Talk:Vedic mythology

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.

???

This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.

[edit] My views

I feel the French text in the body of the article should be removed. If it is agreed, or if no comments come forward, I shall do that, and integrate its English version with other contents, and give proper context to that. Ok. The French content may also continue, after suitable formatting, but I am unable to that as I donot know French.--Bhadani 14:49, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

I wrote a translation underneath that says what the French says. It's crap. Delete it. Note on VfD that the content has completely changed. --Diderot 15:55, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

- For the time being, I am removing these contents. But, they have a meaning - in the Vedic period, Shiva was considered as a benevolent god, whereas, over a period of time, Shiva became synonymous with anger and destruction. --Bhadani 16:32, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] VFD debate link

This article has been kept following this VFD debate. Sjakkalle (Check!) 12:19, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] MERGE with Hindu mythology

Hello,

I think that this article should be merged with Hindu mythology. Vedic religion/mythology is all early Hinduism to begin with, and in case of mythology, I don't think we should cut off the roots from the rest of the tree.

I think it will be a good idea to debate this till, say November 28, 2005. We should carry out the merger or deny it according to the opinions expressed. - Thank you, User:Rama's Arrow

Is the merger actually required? I think there are several dimensions of Hindu mythology, and they require to be dealt with separately. Just to illustrate my point: would anyone say that Shiva be merged with Shaivism? --Bhadani 11:19, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

You are wrong: Shaivism is the worship of Shiva and his inspiration; Hindu mythology is the big cake from which the vedic part is sliced.

Vedic mytho is too closely linked in my opinion: (1) all the stuff about Indra, Vritra etc. too closely influences Ramayana and Mahabharata, which are considered Hindu mytho. To explain each properly, we need the reader to be aquainted with both.

IN ADDITION: W/o Vedic mytho, all Hindu mytho will primarily be is Ramayana and Mahabharata. We have two big articles on those two in the first place, so what does one put in Hindu mytho that makes it special.

Plus, most people consider Hindu and Vedic to be inseparable and pretty much same: so why confuse them by separate articles, when the point can be made by a big section inside one article?

If you are worried about the length, then don't: Hindu mytho needs expansion anyway. There is a threat of repeat material if one does not merge.

I don't know if you wanna vote yes or no after this, but I'll tally the votes on Nov. 28. - Jai Sri Rama! Rama's Arrow. (UTC)

[edit] My response to above

I would like to state that the article had earlier survived a vote for deletion, as indicated hereinabove – and as such redirection to Hindu mythology does not appear appropriate. For discerning readers and researchers, there shall be no confusion. --Bhadani 14:25, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Response to Bhadani

Dear Sir - there are two big POVs here - your judgment of appropriate and in appropriate and the idea that all Wikiusers will be discerning researchers.

I'm NOT threatening to delete! Why is this raised at all?

You have not considered even one of the facts/points that I presented. Please do not make this a question of ego or attitude. - Rama's Arrow.

My dear I would suggest that issues to be discussed here (instead of on talk pages of the users) to maintain continuity. And, dear Mr. Rama’s Arrow, please do not impute motives like ‘ego’ or ‘attitude’ to my words (as you have indicated on my talk page) as I am talking based on the reality of the situation, which had found expression by the will of the community of wikipedians, as expressed in the vote of deletion. Please reconsider your stand. Everyone, including me should remember the proverb: “empty vessels sound much.” And, it has nothing to do with POVs, but the factual accuracy.--Bhadani 14:50, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Stalemate

If User:Bhadani retains his vote of "no", and nobody else votes on this question, then the outcome will be a 1:1 tie.

In this case, I will not merge the article but find a way to closely link Hindu and Vedic mythology to avoid the pitfalls I've foreseen. - Jai Sri Rama! Rama's Arrow.

It is a good idea to sign. Is not it? --Bhadani 14:55, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

noooooooooo.......Jai Sri Rama!

[edit] Another Response to Bhadani

Your plea is ridiculous sir

(1) Do not make my sign an issue here and convolute the debate.

(2) The debate has been entirely posted here.

(3) You have offered no consideration to my points. What conclusion am I supposed to make about your opinion on this matter?

(4) NOBODY IS TALKING ABOUT DELETING - ITS MERGING WE'RE DEBATING. If merged, Vedic mythology's contents will NOT BE ERASED, BUT ADDED to Hindu mythology.

(5) It is you sir, who are not conducting this debate properly. Why you talk about deleting in the first place, I don't know. Second, this community of Wikipedians hasn't showered any vote or opinion upon this matter yet.

