This article is within the scope of WikiProject Japan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Japan-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to
participate, please visit the
project page, where you can join the project, participate in
relevant discussions, and see
lists of open tasks. Current time in Japan: 20:42, April 23, 2024 (
JST,
Reiwa 6) (Refresh)JapanWikipedia:WikiProject JapanTemplate:WikiProject JapanJapan-related articles
This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Buddhism, an attempt to promote better coordination, content distribution, and cross-referencing between pages dealing with
Buddhism. If you would like to participate, please visit the
project page for more details on the projects.BuddhismWikipedia:WikiProject BuddhismTemplate:WikiProject BuddhismBuddhism articles
This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the
project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sculpture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Sculpture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SculptureWikipedia:WikiProject SculptureTemplate:WikiProject Sculpturesculpture articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Visual arts, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
visual arts on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Visual artsWikipedia:WikiProject Visual artsTemplate:WikiProject Visual artsvisual arts articles
Citing sources
I wrote my post from an information brochure I recieved when i visited the site. How should I reference this?
Antleredtuna (
talk) 02:40, 20 August 2008 (UTC)reply
I recommend reading through the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources first, but simply adding something along the lines of "<ref>Name of brochure</ref>" immediately after your text (i.e. in place of the "Fact" tag) should be sufficient. An online source would enable other editors to verify the details, but I think quoting details from a paper guide is acceptable on Wikipedia. Give us a shout if you are still unsure. --
DAJF (
talk) 04:34, 20 August 2008 (UTC)reply
The Daibutsu here were listed according to size (as the note on the list said); This was changed without much of an explanation, so I've reverted it. If there is a better arrangement for "large Buddhas" than size, please say so, and put it up for discussion.
Moonraker12 (
talk) 18:47, 7 June 2009 (UTC)reply
It consented to the order for the ranking. However, please do not rewind it to other parts together. --
663highland (
talk) 10:30, 20 June 2009 (UTC)reply
Sorry, I don't understand. What do you mean?
Moonraker12 (
talk) 15:14, 20 June 2009 (UTC)reply
Please see
this. You only simply rewound it. --
663highland (
talk) 16:12, 20 June 2009 (UTC)reply
Please pardon it when there is an impolite expression because English is not a mother tongue. --
663highland (
talk) 16:18, 20 June 2009 (UTC)reply
Rudyard Kipling is not important for the article on Daibutsu.--
663highland (
talk) 10:37, 20 June 2009 (UTC)reply
I agree, the reference to Kipling is not appropriate in the introduction. It is better where it is now.
Also, the bold letters for the daibutsu name is clearer; it looks better.
Moonraker12 (
talk) 18:23, 24 June 2009 (UTC)reply
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on
Daibutsu. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with
this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with
this tool.