Template talk:Modern Dharmic writers

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Templates for deletion This template was considered for deletion on 2007 February 23. The result of the discussion was keep.

Contents

[edit] TfD nomination of Template:ModernDharmicWriters

Template:ModernDharmicWriters has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. --Sfacets 02:36, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Discussion about the Modern Dharmic Writers Template

[edit] Other/Syncretic

I'm not sure I see how the authors here relate to the Dharmic tradition at all. Barbara Brennan, for instance, is a faith healer and I see no influence (well, except the New Age version of "chakras") in her work. Nightngle 16:40, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

This section should be for writers who are strongly influenced by one or more of the Dharmic religions, or have synthesized some of their teachings, but who can not be classified to be either Hindu/Buddhist/Jain or Sikh. There are many writers and movements that could belong there (think for example Ayyavazhi, certain New Age movements, religious writers who mix Buddhism with Western psychology, sects of Buddhism which are not widely considered to be Buddhism, Bön Buddhism). I agree that Brennan and one or two others are a bit borderline, and I have removed these. The template is new, I believe sufficient writers for this section will be found. --Bondego 20:12, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for helping me understand your thinking. I think this is a good template to use to help people find these important authors. Nightngle 21:37, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Basis for timeframe

On what basis was the decision to restrict the years to from 1875 to present? 1875 seems like an arbitrary date, to say the least. Sfacets 02:52, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Any date would be arbitrary. What is supposed to be since 1875? Publication? Birth date? --Simon D M (talk) 16:47, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Mixing Professors, Religious leaders, and Mystics?

I wonder about the use of the template in its present form. A general template which lists anyone who has ever written about Buddhism since 1875 could get humongous. Is it writings from an academic standpoint? Writings for a religious/proselytizing standpoint? Writing novels with a Buddhist theme or tone? Authors of modern self-help books which draw from Buddhist wisdom? As you can see, there needs to be more definition to the template, otherwise it will turn into a huge mishmash of authors...Lotus 04:52, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree, the present form is just a vehicle for self-promotion. Makes it hard to keep track of spamming as well. --Simon D M (talk) 16:48, 23 January 2008 (UTC)