Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pings Xiao

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was Delete, Nakon 05:48, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pings Xiao and Hsiao P'ing-shih[edit]

Pings Xiao (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Hsiao P'ing-shih (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Pings Xiao is an over-long article about a controversial Chinese Buddhist. The page about him on the Chinese Wikipedia is currently fully protected due to edit wars / vandalism apparently. The problem is an absence of information in English. — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 06:09, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. -- — LinguistAtLarge • Talk  06:15, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Buddhism-related deletion discussions. Clay Collier (talk) 09:50, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Looks to be notable but lacks sources. Should be tagged, and editors given the chance to source and tidy up. Being overtly long is not a reason for deletion, just judicious editing. (I'd tag it myself, but can never find them...) --Michael Johnson (talk) 06:26, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Delete: The biggest problem right now is that there is no clear assertion of notability in the article, and no English-language sources that can be used to assess the importance of the person being described. It's possible that he's somewhat influential abroad, but it's really not possible to quickly assess. Compared to someone like Hsing Yun, he doesn't have much of a presence in English-language sources, and neither do the groups that he is supposed to have started, though there is some question about the transliteration of his name- the article Hsiao P'ing-shih appears to be about the same person, and there's at least one other alternate translit (Xiaopeng Shi variants). The current article is a mess, and appears to be as concerned with defending his views on the Tathagatagarbha as anything else, including a lot of OR, misuse of sources, etc. If the article is kept, it really needs to be cut down to a stub and restructured. --Clay Collier (talk) 07:10, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
My 'delete' is no longer weak. I was holding out hope that Chinese-language sources could be found, but I feel after reading cab's remarks and seeing the SPA wikilove we've attracted that a verifiable, neutral article isn't possible at this time. Comparison to other foreign religious leaders (I mentioned a couple below, but Tep Vong and Bour Kry also came to mind) also leads me to believe his profile in the media isn't comparable with that of other notable figures outside of the English-speaking world. --Clay Collier (talk) 13:02, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. Yes Hsiao P'ing-shih points to the same article on the zh: Wikipedia so I am sure it is the same person. I was very tempted to close this discussion by redirecting Pings Xiao to Hsiao P'ing-shih since the latter article seems to be an appropriate length for the notability of this person in English language sources! Clearly, if the decision here is to keep, then the articles must be merged. — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 08:24, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete precisely one GNews archive hit in Chinese: [1] which is not primarily about him. The Google hits in Chinese are numerous but appear to be nothing but a sea of blogs, forums, video sites, booksellers, and other similar internet flotsam. The only reliable source I can find about him at all is a single news article [2] in a Taiwan local newspaper about how Hsing Yun criticised something he said. cab (talk) 09:33, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • The above GNews link[3] in Chinese is in fact exactly about Pings Xiao. It is his explanation on how Tathagatagarbha relates to modern medical science. This news is a support of his theory and notability. It should not be negatively explained. As for Hsing Yun's criticism in another link[4], that local newspaper stated that it is not correct that Hsing Yun criticized Pings Xiao's personality rather than his doctrine, and all debates should be on the teachings. It is not a negative report to Pings Xiao either.--Jack W Mayer (talk) 04:18, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep If someone can write the articles in English, there do not need to be english sources. If he';s controversial, there is obviously something to say. DGG (talk) 03:18, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • There are no Chinese sources either, as I pointed out above. On what basis exactly are editors supposed to write this article? The extremely verbose say-so of the devotee of his who has hijacked Wikipedia to write an original research essay defending Xiao's non-notable writings? cab (talk) 03:54, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      • Exactly- my concern is that for someone who is claimed to have started Buddhist foundations and given talks in the States and elsewhere, he doesn't appear to have garnered any mention in the press or academic sources. There is not a clear assertion in the article of what his notability is, and the paucity of sources in English or Chinese (referring here to things about him, not books he has written) makes it impossible for independent editors to corroborate his notability or write the article. It would be very surprising to me for a religious leader in abroad involved in a notable public dispute, or the leader of a large following, to not have any mention in the English foreign press- consider Phrarajbhavanavisudh, for instance, a person who most Westerners have never heard of, but who is still well documented in the English press because of his leadership of a large temple and role in a major scandal in Thailand, or Hsing Yun who leads a large Taiwanese following with branches abroad. This combination of factors leads me to believe that a neutral, verifiable article about him can not be written at this time. --Clay Collier (talk) 07:40, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
