Talk:List of Buddhists

message: If so, why does it not say that on the Kublai page? Saimdusan Talk|Contribs 00:49, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Good question. If I remember rightly, he was a pupil of the Sakyapa teacher Phagpa, but that would have to be checked. Peter jackson (talk) 11:19, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Kublai was a Buddhist?

message: :NatKrause: also, I think for most people Daisaku Ikeda is pretty non-controversially a Buddhist teacher -- dispute on talk, please
::He is a founder (and honorary president) of Soka Gakkai International, "a controversial Buddhist or Buddhist-influenced group". I am not disputing whether Daisaku Ikeda is Buddhist teacher (this is interestic matter in itself, as there are different opinions), and whether SGI is a Buddhist religious group. Emphasis is on "controversial". Ikeda founded SGI, which was involved in various controversial matters and himself resigned over scandallous accusations. For more info on SGI controversies, please google for Soka Gakkai Victims Association. I therefore moved Ikeda back to "controversial Buddhists". NatKrause, I think Ikeda qualifies by reputation. If you meant controversies related to whether a particular religious leader teaches Buddhism and not something else, let's discuss further. I think the problem is with the name of this category. ExitControl
::Daisaku Ikeda is definitely controversial.  That SGI teaches or practices Buddhism is by no means a consensus, much on the contrary.  Both buddhists and SGI members are all too aware that the teachings of, say, Tibetan Buddhism, Jodo Shinshu, Zen and Theravada are far closer to each other than either to Daisaku Ikeda's - it is actually a point of pride for SGI.  We just went through this on a brazilian Soto Zen list I participate. Luis Dantas 08:26, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: re Daisaky Ikeda

message: Does the opening sentence "A number of noted individuals have been Buddhists" convey anything useful? It almost suggests Buddhism is so small that it is remarkable that it should attract "noted individuals" Shantavira 18:17, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Opening sentence

message: In order to facilitate some kind of rational standards for inclusion or exclusion, I have decided to make a list of sources demonstrating why we believe that a given celebrity is or is not fairly described as a Buddhist. Other editors, please contribute:
In:
* Ernestine Anderson, , 
* Laurie Anderson , [www.cc.gatech.edu/~jimmyd/laurie-anderson/work/interviews/cage.html]
* Roberto Baggio - ,  
* Fabien Barthez , 
* Orlando Bloom - , 
* Jackie Chan -  <--- can't find any other sources
* Leslie Cheung - 
* Leonard Cohen, 
* Michael Everson - 
* Richard Gere 
* Philip Glass 
* Ron Glass 
* Herbie Hancock  
* Goldie Hawn 
* Jet Li 
* George Lucas - iffy, but I left him on the grounds of his self-description as a "Buddhist Methodist" 
* Anita Mui - 
* Keanu Reeves - , 
* Steven Seagal 
* Patti Smith, singer , 
* Michael Stipe - 
* Oliver Stone - 
* Tina Turner  
* Alice Walker ,
* Naomi Watts  "I have some belief but I am not a strict Buddhist or anything yet."
**She says she's not a strict Buddhist or anything. Is this a citation in favour of her being a Buddhist? - Nat Krause(Talk!) 21:03, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Celebrity Buddhist master citation list

message: I was doing some thinking a while ago about what to do with the list of celebrities on this page (as seen here. I've never really felt very comfortable with it—it always seemed like there was a lot of room for misinformation and exaggeration. This has been demonstrated by the steady stream of questionable additions to the list: the insistence on including Uma Thurman, for example. Basically, what I've decided is that the list so far has not really been attempting to meet encyclopedic standards for referencing, but it should. Odd as it may seem, our "celebrity Buddhists" list really is supposed to be part of an encyclopedia—Wikipedia:Cite sources does apply. Therefore, sooner or later, we should provide reputable, encyclopedia-quality sources for each of the names listed, proving that that person is a Buddhist, or else remove them. I'll do this myself eventually, although I'm not sure when I'll get around to it. I've already gotten started by removing some names that seemed particularly questionable. - Nat Krause(Talk!) 21:04, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Pursuant to this end, I have gone through and removed every name from the list of celebrities and policitians if that person's Wikipedia article doesn't mention Buddhism—which was most of them. I also removed a few names where Buddhism was mentioned, if I thought the claim seemed iffy. Few of people have citations showing them to be public Buddhists, and I'll best almost none of them have encyclopaedia quality citations. Therefore, they can be removed from a list like this without really needing any further explanation. - Nat Krause(Talk!) 22:18, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

text: No, I don't really see that as a solution. "Celebrities who are or claim to be Buddhists" is marginally an encyclopaedic topic, but "celebrities who might be or kind of are Buddhists" just plain isn't. Instead, I urge the editors of this page to revert with extreme prejudice any further additions to the list that don't have credible sources cited. Note: citations should appear in the main article, not on the talk page, contrary to the system I was trying to implement earlier. - Nat Krause(Talk!) 22:18, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed.  The cat needs to be weeded.  Kasreyn 04:16, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

text: I would just hope that moderate Buddhists and those that don't meet your expectations of discipline are not discriminated against. The celebrity list shouldn't exclude individuals that choose not to preach excessively about their personal beliefs in public. Usedbook 07:24, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Thoughts about the direction of this page

message: I have returned Johnny Lovewisdom to the list. Per the afterword to his book, available at  he was a Buddhist.
Mdbrownmsw 17:20, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Johnny Lovewisdom 

message: I presume this list is only supposed to cover historically real persons, not mythical ones like Vimalakirti. I'm not sure any of those mentioned under Indo-Greeks actually existed. Peter jackson 16:06, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Historicity 

