![]() | Vimala Temple has been listed as one of the Art and architecture good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
![]() | A
fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the "
Did you know?" column on
December 4, 2012. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that amorous couples and erotic scenes are depicted on the outer walls of the
Vimala Temple? |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
Photograph in 1890. Not a clear view but seems to be the temple on the extreme right. Phototgraphy has since been strictly prohibited.Getting a better picture may be difficult sids ( talk) 13:04, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
sids' comment Moved from my talk: -- Redtigerxyz Talk 16:17, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
I noted some inaccuracies about Jagannath.
I have made some minor edits to remove these contreversies sids ( talk) 13:27, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
The present reading of Jagannath temple as a centre of worship of Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva is fine.Non specific and non-contreversial sids ( talk) 07:02, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
I have removed Jagannath as Krishna because:
sids ( talk) 10:33, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
The article has been substantially expanded and edited by Redtigerxyz and Nvvchar.It is informative with a number of references from reliable sources . Appropriate Pictures are added in text. Controversies have been resolved. I assess the article as B class sids ( talk) 07:08, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Dwaipayanc ( talk · contribs) 21:52, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
I am tending to fail this because of poor prose, and lack of easy understanding.
Examples:
--Unclear meaning. Uninitiated reader cannot make out what is conveyed here.
I did not read rest of the article. However, unfortunately, it does not seem to meet GA criteria. Will wait a few days for any comment from the nominator. Regards.-- Dwaipayan ( talk) 21:52, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
Continuing comments First, let me apologize for considering the text too difficult in the initial review! It is difficult, but not extremely so. I was sleepy during the first time I was reading the article, and many sentences appeared quite tough! A tired mind.
Anyway, I am continuing the review.
the clause before the comma is missing some word -- "of" or "from" or something (such as, While the central icon of Vimala is from sixth century CE). endash to be used instead of hyphen.
The continued comments have been addressed. Thanks for the review.--
Nvvchar. 07:34, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
"Parshvadevatas (attendant deities) are placed in the central niches of the bada on three sides: the eight-armed Durga slaying Mahishasura on the south; the six-armed goddess Chamunda standing on Shiva, who lies on the ground on the west and an empty niche on the north, probably also having a goddess figure, which was stolen." Citation needed.
I've given a bit of a copyedit and clean to improve readability and understanding and have strengthened the intro. While some of the architectural detail is still a little difficult to follow, and some minor issues no doubt some will spot, I think it's close to GA now. I disagree with the restoral most of
this. To the average English reader I think it looks like Hindu gobbledy-gook and irrelevant to learning about the temple. It is exceptionally difficult to understand. If I came across that independently I'd be put off wanting to read the article. Vimala should have its own article and most of that content not about the temple put in it. It strikes me out of place here and affects readability, even if a brief context is relevant.♦
Dr. ☠ Blofeld 19:20, 16 December 2012 (UTC) ♦
Dr. ☠ Blofeld 17:28, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
Exactly why I left it, its technically right, but still heavy reading. I tried to make it clearer by adding the meaning of some of the architectural terms in brackets which has improved it I think. Can't really see what else I can do without losing information.. ♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 19:25, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
Despite the efforts by Redtigerxyz (and slight effort from me), I am doubtful if the article meets the GA criteria 1a (the prose is clear and concise, respects copyright laws, and the spelling and grammar are correct), specifically the "clear" part.
The sections that I have my doubts on are—the whole "Architecture" section. This section uses loads of non-English words frequently. The problem is, I do not know how to avoid this. The description of architecture will inevitably involve the local language terms.
The next section is the first part of "religious significance" (above "in Shakti Peetha list"). Although I myself am able to understand the meaning, I do not know if it is clear enough. It takes me more than one reading to grasp the meaning.
So, I am unable to provide solution to the problems I found. Perhaps other reviewers may not find it it as big a problem, or, may provide solution, or, may accept the status quo. I have no problem in accepting the status quo and making this a GA, but I need second (or third) opinions before that.
Other than the above-mentioned issues, the article meets GA criteria.-- Dwaipayan ( talk) 07:28, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
Architecture section
Vimana
Jagamohana
Natamandapa
Bhogamandapa
Overall
Sounds like both users are happy with the article, so I'll close this. Wizardman 19:28, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
The legend and mention in various sacred texts as well as Jagannath being a Bhairava needs to be included for comprehensiveness. Unlike places of other religions, legends and religious significance generally dominate in books over architectural features.-- Redtigerxyz Talk 18:44, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
I think an article should be created on Vimala (goddess) and much of that material put in that article. It is important to be comprehensive but I genuinely I think it affects readability of an article about the temple, and I think readability is more important than anything.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 22:05, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
OK, yes my main concern was grasping the reader's attention. There's a lot of unfamiliar terms but that can't be helped for architecture. Changing order would be a very good idea I think.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 18:16, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
Why is there no respective page on the goddess by that name? Stjohn1970 ( talk) 09:03, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
![]() | Vimala Temple has been listed as one of the Art and architecture good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
![]() | A
fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the "
Did you know?" column on
December 4, 2012. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that amorous couples and erotic scenes are depicted on the outer walls of the
Vimala Temple? |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
Photograph in 1890. Not a clear view but seems to be the temple on the extreme right. Phototgraphy has since been strictly prohibited.Getting a better picture may be difficult sids ( talk) 13:04, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
sids' comment Moved from my talk: -- Redtigerxyz Talk 16:17, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
I noted some inaccuracies about Jagannath.
