Top Qs
Timeline
Chat
Perspective

Talk:Vithoba/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Remove ads

Split proposal

I propose the article be split into 2:

  • 1 for the deity
  • other for the temple

Just like Venkateswara and Tirumala Venkateswara Temple are 2 articles. --Redtigerxyz (talk) 05:00, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

I agree. They are two different subjects and there is enough information/references for an article on each. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 05:11, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
Sure it should be done. However what will be included in the deity page? Its not so clear for me what goes where, as its for Tirupati temple/Balaji. Wikidās ॐ 19:16, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Vithoba temple, Pandharpur is formed.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 04:15, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

I will work on the article in a few days and plan to cover these points: The deity article will include:

  • Legends
  • Major temples: including main center of worship
  • Literature dedicated to Vithoba
  • Warkari movement
  • Festivals
  • Involution of deity: From form of Shiva to Vishnu
  • Importance in Maharashtra

--Redtigerxyz (talk) 04:14, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Remove ads

comments

  • This statement comes as a surprise to me. According to M. S. Mate, the devotee Pundalik (believing Pundalik to a historical figure, rather than a mythical one) was instrumental in coaxing the Hoysala king Vishnuvardhana to build the Pandharpur temple to Vishnu. The deity "Vitthal" was named upon the builder king Bittidev, the alias of Vishnuvardhana.[5]
Vishnuvardhana, the Hoysala king went as far north as Lakkundi in Gadag district before being defeated by Chalukya commander Achugi of Gulbarga. I dont believe Vishnuvardhana ever had the opportunity to cross the Krishna river. Perhaps you mean Veera Ballala II who is known to have reached Gulbarga which puts him in range of Pandarpur at the Maharashtra-Karnataka border?Dineshkannambadi (talk) 00:18, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
Here is the ref. --Redtigerxyz (talk) 09:06, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
Interesting. If the temple were consecrated in 1189, as mentioned in the article, then it would be the time of Veera Ballala II. He had successful clashes with Seuna Bilhama in 1189-1190 in the general area under consideration. But then a early 12th century date for the temple is also postulated which is during the time of Vishnuvardhana. The fact that Vishnuvardhana (and his descendents) took to Vaishnavism and built many Vaishnava temples in south Karnataka certianly adds some credibility to the theory of his influence over Pandarpur temple, although Pandarpur is still a ways away.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 11:25, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
As noted, the Pandharpur temple may OR MAY NOT be built in 1189 AD. The date is disputed. I did not find the name "Veera Ballala II" in Vithoba context anywhere. Also Mate presses Vishnuvardhana as the creator to explain the name Vithu, derived from the king's name and the king being a Vaishnava.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 13:38, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
Good enough for me.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 15:57, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
  • V. P. Chavan says that "Pandurang Stotra" by Adi Shankaracharya, if geninue, establishes that Vithoba worship existed as early as 5th century AD, the period of it's author.
I think the dating of Adi Shankaracharya is not firm and ranges mostly from 7-8th century. More as I go along.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 00:21, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
 Done --Redtigerxyz (talk) 09:11, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Please provide disambiguation for tirth-murti and Kshetra-murthi.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 00:42, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
Sorry, didn't get you. disambiguation?? --Redtigerxyz (talk) 09:11, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
I mean English language translation.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 11:18, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
  • There are several places where "dash" is used. This is a style preference. Generally ndash looks better, but others may not agree. (ex:Rakhumai - "mai" means mother).
  • Also, in some places, the "Sanskrit name" appears first and then the English disambiguation. In other cases, the order is reversed. Keep to one style.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 01:24, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
Generally i use the Sanskrit name then the English meaning. If at times, the order is reversed, please excuse you. I have changed the order in as many instances i found. Please change the order if some are left out.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 05:25, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Consorts section: This is confusing to a person not intimate with Hindu lore. Simplyfy the statement Rukmini is traditionally viewed as the wife of Krishna who is considered a form of Vishnu and form of Lakshmi - Vishnu's consort.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 02:41, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
Do i remove the Vishnu part - bolded above ???--Redtigerxyz (talk) 05:11, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
"Something like "Rukmini is traditionally viewed as the wife of Krishna. Krishna is considered a form of Vishnu whose consort is Lakshmi".Dineshkannambadi (talk) 11:20, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
  • In the Worship section, while it may be easy for a Hindu to understand the phrase arati to awaken the god at about 3 am, those who are unfamiliar with this form of worship may find it a little obscure. If there is a way to explain the significance, it should be done. Also, the word "god" is used often, I feel the word "deity" is perhaps better suited as Vithoba is a version of God Vishnu or God Shiva or both. But this is a sensitive issue, so I prefer not to pass judgement. When discussing about the physical attributes, such as the cloathing ritual, it is perhaps better to use the term "cloating the image" rather than than "cloathing the god". Again this is a sensitive issue.
god is used here as a male deity and not as the monotheistic, which is God with a capital God. I have usually used image for rituals, only the word god appears in waking up and sleeping ritual as it sounds more confusing to say the image is waken up. Some terms of Sanskrit jargon like arati or puja can not be summed up coorrectly in a short description, so i left them so with a link. --Redtigerxyz (talk) 05:32, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Explain the term badava. More opinions will surely help. More later.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 02:57, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
Badava was a speeliing error for Badva brahmins.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 05:25, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
I will get back and finish reading this article in a day or two. I have been very busy with other things. Then, one more proof read for consistancy etc. You should still consider getting an experienced copy editor to help you.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 13:26, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
Interesting link to the Hoysala connection with the temple at Padharpur. Dineshkannambadi (talk) 01:36, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
I saw this link in the article (V. P. Chavan says that "Pandurang Stotra" by ...) and it links to a Marathi page on devotional songs I presume. Perhaps you should replace that link with a proper citation to avoid "circular reasoning".Dineshkannambadi (talk) 19:44, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
The link of Marathi wiki, which has the complete text of Pandurang Stotra in Sanskrit, and the Marathi translation. It is not the ref for "V. P. Chavan says", for that a ref is available atend of sentence.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 13:46, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
Remove ads

GA Review

Summarize
Perspective

This review is transcluded from Talk:Vithoba/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

  • Expand the lead to better summarize the entire article.
  • " Bibliography" section should be sorted last name, first name.

 Done --Redtigerxyz (talk) 05:12, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

  • Remove the periods at the end of image captions that are not sentences per WP:MOS#Captions.

 Done --Redtigerxyz (talk) 05:12, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Gary King (talk) 01:22, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the review. It is a great co-incidence that the GA review comes on the holy day of Ashadhi Ekadashi - the biggest festival of Vithoba.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 05:12, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

  • Lead should be significantly expanded and probably split into two paragraphs, per WP:LEAD

 Done If you feel some points are missing, please tell the sections, I will be happy to improve the article.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 06:59, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

  • Also, some very stubby (and unreferenced) paragraphs including "There are numerous, conflicting theories about the origins of the names of the deity.", and "Another name Pandharinath relates to Vithoba being "the lord of Pandhari (a name of Pandharpur)".
    • "There are numerous, conflicting theories about the origins of the names of the deity." does not need a ref as 4-5 diff theories that do not support each other are listed. The sentence can be removed by the reviewer, if he feels
    • Ref for Pandharinath added.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 06:59, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
  • "Krishna[38]) on t" – ref goes after punctuation marks per WP:FN

 Done --Redtigerxyz (talk) 06:59, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

  • "is a 3 feet 9 inches tall," – measurements such as this should be converted to metric units as well, preferably with {{convert}}

 Done --Redtigerxyz (talk) 06:59, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Gary King (talk) 05:19, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Overall great job. This article meets the Good Article criteria and has therefore been passed. Gary King (talk) 17:20, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Remove ads

Copyeditor's questions

Summarize
Perspective
  • I ran into a couple of things last night that I thought I should ask about. It seemed to me that you were saying that it was Mate who believed Pundalik to be an historical figure, but your sentence might mean "if we assume that Pundalik was an historical figure". If it's Mate who believed that, it's an easy fix. I can just change the sentence to read "...Mate, who assumed..." Finetooth (talk) 16:46, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
 Done --Redtigerxyz (talk) 17:09, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
  • I found the sentence that starts, "The deity Vitthala was named by the builder king Bittidev..." a bit puzzling. I interpreted it to mean that the king named the deity after himself. This struck me as unusual, and I may be misunderstanding the meaning. Finetooth (talk) 16:46, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
The interpretation "the king named the deity after himself" is right.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 17:09, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
  • A sentence in "Iconography" says, "Other images depict the right hand making a blessing-gesture, as traditionally misunderstood". Should the word be "understood" rather than "misunderstood"? Finetooth (talk) 21:22, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
"misunderstood" because a blessing gesture is not present in the central image.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 11:15, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
I tinkered some more with this sentence. Please check what I've done to make sure it's OK. Finetooth (talk) 18:16, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
  • I'm not an expert on image licenses, but I've been trying to improve my understanding, and I try to check the licenses the way I would for an FAC review. I see possible problems with three of the images in this article. Image:Sant-Tukaram.jpg may be under copyright; it's not clear from the given information that it is not. Image:SantDnyaneshwar.JPG is under copyright; the home page of the source site says this at the bottom of the page. Image:Purandara.jpg does not specify the original author or the original source; thus it's not clear that 70 years plus the life of the author has elapsed. I think what happens sometimes is that people upload images that they have scanned or copied and in good faith list themselves as the author and/or the source and release the material as GFDL or something similar. However, since they don't own the underlying rights, which belong to someone else, they are not in a position to give them away. Finetooth (talk) 22:34, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
Dnyaneshwar image is copyrighted, as per website. Removed image. Requested the authors of other 2 images to check license. waiting for their replies. Please check if the new img i uploaded is OK.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 15:55, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
I think it is OK. It certainly appears to be in the public domain. Finetooth (talk) 18:01, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
  • I notice that some of the citations to web pages are missing their access dates. These will have to be added to get through FAC. Since the ones that are done are in ISO format, for example, "Retrieved on 2008-09-15", they should all be done in this format. Finetooth (talk) 23:08, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
 Done --Redtigerxyz (talk) 11:15, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
  • In the "Festivals" section, I don't know what "the 11th of bright fortnight in the Hindu month of Ashadha" means. It seems to mean "the 11th day of a well-lit 14 days", but I'm guessing it must have a more specific meaning. Finetooth (talk) 02:27, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
There are 12 Hindu Months, each is divided into 2 fortnight: 1. when the moon waxes (day 1 to full moon - 15 Days), which i referred to as the "bright fortnight" and 2. when the moon wanes (day 1 to new moon day), which i refer as the "dark fortnight". Ashadha, Chaitra, Magha, kartik are names of Hindu months used in the article.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 09:59, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
I find the phrase "the 11th of bright fortnight" so evocative that even though many readers may not exactly understand it, I didn't want to alter it. My solution was to add a note based on what you told me above. If that seems clumsy, feel free to remove it. Finetooth (talk) 18:32, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

At a glance, the article looks good for FAC. I was confident in passing it and I am still confident in the article now. I might have missed something that others will pick up on, but it looks pretty good to me. Gary King (talk) 17:50, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Remove ads

Internal links

I noticed that some of the citations have links to the Bibliography section. I haven't seen links used in that way before, and they may raise editorial eyebrows. One of the things that's puzzling is that some author names are linked, and others are not. Some are linked multiple times. Novetske is linked in citation 1 and 15 but not in 52 and later; the linking pattern seems internally inconsistent in other words. The easiest fix might be to unlink them. Readers will understand the connections without the mechanical links. Citation 28 is an odd case with a different problem. I think it probably should be re-cast to look like citation 31. Finetooth (talk) 18:52, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Other than the loose ends remaining from above, my copyediting here is complete. Finetooth (talk) 20:47, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
checked the source and corrected the ref 28 problem. Removed internal links.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 10:23, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
Remove ads

Grammar

Summarize
Perspective

There are two grammatical errors in the sentence "There are many temples of Vithoba are in Maharashtra, and while some are in Karnataka, Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh." plus it is a bit awkward to read. Not sure how you want to go with this, would sentence wording such as: "Many temples of Vithoba are in Maharashtra; others are in Karnataka, Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh." be what you want to say? -- Michael Devore (talk) 21:36, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

changed.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 11:00, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

The article switches back and forth several times between using a spaced en dash and unspaced em dash for punctuation, for example in appended for reverence – producing the names "Vitthala" and "Vithoba and around the devotee Pundalik—who is credited with bringing the deity to Pandharpur—and around Vithoba's role. Either, but not both, can be used. -- Michael Devore (talk) 16:54, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

– used throughout.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 13:08, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
Good work, except, all dashes that were replaced did not get a space on either side of them. The article's original en dashes are right (with a space on either side), but the new ones are wrong. -- Michael Devore (talk) 22:38, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
 Done --Redtigerxyz (talk) 10:38, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

The Sanskrit "naked" form is spelled three different ways in the article: digambar, digambhar, and digambara. Is that correct? -- Michael Devore (talk) 06:11, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Corrected. --Redtigerxyz (talk) 11:25, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Remove ads

Four sentences

Summarize
Perspective

The four sentences you asked about could be rearranged in many different ways. I'll post some possibilities here.

