571:
what goes on behind the scenes and from my viewpoint I think you could understand my frustration. I am not adding any advertisements or blatantly flamebait material but I think I am treated as such sometimes. I have been playing around editing here for over 4 years but not until recently have I been actually writing any articles. Of the 9 that I have written I have had to fight for five of them very hard. If that is to be expected then so-be-it. Once again I dont mean to be difficult I was just answering the comment that I should really say what I feel.
512:. Its not religious persecution at all, its applying the same rules for notability to Zen centres as to other categories which don't have a separate article for every example (books, albums, tv shows, etc. etc.) So far the only claim to notability seems to be the centre's age, which is both in doubt (external sources indicate the centre is much newer, though founded by the same group as earlier closed centres) and significantly younger than other examples. --
608:. I can see how it would look like a church sort of place but in Buddhism they are something else. It is difficult to ascertain the differences and being I have never been to a Jewish Temple or Muslim one I cannot speak to the differences. However, if you check on the list I linked youll see a huge variety of ones that also have their own wiki page that I have had nothing to do with. I do appreciate the kind suggestion though thank you.
800:: The actual age isn't so very impressive, really. 1972 was the year that all of those Alan Watts books touting Zen were out, so the impressive thing here is merely that this one has kept a single name going (not a single center). There is no indication that this center has achieved notoriety except within the rarefied air of "Zen centers in the US." I'd like to see something that this center has
590:), with only those likely to be accepted as notable by the wider wikipedia community having their own page. This could also provide a useful framework where a short piece on a centre could be developed without likely deletion before being moved to a separate article once it aquires sufficient length and reasons for notability. This is perhaps a plan to discuss with the WikiProject Buddhism --
960:. Looks like quite a reasonable article. No issues with WP:N. WP:N does not require extraordinary claims (oldest/biggest/fattest), it just requires coverage in suitable sources. The article seems to be part of an effort to create complete coverage of Zen/Buddhism, an effort that should be applauded, and which is well within our ambitions (see
863:, perhaps? (i.e. "There is no indication that this center has achieved notoriety except within the rarefied air of 'Zen centers in the US.'") I think you meant notability, by the way, as notoriety is negative attention. Also, there does seem to be at least a small pattern to the the kinds of articles nominated for deletion by Corvus Cornix, i.e.
447:. When nominated for AfD, and when I !voted delete above, this article was definitely delete-worthy. It's now been brought up a few notches, and although I'm still not 100% convinced of it's notability, there are many hundreds of articles less notable that are in no danger of being deleted, so keep. Just.
570:
Sorry Bruce it was not a total comment directed at you. I am just very frustrated and trying to answer all of the uphill battles I am facing by trying to work on articles. This has not been the first article I have written to only have it speedy 30 seconds later. Being I am not an admin I have 0 idea
945:
Notability is determined by the fairly objective measure of coverage in independent sources, not by subjective opinions about what is or isn't important. With five decent sources (and a letter to the editor, but I'll let that slide), I'd say the article passes this criterion. If WikiProject
Buddhism
925:
Zen
Buddhism did not really come to America until the late 60's. Its recent in American history and just a blink in Earths history, but to people interested in Western Zen Buddhism that is a very long time. Even tough Buddhism is 2500 years old (older if your a practicioner), Western Zen (mostly due
981:
I notice 'one of the oldest continuously-running Zen centers' and the fact that there are newspaper references. It is disappointing that the writers of the article had to rely so much on the previous history of the building where the center was located to establish importance; I'd rather know about
793:
The reworked article goes someone towards answering my concerns about its actual age (it does at least mention relocation. I'm still unsure if this really counts as being the same centre or just a different centre with the same founders though). The involvement of the first female Rinzai adds a
128:
Tagged for failure to provide any claims of notability and speedy deleted for that reason. Original creator immediately recreated the article. He claims that WikiProject
Buddhism is planning on creating an article on every Buddhist temple in the world. They ought to start by proving how this
724:
Its being quoted here because its being used as a keep reason by the article's author, I'm posting the link precisely as a way to point out its considered an argument to avoid. I actually think a church or synagouge would have a harder time of it; I think there are more of those, so notability
555:
Sorry you feel I'm being a smart arse, not my intent. The 'othersuffexists' and other similar pages exist to document standard policies and guidelines (if you read it you'll see its completely neutral and has no anti-buddist bias), inserting the link is simply the best way of explaining those
530:
Ok I am relatively new to this editing thing. It is a learning process. Instead of lifting a person up that has an obvious desire to do good work here on wikipedia, the general feeling I get is one of obtuse indifference. This article has no less merit than any of the hundreds listed on the
556:
policies without having to type it all out longhand every time and also emphasises that they're standard policies, not a biased opinion. As it happens my original insertion of this into this page was a direct cut and paste of a response I recieved myself once. --
585:
Hmmm. A suggestion for you. I think its unlikely you'll get every Zen centre accepted as sufficiently notable for their own article. What seems more likely to suceed is a page with basic details of all centres (perhaps done in a similar style to
535:. This is not a Christian/Muslim/Judaism or any one of those faiths place. Being there are very few Buddhist admins I do not feel represented in my plight to save an article. All I have is reference to other articles and I get the smart ass
493:
If you have an accusation to make, make it - nobody likes mealy-mouthed comments and they make the person making them look weak. If you have something to say, have the strength of your convictions and say it - otherwise don't.
