Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Krishnaism/Archive 1

Archive 1

Vote: merger of Krishna Vasudeva article into Krishna

Vote is closed - clear consensus

Merge was proposed and a new section in Krishna article to be created to reflect following references and the main text:

1. '^' KLOSTERMAIER, Klaus K. (2005). A Survey of Hinduism. State University of New York Press; 3 edition, p.206. ISBN 0791470814. “Present day Krishna worship is an amalgam of various elements. According to historical testimonies Krishna-Vasudeva worship already flourished in and around Mathura several centuries before Christ. A second important element is the cult of Krishna Govinda. Still later is the worship of Bala-Krishna, the Divine Child Krishna - a quite prominent feature of modern Krishnaism. The last element seems to have been Krishna Gopijanavallabha, Krishna the lover of the Gopis, among whom Radha occupies a special position. In some books Krishna is presented as the founder and first teacher of the Bhagavata religion.”
2. ^ BASHAM, A. L.. Review:Krishna: Myths, Rites, and Attitudes. by Milton Singer; Daniel H. H. Ingalls, The Journal of Asian Studies, Vol. 27, No. 3 (May, 1968 ), pp. 667-670. www.jstor.org. Retrieved on 2008 May 24.
3. ^ Hastings 2003, p. 540
4. ^ Hastings 2003, p. 540-42
5. '^' SINGH, R.R. (2007). Bhakti And Philosophy. Lexington Books. ISBN 0739114247.

p. 10: "[Panini's] term Vāsudevaka, explained by the second century B.C commentator Patanjali, as referring to "the follower of Vasudeva, God of gods."

Proposed by User:Dbachmann

-

Merge- yes (retaining all relevant material and creating separate section) Wikidās-ॐ 14:24, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Merge- Yes I think it is the best thng to do    Juthani1   ^tcs 18:08, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Merge- Yes, I agree - it makes sense‎.Viprak (talk) 20:15, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Merge - Agree with above. --Shruti14 ^{t c s} 19:58, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Vote is closed - clear indication of the consensus. WP:SNOW Wikidās-ॐ 06

56, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Academic discussions on Krishnaism

• Concerning the academic discussion on Krishnaism...

• Please review a discussion on Krishnaism that can be found at the University of Cumbria website at, Vaishnava. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 03:36, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

• Harvey Cox, a very important theologian at Harvard Divinity School has taught a class on Krishnaism there. A New York Times article concerning him and his class has stated this; Spreading the Gospel at Harvard. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 14:02, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

• MULLICK, Bulloram (1898). Krishna and Krishnaism. S.K. Lahiri & Co. {{cite book}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help) Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 14:20, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

I have added WikiProject Krishnaism/Bibliography with a list of printed material. If you have chance you can expand it, as relating to the subject(s). Wikidās-ॐ 20:37, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Krishnaism

THIS IS A COPY OF THE ORIGINAL PROPOSAL

Description

Uniting and expanding of various traditions where Radha Krishna is worshiped. Wikidās ॐ 21:31, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Scope

Interested Wikipedians (please add your name to the project page and not here)

• Support - Wikidās ॐ
• Support- Wheredevelsdare (talk) 21:16, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support    Juthani1   ^tcs 21:28, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support Maldek (talk) 01:07, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support Simon ives (talk) 07:13, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support Ism schism (talk) 20:28, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Discussion

• The scope will be wide enough to address all needs of any tradition, where Krishna is worshiped as such. Wikidās ॐ 21:58, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

• Probably too specialized to be viable. I would keep these discussions within Wikipedia:WikiProject Hinduism. --Eastmain (talk) 21:39, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Its a wide range of traditions -- but within the scope of the Wikipedia:WikiProject Hinduism with the specialised interest and review scope. Wikidās ॐ 21:55, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

• A few questions. I'm assuming that the phrasing of the description isn't meant to imply that there will be some attempt at religious syncretism here, although the phrasing as it currently exists doesn't rule that out with the "uniting" part. Also, and here I acknowledge my own lack of total awareness of the subject, I'm assuming this is meant to refer to those groups which worship Radha Krishna as primary object(s) of veneration, not simply all those which consider him/them to be divine. A more detailed description of the various groups which are expected to be included in this group would be useful. Also, I know that in some circles Radhakrishna is treated as one entity, although in this case I'm not sure if what is being referred to is one entity or two. Would it be accurate to say that the intention of this group is to deal more directly with the groups which see Vishnu as being derived from Krishna, rather than the other way around? And my apologies for my own often inexact language here. If so, however, how would it relate to the proposed Swaminarayan group? John Carter (talk) 22:40, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