        • DGG's statement points out a fact: Buddhism is an oriental culture and lack of origianl English sources is its nature. If one tries to translate a new further development topic about Buddhism into English, the editors should challenge the correctness of translation and the rationale caomparing to current available English sources because this kind of new information is usually not available in English at the beginning.--Jack W Mayer (talk) 04:18, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • KEEP:There is no need to remove this article since the author has been writing a series of books on Tathagatagarbha, which undoubtedly plays an indispensable role in practicing Buddhism. Despite his different views on the dharma progagted by other contemporary Buddhist groups, The Dharma he propagated in his publications is still worthwhile being publicly studied and meticulously examined by the majority of Buddhist groups. Like Hsing Yun, Pings Xiao, also as a founder of a Buddhist group, is an equally important figure in modern Buddhism. Based on the principles of information accessability and documentary integrity, this article can be served as a valuable resource to Wiki page.--Sophia Chen (talk) 07:08, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
— Sophia Chen (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
  • KEEP: This article is clear to introduce the three-vehicle Buddhist dharma and the practicing way, I desire to watch for a long time and hope the editor to write more contents, please do not delete the Wiki page. More person to see, more person be benefits! Thanks a million! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Demi Yi (talk • contribs)
— Demi Yi (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
  • Keep Although the comtents of two pages are similar ,Pings Xiao is not equal Hsiao P'ing-shih.But anyone who has his spot in the unique noun . I mean two pages are focused on people who are individual.The two pages have their own fans . If you merge one or delete one page, someone can't find his information. In order to protect personal right , keep two page will be good method. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shower0514 (talk • contribs)
— Shower0514 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
  • KEEP: This article is clear to introduce the true Three-Vehicle Buddhist Dharma and the right practicing way, many friends of buddhist & me are desiring to read it for a long time and hope the editor to write more contents, please do not delete the Wiki page. More persons want to see, more persons be benefits! Thanks a million! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jackie Yeh (talk • contribs)
— Jackie Yeh (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
  • KEEP: I think this page is very valuable for non-Chinese speakers to learn more about Pings Xiao and his views on three-vehicle Buddism and Tathagatagarbha; why someone want to delete it? I do not think it is a good idea to merge this page with "Hsiao P'ing-shih" item, because they are quite different in spelling: most Western people would prefer "Pings Xiao" while Taiwan people would prefer "Hsiao P'ing-shih". Moreover, each page has its unique contents. So I agree with Shower0514 (Upstairs): keeping the both pages would help. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Suibingkuai (talk • contribs)
— Suibingkuai (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
Comment for some reason... no, it can't be. But seriously, are we allowed to strike sock puppet's votes? Or is it the closing admin? - Kingpin13 (talk) 08:09, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sockpuppet/meatpuppet votes are usually just noted, not usually struck unless the sockpuppet is blocked. The closing admin will take into account the sockpuppet/meatpuppet contributions. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 08:13, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep When it comes to buddhism,what really matters is definitely not notability, and correctness undoubtly should come before it. That said, it bewildered me even more for anyone to claim Pings Xiao, author of more than eighty buddhism books and founder-leader of a buddhist association with five branches and more than five thousand followers around Taiwan island (R.O.C) , as lack of notability. Lack of global notability ,maybe, but lack of notability in Taiwan ? Definitely not! Is Wikipedia a U.S.-limited knowledge treasure or a global embracing, which Taiwan included, versatile website? we will see.
ps. For anyone who needs proof of notability of Pings Xiao, please check the following search results in Taiwan's biggest online bookstore website.
