Lingguang Temple, Beijing, the Wikipedia article on the site at Badachu, is a community edited encyclopedic account of the Zhaoxian Pagoda, built in 1071 to house a Buddha tooth relic, its destruction by the Eight-Nation Alliance during the Boxer Rebellion in 1900, the recovery of the tooth relic from the ruins, and its later re-enshrinement in a newly built pagoda. Its strength is that a well developed Wikipedia article on a documented relic with a clear destruction and recovery date typically draws together historical and institutional sources into one accessible chronology, useful for that stable factual detail. Its limit is that Wikipedia is a continuously and anonymously editable reference rather than a peer reviewed source, so it is fit for the documented history of the pagoda's destruction and the relic's recovery, but a claim resting on the tooth relic's own authentication needs the Buddhist institutional or scholarly record behind that identification, not the encyclopedia entry alone.
Facts
Assessment
Reliability Tier3
Wikipedia's article on Lingguang Temple at Badachu is a continuously revised, community edited tertiary encyclopedia entry with no named author or peer review process, hence the lower tier, though useful for the temple's documented location and its Buddha tooth relic association. NotesEncyclopedic account of Lingguang Temple at Badachu: the Zhaoxian Pagoda built in 1071 to hold a Buddha tooth relic, the pagoda's destruction by the Eight-Nation Alliance in 1900, the recovery of the tooth from the ruins, and its re-enshrinement in a new pagoda.
Citation
AuthorWikipedia contributors
PublisherWikipedia
Publication Year2025
URLhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lingguang_Temple_(Beijing)
Source Typereference
Cross-Tradition Connections
Associated With
This source names Beijing directly: "Lingguang Temple, Beijing, the Wikipedia article on the site at Badachu, is a community edited encyclopedic account of the Zhaoxian Pagoda, built in 1071 to house a Buddha tooth relic, its..."
Claims Backed By This Source (18 claims)
This source backs 18 claims across the atlas. As facts: 14 well-attested. As cited relationships: 3 holds. Plus 1 entities citing it as a general reference with no single fact or relationship attached.
Disposition By Topic
- Sources, 9 claims: 8 well-attested, 1 holds.
- Artifacts & Relics, 7 claims: 4 well-attested, 2 holds, 1 general references.
- Articles, 2 claims: 2 well-attested.
Reader Challenges (0 open reader challenges)
No disputes yet. Spotted an error or a better source? Open the first one.
Sign in to dispute this or suggest a correction.
View At A Past Year
The atlas records no dated fact of its own for this entry, so there is no other year to choose.