This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Hindu texts article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The article confuses the Vedas as sruthi at the beginning of the article and then as smriti (mistyped as shruthi) later in the article. So, are the Vedas sruthis or smritis?
... as "vedic" is sheer unmitigated nonsense. If someone is good enough to "cite" Radhakrishnan and Moore, the least they could do is to read that book first. It's all laid out in the "General Introduction", starting on p.xvii. rudra ( talk) 14:56, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
The subsection entitled The Vedas appears to have a sentence fragment or incomplete thought. The sentence does not end with a period. It currently reads:
Can someone please look into this? A "blurry line between" what and what? EricP ( talk) 06:52, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
This article does not even match the series sidebar. It needs several more sections, and greater elaboration in general.
It is missing major sections, and has sections that are comparatively minor.
The sections are also incoherent and the writing is haphazard.
NittyG ( talk) 03:59, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
Add the Agamas! CO2Northeast ( talk) 06:42, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
Why all peoples not worship when a new baby born in the house — Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.203.116.241 ( talk) 08:28, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Hindu texts/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.
this could have been better with differnt types of other pictures. |
Last edited at 16:03, 28 June 2009 (UTC). Substituted at 17:57, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
The sections of the article about Vedas and Upanishads were deleted on 12 July 2020 by an IP without any discussion, and these changes were allowed to stand until now, absurdly in my view. Even if those texts are shared by other traditions (they are certainly not "authoritative"/astika in other traditions) that could be mentioned, rather than deleting them. Anyone who believes otherwise could imagine trying to remove "Old Testament" (shared with Judaism) from Biblical canon and imagine what sort of welcome they would receive (except please do NOT actually try that experiment because of WP:POINT).
The absurd deletions could not be undone because of intermediate edits. Therefore I reverted those deletions but reinstated legitimate edits that had occurred more recently. I find it amazing that such absurd deletions were allowed to stand for almost 5 months. Were there no seasoned and knowledgeable editors who were watching this page? If not, a few of them should do so. BTW, a very similar problem has occurred with Template:Hindu scriptures and texts, which as I type, includes such things texts as Kamasutra in the "Sutras" section, but nowhere lists the Upanishads or Vedas. Try imagining what would have happened if someone had removed the Biblical books from Template:Bible sidebar (but don't actually do it because of WP:POINT). -- Presearch ( talk) 01:06, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Hi, Today I found article Rajputra and am wondering if that small content could be merged here? The article was created in 2006. Regards, JoeNMLC ( talk) 16:03, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
Hi @ Joshua Jonathan
I noticed that you reverted some of my latest edits.
I am new to Wikipedia and am still learning.
My original rationale when making the edits was to add 3 new paragraphs that included necessary detail such as the names of the 18 puranas, the name of the composer of the Puranas, and add details on when the Puranas were composed.
When making my edits, I should have included an edit summary to explain this rationale.
I added some new details to the page that I think help improve the article.
Thank you!
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Hindu texts article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The article confuses the Vedas as sruthi at the beginning of the article and then as smriti (mistyped as shruthi) later in the article. So, are the Vedas sruthis or smritis?
... as "vedic" is sheer unmitigated nonsense. If someone is good enough to "cite" Radhakrishnan and Moore, the least they could do is to read that book first. It's all laid out in the "General Introduction", starting on p.xvii. rudra ( talk) 14:56, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
The subsection entitled The Vedas appears to have a sentence fragment or incomplete thought. The sentence does not end with a period. It currently reads:
Can someone please look into this? A "blurry line between" what and what? EricP ( talk) 06:52, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
This article does not even match the series sidebar. It needs several more sections, and greater elaboration in general.
It is missing major sections, and has sections that are comparatively minor.
The sections are also incoherent and the writing is haphazard.
NittyG ( talk) 03:59, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
Add the Agamas! CO2Northeast ( talk) 06:42, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
Why all peoples not worship when a new baby born in the house — Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.203.116.241 ( talk) 08:28, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Hindu texts/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.
this could have been better with differnt types of other pictures. |
Last edited at 16:03, 28 June 2009 (UTC). Substituted at 17:57, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
The sections of the article about Vedas and Upanishads were deleted on 12 July 2020 by an IP without any discussion, and these changes were allowed to stand until now, absurdly in my view. Even if those texts are shared by other traditions (they are certainly not "authoritative"/astika in other traditions) that could be mentioned, rather than deleting them. Anyone who believes otherwise could imagine trying to remove "Old Testament" (shared with Judaism) from Biblical canon and imagine what sort of welcome they would receive (except please do NOT actually try that experiment because of WP:POINT).
The absurd deletions could not be undone because of intermediate edits. Therefore I reverted those deletions but reinstated legitimate edits that had occurred more recently. I find it amazing that such absurd deletions were allowed to stand for almost 5 months. Were there no seasoned and knowledgeable editors who were watching this page? If not, a few of them should do so. BTW, a very similar problem has occurred with Template:Hindu scriptures and texts, which as I type, includes such things texts as Kamasutra in the "Sutras" section, but nowhere lists the Upanishads or Vedas. Try imagining what would have happened if someone had removed the Biblical books from Template:Bible sidebar (but don't actually do it because of WP:POINT). -- Presearch ( talk) 01:06, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Hi, Today I found article Rajputra and am wondering if that small content could be merged here? The article was created in 2006. Regards, JoeNMLC ( talk) 16:03, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
Hi @ Joshua Jonathan
I noticed that you reverted some of my latest edits.
I am new to Wikipedia and am still learning.
My original rationale when making the edits was to add 3 new paragraphs that included necessary detail such as the names of the 18 puranas, the name of the composer of the Puranas, and add details on when the Puranas were composed.
When making my edits, I should have included an edit summary to explain this rationale.
I added some new details to the page that I think help improve the article.
Thank you!