The principle of all inclusive will include all traditions listed here. Its not a question of syncretism, as nobody has to change ones views, its more a common group uniting different traditions, historically and philosophically different, that have the worship of Radha Krishna as part or the main object of worship. Its not exclusive of anyone who would have a difference in the type of worship, nor will this group exclude topic that are not related to Radha Krishna. Like for example history of Swaminarayan even if not the same topic. This group is not based on any other philosophical or otherwise beliefs, as some will consider Radha Krishna to be incarnate of Laksminarayan, that will not exclude in any way or form such group from being the object of this project. Its not single POV project nor is it single tradition project. We are still working on the complete list of the proposed traditions

On the other hand the name, does not cover who is original, be it Vishnu, Narayana, Swaminaraya, Brahman or parabrahman or Krishna. Its clearly can not be a uniting point. What is to unite everyone is that in one way or another they worship Radha Krishna, be it one entity or two divine persons. Wikidās ॐ 22:53, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Looking at the list, the six traditions listed so far seem to be the "Krishna" end of the Vaishnavism spectrum, and to have at present probably sufficient content to justify a work group, although I would still question how it would relate to the proposed Swaminarayan group, though, as I'm not sure it would be the best idea to try to start both simultaneously. Maybe it would work better to start out with this broader group, develop the basic content there, and maybe later split off into various more focused groups later, more or less like what has been done with the various Christianity projects? John Carter (talk) 23:12, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

(Acutally, Dvaita is more on the "Vishnu"/"Narayana" side of Vaishnavism than the "Krishna" end, and I'm not sure about a couple of others on the list.) --Shruti14 ^{t c s} 01:59, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

I defer to your greater knowledge of the subject. Thanks for the clarification.:) John Carter (talk) 02:13, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Interesting project idea. May be a bit specialized, but it could work. Enough articles are within its scope. I recommend test-driving it as a task force within WP:VAISHNAVA for a while and see if it has potential to remain an active WikiProject. One question - how it its relationship with WP:VAISHNAVA? --Shruti14 ^{t c s} 01:10, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

One question which might be relevant here, and I say this knowing comparatively little about "Hinduism" in general, is whether it might work best to contact the Hinduism project and perhaps see if there is enough support for subprojects relating to the major traditions in it. I know from experience a banner can be used to assess and display for multiple subprojects at once, so that shouldn't be a problem. But it might be a good idea to at least consider the possibility of setting up subprojects for all the major traditions at roughly the same time, so that questions regarding interrelationship of the various traditions could all be discussed at basically the same time. John Carter (talk) 02:13, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

I have removed Dvaita from the list of traditions, as they do not worship Radha-Krishna. Radha-Krishna subproject of Hinduism is a good option. I think setting up other subprojects at the same time is also a good idea. How do we proceed? Wikidās ॐ 21:12, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

We need more votes and support before proceeding. I have left a note on WT:HINDU and WT:VAISHNAVA to bring more attention, and potentially more support, to the project. --Shruti14 ^{t c s} 23:08, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Its a narrow field project that will allow us to focus on various sub projects within its scope. The other will have a similar structure and will include all the goals of the Swaminarayana project described a few entries above, and will also include other groups that need similar presentation. Wikidās ॐ 12:32, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Based on what I can see, the major groups not yet covered specifically by either active or proposed groups are Shaktism, Smartism, Ganapatya, and Saura. Does anyone know if there's enough interest for separate groups regarding any of them? John Carter (talk) 15:15, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

• Not really sure about the ism at the end of the title but the project seems like a great idea. Simon ives (talk) 07:13, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

We could create a Wikiproject for every broadly worshipped deity, such as Ganesha. Doing so, however, would detract from the collaboration at the Hinduism Wikiproject. Also, in practice WikiProjects tend to act like cabals. Since ISKON, a cult, represents the most well-known Krisha worship in the west, this may just end up being a forum for their members to vandalize Wikipedia. ☯  Zenwhat (talk) 07:23, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

