A fact from Gita Dhyanam appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the Did you know column on 8 June 2011 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hinduism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Hinduism 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.HinduismWikipedia:WikiProject HinduismTemplate:WikiProject HinduismHinduism articles
This article is within the scope of
WikiProject Religious texts, a project which is currently considered to be defunct.Religious textsWikipedia:WikiProject Religious textsTemplate:WikiProject Religious textsReligious texts articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of
India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia 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.
Hello, thanks for your rating of
Gita Dhyanam at its
talk page. If you would be so kind, to facilitate article improvement, please indicate on the
talk page what elements of a "C class" article you believe the present article lacks. Many thansk --
Presearch (
talk)
21:45, 31 May 2011 (UTC)reply
I will if I have time, if you believe it meets C class or higher, please feel free to upgrade the status. I simply put down start class for...well...starters. LOL. I didn't by any stretch, give it a massive comprehensive review. Take care. Sorry about deleting the link, as you pointed out, it's relevant.
TheRingess (
talk)
22:12, 31 May 2011 (UTC)reply
Based on the above interchange, I expect in the next day or two to 1) insert a sentence or two in lede to reflect additional sections of article body; 2) Upgrade rating to "C class" unless someone points out additional improvements needed for C-class. --
Presearch (
talk)
00:02, 1 June 2011 (UTC)reply
A fact from Gita Dhyanam appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the Did you know column on 8 June 2011 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hinduism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Hinduism 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.HinduismWikipedia:WikiProject HinduismTemplate:WikiProject HinduismHinduism articles
This article is within the scope of
WikiProject Religious texts, a project which is currently considered to be defunct.Religious textsWikipedia:WikiProject Religious textsTemplate:WikiProject Religious textsReligious texts articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of
India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia 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.
Hello, thanks for your rating of
Gita Dhyanam at its
talk page. If you would be so kind, to facilitate article improvement, please indicate on the
talk page what elements of a "C class" article you believe the present article lacks. Many thansk --
Presearch (
talk)
21:45, 31 May 2011 (UTC)reply
I will if I have time, if you believe it meets C class or higher, please feel free to upgrade the status. I simply put down start class for...well...starters. LOL. I didn't by any stretch, give it a massive comprehensive review. Take care. Sorry about deleting the link, as you pointed out, it's relevant.
TheRingess (
talk)
22:12, 31 May 2011 (UTC)reply
Based on the above interchange, I expect in the next day or two to 1) insert a sentence or two in lede to reflect additional sections of article body; 2) Upgrade rating to "C class" unless someone points out additional improvements needed for C-class. --
Presearch (
talk)
00:02, 1 June 2011 (UTC)reply