Talk:Kwan Um School of Zen

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Kwan Um School of Zen was a good article nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. Once these are addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. Reviewed version: May 2, 2008

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Kwan Um School of Zen article.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

	This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Buddhism, an attempt to promote better coordination, content distribution, and cross-referencing between pages dealing with Buddhism. Please participate by editing the article Kwan Um School of Zen, or visit the project page for more details on the projects. Guidelines: Chinese Manual of Style - Naming conventions Indic Manual of Style - Naming conventions Japanese Manual of Style Korean Manual of Style - Naming conventions Tibetan Proposed naming conventions
B	This article has been rated as B-class on the quality scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance scale.
Article Grading: The article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.

[edit] Discussion of the good-article nomination

I have next to no experience in determining good articles, and absolutely no background with regard to Zen (nor any other type of Buddhism, for that matter). Nonetheless, the one thing I notice that doesn't seem to fit with the GAs I've seen is the gallery. It doesn't seem that appropriate or necessary, and as it appears to show those currently at the school, it would need continual monitoring and updating. I'd be interested in other editors' thoughts on this aspect. Lawikitejana (talk) 01:06, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] GA failure

Citation format is wrong. See WP:CITE; there should not be three sections of references.

Gallery - adds nothing to the article.

Prose - needs a lot of cleanup. MSJapan (talk) 04:09, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

"Citation format is wrong. See WP:CITE; there should not be three sections of references." There aren't three sections of references. There is one, along with a notes section. External links are not references. See WP:CITE#Shortened_notes.

This is correct. The citation format is fine, and should not be a reason for GA failure. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 22:48, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

"Gallery adds nothing to the article" Maybe you could explain how you arrived at that conclusion? As it stands, there is no way to discern how you arrived at such a conclusion.

"Prose - needs a lot of cleanup." Needs a lot of cleanup is unhelpful. Please be specific. (Mind meal (talk) 22:33, 2 May 2008 (UTC))