There is a need of unity to a large number of traditions that do have a large and significant thing in common - and that is Krishna as an object of worship. I do think that if more editors are interested such elements of Indic traditions as Smartism Ganapatya will have its own project, however it appears that this have nothing to do with this particular project that is currently about the following traditions:

• Bisnupriya Manipuri Vaishnavas

• Bhagavata

• Gaudiya Vaishnava

• Nimbarka sampradaya

• Svaminarayana sampradaya

• Vallabhā sampradāya

There are in alphabetic order and no specific preference should be given to one over the other, all need a lot of work in regards of their structure and content and yes they can eventually grow into its own project or sub-project. Task groups are good for specific purposes, but when structuring is involved project is a better means, as there is a lot of material to be added. We should not take a pessimistic approach to Wikipedia as in User:Zenwhat/Stay_sane - we have faith in Wikipedia and we should proceed with the project as it will provide better means to structure the material and let individual groups grow into separate projects. There could be other similar projects on similar views shared by a number of traditions, but its only if sufficient number of editors will be interested. I actually take the point about ism and it can be dropped. Any others suggestions as to the name of the project? I think naming is quite essential, some of the projects really need help. Wikidās ॐ 09:22, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

• This idea proposed by Wikidas is a very good one! I believe these ideas discussed above are very constructive and will facilitate a lot of good editing on Wikipedia through efficient communication. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 21:37, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

• Wikidas, perhaps simply WikiProject Radha-Krishna? Simon Ives ^{(talk | contribs)} 01:02, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

I think it would work best using the existing Hinduism project banner, to prevent having too many banners on any given article, but the name proposed above roughly approximates the existing "Shaivism" group. John Carter (talk) 01:07, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

I agree with John Carter. Using the existing Hinduism project banner is appropriate. Krishnaism is also, in my opinion, the best name. Also, in my opinion; Krishnaism is to Krishnology what Christianity is to Christology. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 01:12, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

• Comment Concerning the academic discussion concerning Krishnaism... Please review a discussion on Krishnaism that can be found at the University of Cumbria website at, Vaishnava. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 02:48, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Re:Project Name

Following is the discussion on the Project name and relationship with existing projects.

The original Faiths worshipping RadhaKrishna sounds good. I would hv thgt it comes under the Hinduism/Vaishnava projects and not a seperate one. Wheredevelsdare (talk) 10:28, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

We have following non contradicting proposals:

• Krishna under Hinduism
• Krishnaism as a project and a portal
• Traditions worshipping Radha Krishna under Hinduism/Vaishnavism
• Krishnaism under Hinduism/Vaishnavism
• Radha Krishna Sampradayas under Hinduism/Vaishnavism

I feel that all of them are correct and should redirect to one page. Wikidās ॐ 11:13, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

• I also believe that they should all redirect to one page. In particular, I support Wikidas' idea of a project with a separate assessments that will eventually grow into a portal. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 14:30, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

• I'm in agreement with both wikidas & Ism schism here - Krishnaism as the name of this project and portal with the other names being redirected here. Simon Ives ^{(talk | contribs)} 04:59, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Project tags

Yesterday I placed tags on this page for the Hinduism and Vaishnavism projects. Since the issue of naming is still under discussion, I have removed the tags until there is some consensus reached on the above discussion. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 15:31, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Just add |krishna=yes to standard Hinduism tag. Wikidās-ॐ

Project Name

I believe it should be Radha Krishna    Juthani1   ^tcs 17:07, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Juthani, I propose writing an article on Radha Krishna first and create a workgroup that discusses this topic. I think both should go ahead - we need a number of good sources for Radhakrishna worship in different traditions and a good list of temples where Radha Krishna deities are installed and worshiped. What you think. Wikidās ॐ 09:12, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Came across Radha Krishna - why is it empty? Wheredevelsdare (talk) 21:09, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Its in the process of being created. Please add material to relevant sections. Thank you very much. Wikidās ॐ 21:15, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

An attempt has been made and the article is standing. Probably the first article to get the Project banner on the talk page. It also falls under a few other banners I guess, such as Wikiproject:Hinduism and Wikiproject:Religion Wikidās ॐ 06:02, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