  • "Pundarika asks Krishna for a boon that Krishna stay in that form at the place where the river Bhima flows, making it both a tirtha (holy place near a water body) and a kshetra (holy place where a temple is situated)."
Pundarika asks Krishna to remain in digambar form where the river Bhima flows. He believes that Krishna's presence will make the site a tirtha (holy place near a water body) and a kshetra (holy place with a temple).
  • "When he asked the reason for their appearance, they told Pundalik that Kukkuta served his parents and thus became pious and that by serving the sage they became pure too."
When asked why they had come, they told Pundalik that Kukkuta had become pious by serving his parents. By serving the sage, they had become pious too.
  • "Upon hearing of their plans, Pundalik and his wife joined them on the pilgrimage and forced the parents to walk the whole way and to groom horses while Pundalik and his wife rode on horseback.
Hearing of their plans, Pundalik and his wife joined them on the pilgrimage. While the younger couple rode on horseback, they forced the parents to walk the whole way and to groom the horses.
  • "Pundalik asked a boon that the Lord should stand in that form as Vithoba with Rakhumai (Rukmini) to bless his devotees forever."
Pundalik asked that the Lord, in his Vithoba form, remain on the brick with Rakhumai (Rukmini) and bless his devotees forever. Finetooth (talk) 20:41, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Remove ads

Suggested improvements

Summarize
Perspective

I feel there is too much emphasis on the various authors views. For eg. A sentence that is referenced from R. G. Bhandarkar's book need not begin with according to R. G. Bhandarkar etc. etc. everytime it is referenced from his book, unless there is a direct quote from the author...or to avoid weasel words. It mars the readability of the article. --Anish (talk) 10:39, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

The "according to Bhandarkar" is used because it is Bhandarkar's theory. There are other theories about origins, which are disputed. You are free to remove the "according to" wherever you free appropriate. I will also look at the article for redundancy. --Redtigerxyz (talk) 13:16, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Well...Bhandarkar was just an example....I will try to remove redundancies wherever I notice it.--Anish (talk) 16:04, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

I am unable to understand this sentence gramatically - "R.C. Dhere opines that Vithoba worship is more ancient than the worship of Krishna, "Vedic or pre-Vedic", about 6th century BCE". "Vedic or pre-vedic" refers to Krishna or Vithoba. About 6th century is left hanging and confusing. And 6th Century what ? CE or BCE. Even if it is BCE, it can neither be considered as vedic or pre-vedic as vedic period was before 6th century BCE.--Anish (talk) 08:03, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
That is a kindly expressed comment Anish. I agree the sentence looks wrong, but my main concern is factual historical error. As you say, vedic/pre-vedic refers to a period much earlier than that specified numerically.
We must check sources! :)
PS I hope you are in good health and happy my friend.
Alastair Haines (talk) 00:21, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Hi Alastair my friend.......nice to see you back....and helping others as usual!!!--Anish (talk) 19:21, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Explanation: "R.C. Dhere opines that Vithoba worship is "Vedic or pre-Vedic", about 6th century BCE, thus more ancient than the worship of Krishna." Is this better? --Redtigerxyz (talk) 07:41, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
Yes, now it makes sense gramatically....but not historically. Vedic period was around 1500-1000 BCE. So 6th Century BCE is not vedic or pre-vedic period but Vedantic or Upanishadic period which was from 800-300 BCE. So I suggest something like.. R.C. Dhere opines that Vithoba worship was prevalent about 6th century BCE, thus more ancient than the worship of Krishna--Anish (talk) 19:21, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
I'm happy with Anish' suggestion Tiger. Are you also comfortable that Anish' understanding conforms to the generally accepted definition of the Vedic period? If so, we can go forward together on this one I think. :) Alastair Haines (talk) 02:02, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
"R.C. Dhere opines that Vithoba worship is "Vedic or pre-Vedic", more ancient than the worship of Krishna." The date is not given in the original reference.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 05:04, 9 November 2008 (UTC)


The article is in much better shape now—thanks to Alastair and Tiger. But I have a few more comments to make:

  • First, pundalik section needs a major overhaul. Since he is intricately connected with Vithoba, the section does not explain why he is the central figure. Secondly, it would also add value to the article to explain – Why he is considered a historical figure? Is there an archeological evidence….mention in contemporary texts etc. And why do others dismiss him as a mythical figure? It would make an interesting addition to this section.
  • How about some miracles associated with Vithoba? Redtigerxyz can source them. I found a few here ,
    • ….And a new perspective on the miracles and the egalitarian philosophy of Vithoba and
  • In some cases I find there is double punctuation like in the following case apostrophe as well as brackets are used: Varkari Panth ("The Pilgrims' Path") or Varkari sampradaya ("The Pilgrims' tradition") is one of the most important Vaishnava sects in India.--Anish (talk) 10:07, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
Excellent input thank you Anish. I have copyedited the Pundalik subsection to my satisfaction; however, I agree 100% with you regarding content. All we have in that section is the "votes" of academics, not their reasons. It is not possible for a reader to evaluate or compare the scholars. Having said that, the section seemed to me to be very clearly and smoothly written, sticking right on topic and collecting reliable sources from several points of view—that's outstanding quality. It's also great that clear conclusions are made explicit, and that tangents are not multiplied. But, overall, yes, I agree that readers are likely to want to know more about Pundalik, I, for one, certainly do, but it is beyond my brief to actually go collecting that information. If you, Tiger and any others would be so kind as to source more information, I'd be very happy to do my best smoothing anything if necessary.
Regarding the (parentheses) and "quote marks" you've identified, I agree with you. I don't recollect looking at that section or addressing that issue thoroughly yet. It looks a little tricky in that case, because italics may be needed as well. I think I'd rephrase things as follows.
  • The Varkari sampradaya (way of life) or Vakari panth (path) is one of the most important Vaishnava movements in India.
I won't discuss it here and now, but I can see pros and cons regarding use of the word sect. Like the word cult, these are common, neutral, technical academic terms in religious studies, but are negative terms in colloquial English. An encyclopedia mediates between academic sources and educated readers, showing discretion with regard to technical terms. I may be doing the article a service to translate the academic–religious-studies English usage into something less potentially misleading to a lay reader. But at this stage, I'll retain cult and sect where used, until we have time to share opinions among editors.
I've just discovered I will have the next week clear to achieve three things, two long overdue, this is good news for my work here. I expect to have an early night tonight, but by this time tomorrow I should have copyedited Origins and development, and hopefully Worship the next day. Again, my apologies for being slow (and getting side-tracked here at Wiki a couple of times). Alastair Haines (talk) 10:49, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
Of course Alastair, as you rightly pointed out, the flow of the pundalik section is smooth as far as the copy-edit issue is concerned. Infact the whole article is now smoother and clearer and not simply a collection of academics view. In most cases the reasosn have been specified as to why so-and-so scholar belives so-and-so. But in some cases the reasons are missing so adding it would add more value and clarity. Don't apologise ....... you have already some quite a good work and I can already see the hallmarks of FA article with a few fine tuning.--Anish (talk) 11:59, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
As I'm seeing the quality of the sources and material, I get that FA feeling too. There's quality all over the place, and the written composition was very good before I arrived, in my opinion, anyway. I actually admire the style of things I change for fine-tuning reasons. See you tomorrow. Best regards Alastair Haines (talk) 16:22, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Cult v/s sect is an eternal battle. The word cult as Cult (religious practice) is accepted, though has negative connotations. I am open to own decision reached here.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 14:02, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Though Pundalik is a major figure in Vithoba tradition, he is NOT the subject of this article. Thus why he is a historical or not, may be an WP:UNDUE. I have written the Pundalik section trying to convey 1. Pundalik may be historical and founder of Varkari faith 2. He may be Kannada, Jain or Buddhist reflecting the effect on the Kannada, Jain and Buddhist connections of Vithoba, and 3. why he is a central figure in Vithoba faith. A Pundalik article may be needed. I have used a secondary source (Sand "The Legend of Pundarika: The Founder of Pandharpur", partly visible on google books, you need a hard copy if any one wants to read complete article) for the views, sadly it does not explain the reasons. --Redtigerxyz (talk) 14:55, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Alastair Haines and Anish, i want to thank you both for your time, work and dedication to the article, without which it could not have had a smoother text flow. --Redtigerxyz (talk) 14:55, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Miracles: Some of them are covered in Legend last para. There are numerous others mentioned in Mahipati's works, all of which can't be covered here. I have added a note "For the complete English translation of Bhaktavijaya, which narrates the legend of Pundalik and also tells stories of reported interactions between the saints and Vithoba, see Stories of Indian Saints (1988) by Mahīpati, Justin Edwards Abbott, and Narhar R. Godbole." --Redtigerxyz (talk) 16:17, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
Well, those seem like good answers to me, Tiger. How much material on Pundalik and miracles, and how much scholastic reasoning is appropriate is not an exact kind of question to answer. I think both you and Anish put good cases for each of the two sides.
I think a Pundalik article sounds like a good idea, though there will probably be friendly questioning about merging it here proposed at some time or another. The main thing is sourcing Pundalik information. This article alone shows how very notable he is, historical figure or not. You have already given an outstanding bibliography regarding him too, Tiger.
Anyway, these are not copy-edit issues, so I'll leave it alone. :) Alastair Haines (talk) 10:05, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Remove ads

Question

Summarize
Perspective

Could someone please explain the following sentence for me.

"This also led to conversion of the Shaiva Pundarika shrine to the shrine of the devotee Pundalik, who brought Vithoba to Pandharpur."

Is this part of Dhere's theory? (In which case we can note that in line.) How do the preceding parts of the theory "lead" to this conclusion? Does Dhere believe Pundalik brought Vithoba to Pandharpur, or that Vithoba is "Vedic or pre-Vedic"? Is he suggesting Pundalik is Vedic or earlier?

I simply can't follow the logic. Alastair Haines (talk) 13:35, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

"R.C. Dhere opines that Vithoba worship may be even older—"Vedic or pre-Vedic"; hence predating the worship of Krishna.[14] According to this theory, Vithoba is an amalgam of various local heroes, who gave their lives to save their cattle, and was worshipped first as a Dhangar (a shepherd, cowherd community) deity. The rise of the Yadava dynasty, which had cowherd ancestry, could have led to the glorification of Vithoba as Krishna, who is often depicted as a cowherd. This also led to conversion of the Shaiva Pundarika shrine to the shrine of the devotee Pundalik, who brought Vithoba to Pandharpur. Vithoba is also assimilated in Buddhism as a form of Buddha, who in turn in Hinduism is viewed as a form of Vishnu." This para is entirely a summary of Dhere's theory.

Dhere says: Vithoba is Vedic or pre-Vedic --> an amalgam of local heroes --> Dhangar (cowherd) deity ---> Rise of Yadava (cowherd) dynasty --> identification with Vishnu-Krishna and at the same time, conversion of Shaiva shrines (Pundarika's) to Vaishnava ones (the legendary Pundalik's) --> Buddhism. --Redtigerxyz (talk) 06:26, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for that concise summary. Glad the ideas are sourced, I'll repeat the cites in line. I will think more about how the logic flows. I'm sure it does if Dhere says so, but we have to make that clear for a reader. This reader (namely me) can't work it out from what we currently have in the article, so some clarification is needed. I think your word "legendary" is helpful clarification. Dhere does not believe Pundalik brought Vithoba to Pandharpur, he is quoting the legend as part of his theory of the "vaishnavisation" of Pandharpur. Under Dhere's hypothesis, a Pundalik legend was created as a revisionist history both to further harmonise Vithoba worship with Vaishnavism and to "capture" a Shiva shrine for Vishnu. It's a very interesting theory. I just want to be sure it's what Dhere actually proposed. I like the idea of a Vithoba more ancient than the Vedas, but clearly it comes at the cost of dismissing even more of Pundalik as legendary. I've found reliable sources citing Dhere, and Dhere himself, online. So I'll check things out and clarify as best I can. Feel free to comment on any changes, of course. Alastair Haines (talk) 08:07, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
The interpretation is completely right, Alastair Haines. --Redtigerxyz (talk) 11:03, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
Thank you Tiger, you know the source better than I, so I needed to check.
I have since found this interesting comment in another source.
"What interested Dhere most was his very radical theory that Pundarika was originally a manifestation of Siva which, according to Dhere, somehow was changed into a Vaisnava figure during the period of the Vaisnavization of the different cults of Pandharpur." — Erik Reenberg Sand, "The Legend of Pundarika", in Hans Bakker (ed.), The History of Sacred Places in India as Reflected in Traditional Literature, (Leiden: Brill, 1990), p. 40. Emphasis added.
Adding. Reword if not clear --Redtigerxyz (talk) 12:01, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Remove ads

poet-saint or saint-poet?

Summarize
Perspective

There are preferences in English and academic usage regarding compound designations like saint-poet or poet-saint. More familiar examples to the average reader would be soldier-poet prefered to poet-soldier and prince-bishop prefered to bishop-prince. Comparisons at Google scholar gave the following:

To my ears, poet-saint sounds clearer in intent than saint-poet, since it underscores that they are being cited as religious authorities, not literary ones. This is because English typically prefers descriptive elements to precede their head, just as with ordinary use of adjectives—e.g. "white god".

The first issue is whether the compound intends to be descriptive (karmadharaya) or co-ordinating (dvandva). In other words, are we talking about saints who happened to be poets, poets who happened to be saints or people who were both poets and saints, with no particular emphasis on either. Although the last may be the intent, English prefers use of an explicit conjunction in such cases—the poet and saint or the saint and poet. If a conjunction is used, any emphasis is typically on the first element. If a compound is used, the emphasis is on the second element.

