Talk:Tripitaka Koreana

Korea High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Korea, a collaborative effort to build and improve articles related to Korea. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how use this banner, please refer to the documentation.KoreaWikipedia:WikiProject KoreaTemplate:WikiProject KoreaKorea-related articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by one or more inactive working groups.

Buddhism Mid‑importance

	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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Electronic version available?

There is an (at least one) electronic edition of the TK on CD (or DVD, dont know). The one I have seen seems to be named (beside Korean characters):

Tripitaka Koreana 2004

COPYRIGHT@2004 by The Research Institut of Tripitaka Koreana

I could still not find any way to get this, or even more information, an ISBN or something. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.60.117.55 (talk) 12:08, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What language is the name?

What language is the name "Tripitaka Koreana"? Is it Latin, Sanskrit or something else? 98.110.10.64 (talk) 03:27, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tripitaka is Sanskrit, Koreana is a Latin adjective form based on a borrowed place name. Of course the language of the text is Chinese... AnonMoos (talk) 01:50, 16 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

RfC: Are texts written by Buddhist writers and teachers that explain basic Buddhist concepts reliable secondary sources?

The RfC by Dorje108 states that:

"I propose that texts written by Buddhist writers and teachers that explain basic Buddhist concepts should be considered secondary sources as long as they meet the criteria specified in the guidelines (regardless of whether or not the writer has Western academic training). Do you support this?"

Please see: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Buddhism

Robert Walker (talk) 14:54, 18 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Tripitaka Koreana. 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:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.ocp.go.kr/english/treasure/dom_hae.html
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060206141217/http://www.buddhapia.com/buddhapi/news/campaign/haeinsa/e_p10.html to http://www.buddhapia.com/buddhapi/news/campaign/haeinsa/e_p10.html
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090506052257/http://www.ocp.go.kr/english/treasure/dom_hae.html to http://www.ocp.go.kr/english/treasure/dom_hae.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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: 5 June 2024).

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.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:34, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

this article strains credulity

How can anybody read this without realizing it's almost certainly a nationalist series of lies? such superlatives, such ridiculous claims, such implicit faith! They were damaged as soon as they were removed from their old home? they have survived 750 years in mint condition? they are the most important Buddhist corpus? give me a break! 2607:FEA8:AA03:9600:B943:EACD:F2A2:197F (talk) 23:27, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]