Jai Sri Rama! Rama's Arrow

Kindly read the link given in an earlier section for vote for deletion. I was not aware that you had not read earlier contents of this talk page, and therefore you may have missed certain issues. In case a user desires to "copy" and "paste" (with modifications, etc.) contents from here to Hindu mythology, he/ she is free - why anyone should object to him/ her doing this. My point was different: I was just telling that merging the contents of this page or making this page a redirection link to Hindu mythology is perhaps not a good idea. In case, you are confident about the point under debate, you are most welcome to edit this page in the way you feel proper, including making a redirection link/ merging, etc. Ultimately, some other editors may step into, and if required may reverse any action. One should also sign his comments, as it gives a time-stamp, and has several other benefits. "Signing" is just a suggestion in conformity with the practice which all the registered users generally do unless one desires to camoufalge his/her activities and edits, for some known or unknown reasons, like by changing his/her user-names repeatedly/ editing the same page with different IDs including editing annonymously to give a look to an article that it has been edited by a number of users etc. I am not implying that you or any one else may have done this with this purpose - sometimes, people may forget the password, and are forced to take up other IDs. Now, in case you feel that by merging this article with Hindu mythology would serve any useful purpose, you may initiate the move, some other editor my un-do this. Please also remember, Vedic Mythology and Hindu mythology are two different topics, though inter-related. In case, you think otherwise, how can I prevent you from editing in the way you desire to edit? --Bhadani 15:45, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Another (3) Reply to Bhadani

It is very enjoyable for me to read that you have virtually no respect for my points...I KNOW how bloody easy it will be for me to do whatever I please, but I respect democracy, whether you understand it or not. Your assumption that I will by-pass your vote is insulting.

(1) The previous debate about DELETING this article has no relevance here. When you talk delete, you talk of wiping out info all together. I appreciate this article, but just feel the need for a re-org.

(2) Vedic and Hindu mythologies ARE NOT different topics in my belief...it is your POV to assume so, and it is exactly what is being debated here. What is needed are factual arguments. I've supplied some: you - zero.

(3) I understand as administrator you are concerned about people not using signs, but it is not good to attempt to interject such concerns in a debate about absolutely something else. If you had something to say about it, you should have posted a message on my personal page, which you have already visited before. That would have been appropriate.

(4) A debate is the healthiest when you go point-to-point in exchange of views. I would understand and respect your viewpoint better had you bothered to tell me what you thought about the points I had raised. If you don't supply reason for your arguments, it is obviously a pre-set notion in play.

I am bound by democracy, so what can I do? Your vote is a vote, no matter how you got to it.

The count is 1:1. If "no" votes are added, or if this remains unchanged, the merger will not go thru. If "yes" votes are added, it will.

Jai Sri Rama! Rama's Arrow

Kindly remember that wikipedia is not an experiment in democracy, we are here to write an encyclopedia, and not to count votes - all editors, you as well as me, are here to ensure that wikipedia must reflect the truth. I am aware that you you are a nice person and know that it is better to keep one's temper down, and avoid using the words like "bloody" as you have done - it is neither good for the health nor look beautiful in the context of issues pertaining to Vedic mythology and Hindu mythology. --Bhadani 17:21, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Removing my signed comments

Mr Rama’s Arrow, please do not disturb and delete the continuity of the discussion as you have done by your following edit: [1]

Although, I assume good faith, perhaps you had done something, which you were not expected to do. You also removed my comments duly signed by ~~you~~ me. Please do not do like this – this is really not expected from mature users like you. --Bhadani 17:37, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Response to Above Allegations by User:Bhadani

I wish you had noticed that I only printed an updated version of my comments on your talkpage. If I had not, then you would not have put up my true comments.

The so-called Experiment in Democracy my dear fellow, is respecting other people's viewpoints. This can't be a FREE ENCYLOPEDIA if you don't offer due respect to a person's statements.

I (1) offered a pro-merge argument. You (1) expressed an opposing point of view. I respect that my view is not above yours. Why are you complaining about this?

And I wish you wouldn't squirm about a use of a word like bloody. It is absolutely harmless, not even directed at you.

All I was doing is respecting your POV. It seems ridiculous that you want to challenge that very honorable practice. - User:Rama's Arrow.

[edit] Truth and Democracy: Situation As of Now

All this is deviating from the purpose of discussing the merger....which nobody else is interested in....

I understand User:Bhadani's point about the truth and democracy in Wikipedia, but I don't want to make a major change unless I have the support of other Wikipedians.

I have nothing more to say or add. I do not want to keep rebutting User:Bhadani, and vice-versa.

I will check back on Monday, November 28. If the vote tally, which is 1:1, has changed (or not), I will act accordingly, respecting the democratic verdict.

Jai Sri Rama! User:Rama's Arrow

[edit] Please also see

Kindly also refer to comments by elvenscout742 on the talk page of Hindu mythology. Thanks. --Bhadani 14:13, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../v/e/d/Talk%7EVedic_mythology_3978.html"