An analogy exists in scholarship regarding the Hebrew Bible, where we find discussion of "writing prophets" (Isaiah, Jeremiah et al.). Were we to use a compound for them, they would be writer-prophets rather than prophet-writers, because they are notable for being prophets, not for being writers, the only writing we have from them is their prophetic writing.

As it stands, our article is currently inconsistent. We have "saint-poet Tukaram" and "author-saint Hemachandra" in consecutive paragraphs. What is significant to our readers is not whether Tukaram and Hemachandra are known as quality exponents of particular literary genres, but that they are widely acknowledged as authorities within their religious tradition, as indicated by the ascription of saint. This would be different in an article on Indian poetry, even Indian religious poetry for example, where we could say "poet (and saint) Tukaram" or "saint-poet Tukaram". Here, though, "poet-saint Tukaram" and "author-saint Hemachandra" stress that they are acknowledged authorities for their own tradition, who happen to be a poet and an author in addition to being saints, hence reliable sources for our article.

In any case, consistency suggests we need to alter one or other of the ascriptions. I'll run with placing saint after the hyphen, in order to stress sainthood over other descriptions—we are dealing with nominative tatpurusa here. :) Alastair Haines (talk) 08:07, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

The word "saint-poet" was used as a literal translation of the Marathi "sant-kavi", also in Varkari or Marathi culture, Tukaram or Dnyaneshwar being a sant or saint is more important than just being a poet. I request Alastair Haines to decide and implement the same throughout, both "saint-poet" and "poet-saint" are used by reliable sources used in the article. --Redtigerxyz (talk) 11:12, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
I request Alastair Haines to comment which word, he is going to use. So i can atleast stick to the word, if i am editing. --Redtigerxyz (talk) 13:17, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for your open-ness and your information. I suspected "saint-poet" reflected a non-English background. In particular that it might reflect an Indian language.
With your agreement, my friend, please trust me (and some of the information linked above), that English forms compounds differently to Marathi.
What matters most is that we translate the emphasis, not the word-order. As I'm sure you know very well indeed, when you translate into and out of English, you often change word order because English is so fussy about it.
This is a very minor point, but you have given me a lot of confidence by teaching me that Marathi sant-kavi (saint-poet) suggests emphasis on the first element, you think of it as dvandva don't you? Just like I thought.
That means the best English for it is either "poet-saint" or "saint and poet". For style reasons I recommend we go for the compound.
I am very impressed by your willingness to interact on this point, because you have primary source backing for your term. I hope I've indicated enough above to give you confidence that "poet-saint" really will sound easier to an English reader.
Please confirm for me Tiger that you are happy that we adopt poet-saint for this article. If you're not happy, I will do it the other way around out of respect for the Marathi and for you. Alastair Haines (talk) 23:10, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Remove ads

Dash usage

Summarize
Perspective

Dash usage has become rather messy in the article again. It looks like the original spaced en dashes—an acceptable alternative to unspaced em dashes per MOS:DASH— are migrating to the MoS first choice of unspaced em dashes, which is fine as long as consistency is maintained. However, I notice the article now has unspaced em dashes, spaced en dashes, spaced em dashes, spaced hyphens, and an em dash that is spaced on one side and not the other, all for interrupting punctuation. If a final decision could be reached here on whether to go with either spaced en dashes or unspaced em dashes for the punctuation throughout the article, these mistakes and inconsistencies could be cleaned up in quick order. -- Michael Devore (talk) 08:58, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

I have also observed the very things you mention. I am currently in the process of copyediting the whole article, which naturally includes consistency. I have selected the unspaced m-dash convention, since I observed the inconsistency you've also noted, and I'm adjusting all punctuation anyway. I simply have the habit of using m-dashes. Typeface and quote mark conventions are more significant in this article, since there is considerable transliteration and translation required in communicating core information.
In absolutely everything a copyeditor does, there is room for alternatives. I completely agree that there is no need to fix things that aren't broken, but when a request is made for stylistic improvement, someone has to do it, and you get stuck with some of the stylistic tastes of the volunteer. I'm quite happy for someone else to be that volunteer, someone who has time to complete the task quickly. But unless that occurs soon, you're stuck with me working in fits and starts as relaxation between other projects.
I feel no need to make apologies for any apparant tardiness in my work here. I'm actually interested in the subject matter, and fact checking is part of what I'm doing, it often is with copyedit work. That takes time. Additionally, I've found all the text I've worked with extremely well written, the main need imo is streamlining things a little for readers unfamiliar with the topic area. This too requires I consult some of the sources to be sure emphasis and other subtleties here are in line with what is documented elsewhere.
As I mentioned above, consistency in typeface for transliteration etc. is more complex, and important for legibility I would think; and I intend to document the system I've adopted here on completion of the work. Regarding dashes, feel free to change all closed m-dashes to spaced n-dashes at any point after I've finished. I've little concern regarding that in the long term, but while I'm working, I simply find m-dashes easier to read.
I hope that answers your concern regarding consistency, and gives you realistic expectations regarding time-frame. Alastair Haines (talk) 10:50, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
I have always been confused by the dashes, and thus request Alastair Haines, who copyediting currently, to decide and implement a consistent policy. --Redtigerxyz (talk) 10:57, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
Thank you Tiger. I'll run with closed m-dashes. I should be finished in a few days. People are most welcome to change the dash convention afterwards, I certainly won't feel hurt. :) Alastair Haines (talk) 11:02, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
I have no expectations of a time-frame, but was pointing out a problem with the article in its current incarnation. Nothing beyond this notice need or should be interpreted to include a motive or stylistic judgement. Whatever the final decision, I am certain it will be suitable for the purposes of the article. -- Michael Devore (talk) 11:03, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
Cool! :)
I made a curious error calling Krishna a shepherd rather than cowherd. In between editing here I'm currently writing a commentary on ancient near eastern love poetry that features shepherds. Looks like I need to be careful I don't get my pastoral deities confused! :(
They are interesting examples of compound nouns in English, though, bearing in mind my previous comments above. A cow-herd or sheep-herd is not a type of herd! ;) They are classic examples of "exocentric" or bahuvrihi compounds. I think it's marvellous that Panini helped English linguists understand their own language, although English didn't exist in its modern form until almost 2,000 years later!
It's bed-time for me here in Australia, I'll be back to work tomorrow. Cheers all. Alastair Haines (talk) 13:01, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Remove ads

References

Summarize
Perspective

I've tidied up most of the references, but I've missed a few and it's worth documenting the format and issues so that others can help or follow the pattern if adding to the article later.

Reference format has the following syntax:

  • Doe (2008) pp. 152–58

The issues are:

  • there should be spaces between each element—name, date, page abbreviation and page range;
  • the page abbreviation should be "p." for a single page, "pp." for multiple pages;
  • consecutive pages should be connected by a closed n-dash, distinct pages offset by commas (followed by spaces); and,
  • closing numbers of ranges should be a minimum of two digits, unless the range terminates on page 9 or earlier.

Additionally, where a reference is used more than once it should be named, so that any alterations can be made at one location (the first occurance). A good convention for naming references is to use the authors surname with the first page number appended without any spacing.

Finally, in certain places, it is adequate to specify a range with the abbreviation "f." for 'following page' or "ff." for 'following pages'. This is particularly convenient for naming references, hence the made-up reference above could be named "Doe152ff".

Obviously, in some cases multiple works by one author may be cited with different publication dates, yet identical page numbers in those works. However, authors also often have multiple works in the same year. Some common sense in naming can be used to assist future editors working on the same article.

I'll leave reference clean-up for now, and focus back on the text. Alastair Haines (talk) 01:51, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Other issues

Summarize
Perspective

dashes

I think I've caught all dash/hyphen issues.

  • Punctuation dashing is now exclusively represented by the long, closed m-dash (—).
  • The short, closed n-dash (–) is now strictly a symbol, indicating disjunctions of beginnings and endings of ranges (numbers or months).
  • Hyphens (-) are now strictly orthographical or diacritical—characters used either to connect words, or to indicate a pre- fix or suf -fix.

There are complex possible uses of n-dash and m-dash, but none of them apply to the current text, so we can (thankfully) not worry about them.

dates

There is a little inconsistency with reference to centuries. The most common form I've seen at Wiki (and in this article) has the following syntax:

  • 12th century.

Hence, I'm adjusting things like: twelfth century, 8th-century, 18th Century and so on.

There is also a little inconsistency in BC/BCE and AD/CE. In a Hindu article BCE/CE is appropriate, so I'll adjust accordingly. Late dates, like 1825, generally need no clarification. Early dates, like 2nd century, are often helped by making their "direction" explicit, at least when establishing a context. If repeated regularly after that they can "feel" cumbersome, unless "direction" changes regularly in the material being considered.

I'm noting these things here, so that others can join in (and correct things I overlook). I don't imagine there's much controversy over the conventions I've mentioned, I bring them up only to clarify that this is standard stuff, and so give people confidence to participate (especially when I am being slow).

other

I am developing patterns for dealing with foreign language terms in this article. This is probably the most important and potentially controversial aspect of articles like this one. Personally, I like learning vocabulary (or using what I've learned) in languages other than English. This is not true of most readers, who want to know the history of Vithoba, and current practices, without being swamped with Sanskrit and Marathi. In some cases, ekadashi for example (simply a dvandva compound of eka—'one'—and dashi—'ten'), we could simply use an English translation—eleven, Eleven, 11th, etc.—however, the eleventh of the lunar month is such a distinctive of Vakari tradition, and so frequently refered to, that "adopting" the word into the "vocabulary" of our own article makes a great deal of sense to me. Other words, like palkhi (palanquin), are sufficiently technical that these too should come transliterated rather than translated into our article. I am much less clear that the Marathi word for 'sandles' aids the reader in any clear fashion. At this point, I am not removing any Sanskrit or Marathi vocab from the article, I am simply doing my best to make it as unobtrusive as possible, but there's a limit to that. Italics do, however, help signal to a reader that they are not expected to know a word, and that its definition can be expected to be added in parentheses, or that it has already been so introduced earlier in the text. Alastair Haines (talk) 01:51, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

PS I selected 'palanquin' to translate palkhi, because the English palanquin is actually derived from the Sanskrit palyanka via Malay and Portuguese. And I suspect palkhi comes from the same word via Prakrit into Marathi. In other words, palkhi and palanquin are actually kind of the same word. English and Marathi are cousins. The world is a small place. :) Alastair Haines (talk) 02:18, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
Ekadashi as a word does not only deal with Varkari usage, it is used in every Hindu calendar, and almanac indicating the eleventh day of the lunar month. Also, the word "palkhi" has more shades to it as just being a palanquin (a loose English translation). Palkhis are associated with temple-festivals, when the deity is moved in a palkhi around the temple, in the village, or to another town. Many temples in Maharashtra (can't speak in general about India and Nepal - though atleast some temples in these countries have palkhis) have palkhi-festivals. --Redtigerxyz (talk) 05:44, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
Thank you, yes, that is helpful. I think palkhi must be the word we use throughout the article, because it has no exact English equivalent. The same reason we use the Marathi word rather than the English explains why our simple translation is only that--a simple translation, not a perfect one. The article already cites an English language academic paper that uses palkhi in its title, that should be sufficient evidence that the best treatment is to "borrow" the word into English rather than to translate it in this article.
Regarding ekadashi, yes, although not specific to Vakari, it is yet another example of a word with associations in Indian religions that the number eleven, or even the eleventh of the month simply do not have in English. Again, we are right not to translate it, but to teach the reader what it means so it can be understood as it is used.
As I mentioned, I'm retaining all other Marathi and Sanskrit terms, though I'm noting that I think it would be a fair criticism from someone at FAC to ask that these be kept to what is very closely associated with Vithoba and genuinely necessary. It is an English language article after all, on a religious topic, rather than a lesson in Sanskrit. ;) But remember, this objection is not my objection. I think things are fine, but tastes differ, and there could be a good case made to ask us to be more selective. Let's wait and see.
In any case, I'll be back to work again soon. Alastair Haines (talk) 01:04, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Rakhumai or Rukmini?

Summarize
Perspective

I take it that Rukhumai is the natural Marathi form of the name Rukmini. I think this article should select Marathi forms over Sanskrit, Kannada and Hindi terms, consistent with selecting Vithoba over Vittala. The language of Vithoba devotion is Marathi (and Kannada). This is slightly awkward in English, because English has assimilated a good deal of Sanskrit and Hindi in various ways. However, most English readers will find all terms unfamiliar. After presenting variants at first mention, we should then stick to only one option (the Marathi) from then onwards.

Rukhumai is an excellent example of the difficulty. Many English speakers will recognise Rukmini, however, many won't. At Wiki, of course, there is only one article title and Rukmini is the right choice (imo). However, in this article, after identifying that Rukhumai is Rukmini, I think we should be consistent in calling her Rukhumai without offering the explanation at each usage.

I'm somewhat open on this issue. However, the following seem to be the issues.

  • Do we give alternatives at each reference? E.g. Rukhumai/Rukmini. I think not.
  • Do we use the name most familiar in English? I think not, since this is simply undefined in many cases.
  • Do we adopt one convention for Vithoba and Rukhumai and another for other names and words? Again I think not.

I can easily imagine readers criticising use of Rukhumai as making things more complicated, so editors will do this too. (In fact, part of me has precisely this objection.) However, there are reasons for doing it—authenticity (to the culture being discussed) and consistency (across other words and names which are equally opaque to the English reader). These matters will not always occur to critical readers and are somewhat convoluted to explain in detail.