The page Radha Krishna needs a bit of work and we have to figure out where to put the lyrics, as one editor complained that its not the place. Suggestion was wikilibrary. Wikidās-ॐ 11:59, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Shri Swaminarayan Mandir, Auckland

The article has been tagged for not having a 3rd party source, and I cant find one - can u pl help? Wheredevelsdare (talk) 16:57, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

• Here is one potential source; Carvings bring temple to life in Avondale. I will try to find others as well. Thanks for posting the note. Ism schism (talk) 17:13, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

• Thanks - I came across tht too, but that is of the BAPS Swaminarayan Mandir in Auckland, whiles the article is on the Swaminarayan Sampraday's Swaminarayan Mandir in Auckland. Wheredevelsdare (talk) 17:23, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

I will keep looking. Since the construction date is so recent, I believe that in the short term news sources will become available. I will continue to look because it seems that there should at least be some articles concerning the Mandir's opening. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 18:57, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

The important question why would you need anything then Official Swaminarayan website? If its listed there and this is an accepted reliable official site, I would say you do not need a newspaper article unless notability is disputed. BTW one project is to create a taskgroup for establishing an official list of reliable websites for this project. Wikidās ॐ 20:15, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Bisnupriya Manipuri Society

The article on the Bisnupriya Manipuri Society is short of references. For such a large group of followers/members, much more could be said but the article itself has little or no references. It is a subject that requires some attention and I will start by trying to find some references. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 19:04, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

BTG Magazine #29-06, 1995 Jayadvaita Swami. "How Manipur Became a Krishna Conscious State". www.jswami.info. Retrieved 2008-05-14. {{cite web}}: Text "Jayadvaita Swami" ignored (help)

Doshi, Saryu. (ed.) 1989. Dances of Manipur: The Classical Tradition. Bombay: Marg Publications.

Naorem Sanajaoba. (ed.) 1988. Manipur: Past and Present. Vol. 1. Delhi: Mittal Publication.

Ningomba, Narendra. 2000. Shumang Lila in Manipur: A Traditional Performing Art Form of Manipur. Unpublished thesis submitted to the department of Culture. Ministry of Human Resource Development. Govt. of India.

Paratt, Saroj Nalini. 1980. The Religion of Manipur: Beliefs, Rituals and Historical Development. Calcutta: Firma KLM Private Limited.

Singh, Ayekpam Shyamsunder. 1980. Manipurgi Shumang Lila amasung Theatre (Manipuri Shumang Lila and Theatre). Imphal: Manipur Sahitya Parishad.

Singh, N. Tombi. 1975. Manipur and the Mainstream. Imphal: Published by N.K. Singh under the auspices of the Cheitrebirentombichand Khorjeirup.

Sircar, Manjusri Chaki. 1984. Feminism in a Traditional Society: Women of the Manipur Valley. Ghaziabad: Shakti Books.

Hope that helps, Wikidās ॐ 18:54, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

I have started an article Vaishnavism_of_Manipur - you can help by expanding it if you have time. Wikidās ॐ 21:49, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

I have been expanding on this article - Vaishnavism_of_Manipur - and anyone who wants to contribute is very welcome... I never been to Manipur... Wikidās ॐ 08:25, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

• Thank you Wikidas for creating the article Vaishnavism of Manipur. This will open up a large religious tradition to further expansion on wikipedia. Thank you, I will look for further information to contribute to this valuable article. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 00:17, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Wiki Workgroup?

Don't you think this should be a workgroup. I mean it goes under the Hinduism category. It would serve the main function. All you have to do is rename the page (move it). It can be a group under the Hinduism Project.    Juthani1   ^tcs 19:41, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

I second Juthani - it must come under the Hinduism/Vaishnavism umbrella. Wheredevelsdare (talk) 19:43, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

There is a talk of phasing out the workgroups as a concept on Wikipedia. I'm currently looking into option of keeping it under the Hinduism/Vaishnavism umbrella and at the same time having our own assessments. All suggestions are most welcome. Wikidās ॐ 20:19, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

How can the assessments for this project begin? Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 00:49, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

