"

Hi Padma and Nat!
Padma, I can understand your desire and, frankly, I see that there is precedence for it.  At a prior instantiation of this dab page (here), there was in fact a header, ""In Buddhism."" I also agree with Nat insomuch that I think there is merit in only making changes to articles when merited and I guess Nat is focusing us again on the merit of the inserted/reverted/inserted/reverted/inserted text.  I apologize then for my perhaps putting the cart before the horse.
I think the inserted text contains two significantly different types of information, so I'd like to explore their merits independently.  I'm gonna create two subheaders below to facilitate this.  (talk) 

 Bath, Batha, Tabaath 
The first inserted/reverted sentence reads:
In Islam, the Arabic text Bath, Batha and Tabaath is found in the Qu'ran 62:2 Sura Al-Jumua The Qu'ran, Sura 62:2 http://www.sacred-texts.com/isl/quran/06201.htm and is believed to be refering to Buddha.Maulana Abdul Haque Vidyarti, Muhammad in World Scriptures Vol 3 pg.1007

The (hidden) references are:
 The Qu'ran, Sura 62:2
 http://www.sacred-texts.com/isl/quran/06201.htm
 Maulana Abdul Haque Vidyarti, Muhammad in World Scriptures Vol 3 pg.1007

So, it appears to me that the reason that this sentence is pertinent to the word ""Buddha"" is because it identifies a possible referent in the Qu'ran to the Buddha (or a buddha?).  Since this article is about definitions of the word ""Buddha"" per se — and not about the historical/mythic Buddha or other buddhas — it seems to me that this sentence is inappropriate for this article.  It should go in the appropriate article (e.g., possibly Gautama Buddha or Buddhahood).  Right?  Does this make sense?  This dab page is about the word ""Buddha"" and contains pointers to articles that then provide meanings to this word.  The above sentence alludes to the meaning of ""Buddha"" as Gautama Buddha (or, again, perhaps Buddhahood, still not clear to me from the sentence -) ).  Perhaps in terms of semantic cohesion, it would best fit in Gautama Buddha in world religions?  What do y'all think?   (talk) 

 Buddha (Arabic) 
The second inserted/reverted sentence reads:
The origin of the word Buddha in Arabic is; of descent, or he roused him, and put into action. Buddha Foretels The Advent of Muhammad

The (hidden) reference is:
4. Buddha Foretels The Advent of Muhammad

Here this sentence does in fact provide a new instance of the word ""Buddha,"" separate from the existing denotations (of Gautama Buddha, Buddhahood, Buddharupa, etc.).  I think the next question becomes whether or not every instantiation of this word is worthy of an entry on this WP dab page.  For example, I previously mentioned one prior suggestion, that an entry be identified as a noteworthy instance of the word in another reliable source, such as the Encyclopedia Britannica, the Columbia Encyclopedia, dictionaries from Oxford University Press, etc.  Nat mentioned the matter of each entry on this dab page being associated with an individual WP article (e.g., Buddha Records, Buddha Air, etc.).  This sentence appears to fail to meet either of these suggested standards.  Perhaps if not worthy of an entry in the WP encyclopedia, might it be worth an entry in the Wiktionary (here)?  Does the need for encyclopedic significance make sense?  Thanks for your continued civil discourse,  (talk) "