The question is, do we copyedit in such a way as to conceed in advance to criticisms we can be sure will be raised? I.e. select Rukmini, because that will deflect criticism in future. Or are we willing to document sound reasons for adopting Rukhumai in this article and direct critics to engage with them before voicing any final opinion of their own?

I propose the second. But that may mean refering a critic at an FAC to discussion here, rather than simply accepting the criticism. That takes courage when you want every vote you can get. This is your FAC bid Tiger. It's your risk to take, not mine. I'll back you whichever way you leap. Other people's opinions on this would also be helpful. Reasoning is usually taken more seriously when several people are presenting the same rationale.

I've currently decided to go for Rukhumai, though in previous edits I used Rukmini. I can see both sides, I've even changed my mind, but this article needs to make up its own mind on this one. Please help us decide the issue Tiger, my friend. :) Alastair Haines (talk) 03:35, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

When texts speak of Vithoba, they use Rakhumai reflecting the Varkari's non-Brahmanical Marathi tradition. When texts talk of Vithoba as Krishna, they use Rukmini - may be reflecting a Sanskrit Brahmanical tradition. So to be accurate with the texts, two names are used. Similarly in Haridasa sect section, Vitthala is used instead of Vithoba as Vitthala is word used in Kannada. Also in the temples section. Before shifting to the other spelling, i add "Vitthala (Vithoba)". --Redtigerxyz (talk) 05:32, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
Yes, I see what you were doing in the Consorts section and I liked it very much. Perfect! :)
The way the text flowed there, there was some changing backwards and forward that is hard to explain in a general and simple way, but I agree it was exactly the responsible academic and neutral way to do it.
So, without making any clear rule about it here, I'll press on, I'm sure we'll agree and that we can work together to explain it to others should it not be obvious why things are the way they are. Alastair Haines (talk) 00:51, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Minor issues

Summarize
Perspective

Since Redtigerxyz asked me to point out article issues I might see, here are a few small problems I noticed on a quick read-through. I was time-limited and didn't go into a detailed study of the text, so this isn't meant to be a complete or comprehensive critique, but the article has clearly improved due to recent editing sessions.

  • Re: "Haridasas consider the temple of Pandharpur sacred as well that of Hampi and worship Vitthala along with forms of Krishna." Bad grammar, possibly due to a missing "as" after "as well". If that is the case, a comma or two would be a good adddition to the clause, or perhaps a minor reword to avoid the need. -- Michael Devore (talk) 21:28, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Re: "Another name Pandharinath also refers to Vithoba as the lord of Pandhari (yet another variant for Pandharpur)". There seems to be a word missing here, but I can't quite figure out the desired meaning to place it. Does "Pandharinath" refer to Vithoba?
  • Re: "Eventually, on meeting sage Kukkuta, Pundalik underwent a transformation and devoted his life to the service of his aged parents." Which of the two caused the transformation, did it happen eventually or did it happen on meeting the sage? If the meeting caused the transformation, I'd consider changing "Eventually" to wording such as "Later" or "Later in his life" or dropping it altogether. If the transformation was eventual after meeting the sage, then a slightly different wording choice would be better.
  • Re: "The king ordered Sena to be arrested for not coming to the palace despite royal orders." What king? The transition here is pretty abrupt. Consider something along the lines of "The king of [whatever] had ordered...". The "had" relates back to the need for aid in the previous sentence as a cause.
  • Re: "Apart from these and abhangas, short Marathi devotional poems of the Varkaris, many stutis (praises) and stotras (hymns) are dedicated to Vithoba, some of them originate from the Haridasa tradition." I like "originating from" better than "originate from", otherwise it reads like it should be a separate sentence.

OK, I'm out of time for now. As you can see, nothing major, and it's your decision what changes to make and if you want to make them. If a larger chunk of free time becomes available, I'll try to fit in a more detailed scan after other copyediting passes are complete. -- Michael Devore (talk) 21:28, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for this attention and help, and thanks in advance for coming back when you have time. Two of your comments above relate to sentences I've scrutinised (or altered). The others refer to parts I've not come to yet, so thanks for the advanced tip-offs.
I'm quite happy for the sentences I've "passed" to be changed, of course, but here they are again, and my take on just those two sentences.
  • "Another name, Pandharinath, also refers to Vithoba, as the lord of Pandhari (yet another variant for Pandharpur)".
I've adjusted punctuation. Pandhari is the third alternative name for Pandharpur mentioned in the text. Pandhari-nath means "of Pandhari-Lord" and is used to refer to Vithoba. That -nath means 'Lord' has been explained in the text previously.
I've probably spoiled things now. Once you see it, you see it. The text will probably always make sense. Text is always easier once deciphered, the trick is going back to see what made it difficult to decipher in the first place. Then adjusting things to remove any obstacles. Sometimes, tiredness and unfamiliar words are the obstacle rather than the actual text.
Anyway, I'll adjust the punctuation in the article to make the apposition explicit. Feel free to change the whole sentence or turn it into three sentences. Concise writing is often harder to read.
  • "Eventually, on meeting sage Kukkuta, Pundalik underwent a transformation and devoted his life to the service of his aged parents."
Your questions here Michael mirror many of my own. I'd like to know more of the story, but I'm content with the precis as far as the article goes. The "eventually" could refer to five pages of poetic description of heroic narrative. Whenever, however, and whoever was responsible, the transformation happened, the "narrative conflict" between Pundalik and Vithoba is resolved and Kukkuta provides minimalist explanation. I liked the sentence as very compressed precis storytelling. It does leave answerable questions. Eventually is rich with unexplored implications. Again, please feel free to expand this section, Tiger's very generous with sourcing and expanding. My vote's happy with short and sweet in this case. But please feel free to ignore that, because I'm not a voting kind of man. ;)
So, bottom line, your move, please edit those two sentences (and any others I've finished with) to your satisfaction. Alastair Haines (talk) 06:18, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Glossary

Summarize
Perspective

In the lists (Names and Words) below, the names are categorised by what they denote (to aid seeing relationships), the words are simply offered in alphabetical order.

Names

"Maharashtra is a state in the modern nation of India. Its capital is Mumbai, the 5th most populous city in the world. Historically, it was at the centre of the famous Maratha Empire. The most popular local language is Marathi."

"Vishnu is a major Hindu god, often considered as the Preserver, alongside Brahma (Creator) and Shiva (Destroyer). In Vaishnavism, Vishnu is considered supreme. His consort is Lakshmi. He is famous for ten avatars (appearances) including Krishna and the Buddha in the past, and Kalki who is still to come."

compounds

Words

The main issues here are typography and definition. Regarding typography, words may be written in any one (but not more) of the following ways:

  • in scripts prefered by the native languages (and should not be bold or italic as well);
  • in IAST (again, with rare exceptions, these need no further marking);
  • in italics (when the two methods above are not used, care needs to be taken that such versions of words are found in sources); or,
  • as ordinary English words, because they have been accepted into English dictionaries (care needs to be taken in case English meaning varies from native language meaning, italics signal such shifts).

accepted in English (loanwords)

  • avatar (manifestation) — literally a descent, but generally restricted to divine reference, especially Vishnu (italics may sometimes be appropriate to indicate native language usage of the word)

"A Brahmin is a priest. It is also the name of the highest, priestly caste in the traditional Hindu social system, which includes: Kshatriya (rulers), Vaishya (specialists) and Shudra (workers)."

  • Brahmin (priest) — also highest caste, well-known loanword in English (can take plurals, possessives, form adjectives), doesn't require italics as foreign language term (Oxford English Dictionary 1st ed., 1888, notes capital had generally been prefered to that point)
  • brahminical
  • dhoti — traditional Indian lower-body garment for men, similar to a sarong
  • guru (teacher)
  • raja (king) — cognate to Latin rex, whence "regulation" (from ruler to the rules); see PIE "reg-" in Pokorny (1989) pp. 854–57
  • veena — stringed instrument, developed in India, of lute family, resembling a long guitar, compare with sitar

non-English

  • abhanga (untranslatable) — religious poems of genre unique to Vithoba
  • amrita (food of the gods) — compare with "ambrosia" and "nectar" (now English from Greek)
  • arati (untranslatable) — ritual offering (of light), and songs sung at this
  • bhakti (devotion) — religious devotion, restricted in usage to Vaishnavism (and related yoga school)
  • darshan (untranslatable) — visual reverence, extending from supernatural "visions" to an "audience" with a god in his temple.
  • dasa (servant)
  • dharma (untranslatable) — underlying moral fabric of universe, religious movement or person

"An ekadashi is the 11th day of either fortnight in the cycle of the moon. The moon waxes (grows) to full brightness, then wanes (shrinks) to darkness and a 'new' moon and cycle."

  • ekadashi (11) = eka (1) + dashi (10) see also holy days (above)
  • kshetra (untranslatable) — holy place of spiritual power (contrast with tirtha below)
  • kuldevta (household deity)
  • mandir (temple)
  • murti (untranslatable) — image and hosting shrine
  • palkhi (untranslatable) — ceremonial vehicle carried in pilgrimage and religious procession, containing deities or sandles of saints, cognate to "palanquin"
  • panth (path) — used metaphorically, as in English, for religious "way" of life (from Sanskrit 'to go' or 'move' Monier Williams (2006): p. 585.; see also PIE "pent-" in Pokorny (1989) pp. 808–09 for English cognates "path", "find" and "Pontiff"; note also Wiktionary PIE roots)
More information Glossary ...
  • puja (untranslatable) — symbolic meal or other communion with deity, implying both intimacy and respect
  • samadhi (memorial) — two technical uses of the word: in this article, funerary "memorial"; more commonly, "mental connection" in meditation
  • sampradaya (untranslatable) — famous and established religious tradition
  • samsara (untranslatable) — the ordinary "course" of life, often a technical word analagous to dunya in Qur'anic Arabic, but with Hindu or Buddhist associations like karma
  • svarup (untranslatable) — authentic, original form of self (contrast with "avatar" in English loanwords above)
  • tirtha (untranslatable) — holy place involving water (contrast with kshetra above)
  • vakari (pilgrim) also Vakari (above)
  • yatra (annual pilgrimage)
Initially created by User:Alastair Haines. Changed a little. Perfect. Any special reason why this has been made? --Redtigerxyz (talk) 14:16, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
I thought it might be helpful for various people, ourselves included. Readers will only know three or four of these words. It is good for us to realise how many words readers will be learning while reading the article. Also, it helps point out that some words are long, but denote very simple ideas--Maharastra, it is just the name of a state of the nation of India--but other words are genuinely essential to the article, very short, but still they are labels for ideas that non-Indians will not recognise--like puja. Finally, it helps make clear why some words have capitals, others don't, some have italics, others don't and so on. Alastair Haines (talk) 15:38, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
One way to use this list
It would be a new thing (I think) for us to do this. You could select say 10 or 12 frequently used words from the lists above and source a concise explanation. This could become a Template to be included near the top of the article, and called Glossary. It would make life a lot easier for an English-only reader.
The difficulty readers will always face is that there are two, non-ideal options:
  1. foreign words and ideas are explained at every use (this appears redundant and cumbersome—and it is);
  2. they are explained at first use only (this requires memorisation, first use is often hard to find again).

"An abhanga is a poem dedicated to Vithoba and written in the Marathi language. Many abhangas have been written by Vakari poet-saints, ever since Dnyaneshwar who lived in the 13th century."

If words that are frequently repeated are listed in a place that is easy to find (a glossary) readers are much happier. Things look more professional, just like an ordinary book that deals with many foreign words or ideas.
The trick is to make the glossary short, easy to find, and presented in alphabetical or logical order.
I think words like abhanga and ekadashi need "sidebars" if we don't have a glossary. This helps a reader stay on the same page, without needing to go back and find links or explanations. It's the sort of thing that deflects valid criticisms of "redundancy", without creating more valid criticisms of "lack of clarity".
When Tiger gets back from his break, I'd love to hear what he thinks about producing a short glossary, sidebars or both.
Alastair Haines (talk) 00:49, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Badva and Bhat

Summarize
Perspective
  • "Every pilgrim must employ a Kshetra-upadhya or local priest either a Badva or a Bhat." — Arunchandra S. Pathak (ed.), "Prandharpur", The Gazetteer's Deparment, Maharashtra Government, Mumbai, 2006.

Unfortunately, this excellent source doesn't tell us anything more about the Bhat. On the other hand, unfortunately Wikipedia doesn't tell us anything about the Badva. It appears that local Prandharpur priests who serve vakari consist of family groups who don't always get on well, or at least some weren't in 1977, when the original material was compiled.

The pilgrim who has performed all or any of the above ceremonies seldom fails to worship the god Vithoba and the goddess Rakhumai. The worship is of two kinds: the mahapuja, that is, the great worship also called panchamritpuja or five-nectar worship and the padyapuja or foot-wash worship. During the last few years owing to disputes between the Badvas and the Sevadharis or inferior attendants of the god, the great worship has been stopped. (Ibid.)