I have made some minor edits to remove these contreversies sids ( talk) 13:27, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
The present reading of Jagannath temple as a centre of worship of Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva is fine.Non specific and non-contreversial sids ( talk) 07:02, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
I have removed Jagannath as Krishna because:
sids ( talk) 10:33, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
The article has been substantially expanded and edited by Redtigerxyz and Nvvchar.It is informative with a number of references from reliable sources . Appropriate Pictures are added in text. Controversies have been resolved. I assess the article as B class sids ( talk) 07:08, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Dwaipayanc ( talk · contribs) 21:52, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
I am tending to fail this because of poor prose, and lack of easy understanding.
Examples:
--Unclear meaning. Uninitiated reader cannot make out what is conveyed here.
I did not read rest of the article. However, unfortunately, it does not seem to meet GA criteria. Will wait a few days for any comment from the nominator. Regards.-- Dwaipayan ( talk) 21:52, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
Continuing comments First, let me apologize for considering the text too difficult in the initial review! It is difficult, but not extremely so. I was sleepy during the first time I was reading the article, and many sentences appeared quite tough! A tired mind.
Anyway, I am continuing the review.
the clause before the comma is missing some word -- "of" or "from" or something (such as, While the central icon of Vimala is from sixth century CE). endash to be used instead of hyphen.
The continued comments have been addressed. Thanks for the review.--
Nvvchar. 07:34, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
"Parshvadevatas (attendant deities) are placed in the central niches of the bada on three sides: the eight-armed Durga slaying Mahishasura on the south; the six-armed goddess Chamunda standing on Shiva, who lies on the ground on the west and an empty niche on the north, probably also having a goddess figure, which was stolen." Citation needed.
I've given a bit of a copyedit and clean to improve readability and understanding and have strengthened the intro. While some of the architectural detail is still a little difficult to follow, and some minor issues no doubt some will spot, I think it's close to GA now. I disagree with the restoral most of
this. To the average English reader I think it looks like Hindu gobbledy-gook and irrelevant to learning about the temple. It is exceptionally difficult to understand. If I came across that independently I'd be put off wanting to read the article. Vimala should have its own article and most of that content not about the temple put in it. It strikes me out of place here and affects readability, even if a brief context is relevant.♦
Dr. ☠ Blofeld 19:20, 16 December 2012 (UTC) ♦
Dr. ☠ Blofeld 17:28, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
Exactly why I left it, its technically right, but still heavy reading. I tried to make it clearer by adding the meaning of some of the architectural terms in brackets which has improved it I think. Can't really see what else I can do without losing information.. ♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 19:25, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
Despite the efforts by Redtigerxyz (and slight effort from me), I am doubtful if the article meets the GA criteria 1a (the prose is clear and concise, respects copyright laws, and the spelling and grammar are correct), specifically the "clear" part.
The sections that I have my doubts on are—the whole "Architecture" section. This section uses loads of non-English words frequently. The problem is, I do not know how to avoid this. The description of architecture will inevitably involve the local language terms.
The next section is the first part of "religious significance" (above "in Shakti Peetha list"). Although I myself am able to understand the meaning, I do not know if it is clear enough. It takes me more than one reading to grasp the meaning.
So, I am unable to provide solution to the problems I found. Perhaps other reviewers may not find it it as big a problem, or, may provide solution, or, may accept the status quo. I have no problem in accepting the status quo and making this a GA, but I need second (or third) opinions before that.
Other than the above-mentioned issues, the article meets GA criteria.-- Dwaipayan ( talk) 07:28, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
Architecture section
Vimana
Jagamohana
Natamandapa
Bhogamandapa
Overall
Sounds like both users are happy with the article, so I'll close this. Wizardman 19:28, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
The legend and mention in various sacred texts as well as Jagannath being a Bhairava needs to be included for comprehensiveness. Unlike places of other religions, legends and religious significance generally dominate in books over architectural features.-- Redtigerxyz Talk 18:44, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
I think an article should be created on Vimala (goddess) and much of that material put in that article. It is important to be comprehensive but I genuinely I think it affects readability of an article about the temple, and I think readability is more important than anything.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 22:05, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
OK, yes my main concern was grasping the reader's attention. There's a lot of unfamiliar terms but that can't be helped for architecture. Changing order would be a very good idea I think.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 18:16, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
Why is there no respective page on the goddess by that name? Stjohn1970 ( talk) 09:03, 24 August 2022 (UTC)