Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Hinduism/Mythology/Archive 4

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
← Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 →

Problem on Kali page, please help!

I don’t even know where to begin. Recently on the Kali article, the image Kali2.JPG has repeatedly been deleted from the page on the grounds that it “doesn’t do the goddess justice” or its “grotesque”. At first there was just one, a new user named Dipendra2007, who constantly deleted the photo without first discussing it or replacing it with a new one. I left them several messages on their talk page telling them that they needed to discuss changes like that before doing anything. But time and time again they kept on doing it. I respect that this person is a great devotee of Kali, as they’ve stated she is "a multi-faceted Goddess who is at once the nurturer and shatterer, the upholder of the family as well as one who stands outside all social norms", but therein lies the problem. I believe they are trying to whitewash the page of any material that they feel reflects a negative light on Kali. I keep on telling them that the page needs to be balanced and even opened up a discussion on the talk page in an effort to get some open dialogue going. I suggested that maybe some of the pictures could be switched around. There is one picture, Image:Kaligoddess.jpg, that is still wrathful, but toned down a bit. It is already in the article. I suggested this, but no one has ever read or at least responded to that part of the discussion.

Now all of a sudden there is a new users--MrinaliniB--who has started to delete the photo without discussing it. They too have given me very POV reasons why the picture should not be on the page. I have NEVER once said that I only wanted the current picture up. I’ve stated to all three people that the pictures could be switched around, but yet they keep on deleting it. These two new users just recently created their accounts within the last day or so. I’ve tried to explain that they do not own the article and anyone can edit it, but they don’t listen. They do what they wish. I’m not sure if Dipendra2007 has created a “puppet account” or if he is enlisting people to have the image removed. Either way, that is wrong if their sole purpose on Wikipedia is to get one single picture removed.

If you visit these two editors’ talk pages you will see that I’ve been trying to come to an amiable agreement that will make ALL editors happy. Yet they resist going through the proper channels of discussion and resolvement. They just want what they want, when they want it. They don’t care. I’ve even gone to the point of issuing an idle threat of possible vandalism charges (as you will see on their talk pages) in effort to halt the deletion of the photo, while forcing them to actually engage in some kind of discussion. But that hasn’t stopped them. I told them also that any discussions about the Kali page should take place on the Kali talk page, but they continue to discuss amongst themselves on their own talk pages. This does not leave an accurate record of what is going on on the Kali page.

I therefore come to this wikiproject, which I have been member of for a while, to ask for some sort of intervention here. Please help. Thank you. (Ghostexorcist 19:09, 23 February 2007 (UTC))

The picture problem has been solved as of this morning. However, that doesn't mean there won't be a problem in the future. (Ghostexorcist 12:16, 25 February 2007 (UTC))
As for your Kali image suggestion, it is just that. A suggestion. Post this on the Kali talk page, I frequent it personally. I believe the reason that it is continually removed is that she is not in her traditional pose, as is displayed currently on the page, and it lacks a few of the items Kali carries in the picture currently used.
This is hardly a "problem" it is a complaint that you are not getting your way.--ॐJesucristo301 23:43, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
Huh? I think you are about 7 months too late to join in on the discussion.--Ghostexorcist 10:34, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
Well there didn't seem to be a discussion here at all. I'm just saying.--ॐJesucristo301 11:21, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
The actual discussion was archived on the Kali page. See the archive box.--Ghostexorcist 17:37, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

What is this crap about "mythology"

As a Pious and Devout Hindu, I take offense to the term "mythology", and I am sure many other God-Fearing Hindus feel the same. Saying Krishna is mythological is tantamount to a systematic denial of Indian history. He is fact. Same with Rama, the deities (not gods, Hinduism is monotheistic contrary to western belief). I DEMAND that you replace mythology with "Tradition". You are all Indians, how can you allow such a title? I believe in the veracity of everything about Hinduism, and you are insulting me and countless others with this title. Thank You. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.167.48.187 (talkcontribs)

Request for peer review on Ganesha

Please help improve the article on Ganesha by participating in a peer review of it. ॐ गं गणपतये नमः Buddhipriya 23:30, 1 April 2007 (UTC)


For: A few remarks on " Ganesha" & "Nature of Vedic Deities", visit

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Prabhakar_P_Rao> == PPRao

Need a Free Image for Bhagavad Gita

Hi all, I have posted Image:Gita1.jpg on Wikipedia:Images_and_media_for_deletion/2007_April_8#Image:Gita1.jpg for deletion. Please participate in the discussion there, and also please help find a free alternative to that image. Which means a PD image published in India more than 60 years ago, depicting a similar scene for Krishna preaching Gita to Arjuna. Thanks --Spundun 18:18, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Hindu or Indian mythology?

  • What about Munda myths?
  • What about Dravidian mythology?
  • What about context? --Kalogeropoulos 23:30, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Review please

I have redirected Iringole Kavu. Can someone take a look at the history and see if this was the right move, or what should be done instead. GRBerry 19:37, 13 November 2007 (UTC)