http://search.books.com.tw/exep/prod_search.php?cat=all&key=%A5%AD%B9%EA%BE%C9%AEv
http://search.books.com.tw/exep/prod_search.php?cat=001&key=%A5%AD%B9%EA%A9%7E%A4h
(talk) 15:53, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
— buddhidiver (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
  • KEEP: I think we don't need to delete the wiki page, because it's very nice to learn more and it's good for the Buddhist to realize more.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.165.228.40 (talk • contribs)
— 118.165.228.40 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
  • KEEP: This article is clear to introduce the true Three-Vehicle Buddhist Dharma and the right practicing way, it is the beacon to me when I am at the bottom of my life. I have learned and gained a lot of profit from here and hope the editor to write more contents, please do not delete the Wiki page. More persons want to see, more persons be benefits! Thanks a lot!--Lucia Wilkinson (talk) 09:15, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
— Lucia Wilkinson (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
  • KEEP: I think it is valuable to keep this page because this page will offer very good knowledge for a person who will learn Buddha Dharma or know what is Buddhism correctly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chansann (talk • contribs) 09:24, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
— Chansann) (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
  • KEEP: This article is clear to introduce the true Three-Vehicle Buddhist Dharma and the right practicing way, it is the beacon to me when I am at the bottom of my life. I have learned and gained a lot of profit from here and hope the editor to write more contents, please do not delete the Wiki page. More persons want to see, more persons be benefits! BR Mavis. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mavisk (talk • contribs) 11:18, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
— Mavisk (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
  • KEEP IT:When I became as Buddhist from Christ, I learn many good concept from this teacher, When we learning should based on Buddhist books & good teacher, This page shows the teacher Pings Xiao and Hsiao P'ing-shih his concept & history of teaching that let more and more people will have a good opportunity to follow & learning, to get many many benefit on this Wikipedia Page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by YogiYao (talk • contribs) 12:42, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
— YogiYao (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
  • Keep and stubbify The article itself is crap and needs to be totally rewritten, but the subject seems to have some measure of notability. So delete almost all the unreferenced and PEACOCKy junk, slap a bunch of cleanup tags at the top, and watchlist it to make sure it doesn't get reverted to this. Someone in the future might be able to clean it up for real. rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 13:14, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • But that's the exact problem. We can't rewrite it. There's almost no third-party sources about him. All we can do is parrot what he says about himself in his own writings. cab (talk) 16:22, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: From the viewpoint of the world of non-English-language, this article is absolutely not notable at least for the moment, but from the viewpoint of the world of Chinese-language, this article is absolutely notable. Even though Wiki uses English as its official language, its readers are from all over the world. So, I suggest to keep this article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bodhi2003 (talk • contribs) 13:32, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
— Bodhi2003 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
  • KEEP: I totally agree with Bodhi2003’s opinion. Please keep this article for numerous readers.--Showmei0128 (talk) 14:09, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
— Showmei0128 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
  • KEEP : As a non-Chinese Buddhism practitioner, I have long been searching books on the Tathagatagarbha, widely believed to be the core of the Buddhism. However, due to the language incompatibility (unintelligibility), I have little understanding of essence of Tathagatagarbha and this predicament has kept me from exploring the mystery of Tathagatagarbha for ages. Luckily, one day when I keyed in "witnessed the Buddha-nature" in searching section on Wiki page, it automatically links to one of the Pings Xiao's books named "Buddha-remembrance Without Appearance" below. To my astonishment and delight, the author has such a huge collection of publications, and this indirectly demonstrates his extraordinary competence in writing and profound knowledge about Buddhism. After scrutinizing his page, I have a thorough and rudimentary grasp of what three-vehicle dharma is in Buddhism as well as Chan Schools. Besides, there is a great deal of elaboration on “nirvana” on this page and this is an uncommon but valuable resource. I strongly believe that this page can not only benefit those non-Chinese buddhists who are eager to unveil the mystery of “nirvana” but also establish a brand-new page to the discovery of pristine Buddhism. Therefore, I highly request the intactness of this page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.195.70.190 (talk) 03:08, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
— 123.195.70.190 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
  • KEEP: In terms of historical point of view, Wikipedia should keep the detail information about Pings Xiao as a good historian in Buddhism area. It is a fact that Pings Xiao has published over 100 books about Mahayana Buddhism with over ten thousand students over Taiwan and U.S.A. Even though his writings are in Chinese, I would expect English translations and others will come out soon. I truly believe that Wikipedia is not only a good source of information database but also a true honest historic tracker in different areas. I feel the success of Wikipedia on WEBs is based on the above reasons. Hectorso (talk) 05:24, 19 April 2009 (UTC)hector So[reply]
— Hectorso (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
  • Delete - Not knowing Chinese, I cannot check their facts, but I find the arguments of cab and Clay Collier convincing, that there are not enough independent, reliable sources, even in Chinese, for a verifiable, NPOV article. The flood of SPA "Keep"s do not convince me, in fact the more they come the more it seems likely that any article would be hijacked by POV-pushers and partisans and become, like the :zh article, a focus for edit wars. If and when the :zh article stabilises into something neutral and verifiable, then an article here may become possible. JohnCD (talk) 09:47, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • KEEP -"Not knowing Chinese" is not a good reason to abort someone's contribution because you take away the opportunity of our next generation to learn about the wisdom of Buddhism. This country is a highly respected place because of Freedom of speech and religions. Hectorso (talk) 07:33, 20 April 2009 (UTC)HectorSo[reply]
