projects? This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale. Also, this article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
10. How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? I would say its about the same, except in Wikipedia they might be using more defined language that i'm not familiar with and I feel that would be the only difference.