This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Kashyapa 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
level-5 vital article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I am familiar with Kashyapa as the name of a previous historical Buddha but a) can we have a citation please and b) might that fact be better put in a section like 'Kashyapa in Buddhism' since the bulk of this article is about the Hindu Kashyapa Zero sharp 04:58, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
I have deleted the notion that Kashyapa was the name of the first Buddha. This is false. -Anon
This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 18:26, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
An image used in this article,
File:The Genealogy of Bharata.png, has been nominated for deletion at
Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Media without a source as of 16 February 2012
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:The Genealogy of Bharata.png) This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image -- CommonsNotificationBot ( talk) 12:41, 16 February 2012 (UTC) |
" It can be safely assumed that there were many Kashyaps and the name indicates a status and not just one individual." Can someone provide a reference for this statement or delete it>? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.223.136.186 ( talk) 07:24, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
This is irrelevant thoughts and large number of people wants to increase their social status to make linkage between kashyap rishi Pandit4580 ( talk) 10:46, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
Parashurama killed Kshatriyas 21 times , gave land to kashyap rishi ( according to Ramayana and bhagwat purana ) , Kshatriya is the bigger enemy of Lord parshurama . Then no linkage between kashyap rishi to suryavanshi ( Kshatriya )
Whole Hindu mythology says parshuramas biggest enemy was Kshatriya , Pandit4580 ( talk) 10:53, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
A large section of peoples of Kshatriya always try to increase their social status , relate with the kashyap maharishi , but Strength doesn't change the truth. Pandit4580 ( talk) 10:57, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
@Willard84: There is a broad consensus in secondary and tertiary high quality sources that Kashmir has been named after Kashyapa. Please don't move it. On Multan, the source you added is non-RS/fringe-y; see its strange claims about Vedas and "at least 2500 BC", whole of Afghanistan being Buddhist centuries after invasions began, Arrian came with the troops of Alexander the Great, etc over pages 66-72. All of this is unscholarly, WP:FRINGE and unacceptable in wikipedia. Ms Sarah Welch ( talk) 17:37, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Kashyapa 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
level-5 vital article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I am familiar with Kashyapa as the name of a previous historical Buddha but a) can we have a citation please and b) might that fact be better put in a section like 'Kashyapa in Buddhism' since the bulk of this article is about the Hindu Kashyapa Zero sharp 04:58, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
I have deleted the notion that Kashyapa was the name of the first Buddha. This is false. -Anon
This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 18:26, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
An image used in this article,
File:The Genealogy of Bharata.png, has been nominated for deletion at
Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Media without a source as of 16 February 2012
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:The Genealogy of Bharata.png) This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image -- CommonsNotificationBot ( talk) 12:41, 16 February 2012 (UTC) |
" It can be safely assumed that there were many Kashyaps and the name indicates a status and not just one individual." Can someone provide a reference for this statement or delete it>? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.223.136.186 ( talk) 07:24, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
This is irrelevant thoughts and large number of people wants to increase their social status to make linkage between kashyap rishi Pandit4580 ( talk) 10:46, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
Parashurama killed Kshatriyas 21 times , gave land to kashyap rishi ( according to Ramayana and bhagwat purana ) , Kshatriya is the bigger enemy of Lord parshurama . Then no linkage between kashyap rishi to suryavanshi ( Kshatriya )
Whole Hindu mythology says parshuramas biggest enemy was Kshatriya , Pandit4580 ( talk) 10:53, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
A large section of peoples of Kshatriya always try to increase their social status , relate with the kashyap maharishi , but Strength doesn't change the truth. Pandit4580 ( talk) 10:57, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
@Willard84: There is a broad consensus in secondary and tertiary high quality sources that Kashmir has been named after Kashyapa. Please don't move it. On Multan, the source you added is non-RS/fringe-y; see its strange claims about Vedas and "at least 2500 BC", whole of Afghanistan being Buddhist centuries after invasions began, Arrian came with the troops of Alexander the Great, etc over pages 66-72. All of this is unscholarly, WP:FRINGE and unacceptable in wikipedia. Ms Sarah Welch ( talk) 17:37, 17 March 2017 (UTC)