I'd like to know more about the Sevadhari too. These are not FAC issues, they are matters of detail that can be addressed over time, not necessarily by current editors. In fact, one of the great strengths of the current article is the way it stays very close to addressing the most important information regarding Vithoba from the very best sources. But this doesn't mean all contribution at the article will cease after we succeed in drawing more attention to it by featuring it, quite the opposite, in fact. We may well attract even more quality contributions. Cheers. Alastair Haines (talk) 09:52, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Bhat in Marathi is a type of Brahmin. Badvas are traditionally priests of Vithoba's image of Pandharpur. Utpats are traditionally associated with Rakhumai worship. Similar there are Sevadharis and other kinds of priests who perform special tasks like showing a mirror to the deity to playing music for him. This IMO should be covered in Vithoba temple, Pandharpur not here as the article deals with the deity not the temple in particular. --Redtigerxyz (talk) 12:51, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for answering my questions. That's very helpful and I see your point that details of temple worship and priestly roles belong at the temple article. That doesn't stop some information being here as well, of course. But clearly, just as you say, talking about Bhat goes into unwanted detail. I did find a source that seems to talk about Badva — Lok Nath Soni, "Badwa", in Kumar Suresh Singh, B. K. Lavania, S. K. Mandal, N. N. Vyas, People of India: Rajasthan, Popular Prakashan, 1998. ISBN 9788171547661
Are Vitobha's Badhva part of the same group as Lok Nath Soni's "Badwa"? Alastair Haines (talk) 13:26, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
The Badvas have nothing to do with Rajasthan. Atmost, Badva is spelt as Badava. Badvas are mostly attached to the Pandharpur temple only, not a caste but a family and only afflicted to Vithoba worship and with the Utpats form the adminstaration of the temple, as per my knowledge. I will cover the adminstration in the temple article. --Redtigerxyz (talk) 13:42, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
Good man! Thank you so much. Totally right, this is temple information not Vithoba information. But you understand my questions are natural from a reader, we need the info somewhere. You can see how your work makes a difference, can't you? There are many people like me who want to know more about India if it is made easy for us. We need generous people like you to show us where to look and make it simple for us. Thanks again. Alastair Haines (talk) 01:42, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Plurals in English

Summarize
Perspective

The plural form of nouns in English normally involves some version of suffixing s. However, there are exceptions: foot and feet; child and children; man and men; fish and fish and so on. This becomes much more tricky when words are "new" to English, borrowed from other languages (origami and origami, samurai and samurai), or have a long tradition of being formed according to their original language—antenna, antennae; criterion, criteria; datum, data; addendum, addenda. There are inconsistencies when refering to people groups, especially if by autonym—Pakistani, Pakistanis; Israeli, Israelis; but Maori, Maori (in formal language).

I think I should consult Hobson Jobson to get a feel for how English borrows Indian words. I don't think we can assume that we can just add an s to a non-English word to make it plural. That is certainly often not what it would do in its own language, and it is not what English requires in all cases, in fact English is quite comfortable with mass nouns and endings other than s when it is dealing with a non-native term.

So, for example, while there's no problem at all with saying "Vakaris" if one wants to, in formal written English, "Vakari" feels preferable to me as a plural. In many cases we can also easily phrase things to avoid plurals and avoid the issue. But I'll look into Hobson Jobson, because really those of us working on Indology pages should bring our practice into line with reliable style guides on this point. Alastair Haines (talk) 10:44, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Hmmm, well, there's way too much information for me to make much of it. I need a secondary source. An interesting example of an Indian word that is very widely used in English without a plural is shampoo, apparently from a rather specific word champu, refering to massaging the scalp with oil before a bath. The original word could obviously form plurals, though shampoo is a mass noun in normal English usage, unless I guess you're selecting between brands at a supermarket. For now, I'll take the safe course of casting sentences so that the sense of foreign words would be expected to be singular. Alastair Haines (talk) 11:33, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
Relaible source, used in this article as a ref uses Varkaris .--Redtigerxyz (talk) 12:53, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
Fair enough. That will do for Vakari/Vakaris then. I think it may come down to my own English and inter-language style. I actually regret raising this now, because when I think about it, I'd want to encourage you to write anything you feel comfortable with. If someone who speaks Marathi is comfortable giving words an English inflection, that's a very good guide to it being OK. Alastair Haines (talk) 13:44, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
For plurals and capitalisation of first of other indic words, i have google book searched for reliable sources and changed in the article. --Redtigerxyz (talk) 13:46, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
OK, I've seen the changes you've made and I can live with those. Three things should be said though.
  1. Standards: on some points, what is seen in one source can be done differently in others, or in other places of the same work, because the conventional rules are a bit tricky, or involve personal taste. Additionally, a nineteenth century source, or even a 1980s source is often following different conventions to what is now current. However, where things are taste, we're better off following your taste, because you're the writer here.
  2. Capitals: "braminic" and "puranic" are likely to be the normal and appropriate form because of modern English conventions related to adjectives: "ancient Egypt" not "Ancient Egypt", "biblical writers" not "Biblical writers", "rabbinic interpretation" not "Rabbinic interpretation" and so on. An important reason to keep capitals to a minimum is seen in the glossary above, a capital normally signals a proper noun, and proper nouns are conceptually simple, they are just labels for particular people or things, so they signal to readers that they don't need much "brain-space". The clearer we make the context so they can guess "name of river", "name of person", "name of month" the better.
  3. Foreign words: the major issue here is that at first usage of a foreign term, say kris (Javanese dagger), an English reader doesn't know if the s is from the original language or a plural. In many books (though not journal articles) glossaries are provided, which make the base forms of words absolutely clear. Journal articles don't do this, because they are normally written for academic, not general reception. Wiki is more like a book than a journal article, but without the glossary.
The thing is, you and I and many others know what a gopi is, that Radha is a gopi, and that the gopis related to Krishna are frequently referred to in the plural. So we (like many writers) can use whatever feels comfortable. However, when writing for general readership like Wiki, we cannot assume shared background knowledge, and this constrains the freedom we would otherwise have. In this case, because we offer a translation into the plural, it need not be a problem.
Some English users are so familiar with the kris (above) that they speak of it as Javanese and neighbouring peoples do, using just this one word. However, when speaking to other English speakers, who don't know what it is, they will talk about a kris-knife (though it is more properly a dagger--a kife designed for warfare). But the plural of kris, in English, is not "krisses" as far as I know, but "kris-knives", because it "sounds" better.
Addendum: Austronesian padi (growing rice) came into English by 1623 as "paddy field", with a plural "paddy fields". Only in 1948 did "paddies", short for "paddy fields", become accepted English. (See Etymology.com.)
So, the bottom line is that when words are not English words, we need to treat the reader with extra respect, because we are asking them to learn a new word. So we mark it with italics, then they know they are not crazy--it is a new word. We provide enough context (sometimes just a word or a few in parentheses) so they have a definition ... and we remain sensitive to issues of inflection. For example, we would probably not give them gaj (elephant), because gajs is awful in English. Rather we would probably give gaja (elephant), or gajas (elephants). But there are still issues, what do we do with Hindi hath (hand or hands)? Well, you see how I would do it.
Actually, puja worries me slightly, because this word is in Indonesian too (borrowed from Sanskrit a very long time ago), but it only means 'praise' in that language. Because Indonesian doesn't inflect, I wouldn't speak of pujis if bringing puji into English, but nor would I use puji puji--the Indonesian plural--I'd treat it as a mass noun, which 'praise' often is in English anyway, and puji often is in Indonesian too. That brings us back to puja in Marathi. If this is a countable noun in Marathi, like gopi, you will want to use an "s" to make English plurals. But I would guess bhakti does not work like that. English speaks of religious "devotions", where Marathi would probably see the whole thing as bhakti that cannot be divided. An "English-only" reader may need some clue that bhaktis is not appropriate (with complicated exceptions like the Subway Bhaktis, where the plural refers to the members of the group not to activity).
Anyway, I don't think the plural issues I've described are a serious readability or precision issue in this article, at this point, mainly because you, Tiger, are bilingual and using reliable sources. Alastair Haines (talk) 23:23, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
I totally agree with you about the inconsistencies in English with capitals and plurals of Indic words, but these are not introduced by me or you but Reliable academic sources have used the words that way, so IMO, it is better to follow them.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 05:07, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
Ah! That too is helpful for me to hear. I just checked with a native Indonesian speaker, who is now fluent in English. Her view was that although she might talk about puji (their word, sometimes puja puji, meaning 'singing to God') to an English-only speaker, she'd just never use plural forms in English because they don't do that in Indonesian. She'd always phrase the English in a similar way to Indonesian, so the word would always be puji (or puja puji).
Now you confirm another side of things for me, that you are willing to copy English sources that make plurals of Marathi words that you might not make yourself. Yes, that's certainly the safest course.
As I said, I don't think this is an issue in this article, right now, so much as something needing care. I think sources will actually differ in what they do. In fact, I'm sure you've seen that already—"brahminic" is an excellent example Google Scholar gives a roughly 50-50 split for capital or not capital. So which reliable source do we follow? Do we follow different sources at Vakari and Avatar? What should Wikipedia do? Our own Wiki manual of style doesn't tell us, it says use sources and be consistent. So what I'm really saying here is: editors working in the Indology area should probably have a mini, specialist style guide that they agree to. I think I'm discovering that should definitely include native speakers of Indian languages and English, but maybe even more importantly, it should include bilingual people and should be written to serve people who know nothing about Indian language--i.e. the average Wiki reader.
It crossess my mind that the glossary above could be the beginning of some kind of internal, shared list of non-English words used in Indology articles, which could help writers of future articles to know where they can feel comfortable using special words. It needs to be information and guidelines rather than rules, or people will use it to have arguments rather than produce clear text. Anyway, enough said for now. I believe I have the whole Worship section to copyedit, after which I'm essentially finished. Though I do intend to specify what conventions I've followed and to explain why (which will include sources as appropriate). That way, others can reproduce anything I've done and improve upon it.
OK, here's what I'll do. I need 24 hours to work on real life just now. Tomorrow I'll finish Vithoba. After that, it'll take me a week or so, I'll draft two guides in my own User space: a Writer Guide--writing Indology articles for ease of reading; and a Reader Guide--a short introduction to reading Indology without going crazy. Obviously it will need help from people like you and Anish to get these into working shape, but once we have them, people at FAC can read the Reader Guide before commenting, and writers can be refered by people at FAC to the Writer Guide. It saves everyone going over some issues time and time again, and it stops things from ever getting personal.
Anyway, just a thought. Cheers. Alastair Haines (talk) 06:13, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
This is an excellent idea Alastair....it will be seminal work on wikipedia.......in the long run it will be a big help for Indology articles....I will chip in whenever I can.--Anish (talk) 08:08, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Questions

Summarize
Perspective

Does anyone know a source that tells us how many Vithoba temples there are, and where they are? I guess this might be a more difficult question than it sounds, because there could be lots of small shrines that have never been counted. Just a thought. Alastair Haines (talk) 21:28, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

This is like asking how many churches are in the world? There are numerous small shrines to Vithoba, all over Maharashtra, many more keep on popping up every year. --Redtigerxyz (talk) 05:15, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

I don't understand "yama on his feet", regarding the clothing Vithoba wears. I know Yama, but not yama. Someone please help. Alastair Haines (talk) 22:33, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

PS There's a nice quote from Tukaram in Pande's article (of three months ago).

  • tirthi dhondapani, deva rokada sajjani
  • holy places are made of mere stones, God is in wisdom and in the pious

Alastair Haines (talk) 01:15, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

The last sentence of iconography is from a Marathi religious book that describes the Vithoba image of Pandharpur. Added meaning of yama. --Redtigerxyz (talk) 05:15, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
Thank you, Tiger. I am still concerned about this, because reins and bridle are associated with the mouths of horses, not with human feet. I understand the Sanskrit, yama also means 'twin', which fits the name of the god Yama. A bridle has two, twin sides, one on the left and the other on the right of the horse's mouth, likewise the reins. These allow a horse to be "pulled" left or right. Many uses of yama in Sanskrit seem to be associated with chariots and horses. It is possible that something of this sense is intended for the feet of Vithoba. If so, it may mean sandles, because they have straps of leather like reins. It may also refer to something "restraining" Vithoba, as though tied to a brick, staying to provide lasting blessing to Pandharpur. Because feet (like hath) come in pairs, yama seems to fit, but how? Here are links to rein and bridle in English. I'm sure you'll see the problem. If we can't work out an English word for yama, I think we may, unfortunately, be best off not describing the feet. Alastair Haines (talk) 22:18, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
Commented out the unclear "yama", but retained other marks on the feet.--Redtigerxyz Talk 04:54, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
Perfect handling! :)
Does the god Yama have a sign? Is that sign on Vithoba's feet?
Theologically, if Vithoba is Vishnu the Preserver and Sustainer of life, he triumphs over Yama, god of death ... until the end, of course.
I would not be surprised if this symobolism was involved. But I cannot know it unless a source tells me so.
Perhaps an editor will supply a source that tells us about this one day. :) Alastair Haines (talk) 02:38, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Options

Summarize
Perspective

Here's a good example of needing some kind of consistency, so readers don't get distracted by wondering why things are changing.

  • Varkari Panth (lit. "The Pilgrims' Path") or Varkari sampradaya (lit. "The Pilgrims' tradition")

This is a problem because the first two words look like a book title, which is what italics + capitals indicates—e.g. The Lord of the Rings. Foreign words are written in italics + lower case letters—honi soit qui mal y pense—unless they are names, in which case they are in capital letters without italics—Mao Zedong, Łódź Voivodeship. Theoretically, double quotation marks indicate quotations, of course—"To be or not to be"; but where the quotes indicate a translation, this is often done using single quotes—logos means 'word' in Greek. The last rule is not consistently applied. There are other uses of italics (for example, for emphasis) and of quotation marks (for example, to signal a "so called" something). In fact, when indicating that a word is being named rather than used, either of the last two methods can be found—e.g. the word we are discussing is worship, or the word we are discussing is "worship".

