user157: Recently I've been (rightly) picked up on answering a question from a particualrly perspective and not flagging this up in the answer (here and here)
I think in both cases I would have been very happy for someone to edit the answer and put at the bottom

Note this answer is from the Theravada tradition

Or words to this effect
Does this seem like an acceptable edit to people? For lower rep users it would always be QAed and in every case the original poster can always rollback (which should be the final word i think). We could agree on a standard format for these edits maybe?
Just on a personal note - it's not always forefront in my mind what perspective I am answering questions from because the sangha I practice with is eclectic. Therefore I would be grateful for these kind of edits - it would serve as a reminder to me and help improve the quality of my answers.

user295: Even within a particular tradition there are variations of interpretations among teachers and lineages. So if this is important as answer is from a particular viewpoint then it should be mentioned at the discretion of the poster. 

user289: Yes. 
If we imagine the alternative, then answerers will have to post a survey of a dozen of traditions on each topic.
On the otherhand, people will have to realize that if one person asks-- What happens after we die? (tagged sgi, nichiren) is not a duplicate of "What happens after we die? (tagged vajrayana) and isn't a duplicated of "What happens after we die? (tagged pure-land), which as far as I know have very different answers.

user408: I'm very much in favor of including the particular viewpoint (school/tradition) from which an answer is given as much as possible and where relevant. IMHO any good answer should include this information.
However I'm very much wondering if, in most cases, it is possible for someone else to correctly identify from which particular viewpoint an answer is given. There are so many different kinds of Buddhist traditions, it's probably easy to make false assumptions. Other people may erroneously add that an answer is based on one popular tradition while in fact it is from a smaller, more obscure tradition. That's why I'd like to see the original author add it him/herself. If he/she doesn't include it and it is important for that question/answer, we can always ask to include it using comments.

157: <p>Recently I've been (rightly) picked up on answering a question from a particualrly perspective and not flagging this up in the answer (<a href="https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/a/2480/157">here</a> and <a href="https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/a/1967/157">here</a>)</p>

<p>I think in both cases I would have been very happy for someone to edit the answer and put at the bottom</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>Note this answer is from the Theravada tradition</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Or words to this effect</p>

<p>Does this seem like an acceptable edit to people? For lower rep users it would always be QAed and in every case the original poster can always rollback (which should be the final word i think). We could agree on a standard format for these edits maybe?</p>

<p>Just on a personal note - it's not always forefront in my mind what perspective I am answering questions from because the sangha I practice with is eclectic. Therefore I would be grateful for these kind of edits - it would serve as a reminder to me and help improve the quality of my answers.</p>
 295: <p>Even within a particular tradition there are variations of interpretations among teachers and lineages. So if this is important as answer is from a particular viewpoint then it should be mentioned at the discretion of the poster. </p>
 289: <p>Yes. </p>

<p>If we imagine the alternative, then answerers will have to post a survey of a dozen of traditions on each topic.</p>

<p>On the otherhand, people will have to realize that if one person asks-- What happens after we die? (tagged <a href="https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/sgi" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;sgi&#39;" rel="tag">sgi</a>, <a href="https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/nichiren" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;nichiren&#39;" rel="tag">nichiren</a>) is not a duplicate of "What happens after we die? (tagged <a href="https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/vajrayana" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;vajrayana&#39;" rel="tag">vajrayana</a>) and isn't a duplicated of "What happens after we die? (tagged <a href="https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/pure-land" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;pure-land&#39;" rel="tag">pure-land</a>), which as far as I know have very different answers.</p>
 408: <p>I'm very much in favor of including the particular viewpoint (school/tradition) from which an answer is given as much as possible and where relevant. IMHO any good answer should include this information.</p>

<p>However I'm very much wondering if, in most cases, it is possible for someone else to correctly identify from which particular viewpoint an answer is given. There are so many different kinds of Buddhist traditions, it's probably easy to make false assumptions. Other people may erroneously add that an answer is based on one popular tradition while in fact it is from a smaller, more obscure tradition. That's why I'd like to see the original author add it him/herself. If he/she doesn't include it and it is important for that question/answer, we can always ask to include it using comments.</p>