One have to have an assessor (I would nominate Ism schism). Then you need to add a banner (that needs to be created) and place this banner over each talk page. I have added a chart to the front page. But the most important thing is actually adding a banner or yes comment to the Hinduism part of the banner, however there could be some pages that escape Hinduism banner, and that is a consideration for Krishnaism or Radha Krishna own banner.Wikidās ॐ 06:00, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

I would also like to help assessing articles. It may be better to add a Hinduism banner for most articles, although a separate banner would be fine as well. --Shruti14 ^{t c s} 23:02, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Krishnaism page

Presently the Krishnaism page redirects to Gaudiya Vaishnavism. Since Krishnaism is to Christianity what Krishnology is to Christology, it seems that this redirect should be removed and the Krishnaism page be edified. There are already some sources listed at Academic discussion on Krishnaism. This seems to be the obvious companion article to the Krishnology page. Any thoughts? Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 13:48, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

I have started working on the article, any comments or edits would be appreciated. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 14:36, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Lets us dispel a misunderstanding, and clarify what is Krishnaism, as a wide and ancient culture in the whole Hinduism. I have expanded on the article, but it still needs lots of work.Wikidās-ॐ 22:00, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Reliable source for Krishna temple pages

When looking for reliable sources for North American temples, I came across Harvard University's Pluralism Project. They have profiles of some notable Vaishnava temples that can be very useful. The link is, Harvard University Pluralism Project's Profile of Hindu Temples. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 15:08, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Project banner

Anyone create a project banner yet? If not, what image would be wanted on it? Personally, I would favor using the Hinduism banner, and maybe retitling the group Wikipedia:WikiProject Hinduism/Krishnaism task force. John Carter (talk) 22:19, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

John, thank you for the input. We are currently working on the page: Krishnaism, your input is highly appreciated. I will come back with a banner that refers to Hinduism. Wikidās-ॐ 22:47, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

I like the current banner - great job. --Shruti14 ^{t c s} 00:06, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Has anyone asked to have it integreated into the WikiProject Hinduism banner? Doing so would allow the project to have assessments and probably, in the long run, be better able to keep track of relevant articles. John Carter (talk) 14:41, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

It is already done, just as you did for Vaishnavism part. Assessments are linked to Hinduism assessments. Wikidās-ॐ 16:48, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Image:Radha-Krishna om.jpg in WikiProject Krishnaism tag

THough the uploader declares it to be PD, the right to realease a work in PD lies with the artist, unless it is PD-art - older than 100 years. The tag needs a more suitable PD-art image.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 10:17, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

I have personally labored for a very long time to produce this original image that is based on a crude original (that is incidentally more then 100 years old). I have however no objection to other image along the lines. Wikidās-ॐ 10:36, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

I have no objection if it is 100 years old, please give source of img and tag it as PD-art. If you have drawn or painted the img, please note so in the summary. --Redtigerxyz (talk) 10:15, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

I also found the img here on Exoticindiaart website, on which the site may hold a copyright.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 10:21, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Its obviously a different image, I was not joking when I said that I took the crude original and and produced an original image. Incidently I wrote an email to the Exotic Inida art, and he confirmed back that he does not hold a copy right on this image (which is not used in the page, to make it clear I uploaded the larger original that was used to produce the tumb) no problems with copy right, enjoy original art by myself. Wikidās-ॐ 20:11, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Also the img is blurred img. For pre-cautionary reasons, replaced with the Govardhan img. Also reworded tag message as "This article is within the scope of WikiProject Krishnaism, an attempt to promote better coordination, content distribution, and cross-referencing between pages dealing with traditions worshiping Krishna. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page." Removed ref to Radha, as there are articles like Rukmini, Satyabhama, Gita, which are related to Krishna, but not to Radha.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 13:38, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Other imgs are most welcome.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 13:39, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Category?