These things are all discussed in reliable sources, the rules have changed over time (and will continue to do so), they change from country to country and from one writer or publisher to another. A fair bit of variation is almost always allowed, but not within a single piece of writing. Each piece of writing should stick to its own rules wherever it got them, with the exception that when quoting another piece of writing, it should generally copy what that piece of writing did.

The above is the right way to present the quote, although we do not spell philosopher with a capital P in English any longer, just as we don't spell Brahmin as Brackman. The italics in the last sentence indicated discussion of "words as words" not foreign language terms, and the quotes and italics just used indicated "so called" usage and emphasis, respectively. Alastair Haines (talk) 08:55, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

I like your improvement of the typography to the following:
  • The Varkari Panth (lit. 'The Pilgrims' Path') or Varkari sampradaya (lit. 'The Pilgrims' tradition') ...
I have only altered it by placing sampradaya in italics. To an English-only reader, "Vakari" works as an adjective for the foreign word sampradaya. There are other good ways of doing this. If you are unhappy with the method I've suggested, please feel free to change it, and then I'll understand better what you want to say. Whatever you want to say will be right, I'm sure, I'm just playing the part of an English-only reader, and reflecting what seems strange. I'm sorry about being fussy, but everyone knows the conventions in these things are tricky and complex. :( Everything should be good now though. :) Alastair Haines (talk) 22:31, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
But Varkari is not an adjective of sampradaya. "Varkari Panth" and "Varkari sampradaya"

are complete names of the religious tradition. Alastair, please change to convey this meaning. --Redtigerxyz Talk 04:47, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Perfect feedback, Tiger!
I think you are telling me that "Vakari Panth" and "Vakari Sampradaya" should be all capitals and take the definite article the. This would be a little like the Roman Catholic Church, or the Plymouth Brethren. We cannot write "Plymouth brethren" (sort of a karmadharaya compound or adj-n), because this would mean 'the brothers who live in Plymouth' (adj-n).
This is very easily fixed and will look better as well as being clearer and easier to read. :) Alastair Haines (talk) 04:57, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Literally ...

If the word "literally" can be avoided in translation, that is ideal. It should only be added when it might help the reader get a better "feel" for a word. There is an excellent example in this article.

  • digambar ('naked', literally 'sky clad')

The word "literally" is really only needed when the original language word is being used metaphorically. It introduces a mini "etymology".

I have simplified the translations in the sentence above, because they are "more or less" literal, which is what the reader expects. It is a little confusing for me to say this, but actually "Pilgrim" is literal, yet "Path" is metaphorical in English in this context. But that is perfect for us, since "Vakari" is fairly literal and "Panth" is almost the same metaphor in Indic languages as it is in English. This is not surprising, because historically both words come from the same very ancient source. Not only that, religions in many languages are known by names like "the ... Way". It seems the metaphor that religion is like a path along which you walk is very natural to the human mind.

In case you are uncomfortable with it, I have used the definite article the only once, although

  • The Varkari Panth (Pilgrim Path) or the Varkari Sampradaya (Pilgrim Tradition) is ...

would also be good English.

Does Marathi use a definite article? Does it use it in different or similar ways to English? Alastair Haines (talk) 05:17, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Path is a literal translation of Panth. Pilgrim is a rough translation of Varkari. Varkari is vari + kari (doer), that is, one who does the vari - the annual pilgrimage to Pandharpur. 'Varkari Panth' should be put in quotes or italics to show it is a formal name like Roman Catholic Church. --Redtigerxyz Talk 05:32, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
Marathi does not have capitals. I'm not sure you "feel" the importance of capitals in English. Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi needs no italics or quotes, just like Roman Catholic Church, or a better analogy still—the Catholic devotional tradition known as Cursillo or Emmaus Walk (respectively from the Spanish cursillo and the Greek form of the 1st century Palestinian town, Emmaus). Cursillo and Emmaus do not need italics or quotes because English language speakers don't mind proper nouns sounding "non-English", unlike ordinary, lower case words, which they do expect to be English, or "marked" in some way to show that they are not.
Would you be comfortable with Bharatiya Janata Party (Indian People's Party)?
One reason I didn't use a second definite article is because I wanted to make the two names sound more close to the original language. It is a very, very subtle point, but I am actually trying hard to learn from you the correct understanding of things in the original language context, so I can do my best to present that with full force in the English. I have been trying to provide sources to show you what I'm doing so you can do it yourself as you write. You will always understand what needs to be said better than an English-only writer. What I'm trying to do is faithfully present that so English-only readers will understand it as closely to the right way as possible. Often this is easy, sometimes it is hard, sometimes there is more than one way of doing it.
Please keep telling me anything you are nervous about, because I have no other reliable source regarding Marathi usage and understanding. Alastair Haines (talk) 06:03, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
I appreciate your input, will be useful for other articles I write. What is done now is enough for Varkari Panth.--Redtigerxyz Talk 16:30, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
Excellent! :) Alastair Haines (talk) 19:31, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Vyasatirtha

Summarize
Perspective

"Rajguru" I understand, "preceptor" is harder for me. A rajguru is a teacher (guru) for the king (raj). So indeed is a preceptor a teacher. But the English word is very uncommon and normally found in technical uses like nursing or the Christian usage Wikipedia documents.

I recommend we use the term "royal advisor" here. This is a very well-known and broad term in English, and would include someone who was considered to be a reliable source of either practical or spiritual information for a king.

Tiger knows the sources better than I do. Perhaps you could describe what they say about Vyasatirtha's job. Then we can select English words that: readers will understand, accurately fall within the definition of rajguru, and also summarise what reliable sources tell us about Vyasatirtha. Alastair Haines (talk) 00:21, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

guru is a loanword. Lets use it. --Redtigerxyz Talk 05:16, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
That's clever thinking. :D
I'll support your choice.
We'll see what others think.
Loanwords like "raj" and "guru" do shift a little in meaning when used in English, that's how we know they have become genuine English words now! :)
Let's allow reviewers to comment, if they think it worth doing so. Alastair Haines (talk) 00:04, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Minor nit-picking

Summarize
Perspective
  • Several references have a double "pp.". I think this is due to use of a template which automatically generates a pp. along with an explicit pp.. -- Michael Devore (talk) 21:55, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
Corrected. --Redtigerxyz Talk 05:01, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
  • In both my British and American English dictionaries, "refering" is spelling with two r's as "referring". Since the article uses a single r spelling three times, the spelling seems deliberate so I won't change it myself, but you might double-check if it's correct in your spelling reference. -- Michael Devore (talk) 22:03, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
Corrected. --Redtigerxyz Talk 05:01, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
  • re:"Vijaynagara king Krishnadevaraya", in the rest of the article the spelling is Vijayanagara (an a after the y). Are both correct here? -- Michael Devore (talk) 22:07, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
corrected. --Redtigerxyz Talk 05:06, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Last one. Re: "Vithoba was first worshipped as a pastoral god as early as the sixth century." All other uses of centuries in the article I could find used numeric (e.g. 6th) forms. Although an author is referenced, it doesn't look like a direct quote to keep the form. -- Michael Devore (talk) 22:42, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
6th used. --Redtigerxyz Talk 05:06, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the quick response. Doing. --Redtigerxyz Talk 04:27, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
Thanks from me too Michael! :) Please also feel free to improve prose where you judge things could be smoother. Two eyes are certainly better than one in such things. I'm not too precious about my tastes (except maybe some;). Alastair Haines (talk) 05:05, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

More nit-picking

Summarize
Perspective

WP:MoS notes that major revered literary works do not take italics: Bible (and Genesis, Psalm 119, the Gospel according to Matthew, Epistle to the Hebrews, Revelation, etc.), New Testament, Qur'an, and so on. This extends to Hindu scriptures also: so Rgveda, Vishnu Purana and so on. I was very careful to leave major works unitalicised and italicise minor ones. They've been "corrected". This sort of thing happens often. I'll see about sourcing a list of Hindu scriptures that should remain unitalicised. Meanwhile, a rule of thumb is: for anything that looks like a Veda, Upanishad or Purana—no italics. Could others please help with watching this. Alastair Haines (talk) 10:11, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

It is a stylistic concern, but I dislike structure of the lead's sentence "In the process of his final identification with Vishnu, Vithoba—it has been proposed—may have been: a hero stone, a pastoral deity, a Jain saint, or a manifestation of Shiva or even Buddha." Adjacent conditional phrases in "it has been proposed—may have been", along with the "has/have been" duplication in close proximity and parenthetical/interjection pause immediately followed by a colon/list pause, read clunky to me, almost like a literary stutter. Might you consider merging the "proposed" part into the "may have been" part to form one phrase? Perhaps something along the lines of "Vithoba was proposed to have been:".

To really nit-pick, in "or a manifestation of Shiva or even Buddha." the list's terminal or could be slightly confusing due to the following or, leading to Buddha being read as another list entry rather than as a different manifestation. I considered restoring one of the em dashes removed above to replace the second or as "a manifestation of Shiva—even Buddha.", but I'm not sure the change improves the read. Probably fine as it is, the issue is trivial, regardless. -- Michael Devore (talk) 22:08, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

  • In the process of his final identification with Vishnu, Vithoba—it has been proposed—may have been: a hero stone, a pastoral deity, a Jain saint, or a manifestation of Shiva or even Buddha.
  • Minimal change: In the process of his final identification with Vishnu, Vithoba may have been: a hero stone, a pastoral deity, a Jain saint, a manifestation of Shiva—or even the Buddha.
Nice work Michael. As it stands "Vithoba—it has been proposed—may have been" includes semantic redundancy, with consequent infelicities like you mention. It should be improved somehow. One difficulty is that the verb should distribute across all proposals. These proposals are not all of the same kind. I have listed the proposals in chronological order from the perspective of Vithoba and devotees. What complicates things is that the first four are recent academic reconstructions. The last is a common devotional belief. One sentence (and one verb) is being pressed to say too much.
Perhaps we could say something like:
  • Re-write: Most devotees now identify Vithoba with Vishnu or his avatar Krishna. Many specifically identify him with the Buddha, as an avatar of Vishnu. Various Indologists have proposed a prehistory for Vithoba worship where he was previously: a hero stone, a pastoral deity, a manifestation of Shiva, a Jain saint, or even all of these at various times for various devotees.
Reference to the Buddha needs to be a little careful, because Siddhartha Gautama is considered to be a historical man of the Kshatriya caste by a consensus of scholars, who would not be drawn on whether this historical person was also the Vishnu of faith.
I'm not quite happy with the "was proposed" of your suggestion, but "has been proposed to have been" may not be to everyone's taste, but would be accurate distributively, and "legit" use of English. Feel free to ignore this, or feel free to modify my three sentence option as a replacement for the sentence currently in the text.
On the second point, again I broadly agree. The reader cannot be assumed to know that the Buddha is not considered to be a manifestation of Shiva, rather he is associated with Vishnu. I think my three sentence proposal above spells things out better than the current text. Whatever the linguistic rationale, the meaning is significantly clarified by spreading the ideas over separate sentences. I attempted to be too minimalistic in changes to the text, and tried to be too concise, resulting in something unclear and infelicitous, please adjust according to common sense and good taste. Alastair Haines (talk) 00:31, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
Changed Alastair's 3-line suggestion a little. The three sentence para is good, but then this sentence's info is repeated. "While generally considered a manifestation of the Hindu deities Vishnu or Krishna, he is sometimes associated with the god Shiva, the Buddha or both." This sentence can not be removed from the first para, as Vithoba's Vishnu-Krishna identification is important. Also a hero stone et al identifications need to be in the last para as not so important to be in the first. How is the foll. sentences?
  • "In the process of his final identification with Vishnu, Vithoba was (or should it be "is") proposed to have been: a hero stone, a pastoral deity, a Jain saint, a manifestation of Shiva—or even the Buddha"
  • Putting only the last sentence of the 3-line para in the lead "Various Indologists have proposed a prehistory for Vithoba worship where he was previously: a hero stone, a pastoral deity, a manifestation of Shiva, a Jain saint, or even all of these at various times for various devotees." Both replacing the existing sentence in question. --Redtigerxyz Talk 05:24, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
Perfect, Tiger! :) Alastair Haines (talk) 13:46, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
Which one? --Redtigerxyz Talk 13:55, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
The second choice is better imo, Tiger.
The first sentence has a complex tense issue:
is proposed — simple present passive,
was proposed — simple past passive, or
has been proposed — present perfect passive.
See English conjugation tables#To be played. The most precise tense is the present perfect passive, because: the proposals were made in the past, but are still relevant now. The simple past would suggest that the proposals are no longer accepted now. The simple present would suggest that all proposals are current consensus among academics.
Go with the second sentence, even highly educated native English speakers don't like tenses getting this complicated. ;)
Alastair Haines (talk) 13:46, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
I also like the second version. I had to pause when reading that sentence (as it currently stands) the first time—the emdashes, the colon, the commas, and the list all combine to make it stutter.Priyanath talk 03:07, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
 Done --Redtigerxyz Talk 03:30, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

More nitpicking:

  • In the 'Etymology' section, the phrase 'Varkari etymology' threw me. Is there such a thing? Maybe 'Varkari tradition' is more accurate?
  • In the 'Iconography' section, it says "Vithoba is shown standing arms-akimbo on the brick thrown by the devotee Pundalik." It's not until later in the article that you read the story of Pundalik throwing the brick. That needs to be explained earlier. Or if not, it should be "a brick", since we don't know about "the" brick yet.
  • Under 'Festivals', it says "Up to six hundred thousand Varkaris travel to Pandharpur for the yatra on Shayani Ekadashi. This is the 11th day of the waxing moon in the lunar month of Ashadha." It would be helpful to have a range of western calendar dates when this happens. I think westerners will be curious to know just when six hundred thousand Varkaris are travelling to Panharpur!

