Talk:Hindu milk miracle
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hinduism, an attempt to promote better coordination, content distribution, and cross-referencing between pages dealing with Hinduism. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.
|
| ??? | This article has not been rated yet on the quality scale. |
 |
An entry from Hindu milk miracle appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know? column on 12 July 2006. |
 |
(In case you wondered, the expansion it had from stub status made it eligble.) - Mgm|(talk) 21:48, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
I Want To Believe.
[edit] Expansion
I've recently expanded this article with information from the microfilm archives in my local library. Unfortunately, they only held reels for British newspapers (this being in England), so if anyone can find some more international sources of information, it'd be appreciated :) GeeJo (t)⁄(c) • 13:39, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Written By A True Believer Or Someone With A Good Sense Of Humour
I really hope it's the latter. Either way, no matter how hilarious it is, we should probably change this article to be less crazy. "The scientific community needs to wake up and accept this as a genuine 100% bonafide miracle." Mmm, impartial.
- Yeah, looks like the IP 81.107.87.33 decided to add a bunch of junk to the end. I really should go down to the library one of these days and get information for the 2006 recurrance. At the moment the stuff added by User:WikiMarshall seems a bit tacked on. GeeJo (t)⁄(c) • 15:42, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Why is this a miracle?
The article failed to explain what is so amazing about this phenomenon. Milk is put on a spoon and pressed against the statue and sucked up by the stone. But what happens then? Did the statues suck up more milk that their own volume? Is there something missing here? Where is the miracle part? --80.56.36.253 05:42, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
- There were reports of statues absorbing more than their own volume in milk, but none were substantiated. The "miracle" was that the inanimate statues were drinking at all. If the effect weren't readily explainable by capillary action, it would indeed appear to have been a miracle. As for why the title of the page is as it is, it's simply because that is the name given to the event by the media and world at large. I try to avoid coining neologisms when titling articles. GeeJo (t)⁄(c) • 21:22, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