message: I completely agree with Violetriga that we should hold entries in the "celebrity" and other similar sections of this article to normal standards of citation. However, I'm not sure it makes sense to apply these rules to sections that are specifically about Buddhist teachers. These are people who would not be notable in the first place if they were not Buddhists. For instance, this edit has removed the current Dalai Lama from the list. Isn't this like requesting a source that the Pope is Catholic?—Nat Krause(Talk!·What have I done?) 21:32, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I take your point, particularly for the current Dalai Lama, and am all for them being readded.  The problem is that it is too easy to include a name on a list such as this and we should always try to reference entries especially those of living people.  For each of those people that I removed a source should be rather easy to find - if it's not then we should question their notability.  violet/riga (t) 22:24, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You make a reasonable case. As a start in this direction, I have re-added the current Dalai Lama, with a citation.—Nat Krause(Talk!·What have I done?) 04:15, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citations 

message: What do we do about him? The Buddhist scriptures say he was a Buddhist, but the Jain scriptures say he was a Jain. I suspect he was a politician. Peter jackson (talk) 11:35, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bimbisara 

message: ive rewritten the lede, added a dynamic list tag, some hidden text as a guide to adding names. i will now trim out nonnotable names per standard requirements for lists like this. feel free to add back any names that have references indicating notability and evidence for buddhist belief or practice. im sorry about having to remove the historic names in the first section, but WP cannot be used as a general research tool. the documentation must be here, not elsewhere. also, i would direct attention to List of Buddhist writers, orphaned and sad. It either needs to be expanded, and linked from here, or merged back into this article.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 07:22, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Can you explain what you mean by "im sorry about having to remove the historic names in the first section, but WP cannot be used as a general research tool. the documentation must be here, not elsewhere." Also you removed some important ones with articles that the wikipedia search function gives when you put in the names, so please check this next time. Thanks Mitsube (talk) 07:52, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I was sorry that i had to remove names that are likely to be notable (who would add spurious names here of all places), but that dont have references, unlike some names on other lists that will never be notable. I have observed list articles that were used to help in researching or looking up peoples favorite subjects, where they had never actually indicated notability for many of the names added. the person maintaining the articles actually wrote that, and didnt seem to understand the purpose of list articles. and im sorry i didnt do searches for names. I could have done that. If you think i was too bold with some of these changes, please revert(i see you have barnstars for work with buddhism from an editor i respect). i wont remove any redlinks you think may garner articles. i did check some names that mentioned being students of another teacher, but that student wasnt mentioned in their teachers article, so i removed them. but, i could have been more thorough and made more of an effort with some of the names, even though the original editor should have done that as well. i hope my intent is clearer now. thanks for feedback.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 08:10, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that overall your changes were good. I was unsure about removing some of the names from the first section because I am somewhat familiar with many of the ones you removed and they could in theory have articles about them. I will leave it as it is unless I write articles about them, which I probably won't. Also asking you to search for each name may have been asking too much for so many names. Good work! Mitsube (talk) 07:46, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup 

message: This section  which lists contemporary teachers currently includes only ordained teachers, who are mostly from S.E. Asia. It includes no teachers from the United States that teach within that tradition though not under monastic vows, such as those associated with the Insight Meditation Society (Jack Kornfield, Gil Frondsal or Leigh Brasington). To facilitate their inclusion some sub-categories may be required of either lineages/traditions/hybrid traditions or by nationality (as in the Zen list). Boaby (talk) 21:32, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Organising criteria for Buddhist Teachers 

message: Should we not add Steve Jobs to the list of American Buddhists? His wiki page lists clearly (and evidence shows) that he was a a Buddhist?
:Oh, yes, I'd meant to do that and got distracted. Yworo (talk) 00:25, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Steve Jobs? 

message: Excuse me for bikeshedding, but why wouldn't the proper title be "List of notable buddhists" when the first paragraph of the article says that it "is a list of notable buddhists"?
193.11.138.88 (talk) 02:30, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contradiction between title and first paragraph? 

message: I'd like to add a section for Indian Buddhists; this could include, for example, the Mahasiddhas like Naropa, Tilopa, Kankala, Mekhala, etc. What are your thoughts and suggestions about this? Best, AD64 (talk) 07:36, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Indian Buddhists?

message: I feel the scope of the article is becoming unclear. Are we adding fictional characters to this list as well now? Proposal: only real-life confirmed Buddhists on this list.--Farang Rak Tham (talk) 06:00, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Scope article unclear 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on List of Buddhists. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120218115040/http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_5-2-2005_pg4_12 to http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_5-2-2005_pg4_12
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:31, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on List of Buddhists. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://www.webcitation.org/68ebEgmP4?url=http://blogs.plos.org/neurotribes/2011/10/28/what-kind-of-buddhist-was-steve-jobs-really/ to http://blogs.plos.org/neurotribes/2011/10/28/what-kind-of-buddhist-was-steve-jobs-really/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:17, 24 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I check pages listed in :Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of :List of Buddhists's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.
Reference named "BBC":
From Wang Jianlin: 
From The Simpsons: 
From Roswell (TV series): Roswell High' on BBC". Retrieved on September 1, 2008.
From History of Buddhism in India: 
From Steven Seagal: 
From Eight precepts: 
From Thích Nhất Hạnh: 
From Rula Lenska: 
From Buddhism in Myanmar: 
From Trevor Morgan (EastEnders): 
From Liberal Democratic Party (Japan): 
From Five precepts: 
I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. Feel free to remove this comment after fixing the refs. AnomieBOT⚡ 15:08, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Orphaned references in [[:List of Buddhists]]