Are the relevant articles within the scope of this project being categorized as part of Category:Krishna? --Shruti14 ^{t c s} 00:05, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Assessment section of project page

I have removed the large table template and instead linked to it to keep the page more streamlined, relevant and readable. --Shruti14 ^{t c s} 00:09, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks to John Carter the page correctly displays the articles that the project covers. Wikidās-ॐ 20:07, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Much appreciation to the editors referenced above. Thank you all for the hard work you all have done in getting this project started. I will try to help in the assessment of articles as well as tagging them for the Krishnaism wikiproject. Let me know how I may be of assistance. Thanks again. Ism schism (talk) 04:14, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Bala Krishna

A reference in a recent book sheds some light on the origins of Krishnaism (as one of the views)

KLOSTERMAIER, Klaus K. (2005). A Survey of Hinduism. State University of New York Press; 3 edition, p.206. ISBN 0791470814. “Present day Krishna worship is an amalgam of various elements. According to historical testimonies Krishna-Vasudeva worship already flourished in and around Mathura several centuries before Christ. A second important element is the cult of Krishna Govinda. Still later is the worship of Bala-Krishna, the Divine Child Krishna - a quite prominent feature of modern Krishnaism. The last element seems to have been Krishna Gopijanavallabha, Krishna the lover of the Gopis, among whom Radha occupies a special position. In some books Krishna is presented as the founder and first teacher of the Bhagavata religion

I have made an article Bala Krishna that does not yet reflect the claim that Bala-Krishna, "the Divine Child Krishna" - a quite prominent feature of modern Krishnaism. Can anyone provide further material to expand this stub. Reference to contemporary elements are most welcome as the stub is currently strictly historical. Please also have a look at Cult of Krishna-Vasudeva Wikidās-ॐ 19:46, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

I think you need first to ensure that this article is about the child Krishna and not about any other meanings that could be attributed to 'bala'. And while the word 'bala' as usually written in Latin script is ambiguous, neither of the meanings implies 'divine'. Meanwhile, there is insufficient material there to justify a separate article. Imc (talk) 16:07, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

I can not disagree with you. The 'Divine Child Krishna' is just a quote. And I agree that dab should have discussed first before changing the introduction to see: Balarama as in this case its bAla not bala... quite a mistake. If you read the above note you will see that Im looking for more material on this especially in terms of contemporaneous worship to support the claims on the source. Regards, Wikidās-ॐ 16:14, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Discussion of Krishnaism tallk page on scope

Talk:Krishnaism

Please refer to above talk page for further info. Wikidās-ॐ 14:59, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Nomination of GA articles

A number of articles within the project needs to be developed and nominated for GA - good article status. One of such articles that is critical for this project is Krishna and as majority of members of the project are onboard for this please voice if you do not feel it should be nominated as per Wikipedia:Good article nominations. Any other GA candidates list below please:

To be nominated

--Krishna

--Wikidās-ॐ 14:57, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

As a GA reviewer, not the right time as the article is not yet stable. Secondly, tags.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 15:50, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

I can not see any edit wars current on the article. I accept that tags need to be addressed in majority, I can look into it. Do you know of any edit war situation on the article? It appears stable to me. Wikidās-ॐ 16:27, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

I had a look and it seems to be in better shape now. Maybe a peer-review process can be a first step on the way? Wikidās ॐ 19:06, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Actually looked at the talk page, and some comments do appear to be confrontational. Its not an edit war situation, but maybe you are right and article is not yet stable. Lets give it some few weeks, which will be the time when we will sort out all the references needed. Any other suggestions for a GA article candidate? Wikidās-ॐ 19:25, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

I say it's not yet ready but definitely could be soon. --Shruti14 ^{t c s} 22:22, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Okay. I thought of another candidate - A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada. Any comments? Wikidās-ॐ 14:45, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

• I think there are at least three articles that fit here so far: Vithoba, A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami, and Krishna. Please let me know how I can help with this process. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 19:33, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

I propose to nominate Swaminarayan for GA status. Before tht it would be gr8 if I could get some peer-reviews for the article. Around The Globe^{सत्यमेव जयते} 17:44, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Peer review for Krishna etc

WP:WIAGA - is the guide to determine if the article is a good article. A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami and Vithoba are already on the list of good article candidates. If you know of an uninvolved editor who can check them with the checklist here it would be good, they can be subsequently pass them to be listed as GA or give a review for improving them. Any uninvolved editor can do it, but there is a backlog of articles.

