Talk:Pandava

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Former good article nomineePandava was a Philosophy and religion good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. 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.
October 14, 2008Good article nomineeNot listed

Bhima[edit]

An entry on Bhima needs to be added - at present clicking on the hyperlink to Bhima leads to a page about a genus of moth. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.101.187.192 (talk) 11:26, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

This should be at "Pandavas"[edit]

Whenever I've read something in English about them, the plural has always been "the Pandavas" and not "the Pandava". The Sanskrit plural is "pā́ṇḍavāḥ", so saying "the Pandava" is no more accurate than "the Pandavas", and the latter is by far the most common form in English. --Grammatical error 08:02, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

No, this article should be at Pandava, as the transliteration of the original term. It allows for plural use in Wikipedia as Pandavas, and also allows the correct use of the term Pandava brothers which is itself fairly common in English. But I've changed the usage in the article, from 'the Pandava' to the other forms. Imc 17:47, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Vidura was married to widow Kunti and widow Madri?[edit]

Vidura was father of Pandavas. Kunti and Madri both married to Vidura. Will anybody on Wikipedia clearify what is the fact?
vkvora 03:45, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
Pandu was the father of pandavas. Madri died with pandu and kunti never remarried.nids(♂) 10:26, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
I have added a reference to Iravati Karve's suggestions on this matter. This is that Vidura was the actual father of the Pandava, but that this was never openly stated, since he was a suta, and the legitimacy of the Pandava was important to their claim to the kingdom. i.e. being the sons of a commoner half brother of your mother's husband is not good if you are claiming a kingdom, but being sons of gods is the next best thing. Imc 11:43, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

From hindi[edit]

Please add hi:पाण्डव —Preceding unsigned comment added by Indu (talkcontribs) 17:08, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

GA Review[edit]

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

I am failing this article for its good article review because it has absolutely no inline citations. Please renominate it once it has more citations. Gary King (talk) 06:01, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Can we drop the "a" at the end of nouns?[edit]

Why "pandava"? Why continue to adhere to the stilted British style of adding "a" at the end of our names? Lets start by writing simply "pandav". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.131.53.41 (talk) 22:45, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

As masculine Sanskrit nouns ending in "अ," these nouns should end in "a," as they do now. Moreover, their vocative forms also end in "a" : Arjuna, Yudhisthira, etc. I don't see what's particularly British about this. 71.198.188.48 (talk) 06:08, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

I've reset the change of the names from the original Sanskrit to modern Hindi, and in some cases to modern Indonesian forms. I've also removed much of the accounts of their lives, which duplicates the chapters of the MB which cover the same subject, and the descriptions of the individual characters, which belong under their articles. Imc (talk) 06:29, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
restored the story. To complete a brief story of the epic and role in the epic is needed in any epic charcter.--Redtigerxyz Talk 13:39, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

File:DraupadiDhusasa.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion[edit]

Image-x-generic.svg An image used in this article, File:DraupadiDhusasa.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations
What should I do?

Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
  • If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 16:48, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Gandhara[edit]

It is asserted in this article that the ancient Gandhara kingdom corresponds with modern Kandahar, which is incorrect. Gandhara is closer to the Kabul area, and Kandahar was founded by Alexander. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 214.15.221.38 (talk) 23:21, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Mahabharata a fight between sun god and moon god[edit]

Bhishma the heir of Bharath / Chandra vamasham had the responsibility to care of the kingdom. Karna the son of sun god and the claimant of the Hasthinapur throne.

The system is first a claim will be made and then there comes the righteousness of the claim and then gets support to that claim/issue. The claims are generally made by sun gods and then Dharma/ righteousness by Yama Dharma Raja and support by gods like Agni , Vayu , Varun etc.,

Bhishma knows very well that Karna is a son of sun god and the elder son of Kunthi so he is the person who is going to claim the kingdom. He tried his best to stop the war and live happily but the situation is such that war is eminent. In such a situation he made such a sound that Karna should not enter into the war till he is there because it is his duty/responsibility to take care of both the families. Till he is there there are no much causalities on both the sides(pandavas / kauravas). When he had fallen on the ground Karna entered the battle and the war continued. There came a situation when Kunthi came and met Karna and asked him to come to their side. At that time Karna promised that he will not kill any one even though they came to my hand except Arjuna the son of Firegod. He has not asked Kunthi to tell the same matter to Dharmaraja and stop the battle for the welfare of the kingdom. If incase Karna changes his mind and takes the side of his brothers then Bhisma might have removed his arrows as he is given a boon by his father that death comes to him only when he wishes so and taken up the fight saying that bringing shikandi into the battle is not correct. But that has not happened. Kunthi even getting the chance to stop the battle has not stopped it due to which she lost her son at the hands of his other son Arjuna not only that she is responsible for the death of Duryodhana son of Ghandhari at the hands of Bhima the son of vayu. Bhishma if resolved the problem properly then he would have got a promotion to next stage such as brahmrishi or any such similar to what got by Vishwamitra. Next stages of Kshatriyas. Bhishma left his body after the war and might be after making some arrangements like Karna can achieve his claims only if he gets the support of Duryodhana or so.

If the two ladies Kunthi and her elder sister Ghandhari are at good terms then north India would have gone into the hands of Karna and his five brothers similarly south India would have gone into the hands of Duryodhana and his 99 brothers.

Even today if north Indians want to do something then they should be able to get the support of south Indians for success.

There are two ladies one Ghandhari and the other Kunthi. Kauravas(Duryodhana and his 99 brothers) under the Ghandhari and Pandavas(Karna and his five brothers) under Kunthi. If both these ladies settled the matter then the problem would have been solved. Kunthi should have asked his rest five sons to take kingdom from his brother Karna instead of fighting with Duryodhana.

Getting kingdom through Karna or getting kingdom through Duryodhana only one claim is allowed. Doing work for one time and claiming it twice will only create problems. These type of problems are major in present generations also. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 27.6.60.58 (talk) 07:16, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

pictures at bottom[edit]

Can someone delete the 6 "rock formation" pictures at the bottom they are irrelevant to the topic

Good point. Removed. --regentspark (comment) 19:48, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

Copyediting and links[edit]

I am going through the article and linking literally many dozens of names and terms that no doubt are well known to Hindus, but which are opaque to most non-Hindu readers. The page's wikicode has a headnote "use Indian English", but that doesn't mean assuming all readers are Indian.


§ The Pandavas says

Fearing Parashurama's wrath, Karna lied his identity of being a Brahmana.

The Brahmanas

(/ˈbrɑːmənə/; Sanskrit: ब्राह्मणम्, Brāhmaṇa)... are a collection of ancient Indian texts with commentaries on the hymns of the four Vedas.

Evidently the editor who wrote this sentence was thinking of Brahmin (/ˈbrɑːmənə/; ब्राह्मण), which is pronounced identically to Brahmana, at least in English. I've changed the sentence to

Fearing Parashurama's wrath, Karna falsely claimed to be a Brahmin.


Many other changes as well. See this diff (which includes a change by AnomieBOT).

--Thnidu (talk) 03:25, 25 October 2016 (UTC)