982:
its significance within
American Buddhism. Still, there are enough references that I believe the article could be improved. If nothing changes in six months I think another AfD might be considered.
326:
The sources I can find indicate the actual centre is not nearly as old as the article claims. The current centre seems to be merely the lastest in a long line used by a small group of people.
633:
121:
864:
305:
It doesn't really fit in the main
Buddhism article. If you check around wikipedia you will see several Zen Centers and Buddhist temples, each with their own page.
475:
many of which probably have little or no more notability over this center. Is this a form of religious persecution? Of course not that would be ridiculous
88:
83:
92:
908:
Good point the home is an historical landmark that the center won 2 awards for their restoration. I will have to work this into the article somehow.
691:
Relax! I wasn't refering to your nomination. I was refering to the way the concensus was forming in this discussion. Notice I said "would probably
75:
587:
889:
17:
740:
381:
341:
703:
648:
636:, so I have no idea why that's always quoted. But I do think that there's a valid argument to be made that this afd suffers from
256:
235:
629:
536:
509:
363:
1009:
36:
991:
973:
952:
935:
917:
901:
876:
839:
813:
785:
764:
744:
713:
686:
658:
617:
599:
580:
565:
548:
521:
503:
484:
464:
437:
407:
385:
345:
314:
297:
266:
225:
204:
192:
165:
146:
79:
57:
156:
no evidence of notability presented - what "notability" is asserted just seems to be an attempt to get around CSD. --
946:
can write articles of this quality (as opposed to mere directory-style listings) on other temples, then let them.
888:
Keep. A run-of-the-mill church could not claim to be custodians of a potentially historic building. The centre's
777:
by Mind meal. Author, note well what was done to save this article, and apply those lessons in future editing. --
539:
comment. This is supposed to be part of a much larger project and I am not being represented. That is how I feel.
356:
1008:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
931:
913:
613:
576:
544:
532:
480:
472:
403:
395:
310:
221:
213:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
420:, I feel that it still deserves deletion (though AfD is the right way to go - probably doesn't fail A7 now).
831:
678:
138:
728:
369:
329:
499:
176:
161:
71:
63:
809:
736:
595:
561:
517:
377:
337:
663:
I resent your accusation and want to point you to my nomination, which specifically says that this is
987:
851:
with notability, anyway? Notability is established by sources, not by being "special." Might I refer
822:
Gotta agree. I don't see how being 36 years old makes something notable just on the basis of that.
708:
653:
353:
261:
969:
927:
909:
872:
760:
609:
572:
540:
476:
399:
306:
293:
217:
897:
856:
824:
782:
671:
448:
421:
277:
131:
53:
212:
If you look down the page of this project you will see all the article we still have to write.
495:
157:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
637:
852:
805:
732:
591:
557:
513:
373:
333:
774:
240:
If there's a source for it being one of the oldest Zen
Centers in the US then it should be
983:
698:
643:
284:, which is properly referenced in the article. By oldest Zen center, the key word here is
251:
961:
417:
965:
868:
756:
289:
860:
893:
778:
457:
430:
49:
109:
867:. Please see the very first version, and decide whether or not it deserved AFD? (
640:. A comparable church or synagouge of church would probably fare a lot better. --
948:
471:
by deleting this article you must also delete every temple/center listed on the
605:
416:- non-notable. Being the admin that originally speedied this for failure at
1002:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
755:
Article has been reworked and notability has been established. (
508:
No, not everything has to be deleted because one thing is. See
892:
seems to have a claim to notability that could be researched.
634:
Knowledge (XXG):Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions
604:
Thanks Bruce, I did that article already a few weeks ago:
238:
if it's truly one of the oldest Zen
Centers in the US.