I would put Krishna for WP:PR - the process is described on the peer review page and it will help that article - its an important article for this project! What do you think are there any volunteers for this review? Wikidās ॐ 20:27, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Swaminarayan templates

There are 2 similar templates:

I think the two should be merged.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 04:39, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Very different. The first one is one Swaminarayan Sampraday articles and features only articles of the Swaminarayan Sampraday. The second one is on two main Swaminarayan pages: Bhagwan Swaminarayan and Swaminarayan Faith and includes info of other sects claiming succession to Swaminarayan as well as the Swaminarayan Sampraday. Both serve different purposes. Around The Globe^Contact 10:42, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

I actually would be confused as well, but now I know - there were many sects that follow the same system but some do not follow the acharyas who are of the same bloodline as the founder (and are the only who call themselves Swaminarayan Sampraday) others were ordered by some court in India not to use this name. So.. I have to agree with both they are different and Swaminarayan Sampraday is a part of the bigger picture as far as Wiki is concerned. Any other suggestions. Wikidās-ॐ 10:48, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

I dont c why a template containing articles of various other sects should be put on the Swaminarayan Sampraday page (or articles of other sects having a template containing Swaminarayan Sampraday articles). I know Juthani1 is working on a BAPS template for BAPS, another sect. The idea is to have the common template (Swaminarayan) on the main pages, and a template for each sect for articles pertaining to the sect only so that no aricles of other sects are displayed on other sect pages, this will prevent edit wars that have been taking place on many of the Swaminarayan pages. Around The Globe^Contact 10:59, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

I think the issue here is clarity. For anyone who is not familiar with the topic, its confusing, as there is much more similarity to it then differences. It has to be crystal clear. But at present its not clear so I have to suggest to have a common template that clearly distinguishing the two (maybe with colour). Or two separate collapsable sections. Its is very confusing now for me. Wikidās-ॐ 11:06, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Per Wikidas the architecture of both should be redone to insure clarity and diffrentiation. Around The Globe^Contact 19:01, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

I agree, the templates should be remade for clarity. --Shruti14 ^{t c s} 22:18, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

I agree, if the templates are distinct enough, there is no need for a merger. Although one template with all links can also be thought of. --Redtigerxyz (talk) 14:09, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Vithoba

Need suggestions to improve the article before a GA nom. Please take a look, and if possible, make appropriate changes. Please give a peer review on article talk. Thanks. --Redtigerxyz (talk) 05:18, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

The article passed GA, and also had a peer review. I soon aim to nominate Vithoba for FAC. I would like suggestions to improve the article to FA status. Also, i request some copyeditor to go through the article to polish the language, if needed.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 12:13, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Notablility

While assessing articles for the Krishnaism project, I came across the following article, Sri Muralidhara Swamiji. After looking for various media and scholarly references, I found little. If there are not any reasons to believe that the subject is notable, then I suggest that the article be nominated for deletion. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 06:01, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

• Comment Last week, I listed articles for deletion at Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Hinduism. In particular, I have looked for references for Bihariji Maharaj, Prabhu Jagatbandhu Sundar and Swami Shankarananda Giri. To date, I have not found any. If anyone has any reliable sources or comments, please feel free to share or edit the articles. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 02:09, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

• Comment Please also review Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gusainji as this is a subject that I am not informed about. At first, I thought the article to be a non notable, but there are some sources. If there are other editors better informed, I would appreciate any comment, edits, etc. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 07:51, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

• Note Six new Afds have been listed at, Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Hinduism. These articles are; Lisa M. Wolfe, Tirtha and Kshetra, Shivom Tirth, Swami Vishnu Tirtha, Yogiraj Bharat Bhushan and Yoga Shri Pith. Please review. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 00:31, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Changes to the WP:1.0 assessment scheme

As you may have heard, we at the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial Team recently made some changes to the assessment scale, including the addition of a new level. The new description is available at WP:ASSESS.

• The new C-Class represents articles that are beyond the basic Start-Class, but which need additional references or cleanup to meet the standards for B-Class.
• The criteria for B-Class have been tightened up with the addition of a rubric, and are now more in line with the stricter standards already used at some projects.
• A-Class article reviews will now need more than one person, as described here.

Each WikiProject should already have a new C-Class category at Category:C-Class_articles. If your project elects not to use the new level, you can simply delete your WikiProject's C-Class category and clarify any amendments on your project's assessment/discussion pages. The bot is already finding and listing C-Class articles.

