|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Krishna article.|
|Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5|
|Krishna was one of the Philosophy and religion good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.|
|Current status: Delisted good article|
|Krishna has been listed as a level-4 vital article in Philosophy. If you can improve it, please do. This article has been rated as B-Class.|
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
|Wikipedia Version 1.0 Editorial Team / v0.7 / Vital|
Accessibility to Outsiders
I can’t help but feel that this entry is written for people who know the topic better than I do. From a know-nothing outsider’s viewpoint, there are so many unknown references initially that I fear many would give up before getting the gist of who Krishna is. Shouldn’t the first paragraph be broad general information that anyone can understand? Try to clear your educated mind and consider this phrase from the perspective of an outsider: “…and is also listed in the 24 Keshava Namas of Lord Vishnu which are recited and praised at the beginning of all Vedic pujas.” It is wonderful to delve into the very deepest most obscure detail but initially I believe you must deal with a broad spectrum, dictionary like definition which eliminates all other unknowns (not commonly known)– that is if this information is to be accessible to outsiders. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 15:46, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
Krishna belonged to Abhira (Ahir) Tribe.
Indian sociology through Ghurye, a dictionary By S. Devadas Pillaipage -197
http://books.google.co.in/books?id=voLXAAAAMAAJ&q=krishna+was+abhira&dq=krishna+was+abhira&hl=en&ei=NTuQTdpSwp1xxJTVlQo&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=9&ved=0CFQQ6AEwCA Krishna Leela theme in Rajasthani miniatures
http://books.google.co.in/books?ei=aD2QTbWFJcLMcL7FnYYK&ct=result&id=qZvWAAAAMAAJ&dq=krishna+was+abhira&q=abhira http://books.google.co.in/books?ei=aD2QTbWFJcLMcL7FnYYK&ct=result&id=qZvWAAAAMAAJ&dq=krishna+was+abhira&q=abhiras Hinduism and Buddhism: an historical sketch, Volume 1 By Sir Charles Eliot
http://books.google.co.in/books?id=kMnOBpUy7P4C&pg=PA158&dq=krishna+was+abhira&hl=en&ei=aD2QTbWFJcLMcL7FnYYK&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=6&ved=0CEIQ6AEwBTgU#v=onepage&q&f=false Hindu Gods and Heroes http://books.google.co.in/books?id=_r1buuxthXoC&pg=PA97&dq=krishna+was+abhira&hl=en&ei=VD-QTZagH8qycMXUmYsK&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCgQ6AEwADge#v=onepage&q=krishna%20was%20abhira&f=false
Ahir king Nand Baba and Vasudeva were brothers.
The cattle and the stick: an ethnographic profile of the Raut of Chhattisgarh
Krishna's last words
According to this article, Krishna says, moments before his death to the hunter who has attacked him by mistake, the following: "O Jara, you were Vaali in your previous birth, killed by myself as Rama in Tretayuga. Here you had a chance to even it and since all acts in this world are done as desired by me, you need not worry for this".
I tried going through the references (83-85). One of them brings me back to this page, one of them links me to Ganguli's translation in which this is not mentioned, and the third is not accessible. Neither the Itihasa (of Mahabharata) nor the Puranas say that Jara is Vali. In fact, many scholars of Ramayana opine that Vali got moksha, which means that he did not take birth as Jara.
For this reason, I'm removing the above quoted sentence. If anybody has a concrete evidence, they can re-add the sentence along with the citation. 22.214.171.124 (talk) 08:43, 29 August 2013 (UTC)Raghav Sharman
I checked some of the last reverts of this page, this one, I agree with this edit, but, remembering that it's just a astrological view, i think we can still insert this way:-
- I am not opposed to including traditional dates for Krishna's birth, if there was/were such date(s) generally accepted by scholarly sources. But as the Outlook article you cite above shows, these dates are a dime a dozen, and almost universally rejected/ignored by actual scholars. As for the book by Frank Marcello Antonetti, it is a self-published fringe work by a person with no publication record in the area and not a reliable source. We can find dozens of such new age/fringe publications on google books, which while convenient, should not be used for sourcing an article on a subject covered by numerous scholarly journal articles and books published by university and academic presses. Abecedare (talk) 10:59, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
- Unfortunately, not a single of those is a reliable source. If you think otherwise for any particular source, we can discuss it here on at WP:RSN. In general: it is abetter idea to read the best available sources on a topic and then try to summarize their contents on wikipedia; starting with (often dubious) wikipedia content, and then trying to find sources is often fraught with perils, as in this case. Abecedare (talk) 11:27, 7 October 2013 (UTC)