I also made several minor copy and grammar edits to the article—if any of them are reverted I won't take offense! The article is very thorough and well researched. I'm guessing it's the best article on Vithoba available on the internet, which is what a Featured Article should be. Congratulations on such a great article. Priyanath talk 04:09, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Exactly! What makes the article worth criticising is that it is already so outstandingly good. Look after yourself, Tiger, and manage your time carefully. Very many people can benefit from your work. Alastair Haines (talk) 10:33, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the response and the edits:

  • Etymology changed.
  • Iconography: "The prescribed iconography of Vithoba stipulates that he be shown standing arms-akimbo upon a brick, which is associated with the legend of the devotee Pundalik." in Etymology has already established the association.
  • Western calender months given: Lead: "Shayani Ekadashi in the month of Ashadha, and Prabodini Ekadashi in the month of Kartik." Festivals: "Ashadha (June–July) and Kartik (October–November) Ekadashis" "Up to six hundred thousand Varkaris travel to Pandharpur for the yatra on Shayani Ekadashi, the 11th day of the waxing moon in the lunar month of Ashadha"--Redtigerxyz Talk 05:37, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
Thanks - at some point you might want to ask someone who knows nothing about these things to read the article. That would be a good test run for getting it through FA. Priyanath talk 21:43, 9 December 2008 (UTC)


Ruhrfisch comments

Summarize
Perspective

As requested, here are my comments on the article from a WP:FAC view point. I will work on this in sections. These are all just suggestions / points of discussion, feel free to disagree.

General

  • There are several one or two sentence paragraphs throughout the article that in most cases should be combined with others, or perhaps expanded.
  • A few of these also have no references, for example Reconstruction of the historical development of Vithoba worship has been much debated. In particular, several alternative theories have been proposed regarding the earliest stages, as well as the point at which he came to be recognised as a distinct deity. or The physical characteristics of the central murti (image) of Vithoba at Pandharpur, and various textual references to it, have inspired theories relating to Vithoba worship.
  • The images are somewhat bunched together - could one of the temple images be moved up higher in the article to avoid a large block of text with no images?
  • Most readers will be fuzzy on the geography - could a map of India showing the two states where Vithoba worhips is concentrated be added?
  • The image in the Etymology and other names section is just a crop of the image of the door in the Identifications section. I am not sure what having both images adds to the article.

Lead

  • I would link akimbo
  • It seems odd to link the second variant of the consort's name in ...sometimes accompanied by his main consort Rakhumai (Rukmini). (and not the first name)
  • I would not include the latitude and longitude in the lead in Vithoba's main temple stands at Pandharpur in Maharashtra, close to the Karnataka border (17°40′N 75°20′E). in any case, and since Pandharpur is linked, interested readers can follow the link to see where it is.
  • I would use "his" instead of "the" in Vithoba legends revolve around the devotee Pundalik, ... so change to Vithoba legends revolve around his devotee Pundalik, ...
  • Add a comma to Other devotional literature dedicated to Vithoba includes the Kannada hymns of the Haridasa[,] and Marathi versions of the generic Hindu arati songs, associated with rituals of offering light to the deity.

Etymology...

  • Need a ref for The prescribed iconography of Vithoba stipulates that he be shown standing arms-akimbo upon a brick, which is associated with the legend of the devotee Pundalik.
  • In general I would try and briefly identify the experts cited in this section and throughout the article. So William Crooke, orientalist, and the Varkari poet-saint Tukaram are good, but According to M. S. Mate... is too vague. I would also be consistent on including dates or not for the experts.
  • Why is Bittidev in italics in the Hoysala king Vishnuvardhana alias Bittidev? No other name is italicized, just words.
  • A bit awkward Another popular epithet for Vithoba is discussed by the Jain author-saint Hemachandra (1089–1172 AD)—Panduranga or Pandaranga, which means 'the white god' in Sanskrit. perhaps something like Panduranga or Pandaranga is another popular epithet for Vithoba, which means 'the white god' in Sanskrit. The Jain author-saint Hemachandra (1089–1172 AD) notes it is also used as an epithet for the god Rudra-Shiva. (not sure if this is correct, but you get the idea)
  • Need a ref for Another name, Pandharinath, also refers to Vithoba as the lord of Pandhari (yet another variant for Pandharpur). and perhaps add the one sentence paragraph following to this paragraph, perhaps with a better transition.

More to come, hope this helps, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 03:50, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Typical Ruhrfisch quality criticism. :)
Agreed about paragraphing, Tiger wasn't totally happy with one or two paragraphing changes I proposed. My taste is closer to Ruhr's I suspect, but I also respect Tiger's judgment. I think it is best Tiger decides which paragraphs to merge or to split. I think it is fair to say most people feel most comfortable with middle-sized paragraphs consistently throughout a whole article, rather than some very short and very long ones. It is not a rule and not right or wrong. But the consistent, middle-sized principle is probably best suited to an encyclopedia for general readership.
In general, I overlooked unreferenced sentences like those indicated, because the references followed in later ones. Again, I agree that Ruhrfisch represents a more experienced judgment of what Wiki FAC processes prefer. References can be repeated to cover these sentences. This should not be hard work.
Image comments make sense to me. Nothing to add. Good point about akimbo, certainly not common in English usage, but not uncommon either, perfect word in context, and used in sources.
Linking Rukmini makes more sence because that is the more commonly known form of the name (and actual article title). Rakhumai is in the text and Rukmini in parentheses because context makes the Marathi form of the name more appropriate. An analogy would be, "one classic patriotic song is God bless America (that is the United States)". The appropriate word in context is different to the most common usage, hence the most common usage is indicated in parentheses and receives the link. Certainly other preferences could be applied. Mine are not strong enough to object to a change, though Tiger and I discussed this very issue and agreed on the current method of presentation.
"His devotee Pundalik" is indeed slightly nicer, it is smoother, less academically distanced, without becoming casual or unencyclopedic. Tiger's style is scrupulously academic and rigorous in following sources. I think he benefits from hearing that he can be a little more relaxed. The comma suggestion also strikes me as an improvement.
Good points on refs needed in Etymology section. Bittidev should not be in italics, agreed. However, I believe dates are consistently offered for poet-saints at first mention. Only a few times are they also cited as experts. It is also possible that I added dates for experts earlier than the 20th century. This is slightly, but not entirely arbitrary. The convention I follow is current scholars ("current" assessed generously) get no dates, older scholars get dates to alert the reader that scholarship may have moved on, without cluttering the text with prose to make that point.
Two sentences better than one in Paduranga discussion, agreed.
Summary—I think only in the case of Rakhumai (Rukmini) do I actually disagree with Ruhr. Though the convention regarding dates for people referred to in the article is another point worth a little more interaction.
Thanks for taking the time to scrutinise things so closely and fairly Ruhr. :) Alastair Haines (talk) 07:25, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
You are welcome - I am not done yet. I mostly commented on things that I would have commented on at FAC, but I never know what people will pick up on there. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 20:22, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
Replies

General

  • There are several one or two sentence paragraphs throughout the article that in most cases should be combined with others, or perhaps expanded.
Some 2-3 paras are "topic sentences", which i was told were missing in the earlier FAC. The two below are some of them. "The physical characteristics of the central murti.." and "Reconstruction of the historical..." sum up the whole sections, that are about to come, so are self-explanatory when read along with the suceeding para.
OK, I figured topic sentences are usually part of a larger paragraph, but it is your call. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 20:22, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
  • A few of these also have no references, for example Reconstruction of the historical development of Vithoba worship has been much debated. In particular, several alternative theories have been proposed regarding the earliest stages, as well as the point at which he came to be recognised as a distinct deity. or The physical characteristics of the central murti (image) of Vithoba at Pandharpur, and various textual references to it, have inspired theories relating to Vithoba worship.
As explained earlier.
OK, if made part of the following paragraph they get apparent "cover" from those refs. ;-) Ruhrfisch ><>°° 20:22, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
  • The images are somewhat bunched together - could one of the temple images be moved up higher in the article to avoid a large block of text with no images?
I am sorry i can't help this. As the images where the surrounding text relates to them. Found no images with valid licenses for earlier sections.
Sorry to be unclear - I am not sure why File:Vitthala temple DK.jpg has to be placed where it is in the article. Could it be moved up earlier in a section which is now all text? This seems like the best candidate to move, if you want to move an image. Its caption is not a complete sentence and so should not end with a full stop (period). Ruhrfisch ><>°° 20:22, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Most readers will be fuzzy on the geography - could a map of India showing the two states where Vithoba worship is concentrated be added?
Basically this a religion article, so IMO temples, devotees and the deity are more suitable. Maps may make this article look like a geography article.
  • The image in the Etymology and other names section is just a crop of the image of the door in the Identifications section. I am not sure what having both images adds to the article.
There was only 1 image of Vithoba himself, so i felt that the crop can be beneficial. The crop can be removed. --Redtigerxyz Talk 16:43, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
I would keep the closeup of Vithoba if only keeping one image. The whole door image does show him as one of ten Dashavatars, and, as noted, the article could use some more images. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 20:22, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Lead

Done
  • It seems odd to link the second variant of the consort's name in ...sometimes accompanied by his main consort Rakhumai (Rukmini). (and not the first name)
Rakhumai is the popular name in the Vitoba tradition so needs to be first. Can be done this way: [[Rakhumai|Rukmini]] or [[Rakhuma (Rukmini)|Rukmini]] Here, there is redundacy though
OK, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 20:22, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
  • I would not include the latitude and longitude in the lead in Vithoba's main temple stands at Pandharpur in Maharashtra, close to the Karnataka border (17°40′N 75°20′E). in any case, and since Pandharpur is linked, interested readers can follow the link to see where it is.
Removed.
  • I would use "his" instead of "the" in Vithoba legends revolve around the devotee Pundalik, ... so change to Vithoba legends revolve around his devotee Pundalik, ...
Nice suggestion. Clearer
  • Add a comma to Other devotional literature dedicated to Vithoba includes the Kannada hymns of the Haridasa[,] and Marathi versions of the generic Hindu arati songs, associated with rituals of offering light to the deity.
Done. --Redtigerxyz Talk 16:51, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Etymology...

  • Need a ref for The prescribed iconography of Vithoba stipulates that he be shown standing arms-akimbo upon a brick, which is associated with the legend of the devotee Pundalik.
Available in Iconography section. "Vithoba is shown standing arms-akimbo on the brick thrown by the devotee Pundalik....[2][7]"
  • In general I would try and briefly identify the experts cited in this section and throughout the article. So William Crooke, orientalist, and the Varkari poet-saint Tukaram are good, but According to M. S. Mate... is too vague. I would also be consistent on including dates or not for the experts.
Added who Mate is.
  • Why is Bittidev in italics in the Hoysala king Vishnuvardhana alias Bittidev? No other name is italicized, just words.
Done.
  • A bit awkward Another popular epithet for Vithoba is discussed by the Jain author-saint Hemachandra (1089–1172 AD)—Panduranga or Pandaranga, which means 'the white god' in Sanskrit. perhaps something like Panduranga or Pandaranga is another popular epithet for Vithoba, which means 'the white god' in Sanskrit. The Jain author-saint Hemachandra (1089–1172 AD) notes it is also used as an epithet for the god Rudra-Shiva. (not sure if this is correct, but you get the idea)
Absolutely correct. clearer.
  • Need a ref for Another name, Pandharinath, also refers to Vithoba as the lord of Pandhari (yet another variant for Pandharpur). and perhaps add the one sentence paragraph following to this paragraph, perhaps with a better transition.
Zelliot (1988) p. 170 is the ref which also ref for next sentence. As I understand, we have the same ref for every sentence in the para, 1 at the end of para is OK--Redtigerxyz Talk 17:03, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
One map only Tiger, that mightn't be so bad, but where do we get free maps? Draw one? ;)
Also, even a picture with the Bhima river or Pandharpur would be nice.
Perhaps you or a friend could take one?
Ruhrfisch is only pointing out what people tend to observe at FAC. Pictures matter to people.
Alastair Haines (talk) 17:19, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
I have no objections if an image is added in an appropriate section. I am open to image addition. I would not remove it, but i can't add it as i do not have the technical abilities to produce a such an image. The Pandharpur images would be available by 31st Dec, i am visiting the temple shortly.--Redtigerxyz Talk 17:31, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
The Pandharpur article has File:BHIMARATHIDSC00441.JPG - not sure if any of the structures pictured are Vithoba related. There is a base map of India File:India-locator-map-blank.svg that could be used - just color in the two states. Again, this is only a suggestion, feel free to ignore it. I will try and review some more soon, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 20:22, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
Actually I had added the BHIMARATHIDSC00441.JPG image in the article, but User:Elcobbola who is renown for his knowledge of image copyrights had replied to my query "Thanks. The other (Bhima image) is declared PD. "I, the copyright holder of this work, hereby release it into the public domain." A date stamp is present on photo. --Redtigerxyz (talk) 17:53, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
Yes, I see that, but it doesn't matter. We can't rely on a boilerplate template. We need an explicit assertion of authorship. Did the uploader take this image? Did a friend or relative take it? Did they find it on the website? Эlcobbola talk 18:33, 22 October 2008 (UTC)"
As said earlier any way i was going to Pandharpur, so images would not be a problem. --Redtigerxyz Talk 05:28, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

More comments

Origins and development

  • Identify briefly who R.C. Dhere and G. A. Deleury are - why do their opinions matter?
Added. --Redtigerxyz Talk 05:40, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Possibly clearer sentence Vithoba is also assimilated in Buddhism as a form of Buddha, who in turn is viewed as a form of Vishnu in Hinduism.[16]
Agree. Many scholars would say that Indic religions show a high degree of synchretism—a kind of "consensus" minimising conflict. An alternative for the sentence:
"Vithoba is (sometimes?) assimilated into Buddhism as a form of the Buddha (who is himself, likewise, commonly assimilated into Hinduism as a form of Vishnu)."
Two sentences might be even better still. Concise expression is not always clearest expression. I leave final decision for others. Many good solutions.Alastair Haines (talk) 02:36, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
Done, first recommendation. --Redtigerxyz Talk 05:54, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
  • The present tense seems odd to me here - I guess I think of the assimilation as a past occurence

Despite assimilation in Vaishnavism as Krishna-Vishnu, Vithoba does [did?] not inherit the erotic overtones of Krishna, such as his dalliance with the gopis (milkmaids).