Please leave a message with us if you have any queries regarding the introduction of the revised scheme. This scheme should allow the team to start producing offline selections for your project and the wider community within the next year. Thanks for using the Wikipedia 1.0 scheme! For the 1.0 Editorial Team, §hepBot (Disable) 21:37, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Arjuna's Penance

Today I noticed that this article had been redirected to Descent of the Ganges (Mahabalipuram). As there was no discussion on redirecting the page, I reverted and made note of it on the talk page. An important issue to note is that there are many artistic and religious depictions of Arjuna's Penance - not just the one at Mahabalipuram. For further info here is a one telling of it, The Story of Arjuna's Penance, in J. W. Coombes book The Seven Pagodas. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 21:22, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

That makes sense. I would not think there will be much 'resistance' to this. Wikidās ॐ 07:29, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

True that there are 2 interpretations, but we are speaking of the same sculpture.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 14:31, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

While there is a disputed sculpture at Mahabalipuram, the actual story of Arjuna's Penance is found in art, temples and is discussed in scholarship on Hinduism. While comments on the sculpture at Mahabalipuram should be merged into the Decent of the Ganges, the story and its other representations might warrent an article of its own. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 18:55, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

New Category

The Category:People who have been considered avatars was created after discussion about inclusion of Swaminarayan (and possibly others of similar status) into such potential category as well as its associated list, List of people who have been considered avatars. The category is currently being considered for deletion. --Shruti14 ^{t c s} 14:54, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

There is some resistance from SN people to the inclusion. On the other hand a different category was created Category:Forms of Krishna to make navigation among all forms in theology or worship by different traditions. Should you know of a murti, form or expansion of Krishna that needs to be added, please do not hesitate to add it. In fact please look for them:-) Wikidās ॐ 16:20, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

• Comment The category, Category:People considered avatars by their followers, is under discussion for deletion. Please review. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 02:38, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Appearance of Krishna

There is a discussion on exact details of how Krishna was transfered from the purified mind of Vasudeva to the Devaki as described here. [1] If you have any other sources that support or give details on the details of this please do not hesitate to comment on it at Talk:Krishna. Thank you. Wikidās ॐ 16:16, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Sanskrit revival

Sanskrit revival - as this is a phenomenon relevant to the 20th and 21st century, the subject should be expanded to reflect this transition from one century to another. As this is a large subject, the addition of many editors from diverse perspectives would benefit the expansion of this article. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 18:50, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia 0.7 articles have been selected for Krishnaism

Wikipedia 0.7 is a collection of English Wikipedia articles due to be released on DVD, and available for free download, later this year. The Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team has made an automated selection of articles for Version 0.7.

We would like to ask you to review the articles selected from this project. These were chosen from the articles with this project's talk page tag, based on the rated importance and quality. If there are any specific articles that should be removed, please let us know at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.7. You can also nominate additional articles for release, following the procedure at Wikipedia:Release Version Nominations.

A list of selected articles with cleanup tags, sorted by project, is available. The list is automatically updated each hour when it is loaded. Please try to fix any urgent problems in the selected articles. A team of copyeditors has agreed to help with copyediting requests, although you should try to fix simple issues on your own if possible.

We would also appreciate your help in identifying the version of each article that you think we should use, to help avoid vandalism or POV issues. These versions can be recorded at this project's subpage of User:SelectionBot/0.7. We are planning to release the selection for the holiday season, so we ask you to select the revisions before October 20. At that time, we will use an automatic process to identify which version of each article to release, if no version has been manually selected. Thanks! For the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial team, SelectionBot 22:26, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Hariprasad Pande and Premvati

Concerning the two articles above, do any editors know of any good sourced besides the works of Raymond Brady Williams? As they are both up for Afd, I looked for sources but the only texts I found were Raymond Brady Williams's books and essays. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 00:55, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

The Williams book is the only major neutral source on the subject. Around The Globe^{सत्यमेव जयते} 21:49, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Official sites of SN groups are a good source. Does not have to be entirely third party. Wikidās ॐ 06:08, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

New UBX

I recently created a Userbox for this project. Feel free to add it to your userpages    Juthani1   ^tcs 22:52, 21 October 2008 (UTC)