Talk:Eka Pada Rajakapotasana

Is this similar?

Can Eka Pāda Rājakapotāsana be redirected here? Kinkreet^{~♥moshi moshi♥~} 01:03, 20 March 2013 (UTC) This page, and its corresponding picture, is for eka pada raja kapotasana, which has one leg forward and the other leg behind. "Eka pada" means one foot. Raja kapotasana is both feet touching the head. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.197.14.13 (talk) 16:12, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

That's Kapotasana. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:29, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

Eka Pada Rajakapotasana II –IV

The article is currently only about the first variation of the pose. Where are the others? Morganfitzp (talk) 21:10, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

Sofixit? The later variations appear to be quite ... variable. I've had a go from what seem to be the best sources available. Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:46, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

I would fix these, but certain editors have been reverting any edits I make to yoga articles lately, as if specific areas of Wikipedia were under limited authorship, in which case I’m resigned to coach from the talk page. Morganfitzp (talk) 21:59, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

Really? The only edit I can see that you've made since January 2020 that could even vaguely fit that description concerned use of English on 'Sun Salutation', unless you've been editing using multiple accounts, of course! Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:05, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

[Dwi Pada] Rajakapotasana

I’ve noticed that “Rajakapotasana” redirects here. Usually when a pose nem starts with “Eka Pada” (one-legged) it is derived from a pose that is “Dwi Pada” (two-legged), and often not including these prefixes. This is the case with Rajakapotasana, the upward-facing pose that is similar in shape to its inverted relation, Kapotasana. But the two-legged Kapotasana (and to be clear, all of these poses comprise two legs—they are just doing different things in the pose) appears in neither article, even though it is the pose that bridges the two: Kapotasana > Rajakapotasana > Eka Pada Rajakapotasana > variations of Eka Pada Rajakapotasana. Morganfitzp (talk) 22:10, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

Not sure about this: we don't have to include inverted poses with non-inverted ones even if their names have some relation to each other. Also, the comment about all poses being "two-legged" is wrong: Dwi Pada is used only when the two legs mirror each other; Eka Pada poses have each leg arranged differently. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:02, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

This review is transcluded from Talk:Eka Pada Rajakapotasana/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Onegreatjoke (talk · contribs) 18:47, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello! I have come to review yet another one of your yoga nominations. This will be my fourth review so there may be problems with it. Review shall begin tomorrow. Onegreatjoke (talk) 18:47, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Thanks again. Chiswick Chap (talk) 19:19, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Alright. My review is finished. Putting on hold. Onegreatjoke (talk) 19:28, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Comments have been addressed. I can now promote this. Onegreatjoke (talk) 17:13, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Prose

Lead

• "while the Aerial yoga variant, supported in a hammock, is Flying Pigeon Pose" Probably should be either called flying... or named Flying...

• Done.

• "It is one of the yoga poses often used in advertising to convey desired qualities such as flexibility and grace." could probably just say "It is a yoga pose often used..."

Origins

• The phrase says that it belongs to the (small) subject of poses used in this way.

• "The pose is described in the 20th century by two of Krishnamacharya's pupils, Pattabhi Jois in his Ashtanga Vinyasa Yoga, and B. K. S. Iyengar in his Light on Yoga." I don't think you need the comma there.

• It's standard British punctuation.

Variations

• "In Supported [King] Pigeon or Salamba Kapotasana, the rear leg is straight out and the hands are on the ground beside the hips, so the backbend is reduced." Could probably just say "...hips, reducing the backbend."

• Done.

• "but it is a wholly different pose from the advanced kneeling backbend of Kapotasana." wholly seems unnecessary. Either get rid of it or replace it.

• Done.

• "The strap is grasped with both hands, the arms reversed so that the elbows point upwards." Comma splice. consider doing "...hands; the..."

• No, it's not a splice, nor can we use a semicolon there. The phrase after the comma is in apposition to the main clause, adding more detail.

• "the hands and the rear foot are as for Rajakapotasana I, but according to Iyengar Yoga the front knee points forwards," add comma after Iyengar Yoga.

• That isn't how it's spoken in British English.

• "another block if needed under the front leg" should be "another block, if needed, under the front leg."

• Well, firstly that's not necessary, and secondly it'd bring the comma count up to 5 for the sentence.

That's all for prose.

Alright, passing this section after the edits you made.

Referenced

• What makes Yogapedia reliable?

• removed.

@Chiswick Chap: Are you done with this section? Onegreatjoke (talk) 15:06, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Onegreatjoke: Yes. Chiswick Chap (talk) 15:37, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Other than that everything else is good.

Copyvio

Ok, so earwig is reporting some possibly copyvios. However, I can't decipher if it's a wikimirror, you did copyviod it, or if the website copyviod from here. Regardless, i would like some elaboration. Onegreatjoke (talk) 18:18, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

• Well, firstly most of the reported match is in repeated standard phrases like "in modern yoga as exercise". That is in fact a sign that they copied from us, because I had originally phrased this as "in modern yoga" but had to avoid that because "modern yoga" doesn't actually imply anything to do with exercise or postures, so I changed it. The only more substantial match is their copy of our lead section, which I assembled from scratch to summarize the article, so again, I'm certain they copied us.

I think the same way so pass this section.

Broad

I don't think the origins section is broad enough. For the origins, there really isn't "origins" to go off of. The sentence

"The pose is described in the 20th century by two of Krishnamacharya's pupils, Pattabhi Jois in his Ashtanga Vinyasa Yoga,[3] and B. K. S. Iyengar in his Light on Yoga."

Doesn't really describe the origins of it. I might be wrong (or maybe there isn't enough sources to explain a concrete origin) but that's my main problem with this section. Onegreatjoke (talk) 18:18, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

• There is very little more to be said. What I'd like to say, if I could only source it, is what is evident to anybody who studies the source material, which is that this asana must be a recent invention; it is not described anywhere in nearly 1,000 years of hatha yoga texts. Given that Jois and Iyengar led rival schools, both were taught by Krishnamacharya, and both used this pose, it looks likely that Krishnamacharya invented it. However, it's not in his Yoga Makaranda. But we can't say that in the article.

If there's no information out there then I guess i'll have to pass this.

Neutral

Nothing looks unneutral so this section is a pass.

Stable

Article is stable so pass.

Media

All Media looks good so this section is a pass.