Disagree. Simple present tense is definitely best here. Alternatives:
"Vithoba did not inherit" (simple past) suggests one single known event in past — not true;
"Vithoba has not inherited" (present perfect passive) works because past event relevant now — but why use complex PPP when simple present will do?
The verb inherit permits the tense because it implies present state based on past event: "We inherit half our genes from mum and half from dad", "Vithoba does not inherit erotic overtones". We don't care when inheritance happened, we care only whether it has happened by now. This sentence is about a present state (that doesn't exist because there was no past event). Happier?Alastair Haines (talk) 02:36, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Thanks, that makes more sense - I am OK with "does" now, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 02:27, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
IMO, this is resolved, Thanks to two great English pundits. --Redtigerxyz Talk 05:54, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
  • article inconsistencies, why is it mentions that the Hoysala king Someshvara (use "the") but records Yadava king Krishna granting and notably Yadava king Ramachandra's minister (no use of "the")
Agree (reluctantly). Because it has multiple editors! ;) Tiger prefers no article and I prefer the article but don't insist on it. Most European readers and native English speakers will prefer sentences with articles. I recommend we change to that throughout, but regret it deeply. Less use of the article is authentic "Indian English" and permissible academic English, they are absolutely legitimate varieties of English. However, consistency rules, and standard English uses the article.Alastair Haines (talk) 02:36, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
  • If all that is wanted in consistency, then the first "the" could be dropped, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 02:27, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
Perfect! I am very glad you are open in that direction. Others may disagree with us at FAC. I am thrilled if the three of us are agreed on supporting this "flavour" within the article. Alastair Haines (talk) 02:36, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
Adding "the". Sounds better--Redtigerxyz Talk 05:54, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Lead image has no caption - I assume it is the "central murti (image) of Vithoba at Pandharpur"? If it is the lead image, perhaps refer to this here?
It is not the central murti of Vithoba at Pandharpur. I am searching a free image of Vithoba of Pandharpur, a fair use image of Pandharpur's Vithoba was removed and deleted in process of FAC. --Redtigerxyz Talk 05:54, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Not sure what "IAST original" means in "Viṭhobā is neither Viṣṇu nor Śiva. Viṭhobā is Viṭhobā" (IAST original)
Explanation. The article would be inconsistent in using the International Alphabet of Sanskrit Translation if this was not noted. This allows the reader to be clear that IAST was used because the source used it, rather than an editor supplying it. We should always note this when using emphasis. Sometimes it can be helpful to note the same regarding IAST.
  • OK, but could this be in the reference as a note? Does it have to be in the text of the article itself? Ruhrfisch ><>°° 02:27, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
Perfect! :) Alastair Haines (talk) 02:33, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
I think the IAST original is OK, can be treated as "sic". --Redtigerxyz Talk 05:54, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Following sentence, would it make more sense to say Despite this Although, some priests of the temple point to marks on the Vithoba image's chest as proof of Vithoba being Vishnu, in his form as Krishna.[7]?
changed. --Redtigerxyz Talk 05:59, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Could ref [7] be moved to the end of the last sentence in the Iconography section? If not get rid of the space before the ref, and does and the symbols of a flag (dhwaja), goad (ankusha) and thunderbolt (vajra) on the feet. need a ref?
removed. Anyway not so important, most images i have seen do not have these signs. --Redtigerxyz Talk 05:59, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Worship

  • Need refs for In addition to the rites at the main temple in Pandharpur, Haridasa traditions dedicated to Vitthala flourish in Karnataka. and Varkaris also give him credit with the saying—Dnyanadev rachila paya—which means "Dnyaneshwar laid the foundation".
"In addition to the rites at the main temple in Pandharpur, Haridasa traditions dedicated to Vitthala flourish in Karnataka" is a topic sentence, Haridasa sect is a reference. Added ref for other--Redtigerxyz Talk 06:51, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Perhaps make the caption clear, so The Vitthala temple in Hampi, Karnataka, is believed to have been built by Krishnadevaraya.
Done, but made "is built" as there is no dispute. --Redtigerxyz Talk 06:51, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Perhaps add a sentence explaining the difference between ritual worship and visual adoration, or at least link them if possible.
Agree, but how? I seem to recall that both puja and darshan are indeed linked at fist usage in the article. Puja, however, is used so often I think we need a sidebar for it somewhere to prompt the reader to remember it. Since puja is not the only word like this, I also think a glossary should be considered.
That's one of many options (and normally an excellent one). Problems are that we can only link once; and sometimes it is ideal to use the Indic word in the text, other times it is better to use an English gloss, yet other times a more fulsome prose description works best. The best place to link puja is when we use the word itself (imo). The option you propose works best if the link and idea are only really ever needed once. Perhaps that's true of darshan, it is certainly not true of puja. I think this issue is part of something bigger and important to Indic studies articles. I'll refrain from discussin it in depth here, you can see some of my thoughts in Talk:Vithoba#Glossary above. Alastair Haines (talk) 02:43, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Add "he"? His sleep begins on Shayani Ekadashi (literally the 'sleeping 11th') and [he] finally awakens from his slumber, four months later
Done. --Redtigerxyz Talk 06:51, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
  • What is the "bridght fortnight" in at Kole (Satara district), in memory of Ghadge Bova, which has a fair on the fifth day of the bright fortnight in Magha month ?
Agree. I've overlooked this or it's been added. "Bright fortnight" is a literal translation of an Indian term for the period of the "waxing moon". The article should generally use "waxing moon", though the original language phrase and literal meaning should be (and are) noted somewhere.
  • How about just adding waxing moon - so on the fifth day of the bright fortnight (waxing moon) in Magha monthAlastair Haines (talk) 02:43, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
Done --Redtigerxyz Talk 06:51, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
  • This is a direct quote and needs a ref ...the temple is believed to have housed the central image from Pandharpur, which Vijayanagara king Krishnadevaraya took "to enhance his own status" or to save the image from plunder by Muslim invaders...
Done. I usually place references about a whole para (or 2 lines) at the end if the same references are used for every sentence.--Redtigerxyz Talk 06:51, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

'Legends

  • First paragraph needs a ref
"As discussed in the devotional works " References are there."Legends regarding Vithoba usually focus on the devotee Pundalik—who is credited with bringing the deity to Pandharpur—or on Vithoba's role as a savior to the poet-saints of the Varkari faith." is a topic sentence, whole para references for it. --Redtigerxyz Talk 06:51, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Would it make sense to have this section earlier in the article? It seems to provide more insight into what the devotees of Vithoba believe about him.
What format do you suggest? Surely worth a thought. Legends is put at the end as "Devotional works" and "Varkari sect" have to be discussed before. Rationale of the format now is: Names --> how Vithoba came to be in his current distinct form ---> with whom (deities) is he associated ---> How does iconography support the identifications ---> consorts - associations with various traditions --> Current form of worship ---> Legends --Redtigerxyz Talk 06:51, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
If it were to be moved, I think I would put it right after the Etymology as the legends are quite old, but again it is your call. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 04:09, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
I am sorry but i do not agree on this one as stated before IMO "Devotional works" and "Varkari sect" have to be discussed before, as they consider the background to the texts and Varkari poet-saints. --Redtigerxyz Talk 14:20, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

General comments

  • On reading the whole article, there is a bit of repetition which may be objected to at FAC. Some repetition is good, but does the legend section really need to repeat again that Pundalik brought the deity to Pandharpur (as one example)?
  • There are also several red links - it is not required that an article at FAC have no red links, but it can be helpful to write even stubs for them.

Hope my comments are helpful, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 01:10, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

I am creating full fledged articles for the red links. In the process, started with Bahinabai and Visoba Khechara. Every section needs to stand on it's own as well as part of the whole, so repetition and refernce to other sections is integrated for readers who may skip sections or read one section at random. It can be easily removed if objected to. We can work on that. --Redtigerxyz Talk 07:00, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
Tiger's the one who can really comment, but I'm as impressed as always by both your accuracy and thoroughness, Ruhr. I have one disagreement, though you asked a question, rather than making an assertion, so we probably don't even disagree there. :) I've answered questions where I've been involved or where I might have something relevant to say to aid communication. Where I've made no comment, I simply agree with Ruhr (or have no opinion). Alastair Haines (talk) 02:02, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your kind words. I replied in a few places above. Glad this helps make a very good article even better, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 02:27, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
Oh yes! I agree, it is an excellent article. I only regret that I didn't put more thought into helping Tiger with some of the repeat material. I think he is the best judge of which parts to trim where they are covered elsewhere. Noch einmals vielen Dank. Tchüss. Alastair Haines (talk) 02:31, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
The two great minds above have really made this article better. Vithoba owes it's current form to copyeditors like Haines and reviewers like Ruhrfisch, and many others who have written in the FAC, on this talk, PR and on my talk. Thanks all. --Redtigerxyz Talk 07:00, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
All of my concerns have been changed or replied to, thanks for your kind words. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 14:25, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Ellipses

Summarize
Perspective

Wikipedia:MOS#Ellipses at current revision says the following (layout and emphasis original).

An ellipsis (plural ellipses) is an omission of material from quoted text; or some other omission, perhaps of the end of a sentence, often used in a printed record of conversation. The ellipsis is represented by ellipsis points: a set of three dots.

Style
Ellipsis points (loosely called ellipses) have traditionally been implemented in three ways:
  • Three unspaced periods (...). This is the easiest way, and gives a predictable appearance in HTML. Recommended.
  • Pre-composed ellipsis character (…); generated with the &hellip; character entity, or by insertion from the set below the edit window. This is harder to input and edit, and too small in some fonts. It may be hard to search for. Not recommended.
  • Three spaced periods (. . .). This is an older style that is unnecessarily wide and requires non-breaking spaces to keep it from breaking at the end of a line. Not recommended.

I note three typographic conventions here, the first—Three unspaced periods—is recommended and the other two are not recommended. I have no personal preference in this, so have no objection to following the MOS on this point generally, and in this article in particular. Alastair Haines (talk) 04:38, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Vithoba images

Summarize
Perspective

Hello, I have received the permission to use the following Vithoba images :

  • File:Bhajan_Hall_at_Vithoba_Temple.jpg
  • File:Hatti_Darwaja_of_Vithobha_Temple.jpg
  • File:Vithoba_Temple_Mahadwara.jpg
  • File:Rakhumai_at_Vithoba_Temple.jpg
  • File:Vithoba_of_Pandharpur.jpg

Can some editor (like Redtigerxyz) well versed with the article incorporate the required images? Thanks. --Nvineeth (talk) 07:57, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading the images and getting the permission. Have incorporated two of the images, the images of the temple will be put in the temple article. --Redtigerxyz Talk 10:22, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
Due to some restrictions on usage, the images had to be moved to Wikipedia, and deleted from Wikimedia. The new filenames are as follows:
  • File:Bhajan Hall Vithoba Temple.jpg
  • File:Hatti Darwaja Vithobha Temple.jpg
  • File:Mahadwara of Vithoba Temple.jpg
  • File:Rakhumai Vithoba Temple.jpg
  • File:Vithoba of Pandharpur Temple.jpg

Sorry for the trouble and confusion. The publisher has agreed for the images to be used at Wikipedia with CC attribution, but not completely relinquish the rights ( as reqd by wikimedia ) Thanks. --Nvineeth (talk) 17:20, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Nvineeth forwarded me the email as requested by me. The publisher has put the " non-profit educational purpose only" clause, which is not excepted at wiki. So requesting speedy deletion. --Redtigerxyz Talk 16:13, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Desecration of the Pandharpur temple by Muslims

Desecration etc. continued

Monotheist, non-ritualistic not factual

Worship and service of Vithoba as in the Gazettee

Let us put it this way

Let us put it this way II

Shouldn't "he" be "He"?

Infobox Image

... III

non-Brahmnical

Loading related searches...

Wikiwand - on

Seamless Wikipedia browsing. On steroids.

Remove ads
Remove ads