  • KEEP:We need to keep this page definitely because Hsiao P'ing-shih offers very valuable and true knowledge about Three-Vehicle Buddhist Dharma. He offers not only these but also the correct practicing method. Pls keep this page so more people can see it and get more benefit. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Parami95 (talk • contribs) 12:16, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
— Parami95 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
  • KEEP: As the disappearance of the doctrine of any religion constitutes an irretrievable loss to mankind, there is a desperate need for us to preserve and value any endangered cultural heritage. Take dead languages for example, occasionally a dead language is resurrected from written records. Thus, The Buddha’s right doctrines and relevant cultural background should be highly valued and preserved by means of written records. The Wikipedia, along with the collective efforts of all humans, plays a crucial role in carrying out this sacred task. The significance of keeping wholeness of all Buddhism culture can not too be re-emphasized because any loss of The Buddha’s Dharma is considered the loss of human knowledge assets. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.195.70.190 (talk) 14:41, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Duplicate Keep by 123.195.70.190 struck. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 05:33, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • KEEP: This is valuable information a oft-not discussed part of Buddhism. Therefore, it must be kept. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jyc13 (talk • contribs) 15:08, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
— Jyc13 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
  • KEEP: This is helpful knowledge assets. we need more people like him to post all value document. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Freedom speak (talk • contribs) 23:27, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
— Freedom speak (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
  • KEEP: Any contribution to Wikipedia should be highly esteemed, for it is the outstanding achievement of human wisdom. If highly preserved, it will subsequently create valuable historical documentary records for our next generations. I sincerely hope any biased judgment can be avoided in dealing with this case, and Wikipedia, a totally neutral party as we all believe, is supposed to grant the author the speech freedom to exercise his basic human right, which is universally valued in most democratic societies. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.195.70.190 (talk) 01:26, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Duplicate Keep by 123.195.70.190 struck. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 05:39, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • KEEP:We really need Pings Xiao's excellent exlpanation of the true essence of Buddhism. Through his all published articles or books the genuine Buddhism is entirely revealed. this is condusive to all the people who want to realize the authentic Buddhism taught by the Buddha. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chan.tung.chang (talk • contribs) 04:39, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
— Chan.tung.chang (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Comment: Three SPA accounts have added additional Keep comments to the AfD page. Providing links to closing admins. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 05:38, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • KEEP: I agree with Gogo Dodo that Any contribution to Wikipedia should be highly esteemed, for it is the outstanding achievement of human wisdom. Hectorso (talk) 06:54, 20 April 2009 (UTC)Hector So[reply]
— Hectorso (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
Comment: Duplicate Keep by Hectorso struck.
Comment: The above SPA is very confused by my edits to this AfD. I have made no statement of my opinion in this matter. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 16:24, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • keephuman being like listening;watching;eating;touching;feelling. All this condition match on one of them then they say: That's right! correct! good! deluxe!...etc..! I like it! Now if somebody say something against those. What's happen?? will make own just. or fight to death!! I'm right!!And someone all a time say; I'm all a time right??!! how funny isn't it????!!! poor people!!?
Do I have to keep writing??!! May be will get into result "DELETE"; Why?? "none sense"; why?? "poor English"; why?? "no English-language";"DELETE" WHY? "The current article is a mess"; What's else can cause to have a chance to "DELETE". YES??!!! Million reasons to "DELETE". IF NOT IN my side!!! Does human being see that??!!!
Oh,oh!!!! Freedom Speak!!! I love AMERICA...AMERICA.........AMERICA....... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Freedom speak (talk • contribs) 02:52, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
— Freedom speak (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
  • KEEP: I think most of the concerns are no reliable sources about Pings Xiao. The contents of this link[9] can be a good reference. A very unique insight into the whole Buddha dharma and a practice system which is a further development of both Chan and Pure Land practice ways since a thousand years ago are worthy of being disclosed in spite of whether this person is notable or not. In addition, the Google search with the keyword "平實導師" will have 15,700 hits and with the keyword "蕭平實" will have 10,900 hits. That also proves his notability. But as I know it is not necessarily dependent on things like fame, importance, or the popularity of a topic—although those may contribute. The value of his system itself is enough.--Jack W Mayer (talk) 08:15, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
— Jack W Mayer (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 17:09, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
— Yes, as Gogo Dodo mentioned, I am a new Wiki editor and do not have much experience on it. But please consider the fact and the truth rather than my background.--Jack W Mayer (talk) 03:09, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Buddhism is traditionally an Eastern culture and not popular in Western world. Therefore, Pings Xiao, as a leader of a Buddhist group in the East, is of course not well-known by the Western people. No wonder very little information in English about him can be found on the Internet. However, to be an excellent and complete worldwide knowledge database, it will be good to have this article to introduce this person and his views on Buddhism to the Western people, even though his viewpoints may be controversial. The controversy, as far as I know, is about the correctness of Buddha dharma but this should not affect the value of the existence of this article. For the first appearance of this article on Wikipedia, the length of it may be further reduced or the editor may consider to rewrite it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bodhi2003 (talk • contribs) 15:22, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
— Bodhi2003 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Pings_Xiao&oldid=1074637674"