Talk:Buddhahood/renaming

message: To what should this article be renamed?
Buddhas
Buddha (general)
* Support - Larry Rosenfeld (talk) 16:16, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Renaming vote

message: It's been over two weeks since this vote started and ten days since the last vote.  So, I think we have a stable result. Given the double votes, I tally:
* Buddha (general) - 3 unequivocal votes of support (Tony, Rudy, myself), two "split" no-preference votes (Nat, Peter), two "split" votes with a preference for Buddhahood (Sacca, Clay)
* Buddhahood - two split votes with a preference for Buddhahood (Sacca, Clay); two split no-preference votes (Nat, Peter)
I believe that adds up to Buddha (general) being the first choice while Buddhahood will redirect to Buddha (general).  I'll also move the current Buddha (disambiguation) page to Buddha (though given the prior page history it might require admin help).  Assuming I don't mess up (which I have had a tendency to do with moves in the past), I'll try to implement this presently.
Tony, Rudy, Nat, Sacca, Peter and Clay, thanks so much for taking time to vote.  I appreciate yours and everyone else's patience with this procedure.  With metta, Larry Rosenfeld (talk) 08:16, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Final results

message: Option                        	Advantages                                                          	Disadvantages                                                                  	Google #
Buddha (general)              	                                                                    	synthetic name; "general" is ambiguous (WP precedence is militaristic)         	0
Buddhahood                    	That's the term we already use in the sidebar                       	refers to state, not being                                                     	561
Buddha nature                 	                                                                    	that's different - see Buddha-nature                                           	irrelevant
Buddhas                       	                                                                    	name does not conform to guideline                                             	780
a Buddha                      	                                                                    	name does not conform to guideline                                             	339
Buddha; and rename disamb page	does not need pipes                                                 	Not the most common usage, thus would introduce need for pipes to Gautama      	irrelevant
Buddha (Buddhism)             	                                                                    	synthetic name; still ambiguous                                                	0
Buddha (enlightened being)    	                                                                    	synthetic name                                                                 	0
Buddha (general term)         	                                                                    	synthetic name                                                                 	0
merge with Gautama Buddha     	no more hassle with disambiguation; many links are ambiguous already	would involve a lot of hard work and negotiation; possible maintenance problems	8380
merge with Types of Buddha    	(see #Types of Buddha                                               	                                                                               	
Notes: 
* "synthetic name" means that a name will not occur naturally. This means 
** It always has to be used as a piped link such as Buddha in articles. 
** It will not be entered by readers in the search box.
* "refers to state, not being" means that
** Parts of article need to be reworded
** When link is piped like "Buddha" (or redirected), readers will have to mentally adjust to the different name of the article and that the introduction not immediately mentions "Buddha". 
This is only a start, I'm sure I forgot some. Please do edit the table and the notes so they represent all considerations fairly. — Sebastian 04:34, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sebastian - nice table! nice way to organize the information thus far.  I've added some info — but please revert or reword if you feel the info I added is too wordy, bad English, misses the point or betrays an (unintentional) bias.  Thanks again, Larry Rosenfeld (talk) 17:44, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

text: ca:Buda (il·luminat), :es:Buda (concepto), :lo:ພຣະພຸດທະເຈົ້າ, :nl:Boeddha (verlichte), :sv:Buddha (titel). All other seem to use just plain "Buddha". — Sebastian 03:10, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

text: I don't think we should merge with Gautama Buddha as we will lose the distinction. I'm not sure what the name should be though. Secretlondon (talk) 20:24, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Table of options 

message: After talking some more with Larry about the modalities here we agreed to notify everyone, post it on WP:RM again, and put it up for voting here. So here goes:
* move to Buddhahood per #Table of options and the rest of the discussion above. — Sebastian 05:38, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Final vote 

message: I just realized that the term "buddhahood" doesn't even occur in the lead section. While I found this in the context of renaming the article to "buddhahood", where it is imperative that the title occur in the first sentence, it is a problem already regardless of the title, since Buddhahood redirects here. Can someone who is closer to buddhahood than me please insert the term? — Sebastian 04:38, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I took a swipe, just to get the ball rolling.  Whatever the merit of the words I used (based in part on a PTS PED search), I'm sure it will be changed before I finish this append ;-) (Hey, no argument from me -- I was just trying to get closer to the mark Sebastian set before us :-) )  Sebastian, thanks again for all your hard, excellent work, Larry Rosenfeld (talk) 07:02, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Buddhahood in lead section