175:
Agree; I'm coming up blank as to why it is so notable.
116:
105:
101:
97:
393:
Finally should every one on this list be deleted also?
129:
center is more notable than a run-of-the mill church.
865:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/George Bowman
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
1012:). No further edits should be made to this page.
666:no more notable than a run-of-the mill church
8:
804:that will make outsiders refer to it.
725:becomes more difficult to establish.
588:List of Doctor Who monsters and aliens
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
794:second reason for notability though.
288:, which is what the source says. (
24:
773:in recognition of the excellent
366:is not a valid keep criterion.
1:
847:Tell me what age even has to
236:Buddhism in the United States
1029:
992:21:20, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
974:20:35, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
58:11:00, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
953:19:47, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
936:03:01, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
918:02:03, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
902:20:00, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
877:19:01, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
840:18:05, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
814:15:25, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
786:06:05, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
765:05:38, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
745:02:16, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
714:05:55, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
687:03:33, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
659:02:02, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
618:02:38, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
600:02:23, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
581:02:08, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
566:01:59, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
549:01:50, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
522:01:47, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
504:01:36, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
485:01:29, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
465:21:32, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
438:01:24, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
408:01:19, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
386:01:26, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
357:Zen Center of Los Angeles
346:01:10, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
315:00:56, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
298:06:05, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
267:00:49, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
226:00:41, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
216:Thanks for being tolerant
205:00:33, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
166:00:25, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
147:00:22, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
1005:Please do not modify it.
533:List of Buddhist temples
473:List of Buddhist temples
396:List of Buddhist temples
214:User:Mind meal/Sandbox26
32:Please do not modify it.
72:Zen Center of Syracuse
64:Zen Center of Syracuse
926:to WWII) is very new.
352:Here are two of many
890:letter to the editor
354:Rochester Zen Center
630:WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS
537:WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS
510:WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS
364:WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS
276:Yes, the source is
628:Its funny because
278:James Ishmael Ford
747:
731:comment added by
695:a lot better." --
388:
372:comment added by
348:
332:comment added by
1020:
1007:
838:
834:
827:
726:
706:
701:
685:
681:
674:
651:
646:
462:
454:
435:
427:
367:
327:
259:
254:
202:
200:
199:
190:
145:
141:
134:
119:
113:
95:
44:The result was
34:
1028:
1027:
1023:
1022:
1021:
1019:
1018:
1017:
1016:
1010:deletion review
1003:
837:
832:
825:
823:
704:
699:
684:
679:
672:
670:
649:
644:
632:is included in
458:
455:
450:
431:
428:
423:
282:Zen Master Who?
257:
252:
201:
197:
195:
193:
177:
144:
139:
132:
130:
115:
86:
70:
67:
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
1026:
1024:
1015:
1014:
997:
995:
994:
976:
955:
939:
938:
928:Golgofrinchian
920:
910:Golgofrinchian
905:
904:
885:
884:
883:
882:
881:
880:
829:
817:
816:
795:
788:
768:
749:
748:
721:
720:
719:
718:
717:
716:
676:
625:
624:
623:
622:
621:
620:
610:Golgofrinchian
602:
573:Golgofrinchian
552:
551:
541:Golgofrinchian
527:
526:
525:
524:
506:
488:
487:
477:Golgofrinchian
469:
468:
467:
449:
422:
410:
400:Golgofrinchian
390:
389:
360:
359:
318:
317:
307:Golgofrinchian
302:
301:
270:
269:
232:Merge/Redirect
228:
218:Golgofrinchian
207:
194:
136:
126:
125:
66:
61:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1025:
1013:
1011:
1006:
1000:
999:
998:
993:
989:
985:
980:
977:
975:
971:
967:
963:
959:
956:
954:
951:
950:
944:
941:
940:
937:
933:
929:
924:
921:
919:
915:
911:
907:
906:
903:
899:
895:
891:
887:
886:
878:
874:
870:
866:
862:
858:
857:Corvus cornix
854:
850:
846:
843:
842:
841:
836:
835:
828:
826:Corvus cornix
821:
820:
819:
818:
815:
811:
807:
803:
799:
796:
792:
789:
787:
784:
780:
776:
772:
769:
766:
762:
758:
754:
751:
750:
746:
742:
738:
734:
730:
723:
722:
715:
712:
711:
710:
707:
702:
694:
690:
689:
688:
683:
682:
675:
673:Corvus cornix
668:
667:
662:
661:
660:
657:
656:
655:
652:
647:
639:
635:
631:
627:
626:
619:
615:
611:
607:
603:
601:
597:
593:
589:
584:
583:
582:
578:
574:
569:
568:
567:
563:
559:
554:
553:
550:
546:
542:
538:
534:
529:
528:
523:
519:
515:
511:
507:
505:
501:
497:
492:
491:
490:
489:
486:
482:
478:
474:
470:
466:
463:
461:
456:
453:
446:
442:
441:
440:
439:
436:
434:
429:
426:
419:
415:
411:
409:
405:
401:
398:
397:
392:
391:
387:
383:
379:
375:
371:
365:
362:
361:
358:
355:
351:
350:
349:
347:
343:
339:
335:
331:
325:
324:
316:
312:
308:
304:
303:
299:
295:
291:
287:
283:
279:
275:
272:
271:
268:
265:
264:
263:
260:
255:
247:
243:
239:
237:
233:
229:
227:
223:
219:
215:
211:
208:
206:
203:
191:
188:
184:
180:
174:
171:
170:
169:
168:
167:
163:
159:
155:
149:
148:
143:
142:
135:
133:Corvus cornix
123:
118:
111:
107:
103:
99:
94:
90:
85:
81:
77:
73:
69:
68:
65:
62:
60:
59:
55:
51:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
1004:
1001:
996:
978:
957:
947:
942:
922:
848:
844:
830:
801:
797:
790:
770:
752:
709:(yada, yada)
697:
696:
692:
677:
665:
664:
654:(yada, yada)
642:
641:
496:Fredrick day
459:
451:
444:
432:
424:
413:
412:
394:
322:
320:
319:
286:continuously
285:
281:
280:in his book
273:
262:(yada, yada)
250:
249:
245:
241:
231:
230:
209:
196:Call me MoP!
186:
182:
178:
172:
158:Fredrick day
153:
151:
150:
137:
127:
45:
43:
31:
28:
853:Utgard Loki
806:Utgard Loki
733:BrucePodger
727:—Preceding
592:BrucePodger
558:BrucePodger
514:BrucePodger
443:Changed to
374:BrucePodger
368:—Preceding
334:BrucePodger
328:—Preceding
984:EdJohnston
606:Zen Center
244:. If not,
966:SmokeyJoe
869:Mind meal
757:Mind meal
445:Weak Keep
290:Mind meal
894:Canuckle
779:Dhartung
741:contribs
729:unsigned
460:Islander
433:Islander
382:contribs
370:unsigned
342:contribs
330:unsigned
122:View log
50:Tikiwont
638:WP:BIAS
89:protect
84:history
949:Iain99
798:Delete
775:WP:HEY
705:crewer
650:crewer
414:Delete
323:delete
258:crewer
246:Delete
189:uppets
181:aster
173:Delete
154:delete
117:delete
93:delete
979:Keep.
964:. --
962:WP:5P
923:Reply
845:Reply
418:WP:A7
274:Reply
120:) – (
110:views
102:watch
98:links
16:<
988:talk
970:talk
958:Keep
943:Keep
932:talk
914:talk
898:talk
873:talk
861:WP:N
855:and
833:talk
810:talk
802:done
791:Keep
783:Talk
771:Keep
761:talk
753:Keep
737:talk
700:brew
693:fare
680:talk
645:brew
614:talk
596:talk
577:talk
562:talk
545:talk
518:talk
500:talk
481:talk
452:Talk
425:Talk
404:talk
378:talk
338:talk
311:talk
294:talk
253:brew
248:. --
242:Kept
222:talk
210:Keep
162:talk
140:talk
106:logs
80:talk
76:edit
54:talk
46:Keep
859:to
669:.
234:to
990:)
972:)
934:)
916:)
900:)
875:)
849:do
812:)
781:|
763:)
743:)
739:•
616:)
598:)
579:)
564:)
547:)
520:)
502:)
494:--
483:)
406:)
384:)
380:•
344:)
340:•
321:*
313:)
296:)
224:)
185:f
164:)
152:*
108:|
104:|
100:|
96:|
91:|
87:|
82:|
78:|
56:)
48:.
986:(
968:(
930:(
912:(
896:(
879:)
871:(
808:(
767:)
759:(
735:(
612:(
594:(
575:(
560:(
543:(
516:(
498:(
479:(
402:(
376:(
336:(
309:(
300:)
292:(
220:(
198:☺
187:P
183:o
179:M
160:(
124:)
114:(
112:)
74:(
52:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.